Near here, theres a place called Eagle Creek, and there's some controversial logging going on... now, I'm no friend of clearcut logging by any means, but the wackjobs who were out there burned up a bunch of logging equipment, effectively releasing all sorts of toxins into the air and spilling diesel and motor oil all over the ground. BRILLIANT pro-environmental tactics... really.. *cough*
All this does nothing but reinforce the general perception that these guys, regardless of their cause, are nothing but a bunch of braindead violent miscreants... I think that's somewhat wrong... There *IS* a voice of reason in there.. but i think it gets effectively drowned out by the fools.
Yeah, be a good little worker bee. Otherwise Uncle Sam will have to give you a spanking.
Its the stereotypical extreme-leftist retort: "If you dont agree with me, you must be a TV-made media clone controlled by the government!!!"
Listen, buddy, spouting nonsense about how evil SUV's are and the evils of the corporate 'system' and the flaws of the 'common man' who is controlled by Uncle Sam isnt thinking outside the box any more than your so-called 'worker bee'. I live in Eugene, OR, where alot of this radical left BS is going down, and i can tell you, its not original at all. When you've heard 100 people who look all alike throwing around the same rhetoric, it beings to lose its sparkle and sheen, and starts to look more and more like hackneyed phraseology and cliche sloganism.
And torching SUV dealerships is pretty damn harmful to the environment too. Fumes from paint and oil and plastic and any number of other things go billowing into the atmosphere in quantities that can be quite damaging, esp. if theres a large number of the things burning. And to what end? So youve torched 50 SUVs... Ford can make that many more in an hour. Youve accomplished exactly nothing. Any sort of justification for this is pure arrogance and just putting on the blinders to what is really going on, which is simple criminality. If you really want to change the system, try doing it in a way that will garner real support, rather than Socratic, self-important extremist support. Whether you like it or not, your cause will succeed or fail on the shoulders of 'the common man.'
This comment is a stereotypical example of a leftist trying to justify violence and lawlessness by claiming moral superiority, and I, for one, find it boring and disgusting. Were a right-wing Christian extremist blow up an abortion clinic, they'd all rise up and scream murder, but burning someone else's property is okay, if it's 'for Mother Nature.' The Romania Chevrolet dealership here in Eugene had a bunch of SUVs burned one night, and the justification was that rich capitalists drove them around and destroyed the environment.
I'm sorry, but no matter how crappy SUVs are (and I'm the first to admit I deplore the things), no matter WHAT, violence and destruction are not the solutions. Extreme leftists are always going on about how evil and brutal "the system" is, and how "property is violence," etc. Well... how does throwing bricks at cops or busting up a Starbucks or burning Romania Chevrolet compare to that? Is that any less violent and brutal? Not on your life. It's certainly more juvenile.
I'm tired of the Socratic moral superiority always claimed by radical Leftists, and how they always seem to think they're on the inside track, that somehow, they're better than "the common people," who are reluctant to "rise up and take action." Maybe the common people are happy the way they are... ever thought of that?
JUST what we need... more dicey statistics showing how those evil, insidious, brainwashing CORPORATIONS (*washes mouth out with soap*) are TAKING OVER THE WORLD!!!!!! just like some James Bond movie.
I mean really... I'm no huge fan of 'big money' or 'corporations' (*washes mouth out with soap*), but all this sort of wild finger-pointing and conspiracy theorizing is just too much for me to handle anymore. After living in Eugene, OR (HOME OF THE ANARCHISTS WHO RIOTED IN SEATTLE [err, i mean protested peacefully]) for a few years, this kind of thing always comes off as cliche and pretty uninteresting. Every single day, some group who banks on its own 'moral superiority' is protesting some overwhelming evil in the world, throwing around meaningless slogans like 'Poverty = Violence' and the like, demanding that factories be shut down and corporations (*washes mouth out with soap*) be disbanded, without even thinking about the people who work for said corporations (*washes mouth out with soap*) doing such conspiratorial things as taking phone calls or delivering mail, or, god forbid, MEMOS (!!!!), or the people who work in the factories to feed (with an ill-gotten corporate [*washes mouth out*] paycheck no less!!!) their family. They find trained mouths from Indonesia who, after escaping from rice-paddies to sweat shops to suburban America are right at home pointing the finger at all the abuses, now that theyre paid-speakers driving around in a nice Volvo, or maybe even a Mercedes. And of course there are abuses... it comes with the territory, the territory in question being 'humanity.' What on earth do they expect?
