You are a moron. I don't know how else to break it to you, but the fact that the record companies are thieves does not justify you stealing from both the companies and the artists.
when I suck stuff down, I usually block/disable uploads, because I need that bandwidth.
I should probably turn it on at night when I'm not using the machine to give back, but I haven't bothered.. there's no penalty if I don't do it, so why should I? I know I'm not alone in that line of thinking, though it may be wrong.
It astounds me to watch on a daily basis the right of free speech being taken away.
And of course, all we're going to do is sit and whine about it on Slashdot. I, for one, haven't gotten out and done anything about it, and I would venture to say 99% of the people here haven't either.
And the people passing these laws know this, and we're gonna get screwed.
I submit:
2000-10-23 13:55:04 Nader set to play spoiler (articles,news) (rejected)
after Slashdot asks for articles about candidates other than Gore. But I get rejected for e-mail/email.
That'll be my last Slashdot submission.
BTW, the link to that Nader article is http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A583 18-2000Oct22.html. Talks about him taking votes away from Gore and giving states to Bush, and how the Gore camp is mega-pissed.
me: (turns off NES, pulls cartridge out)
me: (sharp intake of breath)
me: "FFFFFFFFFFTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTFFFFFTTTTTTTTTHHHHH"
me: (another sharp intake of breath)
me: "FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF F F F FF FFFFFFFF FFFF"
me: (puts cartridge back in NES, turns on power)
I just read an article in Time about this.. the sidebar had a study back in 1997 about how mice were exposed to a 30 minute dose of cell-phone radiation for 18 months.
They developed tumors at twice the rate of non-exposed mice.
Draw your own conclusions.. reportedly objections were raised about the study, but the sidebar didn't go into too much detail, so that's all the info I have.
If you think that with the way this country is run, that a Green Party candidate is EVER going to get a majority of the vote in not just 1 state, but enough to actually win an election, you are seriously mistaken.
The Electoral College is seriously flawed and does not give third party candidates a fair chance at winning. But life isn't fair, I suppose.
"Opponents of the Electoral College system also point to the risk of so-called "faithless" Electors. A "faithless Elector" is one who is pledged to vote for his party's candidate for president but nevertheless votes of another candidate. There have been 7 such Electors in this century and as recently as 1988 when a Democrat Elector in the State of West Virginia cast his votes for Lloyd Bensen for president and Michael Dukakis for vice president instead of the other way around. Faithless Electors have never changed the outcome of an election, though, simply because most often their purpose is to make a statement rather than make a difference. That is to say, when the electoral vote outcome is so obviously going to be for one candidate or the other, an occasional Elector casts a vote for some personal favorite knowing full well that it will not make a difference in the result. Still, if the prospect of a faithless Elector is so fearsome as to warrant a Constitutional amendment, then it is possible to solve the problem without abolishing the Electoral College merely by eliminating the individual Electors in favor of a purely mathematical process (since the individual Electors are no longer essential to its operation).
Opponents of the Electoral College are further concerned about its possible role in depressing voter turnout. Their argument is that, since each State is entitled to the same number of electoral votes regardless of its voter turnout, there is no incentive in the States to encourage voter participation. Indeed, there may even be an incentive to discourage participation (and they often cite the South here) so as to enable a minority of citizens to decide the electoral vote for the whole State. While this argument has a certain surface plausibility, it fails to account for the fact that presidential elections do not occur in a vacuum. States also conduct other elections (for U.S. Senators, U.S. Representatives, State Governors, State legislators, and a host of local officials) in which these same incentives and disincentives are likely to operate, if at all, with an even greater force. It is hard to imagine what counter-incentive would be created by eliminating the Electoral College. "
Slashdot Mirror
Apparently your company hires people with poor grammar, perhaps instead of more money, you could ask for a textbook or two?
something > nothing.
you must have missed math class that day?
You are a moron. I don't know how else to break it to you, but the fact that the record companies are thieves does not justify you stealing from both the companies and the artists.
Stealing users comments on Slashdot: not ok.
/.
Stealing music from Napster: ok.
Gotta love
And the future is greedy teenagers who don't want to pay for something, and would rather steal from the record companies AND the artists.
It's not just the record companies you are hurting, I hope you realize that. But you probably don't care, much like everyone else here.
"We are the future..". Whatever. Grow up.
someone mirror this, quick. already slow.
Which when I last checked was part of the lawsuits.. it's not Time-Warner, but I believe they were named as a plantiff.
You guys went and saw X-Men and did a review on it, so the point is moot, isn't it?
when I suck stuff down, I usually block/disable uploads, because I need that bandwidth.
I should probably turn it on at night when I'm not using the machine to give back, but I haven't bothered.. there's no penalty if I don't do it, so why should I? I know I'm not alone in that line of thinking, though it may be wrong.
Isn't that less effective than seperate letters? I would think so.. seeing 10 letters instead of 1 letter with 10 signatures on it.
Until the US decides to hop on and sign this treaty.. did you read the article?
