Notice that all of these stories about Kinect don't actually relate to its stated purpose. Kind of ironic that Kinect seems useful for everything except gaming.
When the president's party has a majority in congress and he uses his position to push for legislation, we say he "passed" it. No one disputes that the new health care law was Obama's bill; similarly, the retroactive immunity legislation came from the Bush administration. You can quibble with the semantics, not with the truth.
One of the things you will find is that a large portion of the "scientific community" exists within colleges and universities, which view anyone who believes that people are responsible for the consequences of their actions as ignorant heathens.
Wouldn't they love Bush then? Passing a bill granting yourself retroactive immunity from prosecution is about as big of a responsibility dodge as I can conceive.
Re:Your right to what?
on
BTJunkie No More?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Your experience doesn't mesh with reality. Heavy P2P users have been found to pay for more legal content than the average person in multiplestudies.
And before someone makes the argument that they can make a website poof, if you actually read the legislation, that is a last measure when there has been no cooperation with the people involved in the matter. The decisions can be challenged in court just fine, there is nothing that says you cannot do that, just like with the DMCA.
You get 5 days to contest it before payment processors are barred from doing business with you and search engines must stop acknowledging your existence. That alone is alarming to me.
Even worse, however, is the provision that gives immunity to those who take that action with just reasonable belief of infringement, i.e. the same requirement placed on DMCA takedowns. Know of anyone who's ever gotten even a slap on the wrist for sending out abusive takedowns? Yeah, me neither.
DMCA is already abusive as hell in that fraudulent claims can be made and the only recourse the attacked individual has is a counter-claim that might not even get the content reinstated. There is no mechanism for holding those who abuse the system accountable. These bills would give this already broken system even more teeth. In the face of all that, what about the response seems hyperbolic to you?
Most people's animalistic urges are about things like eating and fucking. If you count filesharing as the entirety of our animalistic urges, I'd suggest that you must be a huge nerd and/or very boring.
You're presuming that all Christians feel the same way you do about social issues. You're also presuming that anyone who mentions that the United States is a predominately Christian nation must (a) not be a Christian (b) think all Christians are stuck in the 16th century. The post you replied to does not give evidence for either of those points.
So it's not a case of assuming a US citizen couldn't speak ill of the US; more a case of assuming that if the military is paying him to say this, it wants this version of events propagated (note that the piece doesn't provide any evidence pointing to the Russians. His argument is basically, "Well, they could have. And if we make a bunch of assumptions, they might have wanted to as well".).
I'd take anything said by the proponents of any proposal with a grain of salt. Let's see what FactCheck.org has to say (emphasis mine):
With the prebate program in effect, those earning less than $15,000 per year would see their share of the federal tax burden drop from -0.7 percent to -6.3 percent. Of course, if the poorest Americans are paying less under the FairTax plan, then someone else pays more. As it turns out, according to the Treasury Department, “someone else” is everybody earning between $15,000 and $200,000 per year.
Which seems to contradict your statement about saving money until you look at this graph, which includes payroll taxes. So, yes, someone like you making more than $74,000 would save money. As would someone making less than $24,000. However, the $24,000 - $74,000 group (let's call them the lower-middle class) are the ones paying for it. That doesn't sit well with me.
Moreover, I'm not convinced that abolishing corporate taxes would bring all those American manufacturing jobs streaming back. For something like software development, where you'd be paying a high wage to your employees no matter where you were located, sure. But manufacturing? Even with 0% corporate taxes, American labor still costs a hell of a lot more than Chinese or Thai labor.
Prior to 1953, Iran was a constitutional monarchy. Mohammad Mosaddegh was not appointed by the Shah, as you claim, but elected by the Iranian parliament. The Shah also wasn't nearly as independent as you claim; his deference to the United States was part of what led to his eventual ouster. He also wasn't supportive of communism. The communist party of Iran (which supported the nationalization of Iran's oil industry during Mosaddegh's time as Prime Minister) was banned by the Shah. The Soviets even tried to assassinate him, according to defectors.
As for the sources relating to Operation Ajax being from the CIA, well yeah. It was a CIA operation, who else should have known about it? But it didn't occur in a vacuum. The UK wanted Mosaddegh overthrown (remember who owned the oil industry that Mosaddegh wanted to nationalize). So your version of the story is what? That the Shah staged a coup coincidentally at the same time that the UK wanted the US to do the same thing, and the CIA then faked documents taking credit for it? Yeah, sure.
"The actual reason is most probably someone wrote something really harsh about the policies adopted by his political party."
Pretty much, yeah:
About six weeks ago, Mr. Sibal called legal representatives from the top Internet service providers and Facebook into his New Delhi office, said one of the executives who was briefed on the meeting.
At the meeting, Mr. Sibal showed attendees a Facebook page that maligned the Congress Party’s president, Sonia Gandhi. “This is unacceptable,” he told attendees, the executive said, and he asked them to find a way to monitor what is posted on their sites.
I saw a comment on another website speculating that the NSA might be involved with this. I'm not nearly enough of a tinfoil hat wearer to accept that without any evidence, but I think it says something that this looks big enough that people think it must be a government effort.
