Your ignorance of logic, scientific method, and the shortcomings of western thinking is frightening. As Paul Feyerabend states in his classic text Against Method:
Theories cannot be derived from facts. The demand to admit only those theories which follow from facts leaves us without any theory. Hence, science as we know it can exist only if we drop the demand and revise our methodology.
That's all I have to say on that.
I am disheartened by your bourgousie appeal to democracy and the government as agents for change. As any student of history can tell you, government is and always has been the tool of the rich. You cannot expect an institution founded and controlled by the rich to disturb the status quo. Only a bottom-up surge of populist fervor can rock the boat enough to make it over-turn.
Moore's 'Law' is supersition; part of a belief system no more 'correct' or useful than Christianity in the Dark Ages. It's part of an economic and social system that keeps the down-trodden supressed. Any defender of Moore's Law must be prepared to defend the entire capitalist religion. Are you prepared to do this?
What I mean is, that money will go towards attacking each other.. instead of exploiting the consumer.
Are you just stupid? Is that what it is? This theme of conusmer exploitation by evil corporations is present in quite a few of your posts. Please explain to me how consumers are being "exploited". One of the benefits of living in a (relatively) free country is being able to choose from whom you buy. The consumer in a free economy can only be exploited in so much as he lets himself be. By the way, even assuming these evil corporations are exploiting the consumer, how is having money tied up legal battles going to lessen their ability to "exploit"? Seems to me, they'd be working overtime to exploit consumers to make up some of the lost money. On a positive note, at least no one has moderated your post up yet.
To put it briefly, Signal 11 symbolizes to me everything that is wrong with slashdot and the world. He spouts his mouth off, with total confidence in the correctness of his position, even though he knows nothing about the issue under discussion. And then he gets moderated up. If this happened once or twice, I wouldn't care. But Signal 11 won't stop.
Thanks for pointing that out. And I'm sure there are plenty of other instances of Indians "damaging the environment." My main point, though, was that Indians were not some kind of noble earth stewards who got together and decided to shun technology for the sake of the environment.
This idea is little more than a few people's idea to avoid having to follow laws or respect intellectual property rights.
Millions of people routinely "disrespect" intellectual property rights now, without the aid of data havens and with no negative consequences. Why would anyone want to drop a couple grand a month for this service just to host pirated music for the gratification of leeches, especially when they could connect to Napster instead and accomplish the same goal. You apparently have no knowledge or understanding of the background of data havens.
While many may not agree with the current laws, it is not right to abandon them simply for one's own personal gain.
Why not? If you disagree with a law, why should you follow it? And where does personal gain come into the equation of whether or not to follow laws? Let's say you live under a regime which declares the group to which you belong undesirable, and decides to kill you. Would you go along with that edict simply because it's "the law" and the government can't be wrong? Or would you "abandon" that law and try to save your life? And doesn't trying to save your own life lead to "personal gain"? I could go on forever about why your thinking is wrong, but I will restrain myself.
If only out of respect for the people whose works are going to be ripped off by this venture, they must be stopped.
While we're at it, let's shut down Napster, the internet, and all BBSs. Better shut down the phone system, too, or at least outlaw modems. Then we should collect all tape recorders, VCRs, camcorders, put 'em in a pile, and burn 'em. Then to be damn sure the property rights of artists are respected, let's outlaw the ability to transcribe music. Wouldn't want anybody copying down a melody someone else wrote. And for that matter, let's rid the world of writing instruments, so pirates can't copy books. Once again, I could go on like this forever, but you should get the point. Your thinking, if I can call it that, is enormously flawed.
This about this, a small island with none of the "anti-hacker" laws. I could crack thier system, get the personal data and even reruite a few billion dollers into my bank account.
You couldn't "reruite" shit. As far as I know, they aren't running a bank.
Why the hell not, who's going to stop me, I doubt sealand going to track me and then send a sealand police force. No other goverment really has jerisdiction here either. This rocks for the crackers.
I think you can be fairly certain that the companies buying space from HavenCo will pursue you if you try to harm them. I'm not sure of the relevant laws, but I don't think that simply because the server is located out of the jurisdiction of major countries you would be safe from prosecution.
Also, this seems like kind of a good idea not taken far enough. If this island is profitable they'll just get invaded. Heck you don't need a nation to take one over. Their are plenty of billionares the could hire mercs, aritillery and missiles to take them over. This however is too good an idea not to be done.
I don't think I even need to explain how stupid this idea is.
P.S. $10 bucks says that when this happens NAPSTER will have thier own space nation.
Yep. Hell, with Napster's enormous revenue stream, they'll probably have two or three "space nations".
