If a tax is theft, a tax is theft. A tax cannot be not theft, even if it is the "closest thing" to no tax. *shrug*
"A contradiction like yours?... That is precisely the protection for which you must pay."
And I make no bones about that.
Well, minor bones -- because it wouldn't necessarily be something I would *have* to pay, if payment for said service was voluntary. But it would be something that would be in my best interest to contribute money for, provided that I'm actually receiving said protection in return.
There is no contradiction here.
The "protections" I would happily shed (and those I previously stated I'd shed) are pretty much *any* government service, fund, grant, etc... that does *not* protect my individual property rights, such as social security, welfare, medicare, subsidies and whatnot.
Things like a military, police force and legal system, those I'd pay for, since they actually guarantee the only protection I'm entitled to.
And, mind you, if those were the only things I were "required" or "inclined" to pay for, I'd still be paying a damn lot less than I am now for "benefits" I will never personally see.
But I have a feeling we're both slightly preaching to the converted, since it seems like either way we'd argue, we'd both like to see a hell of a lot less taxation and social welfare statism. In which case, I really don't care who's method works, only that within my lifetime we actally get to try one or the other.:)
[First, an aside: anyone that calls themself an "objectivist" is talking out their ass. The most a person can hope for is to strive to be objective. If a person labels himself an objectivist, stop, point at him, scream "Cultist! Cultist!" and run away. Me, I just strive to be objective.]
Hey, we're trying. *chuckle*
Frankly, I don't see how one can even happen without the other. I would happily shed the majority of my government "protections" so that I am free to keep as much of my *earned* personal property as possible. All I really ask are for the protection of my individual [property] rights, and due process of law. That's all any of us have a right to ask for. Anything else is theft.
Take Social Security. Yes, we don't want to be taxed for it. We'd rather take *our*own* money, invest it our way, make more than we're (not) going to get from Social Security. Show me a piece of paper that says, "I waive any right to government support post-retirement; If I'm starving in the street at age 70, it's my own damn fault, now quit taking my hard-earned pay," and I'd sign it.
Medicare. Same deal. Welfare. Same deal. Farm Subsidies. Same deal. Pork-barrel bullshit. Same deal. Stop taking *my* money so that I can use it instead in my own self interest. Mind you, it would certainly be in my best interest to *voluntary* donate of some amount to government functions that exist solely to protect my property rights -- the only duty that government should *ever* have.
As for your conversion to a "single tax on net assets..." I don't think you get it -- How can you call taxation "theft" in one sentence and in the next, call for a tax of any kind? That's contradiction. And I'm sure you know what Alice Rosenbaum had to say about what to do when you reach a contradiction.;)
If that is truly how you feel -- and brother, I hope that it is, because I agree with you -- stand up for yourself and what you believe. Don't post anonymously.
It's called, "Hemlock." Large amounts of "Draino", "Cyanide," "Autoerotic Asphyxiation" and "Jumping in front of a bus" have also proven effective in clinical trials.
This vaccine and its substitutes work by the voluntary self-imposition of a disruption to the human condition on an individual level -- after all, logic holds that an individual who is not living cannot kill another human being. When properly self-administered, (that is, the patient does not plant a bomb beforehand, go on a shooting rampage, or otherwise plan murder and/or mayhem to conclude or coincide with the administration of the vaccine,) the vaccine is 100% effective.
I pretty much came to realize that unions were a complete and total waste the day I saw, on strike, a gaggle of employees of Budget Rent-A-Car.
Budget. FUCKING. Rent-A-Car.
Or maybe it was the time I was working at a TV station and saw 4 union guys drilling *one* hole in the wall. And when the clock struck 4:30 pm, they left the drill, bit only *halfway* through the wall, stuck in the wall, took their ladder down, and quit for the day.
Yes, Hollywood unionized. And how much more time and money does it now take to get anything done in Hollywood? TONS. Unions fucked Hollywood. Unions fuck any and every industry they touch. Unions are detrimental to production.
You want to end up costing and taking longer to get games to market? Unionize the gaming industry. You want to end up paying $100 for a decent game? Unionize the gaming industry.
You wanna see people filing grievances because god forbid somebody wanted a coder to patch something, when that's a patcher's job! Unionize the gaming industry.
*ahem* Just kidding. I know there's a lot of people out there who like it. Just not enough to keep it on the air. And to some extent, I blame the Extreme Fanboys who've done nothing but badmouth the effort since it first aired.
While I enjoy Enterprise, I support it by watching it. If it's gone, I'll be bummed, but life will go on.
I will agree, though -- The current Battlestar *rocks* -- This is one show that, if it maintains its current course and speed, is really going to set a *very* high bar for future sci-fi.
Respectfully submitted, I'm sorry, but it won't work.
