Scientific theories never become laws, that's just not how this works. Theories are units of knowledge that include everything we know and think about a subject and include, not become, laws.
I don't get any of this. Any school I ever was in got evacuated if there was even slightest suspicion that there is anything explosive inside and a bomb squad got called in. This school just carried on with the classes while the boy was locked in a room with his clock. So these "erring on the side of the cation" arguments must be wrong too.
You say you live in the real world.... But real world is the place where self-driving cars have: a) Been on the roads for years, their widespread deployment being limited by legislature. b) Been shown to be way safer than human drivers.
Boy sends a naked picture to a girl, gets a record. She then sends the picture to host of other people with the clear intent to hurt the boy, but that's fine. How was he distributing the picture and she wasn't? That's just... exactly how the world works. Carry on.
Yeah, just like a private company making supply runs to ISS! Complete nonsense made up by people who don't know anything about the problem and didn't spend two minutes thinking it through! It will never happen! I'm telling ya!
How I've know about SHIELD (and even held it in my hand at a dev event in what Americans call Eastern Europe) about a year ago. Not trying be sarcastic, but how is this an announcement?
So are journalism and police investigation or public courts doxxing too?
Basically if you're not allowed to break law anonymously, you're being doxxed, yes?
Seems to me the discussion is ignoring basic facts: those trolls broke the law. If the law was enforced the way it is supposed to, they would likely end up in criminal court (I am not american, but I am assuming it is not legal to threaten someone with rape over there). Then suspension would have been the least of their worries.
Some here said the "punishment" was disproportionate. As opposed to what? If he didn't do nothing or went to the police (same thing), then how proportionate would the punishment be then?
Also what do you suppose would happen if they threaten his daughter in public. Would they be suspended then? Do they deserve some sort protection because they did it over the internet? Please.
No, what he did was awful. But I don't see any of the other outcomes being better. Its just that any other course of action wouldn't rock the boat so much and that's what we've always hated.
True, but you also have to have a conflict that allows the government to justify the spending. It doesn't always have to be an open one (as was the case with Apollo and the Cold War), but it still seem as inefficient way to make any progress.
I agree. What I was trying to say is Google adding ads to email is not the same as a cable TV adding ads to a letter with a bill. In one case, it is the sender adding ads (perfectly OK from civil rights point of view), in the other it is the delivery service itself modyfing mail that should have been confident (the opposite of perfectly OK).
Perhaps just a rhetoric detail though.
Railroads - partly.
Power grid - yes, at least in most of Europe.
Aviation - not really. It all started with private entrepreneurs, the first time governments started any interest in aviation, it was WW 1.
Really? So how many space contractors can deliver payload to ISS at this moment? SpaceX isn't doing anything better than all those that can't? And how many contractors can deliver a kilogram of payload to the orbit for a comparable price to SpaceX?
I get that some people may be sick all the adoration SpaceX is getting lately, but that's not a good excuse for ignoring the reality and substituting your own.
That is bad analogy. The postal service would have to do that. In that case, all bets would be off, because if its OK for postal service to open the mail, then it is certainly OK for the government to do so.
Whether its OK for them to do that if its actually Irish mail is a different question...
You're not listening. These are dev kits, they are not sold for profit, they are sold to create developer ecosystem. Production and distribution costs something, you understand that, right? Because of economies of scale, units produced and sold in small numbers may actually cost more that the final product if they don't make any profit at all.
Besides if profit was the only thing Oculus cares about then why would they care who buys the devices? Riddle me that.
I wouldn't call that "hardly anyone" and I wouldn't call Obj-C niche language, but it does seem other languages have an order of magnitude larger userbase.
Can you name a single browser whose price went down as a result of IE being free?
Not to mention it isn't free, it comes bundled with an expensive OS. Furthermore, by your logic it must have been Netscape that drove the cost of IE down, not the other way around.
Einstein actually came up with the Relativity Theory in his twenties and then spent the rest of his life explaining it to the real losers (read: most of the mankind).
Like I said, there's no line and with all respect, I think you're still trying to draw it. Keep in mind there are even such things as self censorship and soft censorship. It doesn't matter how you dress it up or what reason you have for doing it, censorship is censorship. You don't see the military asserting any right in the second edition, because that's the one that has all the unwanted bits already taken out.
Note that I not condemning it or making any assertion about its morality.
Nope, the "editing" is still censorship. There are many forms of censorship and reasons to do it, but the fact there is some kind of censorship in most states, even those that are supposed to be democratic. After all, the communists didn't prevent most authors and journalists from publishing, they just asserted the right to say what is ok and what isn't. And when it wasn't, there was editing. Yet saying the communist didn't censor the newspapers that were published is a little bit of a stretch.
Like many thing the problem of censorship is not a black and white thing and there is no clearly visible line that has the freedom and law on one side and the orwellian nightmare on the other.
Slashdot Mirror
Scientific theories never become laws, that's just not how this works. Theories are units of knowledge that include everything we know and think about a subject and include, not become, laws.
