I doubt anyone will ever read this, but I'll answer anyway.
Your main criticism seems to suggest you are opposed to search warrants in general, and you are kidding if you seriously believe the police shouldn't be able to search a building with just cause.
Also, I only just showed it wasn't unconstitutional anyway, so your songs are irrelevant.
Besides, we live in well-founded democracies. So all decisions must face public scrutiny. The government can never take over and remove this democracy, if they did, the military would instantly mutiny, and topple that government.
I doubt anyone will ever read this, but I'll respond anyway.
Okay, I'm not a complete expert on these laws, but as far as I understand, the police must, as always, show their just cause to a judge, so they may then get a warrant and do the search. Otherwise it is simply break&enter.
I know you are probably either being a troll or sarcastic, and the incredible space at the end of your message is as annoying as heck, but still I agree with you. Congratulations on being one of the few with the courage to express an unpopular opinion (even if you did do it as an AC).
Firstly, I would like to point out for the 9E+999 time to Americans that the Constitution is not the absolute gospel about what is right and wrong.
Secondly, the search law is in no way unconstitutional. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause . ..."
In no way does this state that you must be informed of a search, all it really requires is that there be just cause.
Besides, what real detriment could this have to a law-abiding citizen (I can only think of benefits!)? And it certainly has benefits in crime prevention (eg you can search or even mark stolen property in a warehouse, then wait for the buyer and arrest them).
I know most people here are pro-rights, and I'll get flamed to hell for this, but it's my opinion, and I feel I have justified it.
Not quite, perhaps "cold fusion=fictional" is slightly more accurate, and even then I'm not too sure.
Also about the post one earlier, warp IS possible, though completely infeasible (though I have read they think they can create it through a different method which is feasible).
Never mentioned anywhere, except billions of books, paintings, and even the bible (unless of course the government stole all the bibles and reprinted them with new segments.
funny, but offtopic.
However, I cannot see the relevance of any of this story. There is probably trillions of tonnes more fusionable material here on Earth, which is also much easier to access.
While in many ways I agree with you in that I find those sort of ads stupid, it's not like they can just grab a camera and take a picture, unless you want it to look flickery, dull and generally hopeless. (at least it's better than pancake ads, where the syrup is really motor oil).
These ads are placed so everyone can see them, it's not like "Big Brother" is constantly invading your privacy by seeing ads. Besides, I'm willing to bet half of those "Average Joe User"s are the people who want this action to be taken, and certainly don't feel violated by it happening.
I doubt it, the huge spy satellite would have far more fuel than a 33cm Snap, and could easily defeat one of them in a tug of war. But why waste your time to slow down and then destroy spy satellites like that when you could simply add a small explosive charge which would be more effective as a weapon (though admittedly not as a garbage cleaner).
Who modded him down??? While someone will probably flame/mod me down for this, I can't see what he said that made him a troll (more likely the moderator was a troll)
Business junket for IT managers, where they can get drunk, exchange ideas freely (you get the drift), and spend incredible amounts on a company expense account.
While it does claim that it would reduce worker injuries, I would have to think that concrete flying out after being hit by a nail at 5000 ft/s would be extremely dangerous.
Also, if this is extremely quiet, powerful and handheld, could this have possible weapons uses??
Straight off, thank you for offering fair and reasonable criticism, not only does it create a less hostile environment, but I would think that is more informative for everyone involved. "Millions of people routinely "disrespect" intellectual property rights now... You apparently have no knowledge or understanding of the background of data havens." Firstly, I'll say that no, I am certainly not the world's biggest expert on data havens, so you are fair to attack me on my expertise, particularly assuming you probably know more. Terrorists constantly kill millions today, but that doesn't mean we should stand by and promote giving away guns to terrorists. In other words, even though we may not be able to stop illegal activity, it doesn't mean we should stand around and watch. "Why not? If you disagree with a law, why should you follow it? Let's say you live under a regime which declares the group to which you belong undesirable, and decides to kill" I disagree with murder laws, can I kill people? I support freedom of the individual, but not if it means taking away the rights of others (in this case, those of the makers of any stolen property). I also support open source, but I think it is only fair to respect the wishes of a writer if they ask that work that they own is not reproduced. I have to go now, but I hope to be back soon to finish this.
"Who the fuck are you to say that?", say what? My opinion? I am simply putting my opinion up, if you don't agree with it, feel free to put up opposing views. I can back up my case with evidence, so what is wrong with that? Really, feel free to attack my arguments, just not my person.
