Public safety should ALWAYS be #1 without exception.
No. Then we end up with loss of individual rights and nonsense like the TSA (and even if it did work, I'd still think it's a terrible violation of people's rights). I have no problem with these people being fired, though.
No, actually he was dead wrong. You use vectors every day in almost everything you do. But you use them intuitively, as opposed to writing them down on a piece of paper and doing abstract math with them.
Consciously, then. Most people just don't think about it and most likely have no idea what a vector is, let alone understand them.
This is why we have laws, so that idiots who don't think DUI is wrong can be expressly told it is.
They could be told it is with or without laws. Laws don't equal morality. My point was that his statement that everyone knows it's wrong is most likely not true.
No, the keys did not mistakenly fall into his hand, mistakenly start the ignition nor did he mistakenly consume alcohol.
But the person might have made a few mistakes, or errors in judgement, to get to that point. Just like I said, actually. I don't see why people think it's a big deal to call it a "mistake." They can still be punished regardless.
I don't believe they're cloning entire animals, though. If the entire reason that someone is a vegetarian is because they don't want to support animals being slaughtered, then this should resolve that concern. I suppose they could also think that eating meat is entirely wrong, but I don't see why that would be.
I was merely acknowledging other (very real) possibilities. It's quite possible (and I'm quite sure it even happens) that someone could believe it's not wrong, and it's quite possible for them to make the error of overestimating their ability to drive while under the influence. While your "what if" scenario was rather random, mine were quite relevant, I believe.
So now you want to conflate eating meat with rape, and then tell me I need to study formal logic a bit more?
What he used is called an "analogy." Using an analogy is not at all the same as saying that two things are exactly alike. Rather, what he was trying to say is that just because something is natural, that doesn't mean it's automatically good. So no, he very likely wasn't trying to say that eating meat is like raping someone.
You can also not think its wrong to chop the tops off of parking meters or rob a bank
Right, and if he said that everyone knows both of those things is wrong, I'd object to that, too. It's possible to believe they're not wrong, and it is likely a subjective matter.
You know how much I will care if at some point I can no longer play them? About as much as a care that I let $5 worth of cheese spoil in my refrigerator this week. I wish it didn't happen, but it doesnt pain me.
Wow, I'm sure companies love that attitude. No accountability necessary! Basically, if all of their customers have this "I only care if it bothers me" attitude, they don't have to worry about much at all.
Maybe it doesn't, but what's being argued about is whether it can be classified as a mistake. I don't think that necessarily implies that we're talking about the law.
A whole country full of angry, enthusiastic torturers who don't care what happens to anyone else but themselves.
That would explain the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" mentality that a lot of people seem to have. It would also explain the people screaming to have alleged pedophiles be skinned alive. Yeah, pedophiles; not child molesters. Some people in the "for the children" crowd seem much more insane and dangerous than those who they want to murder for thought crime to me.
Once you've had multiple family members killed by drunk drivers, you'll feel a little different about it.
Yes, and I'm sure if that happened, I'd be completely impartial. I think there's a reason we don't let victims be judges, juries, and executioners.
But really, what are you saying here? That if I was in a different situation (if some of my family members were killed by drunk drivers) I'd feel differently? Supposing that's true, are you saying that the fact that I'd change my mind means my current views on the matter are wrong? The "if you were in a different situation, you'd feel differently" logic could be used on absolutely anyone. I don't know if that's what you were trying to say, and I hope it wasn't.
For one it was his 5th offense, for another it was his 15th offense, and for the third it was was 17th offense.
5th? 15th? 17th? If that's true, then I would agree with you... I just didn't know to what extent you expected them to be punished.
No, because unless they are mentally retarded, they know, without question, that alcohol and drugs affects their mind and motor skills before ever consuming any and before ever climbing into the driver's seat.
They probably know it affects their mind and motor skills, but to what degree do they think it will affect their ability to drive? At any rate, I highly doubt they intended to harm anyone, so I would indeed say it's a mistake on their part. That doesn't at all mean I think they should be let off, though.
Not quite. The guy in the article presumably intended to get away, but then he let everyone know what he did by posting about it on Facebook. Given the fact that he probably didn't want to get punished for what he did, I'd say that's a bit worse than only driving drunk.
Slashdot Mirror
at the expense at the people who put hard work behind it?
At the expense of them? As far as I know, this guy's actions had no direct effect on the people who made the original product.
but if everything were free in the world
Who claims that everything in the world should be free?
Then I realized what you (or he) meant was that he really, really wanted to see these movies and couldn't obtain them through legal channels.
If you realized that, then why does the rest of your post make it seem as if you didn't?
this guy plainly and simply violated the law and ethics of his culture
Do you think that's a bad thing?
What crushing depression? The fact that someone doesn't do what you like to do (being in a relationship) doesn't mean they're depressed.
Public safety should ALWAYS be #1 without exception.
No. Then we end up with loss of individual rights and nonsense like the TSA (and even if it did work, I'd still think it's a terrible violation of people's rights). I have no problem with these people being fired, though.