Thanks.. that was easy enough. :) My letter is on the way.
Oh yeah, it was "NORIGHTS"
It astounds me to watch on a daily basis the right of free speech being taken away.
And of course, all we're going to do is sit and whine about it on Slashdot. I, for one, haven't gotten out and done anything about it, and I would venture to say 99% of the people here haven't either.
And the people passing these laws know this, and we're gonna get screwed.
Please, I see enough of the thinkgeek VI! EMACS! ad, let's not rehash it all here. :\
I used to be a sysop of a WWIV board and I would read user's mail all the time. My system, my phone line, mine mine mine. Same situation applies here.
:)
//MAILR is good clean fun.
Maybe he didn't have a valid ticket? :)
Here's an article about Nader that got rejected by Slashdot, about how Gore's camp is pissed that the Nader vote may swing key states towards Bush.
Link
I totally agree.
3 18-2000Oct22.html. Talks about him taking votes away from Gore and giving states to Bush, and how the Gore camp is mega-pissed.
I submit:
2000-10-23 13:55:04 Nader set to play spoiler (articles,news) (rejected)
after Slashdot asks for articles about candidates other than Gore. But I get rejected for e-mail/email.
That'll be my last Slashdot submission.
BTW, the link to that Nader article is http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58
(sits down at NES, inserts cartridge)
TV: (flash)
TV: (flash)
TV: (flash)
me: (turns off NES, pulls cartridge out)
me: (sharp intake of breath)
me: "FFFFFFFFFFTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTFFFFFTTTTTTTTTHHHHH"
me: (another sharp intake of breath)
me: "FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF F F F FF FFFFFFFF FFFF"
me: (puts cartridge back in NES, turns on power)
TV: (flash)
TV: (flash)
GODDAMMIT.
:\
The return of Jumpman!
Boing.. boing.. boing..
Hopefully these planets will have ladders randomly placed everywhere.
And then they came for the people with no sense of humor.
:)
:\
Oh, wait, that's you?
Lighten up. It's not like we don't know the Holocaust was a serious event or anything. A little humor never killed anyone.
First they came for the Boos,
but I did not speak out,
because I did not shop there.
Then they came for the free-www-providers,
but I did not speak out,
because I had a cable modem.
Then they came for the petstores,
but I did not speak out,
because I did not own a pet.
Then they came for the movie sites,
but I did not speak out,
because I was busy boycotting Hollywood.
Then they came for VA Linux and Slashdot,
and there was no one left to speak for me.
You have an account, filter out the stories. They told you this was coming.
Idiot.
I just read an article in Time about this.. the sidebar had a study back in 1997 about how mice were exposed to a 30 minute dose of cell-phone radiation for 18 months.
They developed tumors at twice the rate of non-exposed mice.
Draw your own conclusions.. reportedly objections were raised about the study, but the sidebar didn't go into too much detail, so that's all the info I have.
If you think that with the way this country is run, that a Green Party candidate is EVER going to get a majority of the vote in not just 1 state, but enough to actually win an election, you are seriously mistaken.
c ollege.htm
The Electoral College is seriously flawed and does not give third party candidates a fair chance at winning. But life isn't fair, I suppose.
"Opponents of the Electoral College system also point to the risk of so-called "faithless" Electors. A "faithless Elector" is one who is pledged to vote for his party's candidate for president but nevertheless votes of another candidate. There have been 7 such Electors in this century and as recently as 1988 when a Democrat Elector in the State of West Virginia cast his votes for Lloyd Bensen for president and Michael Dukakis for vice president instead of the other way around. Faithless Electors have never changed the outcome of an election, though, simply because most often their purpose is to make a statement rather than make a difference. That is to say, when the electoral vote outcome is so obviously going to be for one candidate or the other, an occasional Elector casts a vote for some personal favorite knowing full well that it will not make a difference in the result. Still, if the prospect of a faithless Elector is so fearsome as to warrant a Constitutional amendment, then it is possible to solve the problem without abolishing the Electoral College merely by eliminating the individual Electors in favor of a purely mathematical process (since the individual Electors are no longer essential to its operation).
Opponents of the Electoral College are further concerned about its possible role in depressing voter turnout. Their argument is that, since each State is entitled to the same number of electoral votes regardless of its voter turnout, there is no incentive in the States to encourage voter participation. Indeed, there may even be an incentive to discourage participation (and they often cite the South here) so as to enable a minority of citizens to decide the electoral vote for the whole State. While this argument has a certain surface plausibility, it fails to account for the fact that presidential elections do not occur in a vacuum. States also conduct other elections (for U.S. Senators, U.S. Representatives, State Governors, State legislators, and a host of local officials) in which these same incentives and disincentives are likely to operate, if at all, with an even greater force. It is hard to imagine what counter-incentive would be created by eliminating the Electoral College. "
Source: http://jceb.co.jackson.mo.us/fun_stuff/electoral_
I recommend you go to Google and search on 'third party candidates electoral college'. You'll find a lot of interesting reading.