No the fundamental right is sharing what you have. I didn't note any profit involved, and even if there was, it's certainly possible to share without financial profit. In fact in most cases I would expect that the sharing comes at a net financial cost.
Actually, with speeding a jail sentence makes much more sense, since statistically you are definitely increasing your chance of accidentally killing someone.
Imagine you speed regularly, and on one of those days you have a tire blowout and the resulting crash kills someone (a typical example of how speeding results in death).
In my mind, that approaches premeditated manslaughter. You didn't set out to kill, but you knowingly engaged in activities that increased your odds of accidentally killing someone.
I would not be opposed to a jail sentence for that.
In all seriousness, if you notice any of them carrying anything shiny, I'd try reporting that they are selling bootlegged cds. If it gets investigated and turns out to be untrue, well, you were just mistaken about what the shiny things were, you thought they looked like bootleg DVDs.
There's typically no contract existing between the entities in question here. This is more like GM sells me a car, and Joe Schmoe steals it and sells it to Jane Eyre. GM doesn't get Jane's business. For whatever reason, I don't care. GM can't bring a breach of contract suit against Joe for their lost business, because they've had no contact with Joe. Instead, they need to get the police to enforce the anti-thievery laws so they won't lose Jane's (and others like her) business.
Sure, it's what's known as a fundamental right, which is differentiated from a legal right. The legal rights around this issue are hazy, but the fundamental rights seem fairly clear.
Your rights are not only what the government tells you they are. At least, you should hope and strive that they not be so.
Now you weigh the degree to which you accept the veracity of the story accordingly, maybe confirming the accuracy through a non-conflicted source before making a bad stock investment or product purchase.
Game rentals. Game subscription fees. Game swag sales. International all of the above.
Factor those back in, and the game industry comes out back on top.
Bottom line: Games get a slightly larger share of consumer entertainment dollars than movies do. People also spend slightly more hours playing games than watching movies.
Adds no new information, as it's an old joke. Takes up space. Repeats information, as it's an old joke. It is located at various places you can reach via attached links.
It does not appear to be in previous comments, but that's an or clause.
People may think that intelligence is an inborn thing, but the scientists who have actually done research would probably suggest to you that it is far more dependent upon training.
Well, soviet style communism doesn't work. Many capitalist democracies have failed too. The long term viability of capitalist democracy as implemented in america is open to question as well.
Maybe socialism is a better model. Let's see how socialist europe holds up over the next couple of hundred years.
The problem with all of these experiments, is that the outcomes are significantly confounded by geography and other factors not related to the government structure.
No? Mankind can have no meaningful impact on the ecological soundness of the universe. Once you have the technology to spread beyond your home galaxy, you really don't need to 'damage' the ecology any more. That even assumes you can actually define damage to the ecology. If you haven't left your home galaxy, then you're talking about damaging less than a hundredth of a percent of the universe, so that's really down in the noise in terms of the overall ecological soundness.
Especially considering that on average it has happened at least 100 times in the history of mankind already.
It seems like his estimate must be a hair off, or we're on the tail end of an amazing lucky streak.
There have been probably 10 events harsh enough to wipe out mankind in the last 2 billion years (and they have gotten less likely over time). How that translates to 1 in 455 or 45500 years is somewhat unclear.
There are people who create wealth. Whether or not it is fair for them to keep wealth, and how much wealth the society which protects them and allows them to create that wealth should allow them to keep is a matter for debate and group decision. Whether they who have created wealth should be the ones to decide which business ventures to try next is likewise a matter for group decision.
Since forever? Virtually all countries have immigration restrictions. And moving to a new country also requires being legally allowed to leave your current country, and having the financial resources to do so.
People decide together when to invest in infrastructure for the greater good, rather than having top down direction decided by one person or a cabal who may no have the group's best interests at heart but rather his/their own?
The wealth I want to distribute is mostly created by natural processes that go on without the help of people. What little people actually create winds up largely concentrated in a few hands through exploitation, not hard work.
Slashdot Mirror
No the fundamental right is sharing what you have. I didn't note any profit involved, and even if there was, it's certainly possible to share without financial profit. In fact in most cases I would expect that the sharing comes at a net financial cost.
Actually, with speeding a jail sentence makes much more sense, since statistically you are definitely increasing your chance of accidentally killing someone.
Imagine you speed regularly, and on one of those days you have a tire blowout and the resulting crash kills someone (a typical example of how speeding results in death).