I don't get any of this. Any school I ever was in got evacuated if there was even slightest suspicion that there is anything explosive inside and a bomb squad got called in. This school just carried on with the classes while the boy was locked in a room with his clock. So these "erring on the side of the cation" arguments must be wrong too.
You say you live in the real world.... But real world is the place where self-driving cars have: a) Been on the roads for years, their widespread deployment being limited by legislature. b) Been shown to be way safer than human drivers.
Boy sends a naked picture to a girl, gets a record. She then sends the picture to host of other people with the clear intent to hurt the boy, but that's fine. How was he distributing the picture and she wasn't? That's just... exactly how the world works. Carry on.
Calm down and read the rest of the comment.
Yeah, just like a private company making supply runs to ISS! Complete nonsense made up by people who don't know anything about the problem and didn't spend two minutes thinking it through! It will never happen! I'm telling ya!
Since the property of being memorable or forgettable is very subjective, I don't see how anyone can be wrong about it.
Kingdom Come: Deliverance by makers of Mafia, Operation Flashpoint, ARMA and others.
How I've know about SHIELD (and even held it in my hand at a dev event in what Americans call Eastern Europe) about a year ago. Not trying be sarcastic, but how is this an announcement?
So are journalism and police investigation or public courts doxxing too? Basically if you're not allowed to break law anonymously, you're being doxxed, yes? Seems to me the discussion is ignoring basic facts: those trolls broke the law. If the law was enforced the way it is supposed to, they would likely end up in criminal court (I am not american, but I am assuming it is not legal to threaten someone with rape over there). Then suspension would have been the least of their worries. Some here said the "punishment" was disproportionate. As opposed to what? If he didn't do nothing or went to the police (same thing), then how proportionate would the punishment be then? Also what do you suppose would happen if they threaten his daughter in public. Would they be suspended then? Do they deserve some sort protection because they did it over the internet? Please. No, what he did was awful. But I don't see any of the other outcomes being better. Its just that any other course of action wouldn't rock the boat so much and that's what we've always hated.
True, but you also have to have a conflict that allows the government to justify the spending. It doesn't always have to be an open one (as was the case with Apollo and the Cold War), but it still seem as inefficient way to make any progress.
I agree. What I was trying to say is Google adding ads to email is not the same as a cable TV adding ads to a letter with a bill. In one case, it is the sender adding ads (perfectly OK from civil rights point of view), in the other it is the delivery service itself modyfing mail that should have been confident (the opposite of perfectly OK). Perhaps just a rhetoric detail though.
Railroads - partly. Power grid - yes, at least in most of Europe. Aviation - not really. It all started with private entrepreneurs, the first time governments started any interest in aviation, it was WW 1.
Really? So how many space contractors can deliver payload to ISS at this moment? SpaceX isn't doing anything better than all those that can't? And how many contractors can deliver a kilogram of payload to the orbit for a comparable price to SpaceX? I get that some people may be sick all the adoration SpaceX is getting lately, but that's not a good excuse for ignoring the reality and substituting your own.
That is bad analogy. The postal service would have to do that. In that case, all bets would be off, because if its OK for postal service to open the mail, then it is certainly OK for the government to do so. Whether its OK for them to do that if its actually Irish mail is a different question...
I.e. they don't actually detect lies.
You're not listening. These are dev kits, they are not sold for profit, they are sold to create developer ecosystem. Production and distribution costs something, you understand that, right? Because of economies of scale, units produced and sold in small numbers may actually cost more that the final product if they don't make any profit at all. Besides if profit was the only thing Oculus cares about then why would they care who buys the devices? Riddle me that.
I wouldn't call that "hardly anyone" and I wouldn't call Obj-C niche language, but it does seem other languages have an order of magnitude larger userbase.
Free market would, but there was no free market in this case. Oligarchy at best.
Can you name a single browser whose price went down as a result of IE being free? Not to mention it isn't free, it comes bundled with an expensive OS. Furthermore, by your logic it must have been Netscape that drove the cost of IE down, not the other way around.
I don't know, Catholic Church has couple of centuries of history of claiming to have all the answers.
Einstein actually came up with the Relativity Theory in his twenties and then spent the rest of his life explaining it to the real losers (read: most of the mankind).
Like I said, there's no line and with all respect, I think you're still trying to draw it. Keep in mind there are even such things as self censorship and soft censorship. It doesn't matter how you dress it up or what reason you have for doing it, censorship is censorship. You don't see the military asserting any right in the second edition, because that's the one that has all the unwanted bits already taken out.
Note that I not condemning it or making any assertion about its morality.
Nope, the "editing" is still censorship. There are many forms of censorship and reasons to do it, but the fact there is some kind of censorship in most states, even those that are supposed to be democratic. After all, the communists didn't prevent most authors and journalists from publishing, they just asserted the right to say what is ok and what isn't. And when it wasn't, there was editing. Yet saying the communist didn't censor the newspapers that were published is a little bit of a stretch. Like many thing the problem of censorship is not a black and white thing and there is no clearly visible line that has the freedom and law on one side and the orwellian nightmare on the other.
I'll guess you'll have to sue me, a fucker, for using the GPLed software I wrote... well, I had it coming.