I personally hate humans for what they are and represent. Those of us with intelligence stand apart from the human race, unhindered but such trivial shit as trying to justify racism.... humans are a bunch of dumb fucking animals that will never learn.
Yeah, that doesn't sound like racism at all.
Mindless hate is not a mark of intelligence, buddy. But then neither is posting anonymously, so what are ya gonna do?
But calling someone a mick, a limey, a dago, a kyke, a kraut, or any other ethnic/racial epithet isn't automatically an attack on that person's group. Besides, generally speaking, using such language says a lot more about the person using it than the person about whom they are speaking. All the more reason not to outlaw such behavior. I'd much rather know that someone is a racist asshole than have them hide their behavior due to wanting to avoid legal hassles. It makes it much easier to keep clear of them and not vote them in as a Senator, for example (not that I live in W. Virginia).
Lawyer: "I'm not a software developer, but it's trivial to use that java library in a C# application"
There are ways to do exactly that. A quick Google search turned up this discussion.
If a company is selling a financial accounting package, and tries to state in their disclaimer that the software is "not fit for any particular purpose", I really can't see a judge signing off on that. Free software, because there is no contract between the parties, can get away with that. But when there's a contract you have to be much, much more explicit to avoid things like this.
IANAL, but that clause would be trivial to toss out. If a company is marketing their software as "the best financial package available" and a giant bug in it then causes massive losses for their customers, leaning on that clause just ain't gonna cut it.
You're right, dumping toxic waste off the Ivory Coast is 100% the same as having some misconfigured search results. You and BadAnalogyGuy must get along great.
Which is why I, even with all else we have to put up with, I'm still in America and not Canada. At least here I can say the President (for example) is a nigger*, and while I would certainly offend people (and possibly lose friends), I wouldn't face jail time.
*I don't actually think this, obviously. I disagree with the man's policies, but that's a long way from hating him so much as to justify calling him that.
Oh, we used to dream of working in an "open work area"! Would ha' been a palace to us. We used to work in an old water tank on a rubbish tip. We got woke up every morning by having a load of rotting fish dumped all over us! Office? Huh.
I got the feeling the list started as "top 100 failures", but the list author couldn't come up with the last 13. He could've gotten one closer if he had included his own list, of course.
the Romans had no concept of zero until the conquest of Spain and the ensuing interaction with the moorish people who lived there.
The Moors didn't live in Spain until the 7th Century. The people in Spain when Rome conquered it were Celts and Iberians. Furthermore, it was the Indians in the 9th Century who developed the concept of zero as a number and not merely a lack of value, which is how the Greeks (and everyone else) viewed it.
They just might try to sue the person who produced the template. Unlike software, where disclaiming liability is a standard practice, legal advice or legal documents might be much more problematic. I am definitely not a lawyer but I hope a lawyer might take a moment to explain whether this is a legitimate concern.
IANAL but I've taken several courses at university on the law. If you produce templates like this, and are not a licensed attorney, you could be guilty of the unlawful practice of law. Depending on your jurisdiction, you may face jail time and/or fines if convicted.
Like I said, IANAL and this is not legal advice. This is just something I learned in college.
You're misunderstanding the problem. It's not a question of, what happens if this is done badly? It's a question of, what happens if this isn't done by a lawyer? Have you never heard of "practicing law without a license"? If you draw up contracts or other forms for other people to use, that's exactly what you're doing. And you aren't just open to civil penalties like with poorly-constructed software. You could face criminal penalties, including fines and jail time.
The law isn't something that a "community" can safely practice. Hire a lawyer and make sure you do things the right way.
I'm sure we're a few generations away from it, but I can't wait until we can send robotic mining craft to Titan and mine the lakes and seas for raw materials to make plastics. By the time it's feasible to do this, I assume we'll have found some other source to answer our energy needs (and if we don't, we surely won't have the energy to do it anyway). But if we do run out of oil here, we'll have to get the raw materials to make plastics from somewhere. Titan seems as good a choice for that purpose as any.
You're saying bacteria could survive in the frozen expanse of Titan, but they couldn't withstand the full force and fury of humanity? I'm not quite sure what to make of that line of thinking: either you really hate humanity and think we're nothing but destructive, or you stand in awe of our power, or some combination of the two. Either way, you strike me as being quite delusional and not interesting in the least bit.
Wasn't that part of the plot of The Hammer of God? That humanity was able to build a ship and weapons sufficient to destroy/deflect a world killing asteroid, but a lone religious nut sabotaged the mission and imperiled the world?
A simple GIS for "hot Australian chicks" will quickly dispel the notion that there is nothing of value in Australia. Though I suppose we could move all of the hot Aussie babes out first. I'm sure I could make room for a few in my house. Out of charity, of course.
You seem to be forgetting that any asteroid on a collision course with us isn't going to be moving in a simple straight line with no movement along other axes. It'll be rotating about like a spinning top, meaning that any engine we fasten to its surface will have to first be aligned along that axis of rotation.
It would be easier, though less precise, to detonate a few missiles nearby it to nudge it onto a different path.
