It seems to me that a machine that didn't want to accept outside interference would have to have a miniature triangulation system and laser beam to disable any nearby devices causing the interference.
Can it actually work this way? Since the invention of the printing press, I can't recall a single instance in which society allowed itself to be censored into ignorance by the existing govenrment.
Would the USSR fit this criteria? Now, it wasn't complete ignorance, since many people got good educations, but non-state-sponsored information was heavily restricted. It seems to be happening again, with the reinstated state control of the media in Russia.
TV often broadcasts pictures of the New York skyline -- maybe ben Laden got his idea from a transition pan in "Friends". Better ban that, too... after all, wouldn't we be remiss if someday someone did get the idea from TV?
Obviously, we need to restrict all crime dramas and action cop films from creating original ideas. The only crimes that they should be able to depict are crimes that have already happened several times, and are already widely known. Otherwise, they could be used as ideas by terrorists.
And Tom Clancy should have the same restrictions. Or at least it should be against the law to translate his books to Arabic.
Just putting...sucks... on a domain doesn't offer much in the way of real criticism.
Um.. I don't think that the domain name was the sum total of the criticism. I'd hazard a guess that there was some more in-depth criticism on the actual web page.
To avoid customer confusion, the owner of a domain name should be required to put up a page at that domain that is appropriate to the domain name. Someone putting up a pro-Vivendi site at a "Sucks" domain is obviously attempting to trick customers into thinking that Vivendi does not suck.
In short, proprietary software vendors usually want to take away rights which copyright law would otherwise grant.
Actually, the proprietary software vendors do give you one thing that copyright law doesn't. Due to a bizarre reading of copyright law, the installation of the software on the computer, and the copy of the software in RAM are considered copies that can be regulated by copyright law. So you can't install or run software without the permission of the copyright holder.
How can you guys allow such an obviously flawed system to exist? The person with the most money wins
To an extent, this is true in the vast majority of governments, but cause and effect are often reversed (the winners get the most money). But the reason it's true to such an extent in the US is that it crept up on us, and it has only become fully apparent recently. Governmental inertia is immense, and the current trajectory is in favor of more money influence.
I prefer my movies without sex and without language.
Wow. Even before the 'talkies' appeared on the scene, they'd put the essential dialogue into the movie as a sort of 'slide'. Offhand, I can't think of any movies with no language at all, though I expect there are some animated ones with language only in the titles and credits.
Assume h is units of happiness. Would it be OK to take 100h from person A if it would give person B 101h? How about if you took 50h each from 2 people to give a third 101h? I don't think it's that easy, even conceptually.
A client of a lawyer has been arrested because he most probably broke the law.
I would disagree with this, especially with respect to the 1000+ people being held WRT the 9/11 attacks.
If the client somehow admits to breaking that law to his lawyer or to a jury, and because of that he gets punished for breaking the law, well, great. Justice being done. If client has a problem with that he should not have broken the law.
The problem is not when the client admits guilt to the lawyer. The problem is that the prosecution gets to listen in to the defense's strategy sessions, and can plan their prosecuton accordingly. This will not result in verdicts that are more fair; it will result in more guilty verdicts. Whoever has more information has the advantage, regardless of the fact of the case.
I have seen Microsoft release products that do really stupid things, but I have trouble recalling the last time they released a music application that unnecessarily formats your harddrive.
Well, the license for the latest release of Media Player claims the right to delete other software from your computer. Of course, it's not a bug - it's a feature.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems to me that a machine that didn't want to accept outside interference would have to have a miniature triangulation system and laser beam to disable any nearby devices causing the interference.
Can it actually work this way? Since the invention of the printing press, I can't recall a single instance in which society allowed itself to be censored into ignorance by the existing govenrment.
Would the USSR fit this criteria? Now, it wasn't complete ignorance, since many people got good educations, but non-state-sponsored information was heavily restricted. It seems to be happening again, with the reinstated state control of the media in Russia.
