So please tell me what happened to the murderers in the "Collateral Murder" video?
Whether that was actual "murder" or a justified collateral damage in a war-zone, there is no parallel to TFA. Because unlike what the terrorists have done at the mall
It was no pre-planned.
It was not boasted about — neither by the actual trigger-pullers, nor by their associates.
It was not done with the intent to terrorize.
It is considered most unfortunate (and possibly criminal) — rather than a just and proper way to fight.
Whatever you do, it'd only further inspire their follows.
The attitude of "we all die sometime, so let's die with glory fighting the infidels", may be broken by making the death at the hands of the "infidels" so much more nasty and gruesome, that the "glory" may not be enough to compensate...
Whether or not it would be effective, is for the military psyops to evaluate — but, if they think, it may help, we ought to follow the advice.
spoken like a true patriot who lets his own army go wild, but is appalled at the actions of others.
Our army does not deliberately kill captured unarmed civilians, Anonymous. They certainly do not conspire to do that — nor do they brag about it on the Internet.
The few times some soldiers were caught doing something like that, it were a major scandal and they got prosecuted — "we" not only not "let them go wild", we try hard to prevent it, whereas Al-Shabab encourages it...
So, worry not, Anonymous, our house is quite clean and we do have a right to outraged.
A fair trial with a presentation of evidence, an impartial weighing of that evidence by a jury of peers, a conviction and sentencing, and a carrying out of the sentence are enough.
Absolute and full agreement. You would note, that I was only talking about the actual sentence — when and if the guilt is proven.
how is this different from using CNN to do the same thing?
It is different in that CNN do not conspire to commit a terrorist attack with hundreds of murders. They profit handsomely from reporting such occurrences, but they don't initiate them. At least, not directly...
Like it or loathe it! our mujahideen confirmed all executions were point blank range!
Me thinks, a conspiracy to commit murder this massive and this blatant, for reasons this nebulous, and with attitude this obnoxious, deserves punishment, that's harsher than an ordinary death penalty...
And not even for the actual murderers, whom I would allow to die in battle, but the jerks cheering them and goading them on — like this little twit behind the tweeter account. A simple needle or firing squad is not enough...
And yet, you remain dirt-poor, crime in the cities is staggering, and slipping back into dictatorship remains a very distinct possibility.
Guess who's been out of wars for 200 years except to provide humanitarian help?
Certainly not Brazil... And where/when you did wage war, whatever limits were placed on the engagement, where not by law or other mighty principles, but simply due to poverty.
Finally, "to provide humanitarian help" is an exception, through which one can drive a truck. America's attack on Iraq, for example, was a humanitarian help to Kuwait and others, was not it?
We have no "terrorist" attacks
Because no self-respecting terrorist cares...
Article 12: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
This is, actually, a good response... I do wish, "correspondence" included the electronic kind, but, I'm sure, NSA would like to disagree. They'll also claim, there is nothing "arbitrary" in a search for terrorists.
Quite clearly spying on their own citizens is what all countries do - to the best of their abilities. So it must be good right?
Brazilian President, in addition to denouncing the spying as evil, accused the US of violating international law.
You seem to agree, so, please, name the treaty being violated.
You shouldnt complain about the NSA spying on you, Your country is just the best
Though I quite agree with the second statement, I don't see, how it relates to the first. Being able to complain freely about the government — with complaints being loud and substantial enough to affect changes in the government's behavior — is part of what makes our country the best, thank you very much.
accusing the NSA of violating international law by its indiscriminate collection of personal information
Which particular law did the the lady have in mind?
Spying on other countries is what all countries do — to the best of their abilities. Perhaps, Brazil's abilities aren't a match for those of the US — and not just in the field of spying. I can see, how the resulting jealousy — among politicians and ordinary citizens alike — can lead to some fiery speeches, but the audience better remember, there is nothing the US has done, that any other country wouldn't have, if only it were able to.
