How exactly are you going to strip congress of the authority to declare staff essential? Moreover, frankly congressmen being able to get information I'd consider a heck of a lot more essential than things that did remain open like air travel. If congress is cut off from their staff we don't have the capacity for the democracy to respond to new and changing information.
The shutdown is stupid. Let's not make it more stupid by breaking important stuff.
Why would he do that? Most of the developers don't need complex documentation and most people who would be doing in professionally already have context. This documentation that's missing is decontextualized documentation for amateurs or computer professionals who deal with this problem irregularly. Generally those problems are handled by a class of tech writer who associate with the product and its commercial support functions. IBM, HP, RedHat... provide commercial support services. That should fall on them not kernel development team.
A religion cannot be criminally liable under freedom of religion. Are Jews criminal liable for killing Jesus? Are Catholics criminally liable for the crusades?
People in the CoS have done horrible things. As are people who are members of other religions. That doesn't give France the right to discriminate against all the people who belong to that religion. There are people born March 7, that have done horrible things. If France were holding everyone born March 7 criminally liable for the acts of some of the people born that day that would be similarly wrong.
Religious freedom disallows the persecution of religious organizations. It allows the persecution of religious individuals. As for a "sham to dodge taxes" that's just you saying you don't like them.
When people talk about the rights of states they are speaking morally not legally. Legally states have whatever rights they have the power to do. So George Bush had the power to hold people indefinitely without trial based on calling them "illegal combatants" but he didn't have the right to do so.
Keep going. What can they do with the money once they get it? That's where the differences start to come in. Commercial entities are free to do what they want with the money.
You would be allowed to release copies of Steamboat Wily but you would not be allowed to create new works with Mickey Mouse. And yes you can use trademark in cases where copyright doesn't apply. Open Source software does that all the time so for example RedHat releases the OS open source but the name RedHat is trademarked and thus some files must be changed.
Of course it implies that. As institutions they aren't subject to the state. Fraud implies the state has the right to evaluate the truth of their claims, under religious freedom they do not. Racketeering implies the state can find the religious institution and not just individuals guilty of crime, the state does not have that right. So you understand the implications perfectly well, that's what religious freedom means.
All states give religions they like to operate that's not religious freedom.
Assume that there were no copyright violations. This is still a clear cut trademark violation. I'm not sure how this case is even questionable. The right thing to have done would have been to go to Nintendo and asked permission to license Mario to do a web based version. Nintendo might have been receptive, and have been willing to grant some sort of license as it is kinda cool. But heck yeah, they own Mario.
This is like me releasing a soda called "old fashioned Coke" using 1970s style soda ingredients.
Exactly! That's the problem. That the French state basically reserves to itself the right to make a list of good religions and bad religions and use that list to deploy state power against the followers as well as encourage private discrimination. That's fundamentally a state that simply doesn't believe in freedom of religion. All states allow freedom of religion for religions they like.
How is that relevant? Most religions are stupid. So what? This is about a state deciding to go after a religion with full on state religious persecution and the encouragement of private discrimination. Either you support state persecution of religions or you don't.
I do Yoga regularly. I find the New Agey quasi Hindu religion parts ridiculous. I still get good exercise, lose weight and tone as a result of the practice. Things like auditing can be quite helpful in helping people get past psychological trauma. In a free state you don't harm people because you disagree with how they spend their leisure time.
The question is whether the state should be using state power to try and destroy a religion. No one is questioning the right of the state to prevent murder. Scientology is openly practiced and quite popular in places like LA and Minneapolis. There are no murders. Certainly there are problems with Scientology and the French state is within their rights to attack illegal behavior on the parts of Scientologists. They are not within their rights to attack Scientology.
Then charge the people involved with conspiracy to commit murder and crimes or being an accessory to murder. Don't charge the entire group with being a "cult" and thus illegal.
The problem with France and Germany is they are making the religion illegal not the crimes illegal.
The power to tax is the power to destroy. Taxation by its very nature requires a degree of oversight which perforce requires the government to have effective regulatory capacity.
So they aren't a business. They have strict limitations on what they can do with their money that don't apply to businesses. And those limitations don't require the kinds of oversight required for businesses.
That's the very definition of religious persecution. So no, if you support freedom of religion you don't support the right of the state to dismantle religions because they don't like them. They cannot treat religions like you would corrupt companies.
The USA has a rather terrific record on Freedom of Religion. That's one tradition we haven't screwed up yet. France is another story, they have a truly dreadful record. This article is about France.
The right to give people nonsensical advice is what freedom of religion is about. I think people who believe you can pray away germs are dead wrong. I also think their opinions deserve 100% legal protections.
Let me second this one. Mathematica, Maple, Sage, Matlab / Octive... Mathematical languages are so nice for scientific computing because the languages have wonderful built in functions.
I was responding to a fairly specific claim comparing Postgres' documentation to Oracle. Not because Oracle says so, but because easily observable fact shows the documentation is far far superior.
As far as more secure Oracle runs many of the most secure systems on the planet. It is has been subjected to harsh attacks and over time few flaws have been found and those have been patched.
That sort of thing is called experiment and is a valid way of determining epistemological truth.
Quality is pretty good. You are going to get a lot of negativity but I don't think it is so bad. Higher quality by far at about the same length comes from Oracle Press.
1) The American people know the surveillance program is larger than they were led to believe. 63% believe the government was lying about what it was collecting and another 18% don't know. 2) They generally oppose it as it is run now but support it with more oversight particularly better court oversight.
Slashdot Mirror
How exactly are you going to strip congress of the authority to declare staff essential? Moreover, frankly congressmen being able to get information I'd consider a heck of a lot more essential than things that did remain open like air travel. If congress is cut off from their staff we don't have the capacity for the democracy to respond to new and changing information.