But from all of that... all the protests, all the finger-pointing, all the anger and (sometimes) righteous frustration, NO ONE has a real solution. NOT ONE person goes beyond the sloganism and the sign-waving. Or, if a solution does somehow make its way to the fore, it will be something so absolutely fantastic, or just vague, that theres no way in hell it can be implemented or even agreed upon. "Tear down the government!" "Stop the WTO!" "Support the Earth Liberation Front!!" etc. After awhile, it's just difficult to take seriously. How does one 'support' the Earth Liberation Front anyways? By giving them money? By helping them burn down buildings (which they admit to doing, by the way)? By being a mouthpiece for *THEIR* propoganda, instead of Nike's propoganda? Its all so mind-boggling. I'm getting confused.
I'm not claiming I have the answers either. Maybe if someone bothered to explain the problem coherently, without resorting to banal slogans, then someone could come up with a solution that just might have a chance of succeeding.
Changes can't happen instantly. Gradual change, gradual solutions will generally work best, because theyre not a violent shock to the system and the people who, for better or worse, rely on that system to feed themselves and their families.
Anyways, sorry for the rant. Hope you found something useful in all of that...
I live a couple hours away from Bend... interesting that I haven't heard a WORD of this on local news... Maybe as the time grows closer things will start heating up in terms of press coverage.
Crazy as it may seem, though, I wish this guy the best of luck. NASA and its international equivalents have held the monopoly on space flight for too long. I'll never be a NASA astronaut, but I'd love to be in space at least once in my life. If this fellow makes it back, and others are heartened by his attempt... it might mean the beginning of a whole new era, where not only military men, scientists, and rich people can experience the majesty of space.
This whole "Czar" (I always thought it was Tsar) thing is a bad idea.. The Soviet Union may be gone, but I don't think even now the Russians look kindly on Czars... We already have enough problems with them because of this missle-defense crap... the last thing we need is for them to think that we're Czarists....
Blah, fine, it was a bad historian joke, but it had to be said.
Firstly, I suppose its somewhat typical for those who are dogmatically opposed to the system to brand anyone who has an inkling of opposition to their slogans a "brainwashed tool of the system TV drone corporate robot," but keep on pretending you're morally superior, if it makes you feel good
Secondly, ideals are just that, ideals. Utopian socialism died (or should have) in the 19th century. Communism will never work because the vast majority of people simply do not want it.
Thirdly, if you'd bothered to read what I said, it pretty clearly states that "I'm no huge fan of capitalism...", in fact, you included that line in your caption... where's the 'black and white' drawing of lines again?
Fourth, if you read the original post, it gushes on about all sorts of sloganistic crap like "Capitalism is slavery!" and "No more welfare!" and other things that are not only somewhat vague in their meaning, but entirely vague on how said poster plans to implement these kinds of wonderful reforms... Radicals (and reactionaries) always forget about that part when they come into power. The Bolsheviks had to keep on a huge portion of the Tsarist buerocracy simply because they themselves had no idea how to get things done.
So... please, before you go off trying to paint me as a "tool of the man," why don't you get your face out of Chomsky or whatever firebrand-of-the-day is popular, and *THINK* about the issues, instead of issuing kneejerk statements about your opponents being drones, and touting your own supposed moral superiority. Your whole attitude is really faux-Socratic.
Socialism is a broad thing, under which Communism does indeed fall. I'd define socialism as any system that is intended to benefit society. If you don't think that Soviet socialism (Communism) had this in mind, regardless of the Stalinist perversions, I think you need to do some more reading. Two *STRIKING* examples are the emancipation of women (which was far more progressive than anything that happened in the United States for decades), and the explosive growth in literacy, even among previously nearly illiterate ethnic groups such as Kazakhs.
I agree... its a real shame that defending oneself is so expensive, and court-supplied attorneys are oft the bottom-of-the-barrel, so to speak... which is the problem. Its easier for an ISP to backdown from corporate lawyers out to fill their boss's pockets as well as their own, than to hire a proper attorney and defend oneself because the monetary costs are generally far too prohibitive for a small ISP or business...
"...because if they don't, they'll end up spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on attorney fees."
THIS is the problem... you've hit it right on the head! THIS is what we need our representatives to stop. I don't want to say I hate lawyers... But it's lawyers who take a well-meaning law such as the DMCA (say what you will... but the DMCA wasn't meant to be a way for big business to strong-arm people, ISP's, and weaker institutions), and turn it into a weapon for the moneyed-folk. It's lawyers who charge exorbanant fees that make ISP's and people unwilling to go to court to defend their rights.
I don't really know what to do to fix the problem. Sometimes I just hate money... bleh.
