Those parties don't call themselves the "Murder Party", because they represent their actions as legitimate, not murder. Calling yourself the "Pirate Party" instead of, say, the "Copyright Party" or "Intellectual Freedom Party" represents your actions as piracy. Which means actual seafaring, murdering, kidnapping, slaving, robbing pirates to most people, and just software theft to others.
If you can't even tell the difference between critizicing a party's policy and critizing its name, like so many others replying in this subthread, how do you expect the public to tell that the Pirate Party isn't just a bunch of robbing pirates?
Goddamn rats are giving false hope to humans that embryonic stemcell therapies can make them walk again. Everyone knows that embryonic stemcells have never cured anyone. It's just part of the rat plan to take over the world with superior healing powers for them, and fake medical research for us.
It's not clear whether the parking lot is owned by the coffeeshop. If it is, the piggybacker has to leave when requested by the management, and should expect to be arrested for trespassing (or similar Vancouver charge) after several warnings from police.
If the coffeeshop does't control the parking lot, then arresting the guy is outrageous. If the coffeeshop put lounge chairs out in that lot and someone sat in them every day without buying anything, there's no law broken. Just someone rudely exploiting the excessive generosity (and sloppiness) of the coffeeshop. Which isn't a crime, even in Vancouver.
Sounds like the coffeeshop manager needs to switch to decaf.
Why doesn't Adobe upgrade their PDF generators to include a "Real Redact" button that actually deletes the redacted data? They could sell it to governments at the usual 1000x government markup rate, and the government would probably still save money vs the fallout from these illusory blackout follies. Neither the government nor Adobe is in the "freedom of information" camp. Maybe the government just refuses to buy an upgrade because that would save money overall.
Read Yergin's book and find him expand that Slashdot-length post in detail. Which doesn't explain away the full oil tankers floating offshore America to intensify the OPEC supply constraints.
But which Yergin does use to insist we deregulate the oil business which pays his bills.
BTW, it's funny how even an Anonymous Coward can disagree with a strong statement without flaming it. Flamebait is in the eye of the TrollMod.
Depends on the reform, of course. There's plenty of room for improvement. The recent Supreme Court "eminent domain" travesty is a good place to fix laws that allow such an obviously bad interpretation.
Since the US Federal government found MS a monopoly, but isn't stopping Microsoft from "encouraging" people to use their software by abusing it, looks like god is the only one left with jurisdiction might actually forbid it.
Sununu is defending his "constituent" (briber^Wcontributor) telco corporations from liability for the broadcast flag. That doesn't make him wrong to oppose the flag, it just makes it less obvious which corporate legislation he insists on. If he insisted on copyright holder laws, he'd get less "support" from telcos. If he really protected consumers, he'd replace the broadcast flag legislation with other legislation that blocks it, rather than leave the vacuum. The vacuum gives Sununu an issue to bargain with the telcos in the future.
I'm not talking about a "partisan issue". I'm talking about a partisan government. Republicans control the government so exclusively that they exclude Democrats from even debate, or even reading the bills before votes. With that power, Republicans insist on the maximum corporate legislation possible - with possibility defined mostly by conflicts between corporations over "market access", without any regard to the people we elect them to protect.
Republicans already have taken the telco position against Net Neutrality, despite its obvious rigging the market for telcos. If MoveOn, which depends on Net Neutrality for its existence in face of telco power, didn't oppose it, the Republicans would have found their common interest with telcos even easier to execute. Shutting out MoveOn from such political activism is the result of abandoning Net Neutrality. Republican kneejerk "enemy's enemy is my friend" is the hallmark of what's wrong with their control of the government.
Nature abhors a vacuum, and power vacuums suck hardest. Without decent legislation to fill the slot that defines value conflicted between different interests, bad legislation will always return to fill it.
It's obvious that the Republican government insists on the maximum corporate legislation possible, and the minimum personal freedom. It's clear that just stopping corporate laws isn't enough to protect our freedom from being destroyed by the government, instead of protected. We need to insert "broadcast flag" laws into the books that prohibit them from interfering with our rights.
The EFF needs to write copyright laws that specify when they can be used and what they mean in practice and in the courts. Like any good lobbyist these days, they need to get politicians to adopt the "language" defining DRM to protect only legitimate rights and privileges. It should be cheap and easy for the EFF, as minimal DRM power is popular and just. In fact, the EFF will be doing politicians a favor by packaging popular public interest in a format that can be easily shown on TV and in newspapers, for maximum fundraising and campaigning effect.