Even if everything you've just said is true and 100% accurate, which I'm not necessarily conceding, it doesn't matter. The Palestinians have a history of attacking Israeli civilians. They cannot now complain if Israel does the same thing. They opened the door, the IDF just walked through it.
And if we then went and invaded Mexico and Canada in 1967, and took 30% more land
If Canada and Mexico had mobilized their entire armies on one choke point on our border and closed an important canal to the majority of our ocean traffic, you're damn right we would've fought back. Given our otherwise normal relations with those two countries, "fighting back" in this case would most likely be limited to economic sanctions and/or tariffs.
The Israelis didn't have that option. They had already fought two wars with Arab nations, and all of their neighbors had alliances with each other. A war with one would quickly turn into a war with all of them. They simply did not have the option to wait and see what would happen. Preemptively invading Egypt was the right call for them to make: it gave them a huge military advantage, and did not cost them anything politically (anyone who hates Israel for that probably would've found some other reason not to like them, anyway).
You also have to remember that the Holocaust was barely more than 20 years past at that time. The generals and politicians in Israel were all either survivors, or had relatives who died in the camps. If you don't think that had an influence on how they viewed possible existential threats, you're incredibly naive.
Besides which, the US already took 30% of Mexico during the US-Mexican War. And no one outside of La Raza is saying we should give back California, Arizona, and New Mexico.
The points seems to be, there are countries in this world where you DO NOT poke the bear. Israel is one, Iran is another.
This woman poked the bear and her laptop paid the price. Next time, she should exercise a little more discretion when crossing a border and try not to stand out as much as she did.
Whether the Israeli military used white phosphorous when targeting civilians (the evidence suggests they were using it the way everyone else does, as flares at night to light up targets so the wrong building/person isn't shot) is irrelevant. As is the question of whether an errant bomb/missile hit a school in a war zone (mistakes happen and collateral damage is tragic, but it's not like it's done on purpose). The question is, have the Israelis have lived with random bombings in civilian areas long enough to justify extreme security measures with regards to unattended bags and suspicious cases crossing the border? I think the answer to that question is "Yes".
In organisms that have "songs"(whales, birds, etc.) but not draconian copyright laws there is some evidence of particular songs being imitated, modified, and re-imitated across fair stretches of time
Slashdot Mirror
I personally hate humans for what they are and represent. Those of us with intelligence stand apart from the human race, unhindered but such trivial shit as trying to justify racism.... humans are a bunch of dumb fucking animals that will never learn.
Yeah, that doesn't sound like racism at all.
Mindless hate is not a mark of intelligence, buddy. But then neither is posting anonymously, so what are ya gonna do?
Good question, and not one I have an answer to.
But calling someone a mick, a limey, a dago, a kyke, a kraut, or any other ethnic/racial epithet isn't automatically an attack on that person's group. Besides, generally speaking, using such language says a lot more about the person using it than the person about whom they are speaking. All the more reason not to outlaw such behavior. I'd much rather know that someone is a racist asshole than have them hide their behavior due to wanting to avoid legal hassles. It makes it much easier to keep clear of them and not vote them in as a Senator, for example (not that I live in W. Virginia).
Lawyer: "I'm not a software developer, but it's trivial to use that java library in a C# application"
There are ways to do exactly that. A quick Google search turned up this discussion.
If a company is selling a financial accounting package, and tries to state in their disclaimer that the software is "not fit for any particular purpose", I really can't see a judge signing off on that. Free software, because there is no contract between the parties, can get away with that. But when there's a contract you have to be much, much more explicit to avoid things like this.
IANAL, but that clause would be trivial to toss out. If a company is marketing their software as "the best financial package available" and a giant bug in it then causes massive losses for their customers, leaning on that clause just ain't gonna cut it.
You're right, dumping toxic waste off the Ivory Coast is 100% the same as having some misconfigured search results. You and BadAnalogyGuy must get along great.
Which is why I, even with all else we have to put up with, I'm still in America and not Canada. At least here I can say the President (for example) is a nigger*, and while I would certainly offend people (and possibly lose friends), I wouldn't face jail time.
*I don't actually think this, obviously. I disagree with the man's policies, but that's a long way from hating him so much as to justify calling him that.
Oh, we used to dream of working in an "open work area"! Would ha' been a palace to us. We used to work in an old water tank on a rubbish tip. We got woke up every morning by having a load of rotting fish dumped all over us! Office? Huh.
You really don't have to RTFA this time.
Well that's a refreshing change from my usual Slashdot experience.
But 87? Really?
I got the feeling the list started as "top 100 failures", but the list author couldn't come up with the last 13. He could've gotten one closer if he had included his own list, of course.
the Romans had no concept of zero until the conquest of Spain and the ensuing interaction with the moorish people who lived there.
The Moors didn't live in Spain until the 7th Century. The people in Spain when Rome conquered it were Celts and Iberians. Furthermore, it was the Indians in the 9th Century who developed the concept of zero as a number and not merely a lack of value, which is how the Greeks (and everyone else) viewed it.