"Capitalism is a slavery system" "We want a truly free system" "bla bla bla bla bla"
How about you try being realistic? Instead of whining, in cliche terms about how bad things supposedly are, why don't you try to change things? And by change things, I don't mean rioting in the streets and overturning cars and smashing shop windows in the name of "righteous protest." I'm no huge fan of capitalism, but all-in-all, I feel it works for me better than so-called "socialism," the likes of which exist in China and in the former Soviet Union, would. It certainly works better for me than so-called anarchy, where everyone is "free to do what they want..." including rob my house and enslave me.
Instead of demonizing capitalism with canned slogans, try to change the world by envisioning a truly better way of life, and not in the broad, vague, unreasonable, and utopian terms you've stated here.
The issue at hand, anyways, is privacy. Without privacy, you wouldn't even be able to post this kind of thing, so instead of screaming about "slave systems," fight for your right to say what's on your mind, or send send encrypted email. I guarantee you'll accomplish much more for the good of yourself and mankind-at-large fighting specific grievances than advancing vague ideologies.
Well... you have a point. However, people won't stand for it for long. Joe-sixpack LIKES Napster. No government ban, no RIAA/MPAA/DCMA whining will ultimately stop him. If Napster dies, he'll use something else.
Combined with the power of the ACLU, the EFF, and similar organizations, Joe-sixpack, whether he's doing the right thing or not by stealing content, is a potent force against the growing anti-privacy movement now engulfing the internet in the name of intellectual property.
The battle continues, but people, sheeplike as they may sometimes appear, posess the power to halt this kind of thing in its tracks, and when the public becomes outraged... its all over for these corporate chumps and their pit of vipers... err, I mean lawyers.
As always: contact your representative, write editorials, hold your own well-publicised media events (really, who's stopping you?).... Protests don't have to be a bunch of dirty hippies rioting and spraying "Die pig" on overturned cars. The battle can be won, but it must be won in a way that makes our side look better.
Man, upon reading the article associated with this story, I have to admit, I got quite a chuckle... It's good to see someone being just as sneaky and underhanded as the RIAA for once... but this time the sneakiness and underhandedness is getting aimed against the RIAA and the DMCA. I hope to god the courts can look past 2600's media image as a "hax0r crax0r" organization, and listen closely to what they, and other free-speech advocates are saying.
As a historian of modern Russia, Stalinism is one of the first things that comes to my mind when I hear about organizations trying to stifle free speech... *especially* academic free speech. While in no way am I comparing the United States government to that of Stalin, we have to be oh-so-careful... because in the future, such comparisons might not only be appropriate, but they might be outlawed...
Kudos to Prof. Felten, 2600, the EFF, and all others who're fighting this kind of drivel. If you haven't already, write your representative.
Although I find "Holocaust Denial" and other sorts of neo-Nazi crap, as well as child porn, etc. pretty foul, I don't like this idea at all... it's opening up a *TOTAL* double standard... The government prosecutes people who DoS Yahoo!, amazon.com, etc. because they don't like said sites, then turns around and DoS's other sites because they don't like the content. This spells bad news. I dunno, maybe I'm missing something.
In my experience, 'anarchists' are nothing but a bunch of hypocratic followers anyways. They do nothing but shout slogans and act morally superior to everyone else, whom they consider 'tools of the man' or 'TV clones' or 'brainwashed religious zombies.'
Your anarchists will never win because they're out of touch, largely in-the-box thinking elitists who tend to be very impressed by their own meager intelligence.
I totally agree. It seems that geneticists love to ride roughshod over common sense, pushing ahead and doing anything they damn well please, simply because they can. Unfortunately, alot of technology proponents support them, simply because it's something new.
Well, sorry for the lack of enthusiasm, but all I can see ahead is a a boatload of problems. If we're going to use this stuff, then I think we've got to really learn how to harness it. It's just like nuclear power... used correctly, it's great. Used incorrectly, and it's a bit of a problem. The same applies to genetics. I think before we start throwing genetically altered species out into the wild, we've got to have a good handle on the implications, and I don't think that a brief period of "controlled release" or whatever is enough. The scientists, I think, are being impatient... they just want to see how their product performs in the wild... I think it's got too many dangerous implications... but im not in control, so I guess all I can do is sit back and hope nothing goes awry...
For once someone else besides me stands up to the politicized rabble...A 'protest' is only effective if you're spreading your ideas to *OTHER* people. The vast amount of 'protests' I see tend to be focused inwards... Yelling slogans to people who already beleive what you do is pointless.
Clearly, you don't understand the nature of a protest. Protests are meant to a) express your dislike with something and b) convince others that your position is correct, so that your movement can enlarge.