No, actually he was dead wrong. You use vectors every day in almost everything you do. But you use them intuitively, as opposed to writing them down on a piece of paper and doing abstract math with them.
Consciously, then. Most people just don't think about it and most likely have no idea what a vector is, let alone understand them.
"Crap, my teacher in high school told us we would never EVER use this stuff!"
And for most people, he was probably right. Of course, to tell everyone that they were never going to use it is another matter.
This is why we have laws, so that idiots who don't think DUI is wrong can be expressly told it is.
They could be told it is with or without laws. Laws don't equal morality. My point was that his statement that everyone knows it's wrong is most likely not true.
No, the keys did not mistakenly fall into his hand, mistakenly start the ignition nor did he mistakenly consume alcohol.
But the person might have made a few mistakes, or errors in judgement, to get to that point. Just like I said, actually. I don't see why people think it's a big deal to call it a "mistake." They can still be punished regardless.
How is that relevant to this teenager's accomplishments?
Anyone who questions anything or criticizes anyone is just jealous. That's the only explanation.
I don't believe they're cloning entire animals, though. If the entire reason that someone is a vegetarian is because they don't want to support animals being slaughtered, then this should resolve that concern. I suppose they could also think that eating meat is entirely wrong, but I don't see why that would be.
I was merely acknowledging other (very real) possibilities. It's quite possible (and I'm quite sure it even happens) that someone could believe it's not wrong, and it's quite possible for them to make the error of overestimating their ability to drive while under the influence. While your "what if" scenario was rather random, mine were quite relevant, I believe.
So now you want to conflate eating meat with rape, and then tell me I need to study formal logic a bit more?
What he used is called an "analogy." Using an analogy is not at all the same as saying that two things are exactly alike. Rather, what he was trying to say is that just because something is natural, that doesn't mean it's automatically good. So no, he very likely wasn't trying to say that eating meat is like raping someone.
You can also not think its wrong to chop the tops off of parking meters or rob a bank
Right, and if he said that everyone knows both of those things is wrong, I'd object to that, too. It's possible to believe they're not wrong, and it is likely a subjective matter.
that just means you have terribly poor judgement
According to society, anyway.
I wasn't aware that the word "mistake" implied not being held accountable. I don't see where it's hypocritical.
"Mistake" is an irrelevant blame-deflector.
It is? You can be blamed for making mistakes, and even punished for them.
You can spend all your time fighting extraordinarily un-restraining DRM, or you can play games.
Or I can play games and not use Steam. Not all games require Steam or even have DRM, you know.
Also, I don't think that "it's not as bad as other DRM" is a good argument.
You know how much I will care if at some point I can no longer play them? About as much as a care that I let $5 worth of cheese spoil in my refrigerator this week. I wish it didn't happen, but it doesnt pain me.
Wow, I'm sure companies love that attitude. No accountability necessary! Basically, if all of their customers have this "I only care if it bothers me" attitude, they don't have to worry about much at all.
Maybe it doesn't, but what's being argued about is whether it can be classified as a mistake. I don't think that necessarily implies that we're talking about the law.
A whole country full of angry, enthusiastic torturers who don't care what happens to anyone else but themselves.
That would explain the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" mentality that a lot of people seem to have. It would also explain the people screaming to have alleged pedophiles be skinned alive. Yeah, pedophiles; not child molesters. Some people in the "for the children" crowd seem much more insane and dangerous than those who they want to murder for thought crime to me.
Once you've had multiple family members killed by drunk drivers, you'll feel a little different about it.
Yes, and I'm sure if that happened, I'd be completely impartial. I think there's a reason we don't let victims be judges, juries, and executioners.
But really, what are you saying here? That if I was in a different situation (if some of my family members were killed by drunk drivers) I'd feel differently? Supposing that's true, are you saying that the fact that I'd change my mind means my current views on the matter are wrong? The "if you were in a different situation, you'd feel differently" logic could be used on absolutely anyone. I don't know if that's what you were trying to say, and I hope it wasn't.
For one it was his 5th offense, for another it was his 15th offense, and for the third it was was 17th offense.
5th? 15th? 17th? If that's true, then I would agree with you... I just didn't know to what extent you expected them to be punished.
No, because unless they are mentally retarded, they know, without question, that alcohol and drugs affects their mind and motor skills before ever consuming any and before ever climbing into the driver's seat.
They probably know it affects their mind and motor skills, but to what degree do they think it will affect their ability to drive? At any rate, I highly doubt they intended to harm anyone, so I would indeed say it's a mistake on their part. That doesn't at all mean I think they should be let off, though.
Not quite. The guy in the article presumably intended to get away, but then he let everyone know what he did by posting about it on Facebook. Given the fact that he probably didn't want to get punished for what he did, I'd say that's a bit worse than only driving drunk.
The police finding out he did it landed him in jail.
You know it's wrong.
What if they don't think it's wrong?
What if they overestimated their ability to drive while under the influence? Would that not be classified as a "mistake"?
We just need to be even more Tough On Crime. That way, we can turn even more people into hardened criminals through the prison system!