I hope that the wide deployment of Firefox makes this SIP client catch on fast and replace the proprietary Skype clients that created the market.
And I hope this SIP client pushes Firefox into even further deployment.
Simple integration of voice into the Web has the power to be the "new Netscape", combining multiple related functions into a single integrated experience among hundreds of millions of people around the world.
Calling the PSTN for a charge might become like the mid-1990s paying small dialup prices to access the rest of the Net for "free".
I'd call the cops and tell them that robbers were in my neighborhood. I'd expect them to come by and see if they were robbing anything.
I certainly wouldn't expect the party to represent me or anyone else but robbers.
If the Crips called themselves a "political party" I wouldn't expect them to stop robbing my neighborhood. If I saw a Crips van parked down the street after seeing a Crips TV commercial saying "we're taking over", I'd call the cops.
Starting Score: 1 point Moderation -1
100% Flamebait
To a TrollMod, a political party calling itself "pirates" is calm and polite. Saying pirates means "robbers" is flamebait. Like a pirate saying their victims had it coming.
In most states, actually operating under the terms of a contract, even if it's not signed by any party, gives that contract full force and effect.
If I used AT&T for anything covered by that privacy "policy", I'd sue them for unilaterally changing the terms of the contract without my consent. If I were a lawyer, I'd construct a class of everyone whose contract they're breaching.
Unless the old privacy policy says "AT&T can unilaterally change any terms of this policy without notice at any time", in which case I'd be a fool to think it was anything but an invitation to screw me whenever they want.
If a party designed to "reform real property laws" called itself the "Robber Party", I would never vote for it, send it money or let its rhetoric/policies influence my politics.
The article we're discussing has the exact same POV as every other WS article I've read through the years: people should stop protecting ourselves with the government, and instead trust corporations. Their writers are as intelligent as the lawyers they use to protect their profits. They're smart about avoiding points that hurt their cause.
That's the Republican POV too. Which is why the WS must be read with an eye spotting their propaganda. And why the Republican Party's politics is different: it's the most dangerous, especially because they actually control the government they want to "drown in a bathtub".
If we had this competition in 1974, when the oil crisis was artificially manufactured by oil corporation collusion with Arab tyrants, floating full tankers held offshore, we might have had 10 or 100 times as much gas to use on the mileage we've consumed.
Now, by the time a practical version of this combustion could be installed in a majority of cars, we'll already well into the terminal decline of many oil producing countries.
Instead, we'll all drive giant 12MPG SUVs clogging the roads, until they just freeze in place.
The WS is the center of the sphere of influence accepted by the Republican government. Which has driven under the influence into nightmare after nightmare. I read it sometimes to keep an eye on the propaganda bubbler before it spews all over us.
I'll take credit for linking to actual thought provocation, in BroadbandReports.com. Not to provocative thoughtlessness.
The Weekly Standard is William Kristol's neocon rag that cheerleaded us into this Iraq debacle, this $9-45 TRILLION debt, and the rest of the BushCo agenda to crush the government that we use to protect ourselves from corporate anarchy.
The standard neocon procedure is to loudly insist that all the problems with their own policies are what's wrong with what they're attacking. It's boring, but it's worked, so they're doing it again.
The standard attack on Net Neutrality is Net Doublecharge, where the backbone like AT&T gets paid already for publishers like Google to connect from upstream, and paid by consumers like you to connect from downstream, to access their link among other networks. They doublecharge websites like Google because they want more money, and can get the entire industry to charge at once so there's no "routing around" the more expensive blackmail networks.
You want to see what their Net Doublecharge Internet will look like? It will look like AT&T's HomeZone, their updated version of AOL's "walled garden", where you get access only to AT&T's official Internet: sites that pay AT&T for access, which don't make any trouble for AT&T's control.
Slashdot Mirror
Those parties don't call themselves the "Murder Party", because they represent their actions as legitimate, not murder. Calling yourself the "Pirate Party" instead of, say, the "Copyright Party" or "Intellectual Freedom Party" represents your actions as piracy. Which means actual seafaring, murdering, kidnapping, slaving, robbing pirates to most people, and just software theft to others.
If you can't even tell the difference between critizicing a party's policy and critizing its name, like so many others replying in this subthread, how do you expect the public to tell that the Pirate Party isn't just a bunch of robbing pirates?