Obviously, you've mastered part A... but if you ever want to be taken seriously, as more than just a braindead rabble bent on breaking stuff, then you need to appeal to the majority of the population. Lasting changes don't happen if there's no support. Read about the Revolutions of 1848 in Europe... there, a vocal minority actually TOPPLED the government, but within weeks, the old regimes were back, because a) the revolutionaries had no good plans for dealing with national issues and b) had no popular support.
Oh yeah... and it's ALLLWAYS those nasty evil cops who just wanna beat down the hippies who're responsible for riots. Give the police some credit, and give me a freakin' break, dude.
It's nice to see someone with some stones standing up to this kind of corporate strongarming.
Now... I live in Eugene, OR, which is one of the hotbeds of 'anti-corporatist anarchism' and such... and though I'd venture to say that a very, very large percentage of the people involved with such groups are just there to wreak havoc, the small portion that does actually beleive in their goals are, in my opinion, going about it the wrong way. Dr. David Touretzky is going about it the right way. Instead of rioting and breaking windows and throwing bricks at cops to make his point, he's going about it in a fashion that not only makes him look clever, but makes the MPA look absolutely stupid. We have to stand up for our rights, or else, eventually, someone is going to ride roughshod over us all, and then it's all over (read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago for a more detailed description of what happens when people don't voice a word of protest when they're being opressed). However, our protests have to be intelligent, well thought out, and above all, non-threatening to the average citizen, which is who we're supposedly trying to get on our side. Tattooed rioters smashing windows and attacking cops to 'send out a message against corporatism' is simply counterproductive. Kudos to Dr. Touretzky.
This seems like one of the few halfway sane comments I've read on this topic today...
Most of the other posts are urging us to fly forths on the wings of genetic engineering to some great new scientific frontier, but we don't really get a clear picture of what this new frontier is supposed to be. Longer lifespans? Well that's great, but with more people alive making more babies, we're gonna run out of food (and places to plant all that genetically engineered wheat that can grow in the middle of the desert fed by only the sun and dust) real quick. Eradication of all diseases? Diseases happen for a reason: to kill off excess population. Sure, disease sucks... it't not a happy thing, but it's a part of living. Death is something we all have to face, and putting it off isn't going to stop the inevitable.
We just need to take this stuff slower... we need to think about the effects of what we're planning to do *BEFORE* we do them... not after we do them, when there's no going back.
Well, I realise from the outset that by saying "I think cloning is a bad idea..." that half the readers of Slashdot are going to instantly lambast me for my views... but that said... I think cloning, and genetic engineering in general, is a bad idea...
1) We don't need more people.
2) What's the use of a clone anyways?
3) If you think anyone except the very rich and famous are going to have access to cloning technology, you're fooling yourself.
4) WE DON'T NEED MORE PEOPLE.
5) Genetic tinkering leads to problems... scientists in Australia were recently trying to find a genetic contraceptive in mice... what they ended up doing was spreading a genetic disease among the mice they were testing on, inadvertantly killing them all. "OOPS!"
6) Oh yeah... and WE DON'T NEED ANYMORE PEOPLE!!
Trying to ride roughshod over nature is not only arrogant, but dangerous and naive. Does genetic engineering have good uses? Sure, but just like nuclear power, it needs to be used responsibly, or we're going to have a real problem on our hands... Earth is overcrowded enough as it is... Nature always takes steps to correct problems... Look at AIDS... where is AIDS most prevalent? In nations that are chock full of people... Nature's trying to wipe out as many people as it can by taking advantage of our breeding urges. Only by *NOT* breeding, can someone stay clear of these sorts of diseases... See the logic? In the face of the potential of a 'genetic weapon', or Nature's reaction to genetic toying, The Bomb looks like a pile of alphabet blocks... Stop trying to be trendy, or embrace every new technology simply because it's new technology, and think about the *REAL* issues at stake.
Actually, I think you're wrong. I think that schools are becoming paranoid parents, afraid of what their students are seemingly capable of, and leaping at any possible solution to a problem that they don't really know how to handle.
I saw this a couple of years ago in my own high school... they kept a list of people who were 'likely' to cause harm to their peers, or act out violently against teachers or staff. The mentality that this exposes is one of utter fear... instead of looking at the facts, and realising that incidences of school violence are extremely rare, they're going on the assumption that there is at least one 'dangerous person' in every school, possibly more, and whether or not said persons ever have shown evidence of violence tendencies, they should be watched extra-carefully. How, then, do most of these non-violent types end up on the 'list'? Well, naturally, 'the-boy-next-door' isn't the most likely candidate, so, perhaps even subconsciously, the 'wierdos' wind up being watched, not only by teachers, but now, apparently, by their own mistrustful peers.