Just another example of how Big Brother has gone corporate.
There are two kinds of sales going right now. A lot of stuff is discounted across the board until the 28th, and then specific items are on sale each day. Portal 2 was on sale until 1:00 PM EST today for $10 as a daily deal. Now that that's over, it'll be on sale for $15 till the end of the sale on Monday.
It attempts to solve an unsolvable security engineering problem (the secure device in an insecure environment) and the security only needs to be broken once for the whole system to fall apart. For some reason, copyright-based industries have failed to grasp this fundamental truth, and their lobbyists have convinced governments to prop up their bad security systems with undemocratic laws and censorship.
On the contrary, the fact that they've turned to legislation shows that do in fact recognize the truth of DRM's infeasibility. When their technical solutions failed, they bought legal ones.
Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it: "thieves stole her bicycle".
Copyright infringement doesn't deprive the owner of the song of their property. They still own the song. Copyright infringement is illegal, but calling it theft is an attempt to make it something it is not. If we want to have a reasonable discussion of the issue, we should start by being clear about what copyright infringement is and what it isn't.
In addition to deaths, radiation also causes lot's of non-terminal cancer, although the same may be said about coal.
What about non-terminal respiratory illness? Convenient how so many Nuclear critics ignore all the problems with the only currently viable Nuclear alternative (if we can get renewable to the point where it can satisfy base-line generation requirements, great. but we're not there yet) and continue to harp on a single nuclear disaster. And you're just as guilty of cherry picking. 1 Million deaths isn't an "example", it's the highest number you could find. Even Greenpeace only puts the number at 200,000+, on par with Banqiao.
I'd be very wary of pinning all my energy hopes on future technology (that XKCD stip makes the point quite well). Nuclear is the best option we have to satisfy our current energy requirements.
As for the reason that the Nuclear advocates don't mention alternative energy, why should they? What's the point of arguing against something that doesn't exist?
My Nook Simple, seems to go braindead when its plugged in. It goes into a "charging" mode.
I assume by "Nook Simple" you mean the original Nook? The only time mine says it's in charging mode is when I've let the battery run completely down. And even then it only displays that message until it gets to a minimum level of charge to function, at which point it operates normally (albeit tethered to its short power cable).
Slashdot Mirror
Notice that all of these stories about Kinect don't actually relate to its stated purpose. Kind of ironic that Kinect seems useful for everything except gaming.
When the president's party has a majority in congress and he uses his position to push for legislation, we say he "passed" it. No one disputes that the new health care law was Obama's bill; similarly, the retroactive immunity legislation came from the Bush administration. You can quibble with the semantics, not with the truth.
Wrong religion. Not all Indians are Hindu. The guy's name is Mufti Ajiaz Arshad Qasmi.
I realize that the desire for censorship crops up in pretty much all religions, but let's lay the blame where it's warranted in this case.
One of the things you will find is that a large portion of the "scientific community" exists within colleges and universities, which view anyone who believes that people are responsible for the consequences of their actions as ignorant heathens.
Wouldn't they love Bush then? Passing a bill granting yourself retroactive immunity from prosecution is about as big of a responsibility dodge as I can conceive.
Your experience doesn't mesh with reality. Heavy P2P users have been found to pay for more legal content than the average person in multiple studies.
And atheists, Muslims, socialists, and communists. And progressives. And the President. And anyone really.
Politics and public discourse in America is full of hate and vitriol. The groups you mention give it out just as much and as well as they get it.
Forgetting about Harriet Miers, aren't we?
And before someone makes the argument that they can make a website poof, if you actually read the legislation, that is a last measure when there has been no cooperation with the people involved in the matter. The decisions can be challenged in court just fine, there is nothing that says you cannot do that, just like with the DMCA.
You get 5 days to contest it before payment processors are barred from doing business with you and search engines must stop acknowledging your existence. That alone is alarming to me.
Even worse, however, is the provision that gives immunity to those who take that action with just reasonable belief of infringement, i.e. the same requirement placed on DMCA takedowns. Know of anyone who's ever gotten even a slap on the wrist for sending out abusive takedowns? Yeah, me neither.
DMCA is already abusive as hell in that fraudulent claims can be made and the only recourse the attacked individual has is a counter-claim that might not even get the content reinstated. There is no mechanism for holding those who abuse the system accountable. These bills would give this already broken system even more teeth. In the face of all that, what about the response seems hyperbolic to you?
Most people's animalistic urges are about things like eating and fucking. If you count filesharing as the entirety of our animalistic urges, I'd suggest that you must be a huge nerd and/or very boring.
You're presuming that all Christians feel the same way you do about social issues. You're also presuming that anyone who mentions that the United States is a predominately Christian nation must (a) not be a Christian (b) think all Christians are stuck in the 16th century. The post you replied to does not give evidence for either of those points.
Except that this guy is a US Air Force analyst.
So it's not a case of assuming a US citizen couldn't speak ill of the US; more a case of assuming that if the military is paying him to say this, it wants this version of events propagated (note that the piece doesn't provide any evidence pointing to the Russians. His argument is basically, "Well, they could have. And if we make a bunch of assumptions, they might have wanted to as well".).