Please, I am not trying to start a flame war with you, and I still do not want to begin one. I took a quick look at you user info and i just think you need to calm down and accept the opinions of others a bit more. Everyone (including you) have your right to voice what you think. Please do not flame me for being "another uninformed piece of shit stupid enough to believe his opinion matters". Everyone's opinion matters, whether it be Signal 11, me, you, or anyone. You are free to challenge my arguments, but please refrain from attacking my person simply because you disagree with me. Simply offer constructive criticism, and I am more likely to change my ways in the future than if you just swear at me. I hope this does not result in permanent hard feelings between us. Cya
This idea is little more than a few people's idea to avoid having to follow laws or respect intellectual property rights. While many may not agree with the current laws, it is not right to abandon them simply for one's own personal gain.
If only out of respect for the people whose works are going to be ripped off by this venture, they must be stopped.
There's nothing which can be done at all really with names, which IMHO must be changed. Just look at www.martinlutherking.org, if you start reading what it has to say, it is a hate site, which clearly slanders MLK, but there is nothing anyone can do.
I'm no rocket scientist (no pun intended), but there must be some way that the remains of the satellite could be put to some function. Given the costs of sending stuff into space is about $US22000/kg (I think), if you can reuse one tonne of old satellite parts, you've just saved yourself $22 million. Again, I know little about the science of satellites, this is just what I think.
I'm usually extremely skeptical and almost always never accept conspiracy theories, but does anyone realise that the embassy bombing occured at the same time as some Chinese spies were caught stealing Tomohawk missile secrets and other stuff. Seems like the bombing was quite a clear payback and warning to China IMHO.
While a nice idea, we'd need to fill space with cesium gas to do it, plus we still need to push the spaceship as usual, just we don't have the mass-increasing problem from the speed of light restriction. However, if you had INCREDIBLY large amounts of material, I guess you could build a "space highway", made of a light-years long tube filled with the gas for this use. Though that would be impractical.
Cesium has a melting point of 28.7, and so is solid at RTP (25 degrees C and 101.3 kPa). Though admittedly this requires almost no heating to melt (even a warm climate will do), so it could certainly still work.
There are also a number of substances which can slow down the speed of light. A vapour of rubidium atoms, light is slowed tremendously down to 8 m/s. In a special ultra cold state of matter called a Bose-Einstein condensate, light is slowed further down to only 50 cm/s, slower than walking pace!
By slowing light down to such low speeds, scientists are coming up with ingenious ways to create artificial black holes (not the same as the real ones) which will allow us to finally study the physics of black holes, such as Hawking radiation and various other problems.
The article's main objection is that going open source will give hackers the ability to find weaknesses in security.
This is a complete joke, if a person wants to find a security hole in a program don't care one bit if their copy of the source code was obtained legally, they will just get it any way they can, whether it be downloaded from an illegal site or decompiled themselves.
The friendly programmers however, do care about the legality of their source code, and are the ones who will gain access through open source.
So quite simply, open source means little increase in hackers finding flaws to exploit, but gives a huge increase in the number of programmers solving the problems.
Slashdot Mirror
Your main criticism seems to suggest you are opposed to search warrants in general, and you are kidding if you seriously believe the police shouldn't be able to search a building with just cause.
Also, I only just showed it wasn't unconstitutional anyway, so your songs are irrelevant.
Besides, we live in well-founded democracies. So all decisions must face public scrutiny. The government can never take over and remove this democracy, if they did, the military would instantly mutiny, and topple that government.
Even government employees are members of society.
Okay, I'm not a complete expert on these laws, but as far as I understand, the police must, as always, show their just cause to a judge, so they may then get a warrant and do the search. Otherwise it is simply break&enter.
I know you are probably either being a troll or sarcastic, and the incredible space at the end of your message is as annoying as heck, but still I agree with you. Congratulations on being one of the few with the courage to express an unpopular opinion (even if you did do it as an AC).
Secondly, the search law is in no way unconstitutional. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause . . .."
In no way does this state that you must be informed of a search, all it really requires is that there be just cause.
Besides, what real detriment could this have to a law-abiding citizen (I can only think of benefits!)? And it certainly has benefits in crime prevention (eg you can search or even mark stolen property in a warehouse, then wait for the buyer and arrest them).
I know most people here are pro-rights, and I'll get flamed to hell for this, but it's my opinion, and I feel I have justified it.
Also about the post one earlier, warp IS possible, though completely infeasible (though I have read they think they can create it through a different method which is feasible).
funny, but offtopic.
However, I cannot see the relevance of any of this story. There is probably trillions of tonnes more fusionable material here on Earth, which is also much easier to access.
Gotta go out the back again, the damn outdoor dunny is clogged up with dingo droppings, and then I'd better go throw another shrimp on the barbie.
While in many ways I agree with you in that I find those sort of ads stupid, it's not like they can just grab a camera and take a picture, unless you want it to look flickery, dull and generally hopeless. (at least it's better than pancake ads, where the syrup is really motor oil).
These ads are placed so everyone can see them, it's not like "Big Brother" is constantly invading your privacy by seeing ads. Besides, I'm willing to bet half of those "Average Joe User"s are the people who want this action to be taken, and certainly don't feel violated by it happening.