With the 'rash' of school violence in the past few years (read: the 'rash of school violence in middle-class white areas), school boards and lawmakers are going hog-wild with rules and legislation that in past days would be considered conservative fringe, laughable, or even outrageous. They're made into veritable media events, with each and every moralist telling us the horrible wrongs of society that have caused these horrible catastrophes. Random violence happens every day in poorer areas of cities like Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, etc., but it doesn't make the news, because it isn't news... at least anymore.
We all know the tune by now:
"Another gang killing in South-Central L.A.? Well, that's a shame, but it's not like we're running out of poor black kids from the ghetto... but when a middle class school in Colorado gets shot up by a couple of heavy-metal fringe Goths, well, that's the boy-next-door who's getting shot at... as American as apple pie."
When people who aren't used to violence suddenly get exposed to it, they get scared, and then their peers get scared, and everyone overreacts. We all know that having students inform on one another is reminiscent of McCarthyism... it's dangerous and I think that this kind of stuff is the knee-jerk reaction of an institution that is terrified of an over-blown problem, and is struggling to find ways of dealing with something that they don't have any control over. Preparedness is one thing... having a plan of contingency in case of such a problem is one thing... but having anonymous accusations is quite another, and we all ought to know the difference. Shame on everyone trying to get away with this. You're buying into a Stalin-esque paranoia.
First, I'd say twins with the exact same DNA are rare. Second, once we have a bunch of people sharing the same genetic structures, which is bound to happen when you've got multiple hosts carrying the exactly same genetic material, then you're opening the floodgates for all sorts of genetic problems to get spread around, and then, in contrast with what you say, it *will* be the end of the world, as far as humans are concerned. AIDS is just one evidence of nature trying to wipe us out in this fashion.
I think the thing is, that often, the companies that are requesting these consulting firms don't know the difference... so they get a piece of software that pretty much bites: it crashes, it only does some of what they need it to do, necessitating them asking their hired consultant for more advice, consultant recommends more software, etc. If something doesn't work quite right, I'd venture to guess that clients are more prone to blame the software, not the consultant, simply because they don't realise that there IS software out there that can fufill their requirements. The first step do busting down on these crooked consultants is to educate the clients, so that they actually REALISE they're getting a raw deal...
Slashdot Mirror
All this does nothing but reinforce the general perception that these guys, regardless of their cause, are nothing but a bunch of braindead violent miscreants... I think that's somewhat wrong... There *IS* a voice of reason in there.. but i think it gets effectively drowned out by the fools.
Yeah, be a good little worker bee. Otherwise Uncle Sam will have to give you a spanking.
Its the stereotypical extreme-leftist retort: "If you dont agree with me, you must be a TV-made media clone controlled by the government!!!"
Listen, buddy, spouting nonsense about how evil SUV's are and the evils of the corporate 'system' and the flaws of the 'common man' who is controlled by Uncle Sam isnt thinking outside the box any more than your so-called 'worker bee'. I live in Eugene, OR, where alot of this radical left BS is going down, and i can tell you, its not original at all. When you've heard 100 people who look all alike throwing around the same rhetoric, it beings to lose its sparkle and sheen, and starts to look more and more like hackneyed phraseology and cliche sloganism.
And torching SUV dealerships is pretty damn harmful to the environment too. Fumes from paint and oil and plastic and any number of other things go billowing into the atmosphere in quantities that can be quite damaging, esp. if theres a large number of the things burning. And to what end? So youve torched 50 SUVs... Ford can make that many more in an hour. Youve accomplished exactly nothing. Any sort of justification for this is pure arrogance and just putting on the blinders to what is really going on, which is simple criminality. If you really want to change the system, try doing it in a way that will garner real support, rather than Socratic, self-important extremist support. Whether you like it or not, your cause will succeed or fail on the shoulders of 'the common man.'
I'm sorry, but no matter how crappy SUVs are (and I'm the first to admit I deplore the things), no matter WHAT, violence and destruction are not the solutions. Extreme leftists are always going on about how evil and brutal "the system" is, and how "property is violence," etc. Well... how does throwing bricks at cops or busting up a Starbucks or burning Romania Chevrolet compare to that? Is that any less violent and brutal? Not on your life. It's certainly more juvenile.
I'm tired of the Socratic moral superiority always claimed by radical Leftists, and how they always seem to think they're on the inside track, that somehow, they're better than "the common people," who are reluctant to "rise up and take action." Maybe the common people are happy the way they are... ever thought of that?