Goddamn rats are giving false hope to humans that embryonic stemcell therapies can make them walk again. Everyone knows that embryonic stemcells have never cured anyone. It's just part of the rat plan to take over the world with superior healing powers for them, and fake medical research for us.
It's not clear whether the parking lot is owned by the coffeeshop. If it is, the piggybacker has to leave when requested by the management, and should expect to be arrested for trespassing (or similar Vancouver charge) after several warnings from police.
If the coffeeshop does't control the parking lot, then arresting the guy is outrageous. If the coffeeshop put lounge chairs out in that lot and someone sat in them every day without buying anything, there's no law broken. Just someone rudely exploiting the excessive generosity (and sloppiness) of the coffeeshop. Which isn't a crime, even in Vancouver.
Sounds like the coffeeshop manager needs to switch to decaf.
Why doesn't Adobe upgrade their PDF generators to include a "Real Redact" button that actually deletes the redacted data? They could sell it to governments at the usual 1000x government markup rate, and the government would probably still save money vs the fallout from these illusory blackout follies. Neither the government nor Adobe is in the "freedom of information" camp. Maybe the government just refuses to buy an upgrade because that would save money overall.
The same filters that block SIP can block Skype. The same tricks to get Skype past them work for SIP.
VoIP is probably going to force ISPs to honor their "unlimited" contracts, or revise them, in combination with other streaming apps.
Read Yergin's book and find him expand that Slashdot-length post in detail. Which doesn't explain away the full oil tankers floating offshore America to intensify the OPEC supply constraints.
But which Yergin does use to insist we deregulate the oil business which pays his bills.
BTW, it's funny how even an Anonymous Coward can disagree with a strong statement without flaming it. Flamebait is in the eye of the TrollMod.
Yes - except the Communist Party, because "Communist" is not defined as "criminal", despite Soviet and other Communists.
"Pirate" means criminal. What's so hard to understand about that?
Depends on the reform, of course. There's plenty of room for improvement. The recent Supreme Court "eminent domain" travesty is a good place to fix laws that allow such an obviously bad interpretation.
Since the US Federal government found MS a monopoly, but isn't stopping Microsoft from "encouraging" people to use their software by abusing it, looks like god is the only one left with jurisdiction might actually forbid it.
Who's got software that automatically reports whether/which CC license is assigned to a given file?
"maximum corporate legislation possible "
Sununu is defending his "constituent" (briber^Wcontributor) telco corporations from liability for the broadcast flag. That doesn't make him wrong to oppose the flag, it just makes it less obvious which corporate legislation he insists on. If he insisted on copyright holder laws, he'd get less "support" from telcos. If he really protected consumers, he'd replace the broadcast flag legislation with other legislation that blocks it, rather than leave the vacuum. The vacuum gives Sununu an issue to bargain with the telcos in the future.
I'm not talking about a "partisan issue". I'm talking about a partisan government. Republicans control the government so exclusively that they exclude Democrats from even debate, or even reading the bills before votes. With that power, Republicans insist on the maximum corporate legislation possible - with possibility defined mostly by conflicts between corporations over "market access", without any regard to the people we elect them to protect.
Republicans already have taken the telco position against Net Neutrality, despite its obvious rigging the market for telcos. If MoveOn, which depends on Net Neutrality for its existence in face of telco power, didn't oppose it, the Republicans would have found their common interest with telcos even easier to execute. Shutting out MoveOn from such political activism is the result of abandoning Net Neutrality. Republican kneejerk "enemy's enemy is my friend" is the hallmark of what's wrong with their control of the government.
Nature abhors a vacuum, and power vacuums suck hardest. Without decent legislation to fill the slot that defines value conflicted between different interests, bad legislation will always return to fill it.
It's obvious that the Republican government insists on the maximum corporate legislation possible, and the minimum personal freedom. It's clear that just stopping corporate laws isn't enough to protect our freedom from being destroyed by the government, instead of protected. We need to insert "broadcast flag" laws into the books that prohibit them from interfering with our rights.
The EFF needs to write copyright laws that specify when they can be used and what they mean in practice and in the courts. Like any good lobbyist these days, they need to get politicians to adopt the "language" defining DRM to protect only legitimate rights and privileges. It should be cheap and easy for the EFF, as minimal DRM power is popular and just. In fact, the EFF will be doing politicians a favor by packaging popular public interest in a format that can be easily shown on TV and in newspapers, for maximum fundraising and campaigning effect.
I hope that the wide deployment of Firefox makes this SIP client catch on fast and replace the proprietary Skype clients that created the market.
