i especially like this bit: The software was to be given away for free, and the entire "commun"ity of developers the world over (including the despised USA) would help with the project. Clearly after time, this software would rival anything put out by US corporations.... so if it truly yields a better product, doesn't that make it... well, better?
"Numerous musicians have traditionally taken advantage of super-distribution of their music, such as the Grateful Dead, a band that attributes much of its success to its encouragement of fans to freely copy and share its music."
...as well as, for the record, metallica, who was given much praise and even compared to the dead when they set up a special area (called the "snake pit") specifically for people who wanted to record during one of their tours.
not to run that one any further into the ground, but i saw the reference and thought i'd throw this out there.
yes, absolute and unquestioning compliance is definitely the way to go.
for instance, if you live in a state that hasn't repealed or at least set precedents against "sodomy statutes," you'd better make sure you don't have sex that isn't legal. you can check for your state here also, many states have laws against premarital sex, so wait 'til you're married, folks!
my point is that not all laws are just (for a better parallel, read about america's prohibition of alcohol). there are some things that the government just has no business enforcing upon me. i'm not necessarily saying that the answer is simply to disobey the laws, just that if everyone accepted unjust laws, as you're suggesting, unjust laws would never be changed.
should have included the following line in the recent u.s. currency redesign: "this note is legal tender for all debts, public and private. unless we're talking about a particularly large debt, in which case we reserve the right to detain and search you."
i think that the important point is sort of being missed in this thread: cash is cash, and when you're in the united states, everyone is required to accept it. so if you feel more comfortable using cash, for any reason, you should not be harrassed. you can argue whether or not it's "reasonable" or "useful" to harrass someone for carrying (somewhat) large amounts of cash, but this harrassment blatantly hinders activity that is unquestionably legal; namely, using cash for all debts, public and private.
why are most articles on the web shorter than this? because for some reason, maybe because we have so much information just itching for a clear shot at our retinas, people get bored or overwhelmed or just disinterested in any article that's too long, and has too much substance. we want short and to the point. hey, i've got 6 other sites to check out while i'm drinking coffee, not getting any work done-- just cut to the chase, ok?
personally i still like hearing other people's opinions and views. even if they aren't chewed up into little text bites for me.
Slashdot Mirror
that's good shit...
i especially like this bit: The software was to be given away for free, and the entire "commun"ity of developers the world over (including the despised USA) would help with the project. Clearly after time, this software would rival anything put out by US corporations.... so if it truly yields a better product, doesn't that make it... well, better?
other than that, a fun read.
"Numerous musicians have traditionally taken advantage of super-distribution of their music, such as the Grateful Dead, a band that attributes much of its success to its encouragement of fans to freely copy and share its music."
...as well as, for the record, metallica, who was given much praise and even compared to the dead when they set up a special area (called the "snake pit") specifically for people who wanted to record during one of their tours.
not to run that one any further into the ground, but i saw the reference and thought i'd throw this out there.
yes, absolute and unquestioning compliance is definitely the way to go.
for instance, if you live in a state that hasn't repealed or at least set precedents against "sodomy statutes," you'd better make sure you don't have sex that isn't legal. you can check for your state here also, many states have laws against premarital sex, so wait 'til you're married, folks!
my point is that not all laws are just (for a better parallel, read about america's prohibition of alcohol). there are some things that the government just has no business enforcing upon me. i'm not necessarily saying that the answer is simply to disobey the laws, just that if everyone accepted unjust laws, as you're suggesting, unjust laws would never be changed.
should have included the following line in the recent u.s. currency redesign: "this note is legal tender for all debts, public and private. unless we're talking about a particularly large debt, in which case we reserve the right to detain and search you."
i think that the important point is sort of being missed in this thread: cash is cash, and when you're in the united states, everyone is required to accept it. so if you feel more comfortable using cash, for any reason, you should not be harrassed. you can argue whether or not it's "reasonable" or "useful" to harrass someone for carrying (somewhat) large amounts of cash, but this harrassment blatantly hinders activity that is unquestionably legal; namely, using cash for all debts, public and private.
why are most articles on the web shorter than this? because for some reason, maybe because we have so much information just itching for a clear shot at our retinas, people get bored or overwhelmed or just disinterested in any article that's too long, and has too much substance. we want short and to the point. hey, i've got 6 other sites to check out while i'm drinking coffee, not getting any work done-- just cut to the chase, ok?
personally i still like hearing other people's opinions and views. even if they aren't chewed up into little text bites for me.