I mean really... I'm no huge fan of 'big money' or 'corporations' (*washes mouth out with soap*), but all this sort of wild finger-pointing and conspiracy theorizing is just too much for me to handle anymore. After living in Eugene, OR (HOME OF THE ANARCHISTS WHO RIOTED IN SEATTLE [err, i mean protested peacefully]) for a few years, this kind of thing always comes off as cliche and pretty uninteresting. Every single day, some group who banks on its own 'moral superiority' is protesting some overwhelming evil in the world, throwing around meaningless slogans like 'Poverty = Violence' and the like, demanding that factories be shut down and corporations (*washes mouth out with soap*) be disbanded, without even thinking about the people who work for said corporations (*washes mouth out with soap*) doing such conspiratorial things as taking phone calls or delivering mail, or, god forbid, MEMOS (!!!!), or the people who work in the factories to feed (with an ill-gotten corporate [*washes mouth out*] paycheck no less!!!) their family. They find trained mouths from Indonesia who, after escaping from rice-paddies to sweat shops to suburban America are right at home pointing the finger at all the abuses, now that theyre paid-speakers driving around in a nice Volvo, or maybe even a Mercedes. And of course there are abuses... it comes with the territory, the territory in question being 'humanity.' What on earth do they expect?
But from all of that... all the protests, all the finger-pointing, all the anger and (sometimes) righteous frustration, NO ONE has a real solution. NOT ONE person goes beyond the sloganism and the sign-waving. Or, if a solution does somehow make its way to the fore, it will be something so absolutely fantastic, or just vague, that theres no way in hell it can be implemented or even agreed upon. "Tear down the government!" "Stop the WTO!" "Support the Earth Liberation Front!!" etc. After awhile, it's just difficult to take seriously. How does one 'support' the Earth Liberation Front anyways? By giving them money? By helping them burn down buildings (which they admit to doing, by the way)? By being a mouthpiece for *THEIR* propoganda, instead of Nike's propoganda? Its all so mind-boggling. I'm getting confused.
I'm not claiming I have the answers either. Maybe if someone bothered to explain the problem coherently, without resorting to banal slogans, then someone could come up with a solution that just might have a chance of succeeding.
Changes can't happen instantly. Gradual change, gradual solutions will generally work best, because theyre not a violent shock to the system and the people who, for better or worse, rely on that system to feed themselves and their families.
Anyways, sorry for the rant. Hope you found something useful in all of that...
Crazy as it may seem, though, I wish this guy the best of luck. NASA and its international equivalents have held the monopoly on space flight for too long. I'll never be a NASA astronaut, but I'd love to be in space at least once in my life. If this fellow makes it back, and others are heartened by his attempt... it might mean the beginning of a whole new era, where not only military men, scientists, and rich people can experience the majesty of space.
Blah, fine, it was a bad historian joke, but it had to be said.
Secondly, ideals are just that, ideals. Utopian socialism died (or should have) in the 19th century. Communism will never work because the vast majority of people simply do not want it.
Thirdly, if you'd bothered to read what I said, it pretty clearly states that "I'm no huge fan of capitalism...", in fact, you included that line in your caption... where's the 'black and white' drawing of lines again?
Fourth, if you read the original post, it gushes on about all sorts of sloganistic crap like "Capitalism is slavery!" and "No more welfare!" and other things that are not only somewhat vague in their meaning, but entirely vague on how said poster plans to implement these kinds of wonderful reforms... Radicals (and reactionaries) always forget about that part when they come into power. The Bolsheviks had to keep on a huge portion of the Tsarist buerocracy simply because they themselves had no idea how to get things done.
So... please, before you go off trying to paint me as a "tool of the man," why don't you get your face out of Chomsky or whatever firebrand-of-the-day is popular, and *THINK* about the issues, instead of issuing kneejerk statements about your opponents being drones, and touting your own supposed moral superiority. Your whole attitude is really faux-Socratic.
THIS is the problem... you've hit it right on the head! THIS is what we need our representatives to stop. I don't want to say I hate lawyers... But it's lawyers who take a well-meaning law such as the DMCA (say what you will... but the DMCA wasn't meant to be a way for big business to strong-arm people, ISP's, and weaker institutions), and turn it into a weapon for the moneyed-folk. It's lawyers who charge exorbanant fees that make ISP's and people unwilling to go to court to defend their rights.
I don't really know what to do to fix the problem. Sometimes I just hate money... bleh.
[rant]
Oh please. This is such typical drivel:
"Capitalism is a slavery system" "We want a truly free system" "bla bla bla bla bla"
How about you try being realistic? Instead of whining, in cliche terms about how bad things supposedly are, why don't you try to change things? And by change things, I don't mean rioting in the streets and overturning cars and smashing shop windows in the name of "righteous protest." I'm no huge fan of capitalism, but all-in-all, I feel it works for me better than so-called "socialism," the likes of which exist in China and in the former Soviet Union, would. It certainly works better for me than so-called anarchy, where everyone is "free to do what they want..." including rob my house and enslave me.