First, you're dealing with a very small set of 3d models that can be easily duplicated. (Lets face it, the stock set is all that's ever going to be used. If you think that folks have forever to constantly create and install new models, you're mistaken. Also, what's to stop spammers from simply buying the same model's you're using? Nothing.
The *lighting* of the original is a red herring, the fact that the background is fairly plain and offers a noticable, distinctive difference between it and the models, makes it easy to separate the silhouette of the models from the background. (Even if the background isn't kept plain in a live system, edge detection should make it very easy to tell the background from the models. Copies of the models can be fairly easily positioned to match the silhoutte of models in the original, and then the letters can be overlayed much the same way, and then identified.
And that's if a spammer actually wants to go through that trouble. They'd do better just to take the "hints" to determine the number of letters in the subaddress, and then blitz the mail server with many/every possible combination(s).
Also, your "hints" are rather anglo-centric, which could cause you problems.
And, all that said, but, I'm sorry, I can't think of many consumers who are going to want to go through all this trouble just to freaking send/recieve email.
Actually, yes, the company's ethics *did* make some online play of Diablo (and I think some other blizzard games) on people's own servers a lot less fun, or rather, nonexistent/impossible/etc.
bnetd was a great project cease-and-desisted to death. A lot of people bitched and moaned at the time of course, but when it can time to put their money where their mouths were, of course they all ran out instead and bought the latest Vivendi games.
Not that I'll buy it -- I'm still pissed at Vivendi over the bnetd debacle. Cocksuckers. (Nice to see all you WarCraft III and WoW players stuck to your principles on _that_ one.)
"please note that harassing the receptionist at these places is unlikely to cause any change in their investment policies"
No, but harrassing the *board* members might. That's why I love the SEC's EDGAR search. Names, and in name cases, phone numbers, for company board members.
Or you could ask the UN to do something about it. But of course, unless there's Oil-for-Food bribes involved, they're not likely to do anything about it.
* Description: switch to enable caching of objects served over a secure connection (SSL). * Type: boolean * Default: false * Recommendation: true on systems where it is secure to cache these objects.
By default, Firefox (and Mozilla. and Netscape.) will *NOT* cache SSL-served pages. And, contrary to your administrator's *other* claim, you most certainly *can* toggle this behaviour in Firefox.
Really, Science doesn't need any help from Journalism in the distortion department.
The scientific community has it's own politics, party lines, misinformation and smear campaigns, more interested in keeping their theories considered "the way" that things happen, than in any constant search for truth and fact.
Given the *incredible* cost of dealing with other recent Federally Unfunded Standards Mandates (HIPAA, Sarbanes Oxley, ADA) many communities/industries are already at the breaking point. The expense of complaince with some newfangled Federal Election Transaction Standard -- without some *intensive* study to 1) make sure it would actually make a freaking bit of difference (remember folks, that *most* precincts vote tally's worked out just fine.) and 2) would be inexpensive enough to implement and/or 3) whether there would be federal money available for communities with which to implement it -- would *not* be acceptable to most of the communities out there.
Remember, kiddies, that in just about every state, the margin was *very* close. A lot of 51% to 49% or thereabouts states. Only _slightly_ fewer "stupid" people in Republican-won states voted for Kerry than voted for Bush.
For what it's worth, my IQ far exceeds even the average IQ in Democrat-won states, and I voted for Bush. *shrug*
So, well, just in the span of one Slashdot dicussion, Republicans are deemed racist *and* stupid by (presumably) non-Republicans. I've not read through the rest of this yet, I imagine there's more ways we're evil listed there somewhere. And yet *we're* the cause of all the divisiveness and societal ills? Doesn't take a fucking genious to see through that one, ya know.
As a conservative, let me tell you that I'm not racist. By-and-large, conservatives are not racist.
That we're percieved as such, however, says a *lot* about the prejudices held by those who would call us racist. To which I can only respond with, "Dumbasses, heal thyself."
Slashdot Mirror
And you would do well to stand up for yourself and your beliefs and post your name with your comments in the future.
If a tax is theft, a tax is theft. A tax cannot be not theft, even if it is the "closest thing" to no tax. *shrug*
... That is precisely the protection for which you must pay."
:)
"A contradiction like yours?
And I make no bones about that.
Well, minor bones -- because it wouldn't necessarily be something I would *have* to pay, if payment for said service was voluntary. But it would be something that would be in my best interest to contribute money for, provided that I'm actually receiving said protection in return.
There is no contradiction here.
The "protections" I would happily shed (and those I previously stated I'd shed) are pretty much *any* government service, fund, grant, etc... that does *not* protect my individual property rights, such as social security, welfare, medicare, subsidies and whatnot.