TV often broadcasts pictures of the New York skyline -- maybe ben Laden got his idea from a transition pan in "Friends". Better ban that, too... after all, wouldn't we be remiss if someday someone did get the idea from TV?
Obviously, we need to restrict all crime dramas and action cop films from creating original ideas. The only crimes that they should be able to depict are crimes that have already happened several times, and are already widely known. Otherwise, they could be used as ideas by terrorists.
And Tom Clancy should have the same restrictions. Or at least it should be against the law to translate his books to Arabic.
Just putting ...sucks... on a domain doesn't offer much in the way of real criticism.
Um.. I don't think that the domain name was the sum total of the criticism. I'd hazard a guess that there was some more in-depth criticism on the actual web page.
To avoid customer confusion, the owner of a domain name should be required to put up a page at that domain that is appropriate to the domain name. Someone putting up a pro-Vivendi site at a "Sucks" domain is obviously attempting to trick customers into thinking that Vivendi does not suck.
Wow. That's good news. So what separates software from books now, with respect to the 'first sale' doctrine?
In short, proprietary software vendors usually want to take away rights which copyright law would otherwise grant.
Actually, the proprietary software vendors do give you one thing that copyright law doesn't. Due to a bizarre reading of copyright law, the installation of the software on the computer, and the copy of the software in RAM are considered copies that can be regulated by copyright law. So you can't install or run software without the permission of the copyright holder.
Monopolies (and therefore probabably cartels) aren't in much danger from the current administration. It's hard to see how near this future is.
"Foreign Policy" magazine is hardly a group of basement-bound teenagers spouting the Slashdot party line.
How can you guys allow such an obviously flawed system to exist?
The person with the most money wins
To an extent, this is true in the vast majority of governments, but cause and effect are often reversed (the winners get the most money). But the reason it's true to such an extent in the US is that it crept up on us, and it has only become fully apparent recently. Governmental inertia is immense, and the current trajectory is in favor of more money influence.
I prefer my movies without sex and without language.
Wow. Even before the 'talkies' appeared on the scene, they'd put the essential dialogue into the movie as a sort of 'slide'. Offhand, I can't think of any movies with no language at all, though I expect there are some animated ones with language only in the titles and credits.
Assume h is units of happiness. Would it be OK to take 100h from person A if it would give person B 101h? How about if you took 50h each from 2 people to give a third 101h? I don't think it's that easy, even conceptually.
Unfortunately, "better place" is not objective, either?
I'm an idiot.
A client of a lawyer has been arrested because he most probably broke the law.
I would disagree with this, especially with respect to the 1000+ people being held WRT the 9/11 attacks.
If the client somehow admits to breaking that law to his lawyer or to a jury, and because of that he gets punished for breaking the law, well, great. Justice being done. If client has a problem with that he should not have broken the law.
The problem is not when the client admits guilt to the lawyer. The problem is that the prosecution gets to listen in to the defense's strategy sessions, and can plan their prosecuton accordingly. This will not result in verdicts that are more fair; it will result in more guilty verdicts. Whoever has more information has the advantage, regardless of the fact of the case.
s/on/up against/g
And, the monitoring only extends to telephone and mail; private meetings are undoubtably private.
What's the difference? And also, the fact that they're willing to bend the rules this much sort of removes the "undoubtedly" from your statement.
Oh, as long as it's only a few people...
You were right the first time.
I have seen Microsoft release products that do really stupid things, but I have trouble recalling the last time they released a music application that unnecessarily formats your harddrive.
Well, the license for the latest release of Media Player claims the right to delete other software from your computer. Of course, it's not a bug - it's a feature.
Wow. Your post
made me wobble
and sway
down to the
floor, with
visions of
"Spy vs Spy vs Spy"
swirling
around my head...
No discussion about apostrophes is complete without this.
So you'd take his comics seriously, but his serious book lightly?
Except patents last for 17 years, while copyright lasts for 75+life of author.
And a Hydraliskish head.