In my mind, that approaches premeditated manslaughter. You didn't set out to kill, but you knowingly engaged in activities that increased your odds of accidentally killing someone.
I would not be opposed to a jail sentence for that.
But stealing digital media??????
A debt you can never repay is what bankruptcy helpfully ends in 8 years or less.
In all seriousness, if you notice any of them carrying anything shiny, I'd try reporting that they are selling bootlegged cds. If it gets investigated and turns out to be untrue, well, you were just mistaken about what the shiny things were, you thought they looked like bootleg DVDs.
There's typically no contract existing between the entities in question here. This is more like GM sells me a car, and Joe Schmoe steals it and sells it to Jane Eyre. GM doesn't get Jane's business. For whatever reason, I don't care. GM can't bring a breach of contract suit against Joe for their lost business, because they've had no contact with Joe. Instead, they need to get the police to enforce the anti-thievery laws so they won't lose Jane's (and others like her) business.
Sure, it's what's known as a fundamental right, which is differentiated from a legal right. The legal rights around this issue are hazy, but the fundamental rights seem fairly clear.
Your rights are not only what the government tells you they are. At least, you should hope and strive that they not be so.
Just to be clear then, that language says that I can use version 2 of the FSF license, or any later numbered version of my own design?
Perfect!
User 6573 ... maybe not.
Now you weigh the degree to which you accept the veracity of the story accordingly, maybe confirming the accuracy through a non-conflicted source before making a bad stock investment or product purchase.
No No No! Bad Mods! No biscuit!
The parent post was off-topic. Not redundant!
Game rentals.
Game subscription fees.
Game swag sales.
International all of the above.
Factor those back in, and the game industry comes out back on top.
Bottom line: Games get a slightly larger share of consumer entertainment dollars than movies do. People also spend slightly more hours playing games than watching movies.
Let's do a performance test of the two systems. How many days does september have:
....
30 days hath september
30 days.
Every thrid month has 31:
September is month 9. 9 is a multiple of 3.
31 days.
Hmm.
Are you seriously suggesting that ordinary people could add or subtract 3 digit numbers?
This post:
Adds no new information, as it's an old joke.
Takes up space.
Repeats information, as it's an old joke.
It is located at various places you can reach via attached links.
It does not appear to be in previous comments, but that's an or clause.
People may think that intelligence is an inborn thing, but the scientists who have actually done research would probably suggest to you that it is far more dependent upon training.
Except you can pay to have your chips fabbed, and it's not horrendously expensive. You can get a 1-of in the $100,000 range.
And we all know, that as long as you're paid to commit a crime, you can't be held liable for it.
Well, soviet style communism doesn't work. Many capitalist democracies have failed too. The long term viability of capitalist democracy as implemented in america is open to question as well.
Maybe socialism is a better model. Let's see how socialist europe holds up over the next couple of hundred years.
The problem with all of these experiments, is that the outcomes are significantly confounded by geography and other factors not related to the government structure.
No? Mankind can have no meaningful impact on the ecological soundness of the universe. Once you have the technology to spread beyond your home galaxy, you really don't need to 'damage' the ecology any more. That even assumes you can actually define damage to the ecology. If you haven't left your home galaxy, then you're talking about damaging less than a hundredth of a percent of the universe, so that's really down in the noise in terms of the overall ecological soundness.
Especially considering that on average it has happened at least 100 times in the history of mankind already.
It seems like his estimate must be a hair off, or we're on the tail end of an amazing lucky streak.
There have been probably 10 events harsh enough to wipe out mankind in the last 2 billion years (and they have gotten less likely over time). How that translates to 1 in 455 or 45500 years is somewhat unclear.
Sure, it requires escaping the universe, but it's not impossible.
There are people who create wealth. Whether or not it is fair for them to keep wealth, and how much wealth the society which protects them and allows them to create that wealth should allow them to keep is a matter for debate and group decision. Whether they who have created wealth should be the ones to decide which business ventures to try next is likewise a matter for group decision.
Since forever? Virtually all countries have immigration restrictions. And moving to a new country also requires being legally allowed to leave your current country, and having the financial resources to do so.
People decide together when to invest in infrastructure for the greater good, rather than having top down direction decided by one person or a cabal who may no have the group's best interests at heart but rather his/their own?
The wealth I want to distribute is mostly created by natural processes that go on without the help of people. What little people actually create winds up largely concentrated in a few hands through exploitation, not hard work.