Things like a military, police force and legal system, those I'd pay for, since they actually guarantee the only protection I'm entitled to.
And, mind you, if those were the only things I were "required" or "inclined" to pay for, I'd still be paying a damn lot less than I am now for "benefits" I will never personally see.
But I have a feeling we're both slightly preaching to the converted, since it seems like either way we'd argue, we'd both like to see a hell of a lot less taxation and social welfare statism. In which case, I really don't care who's method works, only that within my lifetime we actally get to try one or the other.
[First, an aside: anyone that calls themself an "objectivist" is talking out their ass. The most a person can hope for is to strive to be objective. If a person labels himself an objectivist, stop, point at him, scream "Cultist! Cultist!" and run away. Me, I just strive to be objective.]
;)
Hey, we're trying. *chuckle*
Frankly, I don't see how one can even happen without the other. I would happily shed the majority of my government "protections" so that I am free to keep as much of my *earned* personal property as possible. All I really ask are for the protection of my individual [property] rights, and due process of law. That's all any of us have a right to ask for. Anything else is theft.
Take Social Security. Yes, we don't want to be taxed for it. We'd rather take *our*own* money, invest it our way, make more than we're (not) going to get from Social Security. Show me a piece of paper that says, "I waive any right to government support post-retirement; If I'm starving in the street at age 70, it's my own damn fault, now quit taking my hard-earned pay," and I'd sign it.
Medicare. Same deal. Welfare. Same deal. Farm Subsidies. Same deal. Pork-barrel bullshit. Same deal. Stop taking *my* money so that I can use it instead in my own self interest. Mind you, it would certainly be in my best interest to *voluntary* donate of some amount to government functions that exist solely to protect my property rights -- the only duty that government should *ever* have.
As for your conversion to a "single tax on net assets..." I don't think you get it -- How can you call taxation "theft" in one sentence and in the next, call for a tax of any kind? That's contradiction. And I'm sure you know what Alice Rosenbaum had to say about what to do when you reach a contradiction.
Check YOUR premises.
Put a NAME to your words. Stand behind them.
If that is truly how you feel -- and brother, I hope that it is, because I agree with you -- stand up for yourself and what you believe. Don't post anonymously.
You guys *are* a bunch of looters.
Such a vaccine already exists.
It's called, "Hemlock." Large amounts of "Draino", "Cyanide," "Autoerotic Asphyxiation" and "Jumping in front of a bus" have also proven effective in clinical trials.
This vaccine and its substitutes work by the voluntary self-imposition of a disruption to the human condition on an individual level -- after all, logic holds that an individual who is not living cannot kill another human being. When properly self-administered, (that is, the patient does not plant a bomb beforehand, go on a shooting rampage, or otherwise plan murder and/or mayhem to conclude or coincide with the administration of the vaccine,) the vaccine is 100% effective.
I pretty much came to realize that unions were a complete and total waste the day I saw, on strike, a gaggle of employees of Budget Rent-A-Car.
Budget. FUCKING. Rent-A-Car.
Or maybe it was the time I was working at a TV station and saw 4 union guys drilling *one* hole in the wall. And when the clock struck 4:30 pm, they left the drill, bit only *halfway* through the wall, stuck in the wall, took their ladder down, and quit for the day.
Yes, Hollywood unionized. And how much more time and money does it now take to get anything done in Hollywood? TONS. Unions fucked Hollywood. Unions fuck any and every industry they touch. Unions are detrimental to production.
You want to end up costing and taking longer to get games to market? Unionize the gaming industry. You want to end up paying $100 for a decent game? Unionize the gaming industry.
You wanna see people filing grievances because god forbid somebody wanted a coder to patch something, when that's a patcher's job! Unionize the gaming industry.
Budget. FUCKING. Rent-A-Car.
Windy with brief high temperatures in 50,000's, followed by mostly cloudy skies.
If you don't have to stand in line for toilet paper today, your best bet is to stay home.
.... it's only like $20 million a fan!
*ahem* Just kidding. I know there's a lot of people out there who like it. Just not enough to keep it on the air. And to some extent, I blame the Extreme Fanboys who've done nothing but badmouth the effort since it first aired.
While I enjoy Enterprise, I support it by watching it. If it's gone, I'll be bummed, but life will go on.
I will agree, though -- The current Battlestar *rocks* -- This is one show that, if it maintains its current course and speed, is really going to set a *very* high bar for future sci-fi.
Whoa there, Nellie. You just took the gold medal in conclusion-jumping, dude. I'm saying nothing of the sort.
Actually, yes, I was referring to 9/11. But I wouldn't exactly call it a joke, because I wasn't joking.
And we wonder why people crash planes into our buildings.
Respectfully submitted, I'm sorry, but it won't work.