I doubt it, the huge spy satellite would have far more fuel than a 33cm Snap, and could easily defeat one of them in a tug of war. But why waste your time to slow down and then destroy spy satellites like that when you could simply add a small explosive charge which would be more effective as a weapon (though admittedly not as a garbage cleaner).
Who modded him down??? While someone will probably flame/mod me down for this, I can't see what he said that made him a troll (more likely the moderator was a troll)
Business junket for IT managers, where they can get drunk, exchange ideas freely (you get the drift), and spend incredible amounts on a company expense account.
While it does claim that it would reduce worker injuries, I would have to think that concrete flying out after being hit by a nail at 5000 ft/s would be extremely dangerous.
Also, if this is extremely quiet, powerful and handheld, could this have possible weapons uses??
Straight off, thank you for offering fair and reasonable criticism, not only does it create a less hostile environment, but I would think that is more informative for everyone involved. "Millions of people routinely "disrespect" intellectual property rights now ... You apparently have no knowledge or understanding of the background of data havens." Firstly, I'll say that no, I am certainly not the world's biggest expert on data havens, so you are fair to attack me on my expertise, particularly assuming you probably know more. Terrorists constantly kill millions today, but that doesn't mean we should stand by and promote giving away guns to terrorists. In other words, even though we may not be able to stop illegal activity, it doesn't mean we should stand around and watch. "Why not? If you disagree with a law, why should you follow it? Let's say you live under a regime which declares the group to which you belong undesirable, and decides to kill" I disagree with murder laws, can I kill people? I support freedom of the individual, but not if it means taking away the rights of others (in this case, those of the makers of any stolen property). I also support open source, but I think it is only fair to respect the wishes of a writer if they ask that work that they own is not reproduced. I have to go now, but I hope to be back soon to finish this.
"Who the fuck are you to say that?", say what? My opinion? I am simply putting my opinion up, if you don't agree with it, feel free to put up opposing views. I can back up my case with evidence, so what is wrong with that? Really, feel free to attack my arguments, just not my person.
Please, I am not trying to start a flame war with you, and I still do not want to begin one. I took a quick look at you user info and i just think you need to calm down and accept the opinions of others a bit more. Everyone (including you) have your right to voice what you think. Please do not flame me for being "another uninformed piece of shit stupid enough to believe his opinion matters". Everyone's opinion matters, whether it be Signal 11, me, you, or anyone. You are free to challenge my arguments, but please refrain from attacking my person simply because you disagree with me. Simply offer constructive criticism, and I am more likely to change my ways in the future than if you just swear at me. I hope this does not result in permanent hard feelings between us. Cya
If only out of respect for the people whose works are going to be ripped off by this venture, they must be stopped.
There's nothing which can be done at all really with names, which IMHO must be changed. Just look at www.martinlutherking.org, if you start reading what it has to say, it is a hate site, which clearly slanders MLK, but there is nothing anyone can do.
I'm no rocket scientist (no pun intended), but there must be some way that the remains of the satellite could be put to some function. Given the costs of sending stuff into space is about $US22000/kg (I think), if you can reuse one tonne of old satellite parts, you've just saved yourself $22 million. Again, I know little about the science of satellites, this is just what I think.
I'm usually extremely skeptical and almost always never accept conspiracy theories, but does anyone realise that the embassy bombing occured at the same time as some Chinese spies were caught stealing Tomohawk missile secrets and other stuff. Seems like the bombing was quite a clear payback and warning to China IMHO.
While a nice idea, we'd need to fill space with cesium gas to do it, plus we still need to push the spaceship as usual, just we don't have the mass-increasing problem from the speed of light restriction. However, if you had INCREDIBLY large amounts of material, I guess you could build a "space highway", made of a light-years long tube filled with the gas for this use. Though that would be impractical.
Cesium has a melting point of 28.7, and so is solid at RTP (25 degrees C and 101.3 kPa). Though admittedly this requires almost no heating to melt (even a warm climate will do), so it could certainly still work.
By slowing light down to such low speeds, scientists are coming up with ingenious ways to create artificial black holes (not the same as the real ones) which will allow us to finally study the physics of black holes, such as Hawking radiation and various other problems.
You can find the story at: http://www.newscientis t.com/features/features.jsp?id=ns22301
If these complete jokes are what they actually want you to see, imagine what they've their legal team has managed to hide in that proposal.
This is a complete joke, if a person wants to find a security hole in a program don't care one bit if their copy of the source code was obtained legally, they will just get it any way they can, whether it be downloaded from an illegal site or decompiled themselves.
The friendly programmers however, do care about the legality of their source code, and are the ones who will gain access through open source.
So quite simply, open source means little increase in hackers finding flaws to exploit, but gives a huge increase in the number of programmers solving the problems.