The shutdown is stupid. Let's not make it more stupid by breaking important stuff.
Why would he do that? Most of the developers don't need complex documentation and most people who would be doing in professionally already have context. This documentation that's missing is decontextualized documentation for amateurs or computer professionals who deal with this problem irregularly. Generally those problems are handled by a class of tech writer who associate with the product and its commercial support functions. IBM, HP, RedHat... provide commercial support services. That should fall on them not kernel development team.
A religion cannot be criminally liable under freedom of religion. Are Jews criminal liable for killing Jesus? Are Catholics criminally liable for the crusades?
People in the CoS have done horrible things. As are people who are members of other religions. That doesn't give France the right to discriminate against all the people who belong to that religion. There are people born March 7, that have done horrible things. If France were holding everyone born March 7 criminally liable for the acts of some of the people born that day that would be similarly wrong.
Religious freedom disallows the persecution of religious organizations. It allows the persecution of religious individuals. As for a "sham to dodge taxes" that's just you saying you don't like them.
When people talk about the rights of states they are speaking morally not legally. Legally states have whatever rights they have the power to do. So George Bush had the power to hold people indefinitely without trial based on calling them "illegal combatants" but he didn't have the right to do so.
Keep going. What can they do with the money once they get it? That's where the differences start to come in. Commercial entities are free to do what they want with the money.
You would be allowed to release copies of Steamboat Wily but you would not be allowed to create new works with Mickey Mouse. And yes you can use trademark in cases where copyright doesn't apply. Open Source software does that all the time so for example RedHat releases the OS open source but the name RedHat is trademarked and thus some files must be changed.
Of course it implies that. As institutions they aren't subject to the state. Fraud implies the state has the right to evaluate the truth of their claims, under religious freedom they do not. Racketeering implies the state can find the religious institution and not just individuals guilty of crime, the state does not have that right. So you understand the implications perfectly well, that's what religious freedom means.
All states give religions they like to operate that's not religious freedom.
Assume that there were no copyright violations. This is still a clear cut trademark violation. I'm not sure how this case is even questionable. The right thing to have done would have been to go to Nintendo and asked permission to license Mario to do a web based version. Nintendo might have been receptive, and have been willing to grant some sort of license as it is kinda cool. But heck yeah, they own Mario.
This is like me releasing a soda called "old fashioned Coke" using 1970s style soda ingredients.
Religions shouldn't be able to be convicted of fraud, they don't engage in commerce.
Exactly! That's the problem. That the French state basically reserves to itself the right to make a list of good religions and bad religions and use that list to deploy state power against the followers as well as encourage private discrimination. That's fundamentally a state that simply doesn't believe in freedom of religion. All states allow freedom of religion for religions they like.
How is that relevant? Most religions are stupid. So what? This is about a state deciding to go after a religion with full on state religious persecution and the encouragement of private discrimination. Either you support state persecution of religions or you don't.
I do Yoga regularly. I find the New Agey quasi Hindu religion parts ridiculous. I still get good exercise, lose weight and tone as a result of the practice. Things like auditing can be quite helpful in helping people get past psychological trauma. In a free state you don't harm people because you disagree with how they spend their leisure time.
The question is whether the state should be using state power to try and destroy a religion. No one is questioning the right of the state to prevent murder. Scientology is openly practiced and quite popular in places like LA and Minneapolis. There are no murders. Certainly there are problems with Scientology and the French state is within their rights to attack illegal behavior on the parts of Scientologists. They are not within their rights to attack Scientology.
This is rather clear cut.
Then charge the people involved with conspiracy to commit murder and crimes or being an accessory to murder. Don't charge the entire group with being a "cult" and thus illegal.
The problem with France and Germany is they are making the religion illegal not the crimes illegal.
I don't see much difference between Islam and Christianity.
That being said, terrorist organizations have moderate widespread support in the muslim communities, particularly during the Iraq war: http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/09/EXTREM15.png
The power to tax is the power to destroy. Taxation by its very nature requires a degree of oversight which perforce requires the government to have effective regulatory capacity.
So they aren't a business. They have strict limitations on what they can do with their money that don't apply to businesses. And those limitations don't require the kinds of oversight required for businesses.
That's the very definition of religious persecution. So no, if you support freedom of religion you don't support the right of the state to dismantle religions because they don't like them. They cannot treat religions like you would corrupt companies.
The USA has a rather terrific record on Freedom of Religion. That's one tradition we haven't screwed up yet. France is another story, they have a truly dreadful record. This article is about France.
The right to give people nonsensical advice is what freedom of religion is about. I think people who believe you can pray away germs are dead wrong. I also think their opinions deserve 100% legal protections.
Let me second this one. Mathematica, Maple, Sage, Matlab / Octive... Mathematical languages are so nice for scientific computing because the languages have wonderful built in functions.
I was responding to a fairly specific claim comparing Postgres' documentation to Oracle. Not because Oracle says so, but because easily observable fact shows the documentation is far far superior.
As far as more secure Oracle runs many of the most secure systems on the planet. It is has been subjected to harsh attacks and over time few flaws have been found and those have been patched.
That sort of thing is called experiment and is a valid way of determining epistemological truth.
Oracle is a complex product meant for experts and specialists.
Quality is pretty good. You are going to get a lot of negativity but I don't think it is so bad. Higher quality by far at about the same length comes from Oracle Press.
I think the results are clear.
1) The American people know the surveillance program is larger than they were led to believe. 63% believe the government was lying about what it was collecting and another 18% don't know.
2) They generally oppose it as it is run now but support it with more oversight particularly better court oversight.
Why would the new revelations change opinion?
Thank you for being honest about the fact that Oracle is still way ahead on the niche high end. Your statement I can agree with.