They just might try to sue the person who produced the template. Unlike software, where disclaiming liability is a standard practice, legal advice or legal documents might be much more problematic. I am definitely not a lawyer but I hope a lawyer might take a moment to explain whether this is a legitimate concern.
IANAL but I've taken several courses at university on the law. If you produce templates like this, and are not a licensed attorney, you could be guilty of the unlawful practice of law. Depending on your jurisdiction, you may face jail time and/or fines if convicted.
Like I said, IANAL and this is not legal advice. This is just something I learned in college.
The same liability as a closed-source program.
You're misunderstanding the problem. It's not a question of, what happens if this is done badly? It's a question of, what happens if this isn't done by a lawyer? Have you never heard of "practicing law without a license"? If you draw up contracts or other forms for other people to use, that's exactly what you're doing. And you aren't just open to civil penalties like with poorly-constructed software. You could face criminal penalties, including fines and jail time.
The law isn't something that a "community" can safely practice. Hire a lawyer and make sure you do things the right way.
I'm sure we're a few generations away from it, but I can't wait until we can send robotic mining craft to Titan and mine the lakes and seas for raw materials to make plastics. By the time it's feasible to do this, I assume we'll have found some other source to answer our energy needs (and if we don't, we surely won't have the energy to do it anyway). But if we do run out of oil here, we'll have to get the raw materials to make plastics from somewhere. Titan seems as good a choice for that purpose as any.
You're saying bacteria could survive in the frozen expanse of Titan, but they couldn't withstand the full force and fury of humanity? I'm not quite sure what to make of that line of thinking: either you really hate humanity and think we're nothing but destructive, or you stand in awe of our power, or some combination of the two. Either way, you strike me as being quite delusional and not interesting in the least bit.
It's all the Rosie O'Donnell and Margaret Cho comedy specials in her queue.
Wasn't that part of the plot of The Hammer of God? That humanity was able to build a ship and weapons sufficient to destroy/deflect a world killing asteroid, but a lone religious nut sabotaged the mission and imperiled the world?
A simple GIS for "hot Australian chicks" will quickly dispel the notion that there is nothing of value in Australia. Though I suppose we could move all of the hot Aussie babes out first. I'm sure I could make room for a few in my house. Out of charity, of course.
You seem to be forgetting that any asteroid on a collision course with us isn't going to be moving in a simple straight line with no movement along other axes. It'll be rotating about like a spinning top, meaning that any engine we fasten to its surface will have to first be aligned along that axis of rotation.
It would be easier, though less precise, to detonate a few missiles nearby it to nudge it onto a different path.
Even if everything you've just said is true and 100% accurate, which I'm not necessarily conceding, it doesn't matter. The Palestinians have a history of attacking Israeli civilians. They cannot now complain if Israel does the same thing. They opened the door, the IDF just walked through it.
And if we then went and invaded Mexico and Canada in 1967, and took 30% more land
If Canada and Mexico had mobilized their entire armies on one choke point on our border and closed an important canal to the majority of our ocean traffic, you're damn right we would've fought back. Given our otherwise normal relations with those two countries, "fighting back" in this case would most likely be limited to economic sanctions and/or tariffs.
The Israelis didn't have that option. They had already fought two wars with Arab nations, and all of their neighbors had alliances with each other. A war with one would quickly turn into a war with all of them. They simply did not have the option to wait and see what would happen. Preemptively invading Egypt was the right call for them to make: it gave them a huge military advantage, and did not cost them anything politically (anyone who hates Israel for that probably would've found some other reason not to like them, anyway).
You also have to remember that the Holocaust was barely more than 20 years past at that time. The generals and politicians in Israel were all either survivors, or had relatives who died in the camps. If you don't think that had an influence on how they viewed possible existential threats, you're incredibly naive.
Besides which, the US already took 30% of Mexico during the US-Mexican War. And no one outside of La Raza is saying we should give back California, Arizona, and New Mexico.
Reading comprehension FAIL.
The points seems to be, there are countries in this world where you DO NOT poke the bear. Israel is one, Iran is another.
This woman poked the bear and her laptop paid the price. Next time, she should exercise a little more discretion when crossing a border and try not to stand out as much as she did.
Data was shot three times - but all fatal bullets missed the parent modem, the very heart of the data disk
I think that makes even less sense in English than Swedish.
Israel was proclaimed an idependent state by Israel May 14th 1948.
The United States was proclaimed an independent state by the United States on July 4, 1776. Does that mean we don't exist, either?
Whether the Israeli military used white phosphorous when targeting civilians (the evidence suggests they were using it the way everyone else does, as flares at night to light up targets so the wrong building/person isn't shot) is irrelevant. As is the question of whether an errant bomb/missile hit a school in a war zone (mistakes happen and collateral damage is tragic, but it's not like it's done on purpose). The question is, have the Israelis have lived with random bombings in civilian areas long enough to justify extreme security measures with regards to unattended bags and suspicious cases crossing the border? I think the answer to that question is "Yes".
In organisms that have "songs"(whales, birds, etc.) but not draconian copyright laws there is some evidence of particular songs being imitated, modified, and re-imitated across fair stretches of time
FTFY.