Instead of demonizing capitalism with canned slogans, try to change the world by envisioning a truly better way of life, and not in the broad, vague, unreasonable, and utopian terms you've stated here.
The issue at hand, anyways, is privacy. Without privacy, you wouldn't even be able to post this kind of thing, so instead of screaming about "slave systems," fight for your right to say what's on your mind, or send send encrypted email. I guarantee you'll accomplish much more for the good of yourself and mankind-at-large fighting specific grievances than advancing vague ideologies.
[/rant]
Well... you have a point. However, people won't stand for it for long. Joe-sixpack LIKES Napster. No government ban, no RIAA/MPAA/DCMA whining will ultimately stop him. If Napster dies, he'll use something else.
Combined with the power of the ACLU, the EFF, and similar organizations, Joe-sixpack, whether he's doing the right thing or not by stealing content, is a potent force against the growing anti-privacy movement now engulfing the internet in the name of intellectual property.
The battle continues, but people, sheeplike as they may sometimes appear, posess the power to halt this kind of thing in its tracks, and when the public becomes outraged... its all over for these corporate chumps and their pit of vipers... err, I mean lawyers.
As always: contact your representative, write editorials, hold your own well-publicised media events (really, who's stopping you?).... Protests don't have to be a bunch of dirty hippies rioting and spraying "Die pig" on overturned cars. The battle can be won, but it must be won in a way that makes our side look better.
Man, upon reading the article associated with this story, I have to admit, I got quite a chuckle... It's good to see someone being just as sneaky and underhanded as the RIAA for once... but this time the sneakiness and underhandedness is getting aimed against the RIAA and the DMCA. I hope to god the courts can look past 2600's media image as a "hax0r crax0r" organization, and listen closely to what they, and other free-speech advocates are saying.
As a historian of modern Russia, Stalinism is one of the first things that comes to my mind when I hear about organizations trying to stifle free speech... *especially* academic free speech. While in no way am I comparing the United States government to that of Stalin, we have to be oh-so-careful... because in the future, such comparisons might not only be appropriate, but they might be outlawed...
Kudos to Prof. Felten, 2600, the EFF, and all others who're fighting this kind of drivel. If you haven't already, write your representative.
Although I find "Holocaust Denial" and other sorts of neo-Nazi crap, as well as child porn, etc. pretty foul, I don't like this idea at all... it's opening up a *TOTAL* double standard... The government prosecutes people who DoS Yahoo!, amazon.com, etc. because they don't like said sites, then turns around and DoS's other sites because they don't like the content. This spells bad news. I dunno, maybe I'm missing something.
Your anarchists will never win because they're out of touch, largely in-the-box thinking elitists who tend to be very impressed by their own meager intelligence.
Well, sorry for the lack of enthusiasm, but all I can see ahead is a a boatload of problems. If we're going to use this stuff, then I think we've got to really learn how to harness it. It's just like nuclear power... used correctly, it's great. Used incorrectly, and it's a bit of a problem. The same applies to genetics. I think before we start throwing genetically altered species out into the wild, we've got to have a good handle on the implications, and I don't think that a brief period of "controlled release" or whatever is enough. The scientists, I think, are being impatient... they just want to see how their product performs in the wild... I think it's got too many dangerous implications... but im not in control, so I guess all I can do is sit back and hope nothing goes awry...
For once someone else besides me stands up to the politicized rabble...A 'protest' is only effective if you're spreading your ideas to *OTHER* people. The vast amount of 'protests' I see tend to be focused inwards... Yelling slogans to people who already beleive what you do is pointless.
Obviously, you've mastered part A... but if you ever want to be taken seriously, as more than just a braindead rabble bent on breaking stuff, then you need to appeal to the majority of the population. Lasting changes don't happen if there's no support. Read about the Revolutions of 1848 in Europe... there, a vocal minority actually TOPPLED the government, but within weeks, the old regimes were back, because a) the revolutionaries had no good plans for dealing with national issues and b) had no popular support.
Oh yeah... and it's ALLLWAYS those nasty evil cops who just wanna beat down the hippies who're responsible for riots. Give the police some credit, and give me a freakin' break, dude.