With the prebate program in effect, those earning less than $15,000 per year would see their share of the federal tax burden drop from -0.7 percent to -6.3 percent. Of course, if the poorest Americans are paying less under the FairTax plan, then someone else pays more. As it turns out, according to the Treasury Department, “someone else” is everybody earning between $15,000 and $200,000 per year.
Which seems to contradict your statement about saving money until you look at this graph, which includes payroll taxes. So, yes, someone like you making more than $74,000 would save money. As would someone making less than $24,000. However, the $24,000 - $74,000 group (let's call them the lower-middle class) are the ones paying for it. That doesn't sit well with me.
Moreover, I'm not convinced that abolishing corporate taxes would bring all those American manufacturing jobs streaming back. For something like software development, where you'd be paying a high wage to your employees no matter where you were located, sure. But manufacturing? Even with 0% corporate taxes, American labor still costs a hell of a lot more than Chinese or Thai labor.
Every statement you made was false.
Prior to 1953, Iran was a constitutional monarchy. Mohammad Mosaddegh was not appointed by the Shah, as you claim, but elected by the Iranian parliament. The Shah also wasn't nearly as independent as you claim; his deference to the United States was part of what led to his eventual ouster. He also wasn't supportive of communism. The communist party of Iran (which supported the nationalization of Iran's oil industry during Mosaddegh's time as Prime Minister) was banned by the Shah. The Soviets even tried to assassinate him, according to defectors.
As for the sources relating to Operation Ajax being from the CIA, well yeah. It was a CIA operation, who else should have known about it? But it didn't occur in a vacuum. The UK wanted Mosaddegh overthrown (remember who owned the oil industry that Mosaddegh wanted to nationalize). So your version of the story is what? That the Shah staged a coup coincidentally at the same time that the UK wanted the US to do the same thing, and the CIA then faked documents taking credit for it? Yeah, sure.
Pretty much, yeah:
About six weeks ago, Mr. Sibal called legal representatives from the top Internet service providers and Facebook into his New Delhi office, said one of the executives who was briefed on the meeting.
At the meeting, Mr. Sibal showed attendees a Facebook page that maligned the Congress Party’s president, Sonia Gandhi. “This is unacceptable,” he told attendees, the executive said, and he asked them to find a way to monitor what is posted on their sites.
From the NYT blog.
Poor phrasing. Blackberries don't run Android, but they do run CarrierIQ.
Please don't reply that Android is open source, unless you can show me the sources for CIQ!!!
Please don't reply that Linux is open source, unless you can show me the sources for Flash or Opera.
I saw a comment on another website speculating that the NSA might be involved with this. I'm not nearly enough of a tinfoil hat wearer to accept that without any evidence, but I think it says something that this looks big enough that people think it must be a government effort.
Just another example of how Big Brother has gone corporate.
There are two kinds of sales going right now. A lot of stuff is discounted across the board until the 28th, and then specific items are on sale each day. Portal 2 was on sale until 1:00 PM EST today for $10 as a daily deal. Now that that's over, it'll be on sale for $15 till the end of the sale on Monday.
It attempts to solve an unsolvable security engineering problem (the secure device in an insecure environment) and the security only needs to be broken once for the whole system to fall apart. For some reason, copyright-based industries have failed to grasp this fundamental truth, and their lobbyists have convinced governments to prop up their bad security systems with undemocratic laws and censorship.
On the contrary, the fact that they've turned to legislation shows that do in fact recognize the truth of DRM's infeasibility. When their technical solutions failed, they bought legal ones.
Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it: "thieves stole her bicycle".
Copyright infringement doesn't deprive the owner of the song of their property. They still own the song. Copyright infringement is illegal, but calling it theft is an attempt to make it something it is not. If we want to have a reasonable discussion of the issue, we should start by being clear about what copyright infringement is and what it isn't.
Who says he was suggesting they do it with each other? Might be why she's mad.
If you're only buying DRM-free games, you're still probably not using CDs.
In addition to deaths, radiation also causes lot's of non-terminal cancer, although the same may be said about coal.
What about non-terminal respiratory illness? Convenient how so many Nuclear critics ignore all the problems with the only currently viable Nuclear alternative (if we can get renewable to the point where it can satisfy base-line generation requirements, great. but we're not there yet) and continue to harp on a single nuclear disaster. And you're just as guilty of cherry picking. 1 Million deaths isn't an "example", it's the highest number you could find. Even Greenpeace only puts the number at 200,000+, on par with Banqiao.
I'd be very wary of pinning all my energy hopes on future technology (that XKCD stip makes the point quite well). Nuclear is the best option we have to satisfy our current energy requirements.
As for the reason that the Nuclear advocates don't mention alternative energy, why should they? What's the point of arguing against something that doesn't exist?
My Nook Simple, seems to go braindead when its plugged in. It goes into a "charging" mode.
I assume by "Nook Simple" you mean the original Nook? The only time mine says it's in charging mode is when I've let the battery run completely down. And even then it only displays that message until it gets to a minimum level of charge to function, at which point it operates normally (albeit tethered to its short power cable).