Any entity that is to continue to exist must look out for its own survival.
In our current system of government, the greatest danger to the existing power structure is voting. A better educated populace is more likely to vote, while a TV watching populace is less likely to do so. So it is in the interests of the state to do what it can to discourage education beyond the minimum level necessary to support the state. Hence the emphasis on putting lots of dollars into extending the reach and influence of TV.
That's certainly true. Java's lack of a preprocessor stage is a significant weakness. I was really only replying to the notion that java didn't have an equivalent mechanism for exposing the public interface of a class to a customer without revealing code.
It's unclear to me whether he is personally a holocaust denier or not, based on his poor English. But on a factual level, he is correct, much of the EU appears headed towards passing restrictions on the free speech of holocaust deniers. Although personally I despise such a view point, I don't need the government restricting free speech at this level.
I think that's a fairly clearl misinterpretation. The OP is clearly claiming that the little guy can surive and thrive without serious copyright protections, and that only the big cartels are likely to be hurt by ending copyright protections. So he's not making a claim only based on the people who abuse copyright, he's saying it will be good all around.
"How many copyrights do most people [enforce?] If you guessed "none", you'd be right."
That's clearly a true statement. Most people enforce no copyrights. If that's not true of your circle of acquaintances, I guarantee you are way outside the mainstream.
As to his 'weak appeal to authority' you've also completely misunderstood. He's making a factual claim contradicting what he believes is the parent poster's misinformed opinion. The point is that there are insightful people who believe we'd be better off entirely without copyright, and maybe the parent just hasn't thought about it enough.
As to the grandparent's demeaning:
Would you like to live in an anarchy? No. It'd suck because there were no rules. Likewise this would suck.
I think that clearly fits the bill, maybe you disagree.
Finally, I think you're wrong about the ALL IP issue, and I suspect so did the parent. We really do think that everyone will be better off excepting the major cartels, even the little guy involved in creative endeavors.
I think the OP fairly clearly meant registered copyrights. Granted that we all receive the magic copyright on our creations, but that isn't relevant to the argument in any way is it? How many people ever use their copyrights to force someone to pay them for content might be a better question.
I think he fairly clearly meant 'enforce' when he used 'own'. Granted that we all receive the magic copyright on any creation, but that was clearly not what he meant.
Note that java will not let you apply an operation to an object of the wrong type: the type cast will throw exception first, and take you out of scope of the operation.
I wish I could tell you, but I cannot comprehend nature's time cube. IMO the 2nd page, which used to be the first, is better than what he has on the first page now.
Slashdot Mirror
No:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/payed
And yes, not that I have to side scroll much on my 1920 horizontal pixel widescreen.
How do you watch the dvd's without a display?
Any entity that is to continue to exist must look out for its own survival.
In our current system of government, the greatest danger to the existing power structure is voting. A better educated populace is more likely to vote, while a TV watching populace is less likely to do so. So it is in the interests of the state to do what it can to discourage education beyond the minimum level necessary to support the state. Hence the emphasis on putting lots of dollars into extending the reach and influence of TV.
Mac hardware always does rip you off, I only payed $39 for my 8 button pc-mouse, not $180.
Or even the free food and drinks that insult you. Man, those don't go down easy.
Note to mods & metamods: busted for using overrated on an unmoderated post.
The actual definition of literally, though, does allow for the OP's usage:
http://www.answers.com/literally&r=67
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/literally
But actually, it doesn't:
http://www.answers.com/literally&r=67
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/literally
Now that i've let everyone give me a hard time:
http://www.answers.com/literally&r=67
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/literally
That's certainly true. Java's lack of a preprocessor stage is a significant weakness. I was really only replying to the notion that java didn't have an equivalent mechanism for exposing the public interface of a class to a customer without revealing code.
Here's a couple of links explaining that in fact the OP's usage was correct:k +your+socks+off.html
http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/knoc
http://www.word-detective.com/021804.html
It's unclear to me whether he is personally a holocaust denier or not, based on his poor English. But on a factual level, he is correct, much of the EU appears headed towards passing restrictions on the free speech of holocaust deniers. Although personally I despise such a view point, I don't need the government restricting free speech at this level.
Where's that slashdot guy making mom++ when you need him.
Unfortunately, his project seems to be moving at a glacial pace, but here's a link:
http://mompp.sourceforge.net/
I think that's a fairly clearl misinterpretation. The OP is clearly claiming that the little guy can surive and thrive without serious copyright protections, and that only the big cartels are likely to be hurt by ending copyright protections. So he's not making a claim only based on the people who abuse copyright, he's saying it will be good all around.
That's clearly a true statement. Most people enforce no copyrights. If that's not true of your circle of acquaintances, I guarantee you are way outside the mainstream.
As to his 'weak appeal to authority' you've also completely misunderstood. He's making a factual claim contradicting what he believes is the parent poster's misinformed opinion. The point is that there are insightful people who believe we'd be better off entirely without copyright, and maybe the parent just hasn't thought about it enough.
As to the grandparent's demeaning:
I think that clearly fits the bill, maybe you disagree.
Finally, I think you're wrong about the ALL IP issue, and I suspect so did the parent. We really do think that everyone will be better off excepting the major cartels, even the little guy involved in creative endeavors.
You omitted some of the most important content:
Phase 2: ???
What's phase 2? We don't know.
Phase 3: Profit
Everyone in the pirate party gets rich!
I'm fairly sure Captain Morgan is the right brand whatever your liquor.
I think the OP fairly clearly meant registered copyrights. Granted that we all receive the magic copyright on our creations, but that isn't relevant to the argument in any way is it? How many people ever use their copyrights to force someone to pay them for content might be a better question.
I think he fairly clearly meant 'enforce' when he used 'own'. Granted that we all receive the magic copyright on any creation, but that was clearly not what he meant.
re: your sig:
You're right: I'd certainly hate to imagine that someone might effect a facial affect.
Note that java will not let you apply an operation to an object of the wrong type: the type cast will throw exception first, and take you out of scope of the operation.
Just a note: interface == .h for java. Document all you want, and ship to your customer, along with a crypted jar with the actual binary.
I wish I could tell you, but I cannot comprehend nature's time cube.
IMO the 2nd page, which used to be the first, is better than what he has on the first page now.
Indeed, and we have such a visionary among us now, with a truly revolutionary view of the universe that will shatter the existing framework:
http://www.timecube.com/
Indeed, and history has shown just how much more sense slave markets make, right?