And I hope this SIP client pushes Firefox into even further deployment.
Simple integration of voice into the Web has the power to be the "new Netscape", combining multiple related functions into a single integrated experience among hundreds of millions of people around the world.
Calling the PSTN for a charge might become like the mid-1990s paying small dialup prices to access the rest of the Net for "free".
Are you reading my post? If the Communists called themselves the "Mafia", I'd call the cops on them.
IIRC mine was in the serial number range mentioned in the public recall notice.
Even if they weren't, their form should have kicked back a reassuring note that I'm safe.
I'd call the cops and tell them that robbers were in my neighborhood. I'd expect them to come by and see if they were robbing anything.
I certainly wouldn't expect the party to represent me or anyone else but robbers.
If the Crips called themselves a "political party" I wouldn't expect them to stop robbing my neighborhood. If I saw a Crips van parked down the street after seeing a Crips TV commercial saying "we're taking over", I'd call the cops.
Starting Score: 1 point
Moderation -1
100% Flamebait
To a TrollMod, a political party calling itself "pirates" is calm and polite. Saying pirates means "robbers" is flamebait. Like a pirate saying their victims had it coming.
In most states, actually operating under the terms of a contract, even if it's not signed by any party, gives that contract full force and effect.
If I used AT&T for anything covered by that privacy "policy", I'd sue them for unilaterally changing the terms of the contract without my consent. If I were a lawyer, I'd construct a class of everyone whose contract they're breaching.
Unless the old privacy policy says "AT&T can unilaterally change any terms of this policy without notice at any time", in which case I'd be a fool to think it was anything but an invitation to screw me whenever they want.
If a party designed to "reform real property laws" called itself the "Robber Party", I would never vote for it, send it money or let its rhetoric/policies influence my politics.
I'd call the cops.
The article we're discussing has the exact same POV as every other WS article I've read through the years: people should stop protecting ourselves with the government, and instead trust corporations. Their writers are as intelligent as the lawyers they use to protect their profits. They're smart about avoiding points that hurt their cause.
That's the Republican POV too. Which is why the WS must be read with an eye spotting their propaganda. And why the Republican Party's politics is different: it's the most dangerous, especially because they actually control the government they want to "drown in a bathtub".
If we had this competition in 1974, when the oil crisis was artificially manufactured by oil corporation collusion with Arab tyrants, floating full tankers held offshore, we might have had 10 or 100 times as much gas to use on the mileage we've consumed.
Now, by the time a practical version of this combustion could be installed in a majority of cars, we'll already well into the terminal decline of many oil producing countries.
Instead, we'll all drive giant 12MPG SUVs clogging the roads, until they just freeze in place.
I responded to the Dell AC recall with their official website form. Two units. Never heard from them again.
That made me certain that Dell incompetence would make my bricks explode.
I replaced them at my own expense. And considered sneaking into a Dell office and swapping mine in for theirs.
The WS is the center of the sphere of influence accepted by the Republican government. Which has driven under the influence into nightmare after nightmare. I read it sometimes to keep an eye on the propaganda bubbler before it spews all over us.
I'll take credit for linking to actual thought provocation, in BroadbandReports.com. Not to provocative thoughtlessness.
Moderation -1
100% Flamebait
AT&T's got AsTrollMods out astroturfing their propaganda on Slashdot. Or maybe it's Kristol's stormtroopers.
There won't be any flaming on AT&T's Internet1.1 - Homeland Security will protect us from that.
The Weekly Standard is William Kristol's neocon rag that cheerleaded us into this Iraq debacle, this $9-45 TRILLION debt, and the rest of the BushCo agenda to crush the government that we use to protect ourselves from corporate anarchy.
The standard neocon procedure is to loudly insist that all the problems with their own policies are what's wrong with what they're attacking. It's boring, but it's worked, so they're doing it again.
The standard attack on Net Neutrality is Net Doublecharge, where the backbone like AT&T gets paid already for publishers like Google to connect from upstream, and paid by consumers like you to connect from downstream, to access their link among other networks. They doublecharge websites like Google because they want more money, and can get the entire industry to charge at once so there's no "routing around" the more expensive blackmail networks.
You want to see what their Net Doublecharge Internet will look like? It will look like AT&T's HomeZone, their updated version of AOL's "walled garden", where you get access only to AT&T's official Internet: sites that pay AT&T for access, which don't make any trouble for AT&T's control.