Now, spying on one's own citizens — that's bad. But that's not a matter for international law, is it?
Yes, sometimes worthwhile things are difficult and you just have to slog through, but why do it unnecessarily?
No need to do it unnecessarily. And yet, the modern emphasis on making things fun disturbs me — because when "fun" comes into conflict with results, "fun" tends to win nowadays... Witness the prevalence of Asian children, whose "dragon mothers" are not (yet?) quite as enamored with the "fun", being so successful entering the best colleges, for example, that the admission boards adjusted the rules to favor Whites over Asians (although Blacks are still the most favored) to comply with the racist "affirmative action" laws and personal beliefs...
What's next? Slashdot reviews of "Metallurgy for Dummies" or "Making Radiology Fun"?.. Oh, wait...
Such optimizing things for new users — while pessimizing the experience for others — is a trap. This is exactly, how you end-up with a dumbed-down system — whether it is an OS, or a user-interface for anything. Easy to get started — maybe, you'll achieve that. Hard to keep going — this one will likely be yours...
If you can't see the difference between competition and outright fraud...
Competition can very well use fraudulent methods, but I know, what you mean — from your previous post. Again: I know the difference, but insist, it is not relevant to this particular conversation.
And you know what? That's called human nature. EVERYTHING today is built upon something from earlier ideas.
Indeed. And yet, selling pants identical in design to Versaci's is unethical — if not illegal. And no amount of evasion-talk like: "Oh, but I'm not stealing — Versaci still has his design, does not he?" — or: "Versaci is too expensive, my replicas are for the poor!" — you know the usual excuses — is making it any better.
Counterfeits are not Knock Offs. Very different things.
A distinction without difference — to this conversation. In both cases one entity uses a set of ideas (particular design, or an entire collection, or even a brand) developed by another to enrich itself. It may or may not always be illegal, but it nearly always is unethical.
Citation [freakonomics.com] provided
The article you linked to is titled "Why Knockoffs Can Help Build a Strong Brand". Perhaps, they can. And using them — or choosing not to — is up to the brand's owner, not to the thieves.
Nobody NEEDS the latest fashion, yet year after year it's a multi-billion dollar industry that's rife with product that is very hard to distinguish from the brand name stuff.
Yes, yes. And we are all locking our homes and cars, and thefts keep happening anyway. Hardly an excuse for the thieves.
They currently do NOT have any 'reward' for fashion designers.
They are paid good monies not for measuring and sewing, but merely for thinking stuff up. What they devise is not tangible property, but intellectual — and the second we can all begin producing exactly the same products from their designs they'll stop getting their pay (save for custom gigs) and turn from professionals to hobbyists.
There is no IP protection in fashion.
There are some — brand-names, at least, are protected.
Designer clothes, assuming they are high quality, should not be
And the decision on how much they cost should be vested entirely with the owner. Too expensive? Don't buy it, end of story...
People using other people's ideas without paying (or even acknowledging) are thieves — whether the idea is about clothing design, or software, or a music tune. There is no better word for it.
The fact that "cheap knock-offs of designer clothes and footwear" are possible proves there is no inherent value in the design.
How does one prove the other? The value exists — I like, how some of the designs look on my better third, and think, world would've been a sadder place without them.
What it proves is that it is possible to "steal" the design — use it without rewarding the designer. But we already knew that.
GOOD designers are still THRIVING despite having no IP laws protecting them...
There are IP-laws protecting designers. NYPD, for for just one example, periodically arrests peddlers of the fakes — and confiscates their counterfeit goods — they have a special unit for the purpose.
when they can afford the Prada bag...they tend to buy it.
Citation needed. (Note: anecdotal evidence from your girlfriend would not count.)
this will HELP people who design things by making them better and faster at it
Today some people prefer the real thing, because the manufacturing quality is still better. When/if the hypothetical 3D-printing is used by both the fake and the real — producing indistinguishable pieces from the same designs — the clothing designer will stop being a profession and become a hobby.