It only encourages him. When he sees this kind of moderation, he thinks it means his opinions matter and people care what he has to say. This is clearly not the case. The only moderation bojay should be getting is down.
Funny you should mention that. I just got back from the gas station - prices are up to $1.70 over here, from $1.19 this past fall. But, not being one to trust only my experiences, decided to consult my macroeconomics book (ISBN 0-07-046814-1, Economics: Principles, Problems, and Policies). The consumer price index (CPI) in 1929 was 17, and in 1970 was at 38.8. About those falling prices...
You are a supreme idiot. Gas prices undergo large price fluctuations in the short term. That doesn't neceassarily mean the price is going up on a longer time scale. The world's oil supply is largely controlled by OPEC; recently, when prices were driven so low by the abundance of oil that oil company profits began to suffer, OPEC decided to limit oil production, leading to higher prices.
Capitalism, if left to its own devices, will consume every tree, every drop of water, every gallon of petrol, until this world is a desolate wasteland
You are a complete fucking moron. You don't begin to understand economics. Keep your fucking mouth shut unless you know what you are talking about. As it stands now, we are nowhere near running out of "petrol", and if oil supplies start to dwindle, prices will shoot up until other energy sources become more cost effective. Logging by corporations is largely confined to trees they planted themselves; the destruction of your beloved rain forest is due to the slash-and-burn efforts of third world subsistence farmers. And how the hell are we going to run out of water? A few more points: First, about the idea of American Indians as environmental icons. This is idiotic. They were living with fucking stone age technology. They couldn't damage the environment if they wanted to. Every other group on earth at one time or another lived at a similar level of primitiveness, "in harmony" with the environment. Do you want to return to a time when we don't harm the environment but die by the age of 35? And about the premises behind environmentalism. Many environmentalists give the impression that they feel the earth would be a better place without humans. Some even come right out and say it. "Think of how clean the air would be and how happy all the cute little animals would be." But what is the point? All these little animals go on living and dying for a few billion more years until the sun expands and puts an end to their happy little lives. Meanwhile, there would be no art, science, or anything worthwhile.
Slashdot Mirror
I am disheartened by your bourgousie appeal to democracy and the government as agents for change. As any student of history can tell you, government is and always has been the tool of the rich. You cannot expect an institution founded and controlled by the rich to disturb the status quo. Only a bottom-up surge of populist fervor can rock the boat enough to make it over-turn.
Moore's 'Law' is supersition; part of a belief system no more 'correct' or useful than Christianity in the Dark Ages. It's part of an economic and social system that keeps the down-trodden supressed. Any defender of Moore's Law must be prepared to defend the entire capitalist religion. Are you prepared to do this?
What I mean is, that money will go towards attacking each other.. instead of exploiting the consumer.
Are you just stupid? Is that what it is?
This theme of conusmer exploitation by evil corporations is present in quite a few of your posts. Please explain to me how consumers are being "exploited". One of the benefits of living in a (relatively) free country is being able to choose from whom you buy. The consumer in a free economy can only be exploited in so much as he lets himself be.
By the way, even assuming these evil corporations are exploiting the consumer, how is having money tied up legal battles going to lessen their ability to "exploit"? Seems to me, they'd be working overtime to exploit consumers to make up some of the lost money.
On a positive note, at least no one has moderated your post up yet.
To put it briefly, Signal 11 symbolizes to me everything that is wrong with slashdot and the world. He spouts his mouth off, with total confidence in the correctness of his position, even though he knows nothing about the issue under discussion. And then he gets moderated up. If this happened once or twice, I wouldn't care. But Signal 11 won't stop.
Thanks for pointing that out. And I'm sure there are plenty of other instances of Indians "damaging the environment." My main point, though, was that Indians were not some kind of noble earth stewards who got together and decided to shun technology for the sake of the environment.
This idea is little more than a few people's idea to avoid having to follow laws or respect intellectual property rights.
Millions of people routinely "disrespect" intellectual property rights now, without the aid of data havens and with no negative consequences. Why would anyone want to drop a couple grand a month for this service just to host pirated music for the gratification of leeches, especially when they could connect to Napster instead and accomplish the same goal. You apparently have no knowledge or understanding of the background of data havens.
While many may not agree with the current laws, it is not right to abandon them simply for one's own personal gain.
Why not? If you disagree with a law, why should you follow it? And where does personal gain come into the equation of whether or not to follow laws? Let's say you live under a regime which declares the group to which you belong undesirable, and decides to kill you. Would you go along with that edict simply because it's "the law" and the government can't be wrong? Or would you "abandon" that law and try to save your life? And doesn't trying to save your own life lead to "personal gain"? I could go on forever about why your thinking is wrong, but I will restrain myself.