Now... I live in Eugene, OR, which is one of the hotbeds of 'anti-corporatist anarchism' and such... and though I'd venture to say that a very, very large percentage of the people involved with such groups are just there to wreak havoc, the small portion that does actually beleive in their goals are, in my opinion, going about it the wrong way. Dr. David Touretzky is going about it the right way. Instead of rioting and breaking windows and throwing bricks at cops to make his point, he's going about it in a fashion that not only makes him look clever, but makes the MPA look absolutely stupid. We have to stand up for our rights, or else, eventually, someone is going to ride roughshod over us all, and then it's all over (read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago for a more detailed description of what happens when people don't voice a word of protest when they're being opressed). However, our protests have to be intelligent, well thought out, and above all, non-threatening to the average citizen, which is who we're supposedly trying to get on our side. Tattooed rioters smashing windows and attacking cops to 'send out a message against corporatism' is simply counterproductive. Kudos to Dr. Touretzky.
Most of the other posts are urging us to fly forths on the wings of genetic engineering to some great new scientific frontier, but we don't really get a clear picture of what this new frontier is supposed to be. Longer lifespans? Well that's great, but with more people alive making more babies, we're gonna run out of food (and places to plant all that genetically engineered wheat that can grow in the middle of the desert fed by only the sun and dust) real quick. Eradication of all diseases? Diseases happen for a reason: to kill off excess population. Sure, disease sucks... it't not a happy thing, but it's a part of living. Death is something we all have to face, and putting it off isn't going to stop the inevitable.
We just need to take this stuff slower... we need to think about the effects of what we're planning to do *BEFORE* we do them... not after we do them, when there's no going back.
---
1) We don't need more people.
2) What's the use of a clone anyways?
3) If you think anyone except the very rich and famous are going to have access to cloning technology, you're fooling yourself.
4) WE DON'T NEED MORE PEOPLE.
5) Genetic tinkering leads to problems... scientists in Australia were recently trying to find a genetic contraceptive in mice... what they ended up doing was spreading a genetic disease among the mice they were testing on, inadvertantly killing them all. "OOPS!"
6) Oh yeah... and WE DON'T NEED ANYMORE PEOPLE!!
Trying to ride roughshod over nature is not only arrogant, but dangerous and naive. Does genetic engineering have good uses? Sure, but just like nuclear power, it needs to be used responsibly, or we're going to have a real problem on our hands... Earth is overcrowded enough as it is... Nature always takes steps to correct problems... Look at AIDS... where is AIDS most prevalent? In nations that are chock full of people... Nature's trying to wipe out as many people as it can by taking advantage of our breeding urges. Only by *NOT* breeding, can someone stay clear of these sorts of diseases... See the logic? In the face of the potential of a 'genetic weapon', or Nature's reaction to genetic toying, The Bomb looks like a pile of alphabet blocks... Stop trying to be trendy, or embrace every new technology simply because it's new technology, and think about the *REAL* issues at stake.
-------
I saw this a couple of years ago in my own high school... they kept a list of people who were 'likely' to cause harm to their peers, or act out violently against teachers or staff. The mentality that this exposes is one of utter fear... instead of looking at the facts, and realising that incidences of school violence are extremely rare, they're going on the assumption that there is at least one 'dangerous person' in every school, possibly more, and whether or not said persons ever have shown evidence of violence tendencies, they should be watched extra-carefully. How, then, do most of these non-violent types end up on the 'list'? Well, naturally, 'the-boy-next-door' isn't the most likely candidate, so, perhaps even subconsciously, the 'wierdos' wind up being watched, not only by teachers, but now, apparently, by their own mistrustful peers.
With the 'rash' of school violence in the past few years (read: the 'rash of school violence in middle-class white areas), school boards and lawmakers are going hog-wild with rules and legislation that in past days would be considered conservative fringe, laughable, or even outrageous. They're made into veritable media events, with each and every moralist telling us the horrible wrongs of society that have caused these horrible catastrophes. Random violence happens every day in poorer areas of cities like Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, etc., but it doesn't make the news, because it isn't news... at least anymore.
We all know the tune by now:
"Another gang killing in South-Central L.A.? Well, that's a shame, but it's not like we're running out of poor black kids from the ghetto... but when a middle class school in Colorado gets shot up by a couple of heavy-metal fringe Goths, well, that's the boy-next-door who's getting shot at... as American as apple pie."
When people who aren't used to violence suddenly get exposed to it, they get scared, and then their peers get scared, and everyone overreacts. We all know that having students inform on one another is reminiscent of McCarthyism... it's dangerous and I think that this kind of stuff is the knee-jerk reaction of an institution that is terrified of an over-blown problem, and is struggling to find ways of dealing with something that they don't have any control over. Preparedness is one thing... having a plan of contingency in case of such a problem is one thing... but having anonymous accusations is quite another, and we all ought to know the difference. Shame on everyone trying to get away with this. You're buying into a Stalin-esque paranoia.
---
---
---
Poor guy.
--