If not, then they go out of business...which is sort what business is about no?
That's just what I said — if some other way to reward designers is not found, they'll stop designing... Whether that's good or bad — decide for yourself.
can i print clothes or shoes for my kids on a 3d printer?
For years cheap knock-offs of designer clothes and footwear have been available at a fraction of the "real thing" prices. 3D-printing does not introduce the problem — it only makes it worse. Worse for the people, who design stuff.
Some new way of rewarding them would have to be created, or else the designers will have to switch professions...
Slashdot Mirror
Whether that was actual "murder" or a justified collateral damage in a war-zone, there is no parallel to TFA. Because unlike what the terrorists have done at the mall
I never said.
The person behind the twitter-account conspired with the actual trigger-pullers.
Do you have any evidence of such conspiracy? Not mere meeting of minds, but of actual conspiracy? Let's see it...
Put up or shut up, so to speak...
The attitude of "we all die sometime, so let's die with glory fighting the infidels", may be broken by making the death at the hands of the "infidels" so much more nasty and gruesome, that the "glory" may not be enough to compensate...
Whether or not it would be effective, is for the military psyops to evaluate — but, if they think, it may help, we ought to follow the advice.
Our army does not deliberately kill captured unarmed civilians, Anonymous. They certainly do not conspire to do that — nor do they brag about it on the Internet.
The few times some soldiers were caught doing something like that, it were a major scandal and they got prosecuted — "we" not only not "let them go wild", we try hard to prevent it, whereas Al-Shabab encourages it...
So, worry not, Anonymous, our house is quite clean and we do have a right to outraged.
Absolute and full agreement. You would note, that I was only talking about the actual sentence — when and if the guilt is proven.
It is different in that CNN do not conspire to commit a terrorist attack with hundreds of murders. They profit handsomely from reporting such occurrences, but they don't initiate them. At least, not directly...
Me thinks, a conspiracy to commit murder this massive and this blatant, for reasons this nebulous, and with attitude this obnoxious, deserves punishment, that's harsher than an ordinary death penalty...
And not even for the actual murderers, whom I would allow to die in battle, but the jerks cheering them and goading them on — like this little twit behind the tweeter account. A simple needle or firing squad is not enough...
Certainly not Brazil... And where/when you did wage war, whatever limits were placed on the engagement, where not by law or other mighty principles, but simply due to poverty.
Finally, "to provide humanitarian help" is an exception, through which one can drive a truck. America's attack on Iraq, for example, was a humanitarian help to Kuwait and others, was not it?
Because no self-respecting terrorist cares...
This is, actually, a good response... I do wish, "correspondence" included the electronic kind, but, I'm sure, NSA would like to disagree. They'll also claim, there is nothing "arbitrary" in a search for terrorists.
Brazilian President, in addition to denouncing the spying as evil, accused the US of violating international law.
You seem to agree, so, please, name the treaty being violated.
Though I quite agree with the second statement, I don't see, how it relates to the first. Being able to complain freely about the government — with complaints being loud and substantial enough to affect changes in the government's behavior — is part of what makes our country the best, thank you very much.
Ok, let's play... Please, quote the international treaty, of which the US is a signatory, which prevents countries from spying on foreigners.
Put up or shut up, so to speak...
Which particular law did the the lady have in mind?
Spying on other countries is what all countries do — to the best of their abilities. Perhaps, Brazil's abilities aren't a match for those of the US — and not just in the field of spying. I can see, how the resulting jealousy — among politicians and ordinary citizens alike — can lead to some fiery speeches, but the audience better remember, there is nothing the US has done, that any other country wouldn't have, if only it were able to.
Now, spying on one's own citizens — that's bad. But that's not a matter for international law, is it?
And "Gun Free Zones" for some others.
Yeah, and for another example of the same logic, suicide give you a good chance to be noticed and, perhaps, even appreciated.