If only out of respect for the people whose works are going to be ripped off by this venture, they must be stopped.
While we're at it, let's shut down Napster, the internet, and all BBSs. Better shut down the phone system, too, or at least outlaw modems. Then we should collect all tape recorders, VCRs, camcorders, put 'em in a pile, and burn 'em. Then to be damn sure the property rights of artists are respected, let's outlaw the ability to transcribe music. Wouldn't want anybody copying down a melody someone else wrote. And for that matter, let's rid the world of writing instruments, so pirates can't copy books. Once again, I could go on like this forever, but you should get the point. Your thinking, if I can call it that, is enormously flawed.
This about this, a small island with none of the "anti-hacker" laws. I could crack thier system, get the personal data and even reruite a few billion dollers into my bank account.
You couldn't "reruite" shit. As far as I know, they aren't running a bank.
Why the hell not, who's going to stop me, I doubt sealand going to track me and then send a sealand police force. No other goverment really has jerisdiction here either. This rocks for the crackers.
I think you can be fairly certain that the companies buying space from HavenCo will pursue you if you try to harm them. I'm not sure of the relevant laws, but I don't think that simply because the server is located out of the jurisdiction of major countries you would be safe from prosecution.
Also, this seems like kind of a good idea not taken far enough. If this island is profitable they'll just get invaded. Heck you don't need a nation to take one over. Their are plenty of billionares the could hire mercs, aritillery and missiles to take them over. This however is too good an idea not to be done.
I don't think I even need to explain how stupid this idea is.
P.S. $10 bucks says that when this happens NAPSTER will have thier own space nation.
Yep. Hell, with Napster's enormous revenue stream, they'll probably have two or three "space nations".
Jesus! How many of them are there?
Don't mod up comments like the above. The above post could have been written by a severely retarted 8 year old.
Wrong, wrong, wrong! It is Signal 11 you need to be moderating down. Not me.
It only encourages him. When he sees this kind of moderation, he thinks it means his opinions matter and people care what he has to say. This is clearly not the case. The only moderation bojay should be getting is down.
(Score:-1, Sheer_idiocy)
Right now, trolls need to focus on destroying Signal 11.
Like I keep saying, Signal 11 needs to shut the fuck up. He is really detracting from my slashdot browsing experience.
"Just shut the hell up, Signal 11"
You have nothing worthwhile to say. Quit talking, bastard.
I've said it before and I'll continue to say it. Signal 11 is an idiot who needs to shut the fuck up before he exposes his ignorance any further.
Funny you should mention that. I just got back from the gas station - prices are up to $1.70 over here, from $1.19 this past fall. But, not being one to trust only my experiences, decided to consult my macroeconomics book (ISBN 0-07-046814-1, Economics: Principles, Problems, and Policies). The consumer price index (CPI) in 1929 was 17, and in 1970 was at 38.8. About those falling prices...
You are a supreme idiot. Gas prices undergo large price fluctuations in the short term. That doesn't neceassarily mean the price is going up on a longer time scale. The world's oil supply is largely controlled by OPEC; recently, when prices were driven so low by the abundance of oil that oil company profits began to suffer, OPEC decided to limit oil production, leading to higher prices.
Who the hell moderated Signal 11's post as "insightful"?
Capitalism, if left to its own devices, will consume every tree, every drop of water, every gallon of petrol, until this world is a desolate wasteland
You are a complete fucking moron. You don't begin to understand economics. Keep your fucking mouth shut unless you know what you are talking about.
As it stands now, we are nowhere near running out of "petrol", and if oil supplies start to dwindle, prices will shoot up until other energy sources become more cost effective.
Logging by corporations is largely confined to trees they planted themselves; the destruction of your beloved rain forest is due to the slash-and-burn efforts of third world subsistence farmers.
And how the hell are we going to run out of water?
A few more points:
First, about the idea of American Indians as environmental icons. This is idiotic. They were living with fucking stone age technology. They couldn't damage the environment if they wanted to. Every other group on earth at one time or another lived at a similar level of primitiveness, "in harmony" with the environment. Do you want to return to a time when we don't harm the environment but die by the age of 35?
And about the premises behind environmentalism. Many environmentalists give the impression that they feel the earth would be a better place without humans. Some even come right out and say it. "Think of how clean the air would be and how happy all the cute little animals would be." But what is the point? All these little animals go on living and dying for a few billion more years until the sun expands and puts an end to their happy little lives. Meanwhile, there would be no art, science, or anything worthwhile.