First, you're dealing with a very small set of 3d models that can be easily duplicated. (Lets face it, the stock set is all that's ever going to be used. If you think that folks have forever to constantly create and install new models, you're mistaken. Also, what's to stop spammers from simply buying the same model's you're using? Nothing.
The *lighting* of the original is a red herring, the fact that the background is fairly plain and offers a noticable, distinctive difference between it and the models, makes it easy to separate the silhouette of the models from the background. (Even if the background isn't kept plain in a live system, edge detection should make it very easy to tell the background from the models. Copies of the models can be fairly easily positioned to match the silhoutte of models in the original, and then the letters can be overlayed much the same way, and then identified.
And that's if a spammer actually wants to go through that trouble. They'd do better just to take the "hints" to determine the number of letters in the subaddress, and then blitz the mail server with many/every possible combination(s).
Also, your "hints" are rather anglo-centric, which could cause you problems.
And, all that said, but, I'm sorry, I can't think of many consumers who are going to want to go through all this trouble just to freaking send/recieve email.
From the sound of it, *what* principles?
Actually, yes, the company's ethics *did* make some online play of Diablo (and I think some other blizzard games) on people's own servers a lot less fun, or rather, nonexistent/impossible/etc.
bnetd was a great project cease-and-desisted to death. A lot of people bitched and moaned at the time of course, but when it can time to put their money where their mouths were, of course they all ran out instead and bought the latest Vivendi games.
...JUST RELEASE THE FREAKING GAME ALREADY!
Not that I'll buy it -- I'm still pissed at Vivendi over the bnetd debacle. Cocksuckers. (Nice to see all you WarCraft III and WoW players stuck to your principles on _that_ one.)
"please note that harassing the receptionist at these places is unlikely to cause any change in their investment policies"
No, but harrassing the *board* members might. That's why I love the SEC's EDGAR search. Names, and in name cases, phone numbers, for company board members.
Two words: Regime Change.
Or you could ask the UN to do something about it. But of course, unless there's Oil-for-Food bribes involved, they're not likely to do anything about it.
well, that was 60MB of bandwidth I'll never get back.
Of course you can -- why wouldn't you want to?
I can think of a number of commercial sites that would be rendered useless if you couldn't save a page/file that's been delivered via SSL.
I think I'm going to have to call bullshit on your admistrator.
In about:config, the property you want to look for is:
browser.cache.disk_cache_ssl
From This Page:
* Description: switch to enable caching of objects served over a secure connection (SSL).
* Type: boolean
* Default: false
* Recommendation: true on systems where it is secure to cache these objects.
By default, Firefox (and Mozilla. and Netscape.) will *NOT* cache SSL-served pages. And, contrary to your administrator's *other* claim, you most certainly *can* toggle this behaviour in Firefox.
This might just be me, but staring at my Windows 2000 Laptop all days bugs the hell out of my eyes.
But I go home and stare at my XP desktop with Cleartype enable, and I have a *much* better time of it, even on the white-screen/black-text stuff.
Really, Science doesn't need any help from Journalism in the distortion department.
The scientific community has it's own politics, party lines, misinformation and smear campaigns, more interested in keeping their theories considered "the way" that things happen, than in any constant search for truth and fact.
More Federal Standards are NOT the answer.
Given the *incredible* cost of dealing with other recent Federally Unfunded Standards Mandates (HIPAA, Sarbanes Oxley, ADA) many communities/industries are already at the breaking point. The expense of complaince with some newfangled Federal Election Transaction Standard -- without some *intensive* study to 1) make sure it would actually make a freaking bit of difference (remember folks, that *most* precincts vote tally's worked out just fine.) and 2) would be inexpensive enough to implement and/or 3) whether there would be federal money available for communities with which to implement it -- would *not* be acceptable to most of the communities out there.
Slashdot and Politics. I cringe.
Lies, Damned Lies, Statistics and FUD.
Remember, kiddies, that in just about every state, the margin was *very* close. A lot of 51% to 49% or thereabouts states. Only _slightly_ fewer "stupid" people in Republican-won states voted for Kerry than voted for Bush.
For what it's worth, my IQ far exceeds even the average IQ in Democrat-won states, and I voted for Bush. *shrug*
So, well, just in the span of one Slashdot dicussion, Republicans are deemed racist *and* stupid by (presumably) non-Republicans. I've not read through the rest of this yet, I imagine there's more ways we're evil listed there somewhere. And yet *we're* the cause of all the divisiveness and societal ills? Doesn't take a fucking genious to see through that one, ya know.
As a conservative, let me tell you that I'm not racist. By-and-large, conservatives are not racist.
That we're percieved as such, however, says a *lot* about the prejudices held by those who would call us racist. To which I can only respond with, "Dumbasses, heal thyself."