Benefits, you say? Only if you are paid per end-user license...
No need to do it unnecessarily. And yet, the modern emphasis on making things fun disturbs me — because when "fun" comes into conflict with results, "fun" tends to win nowadays... Witness the prevalence of Asian children, whose "dragon mothers" are not (yet?) quite as enamored with the "fun", being so successful entering the best colleges, for example, that the admission boards adjusted the rules to favor Whites over Asians (although Blacks are still the most favored) to comply with the racist "affirmative action" laws and personal beliefs...
What's next? Slashdot reviews of "Metallurgy for Dummies" or "Making Radiology Fun"?.. Oh, wait...
Such optimizing things for new users — while pessimizing the experience for others — is a trap. This is exactly, how you end-up with a dumbed-down system — whether it is an OS, or a user-interface for anything. Easy to get started — maybe, you'll achieve that. Hard to keep going — this one will likely be yours...
Why wouldn't you just compare him with Hitler (disfavorably) and be done for the day?
And my point was, this awesome state of affairs is a luxury — an un- (or, at best, under-) appreciated one.
You spoiled-rotten 21st century golden billion... Having to learn a trade has nothing to do with it, has it?
It must all be fun and games, or else you aren't going to bother getting up in the morning, are you?
Oh, well, for toddlers it is Ok, I suppose...
Competition can very well use fraudulent methods, but I know, what you mean — from your previous post. Again: I know the difference, but insist, it is not relevant to this particular conversation.
Indeed. And yet, selling pants identical in design to Versaci's is unethical — if not illegal. And no amount of evasion-talk like: "Oh, but I'm not stealing — Versaci still has his design, does not he?" — or: "Versaci is too expensive, my replicas are for the poor!" — you know the usual excuses — is making it any better.
A distinction without difference — to this conversation. In both cases one entity uses a set of ideas (particular design, or an entire collection, or even a brand) developed by another to enrich itself. It may or may not always be illegal, but it nearly always is unethical.
The article you linked to is titled "Why Knockoffs Can Help Build a Strong Brand". Perhaps, they can. And using them — or choosing not to — is up to the brand's owner, not to the thieves.
Yes, yes. And we are all locking our homes and cars, and thefts keep happening anyway. Hardly an excuse for the thieves.
They are paid good monies not for measuring and sewing, but merely for thinking stuff up. What they devise is not tangible property, but intellectual — and the second we can all begin producing exactly the same products from their designs they'll stop getting their pay (save for custom gigs) and turn from professionals to hobbyists.
There are some — brand-names, at least, are protected.
And the decision on how much they cost should be vested entirely with the owner. Too expensive? Don't buy it, end of story...
People using other people's ideas without paying (or even acknowledging) are thieves — whether the idea is about clothing design, or software, or a music tune. There is no better word for it.
How does one prove the other? The value exists — I like, how some of the designs look on my better third, and think, world would've been a sadder place without them.
What it proves is that it is possible to "steal" the design — use it without rewarding the designer. But we already knew that.
There are IP-laws protecting designers. NYPD, for for just one example, periodically arrests peddlers of the fakes — and confiscates their counterfeit goods — they have a special unit for the purpose.
Citation needed. (Note: anecdotal evidence from your girlfriend would not count.)
Today some people prefer the real thing, because the manufacturing quality is still better. When/if the hypothetical 3D-printing is used by both the fake and the real — producing indistinguishable pieces from the same designs — the clothing designer will stop being a profession and become a hobby.
That's just what I said — if some other way to reward designers is not found, they'll stop designing... Whether that's good or bad — decide for yourself.
For years cheap knock-offs of designer clothes and footwear have been available at a fraction of the "real thing" prices. 3D-printing does not introduce the problem — it only makes it worse. Worse for the people, who design stuff.
Some new way of rewarding them would have to be created, or else the designers will have to switch professions...