Being allowed to speak also means being allowed to speak back.
Even though bad ideas are allowed to be spoken in a society with free speech it also means that counter arguments are allowed to be made.
If you restrict the bad ideas from being spoken you also stop the counter arguments and those that would speak them assume the bad ideas are right BECAUSE of the very restrictions against them and thus the system devised to stop those ideas instead reinforces them.
Sad but true in a way. Though it doesn't apply just to Nazis there are many other regimes that came before that were far worse and there have been and will be many others probably far worse still(note: I am not defending Nazism only saying that yes in fact things can get worse than that).
The first steps on that road and down most of its length the paving stones are made of personal freedoms taken, especially those that limit speech or aim to limit thought.
I know why Germany is so keen on keeping Nazism dead for good, an admirable goal, but it seems they are playing with the some of the same kind of fire when they use these laws.
This isn't about her poor attempts it is about the poor support she is receiving.
A. Someone should tell her that OO.org will do nearly everything the MS Office does. I really can't imagine her classes using anything that wasn't covered esp if she was only typing up papers.
B. She didn't contact Verizon because I know from a friend's experience that they do have at least some support for Linux users(or rather those that don't figure out how to do it w/o the disk).
Uhm certainly not. You also have to factor out user login time because some of us actually use basic security features. By that measure many computers at the university computer lab may regularly take hours to boot.
Also if you count that why not count the time it takes to start up a webbrowser, file manager, and office suit along with whatever graphics intensive game you might play...oh and for the game better add in the time it takes to actually get that first frag of the day after all you're not REALLY playing until something dies.
Also "usable desktop" depends on the user. A good shell is usable for plenty of people out there while for others nothing but the sleekest shiniest eyecandilicious gui will suffice.
The ocean is connected to the land as far as ecosystems go. A single asteroid can kill off both land and oceanic populations.
On the other hand if you had viable terrestrial and space populations then a single asteroid would have a much more difficult go at it.
And it isn't just asteroids that we have to worry about. It isn't a matter of if the surface of this planet will become uninhabitable to humans it is a more a matter of when.
Space Colonization is a matter of survival of the species and other species as well. Also we may just learn something along the way.
uhm it is an example of a bad objective theory, not of objective reasoning.
As I am arguing against the use of objectivity alone as a reason for an argument then I only need show that a line of objective reasoning can be both objective and wrong.
Adding the word objective to your argument does not make it any more objective.
You need to show WHY it is objectively more or less of a monopoly than the Law says and ALSO show why we should consider your definition of monopoly rather than the legal one.
Objectively strangling an infant or elderly person should be less of a crime than strangling a young adult because the young adult is harder to replace than the infant and has more to provide to society in terms of man-hours work.
While objectivity can help justice; justice is not necessarily objective
Maybe not today, maybe not tommorow, but some times and soon...
Someone will notice that Intel has beccome a full-scale monopoly that does indeed prevent other competitors from entering the market and competing.
With AMD, Intel has a nice biopoly which it can easily and truthfully claim competition(not fair market competition mind you). AMD is all too happy to allow this and even lend a helping hand sometimes.
If AMD goes then someone will pick up the pieces, and if they don't eventually you'll get back to monopoly litigation. Might not happen within the year, but it will eventually happen. That sort of litigation can force Intel to split and worse.
Then I'd choose an out-of-the-way abandoned building which I have turned into my own personal torture game. I'd create a creepy doll with a recorded swazzle(google "Punch and Judy") laugh and drug all the contestants having them wake up to choose to kill one another in creative ways or die horribly.
Except private spaceflight is one of the MAJOR goals of US space research in the first place. We ultimately on the horizon want to go into space and that means private flights.
Now that we are starting to see private flights NASA's role starts to change from primary R&D to a management and control organization part of which I think should go into the Military and FAA.
Slashdot Mirror
Being allowed to speak also means being allowed to speak back.
Even though bad ideas are allowed to be spoken in a society with free speech it also means that counter arguments are allowed to be made.
If you restrict the bad ideas from being spoken you also stop the counter arguments and those that would speak them assume the bad ideas are right BECAUSE of the very restrictions against them and thus the system devised to stop those ideas instead reinforces them.
It isn't Godwin if the topic can be directly related to Nazis.
Germany restricting rights is a topic that historically can be directly related therefore no Godwin.
Sad but true in a way. Though it doesn't apply just to Nazis there are many other regimes that came before that were far worse and there have been and will be many others probably far worse still(note: I am not defending Nazism only saying that yes in fact things can get worse than that).
The first steps on that road and down most of its length the paving stones are made of personal freedoms taken, especially those that limit speech or aim to limit thought.
I know why Germany is so keen on keeping Nazism dead for good, an admirable goal, but it seems they are playing with the some of the same kind of fire when they use these laws.
This isn't about her poor attempts it is about the poor support she is receiving.
A. Someone should tell her that OO.org will do nearly everything the MS Office does. I really can't imagine her classes using anything that wasn't covered esp if she was only typing up papers.
B. She didn't contact Verizon because I know from a friend's experience that they do have at least some support for Linux users(or rather those that don't figure out how to do it w/o the disk).
Wow. You have the money time and power to do that?
Most people don't.
To those who marked me troll.
It is a reference to the book "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep"!
The iDroids dream of them.
I don't think so.
Don't count Apple out just because Jobs is gone. He isn't the ONLY person working at Apple and he certainly isn't the once and future designer.
Sure they might not do as well but they still have Ipods, Itunes, Imacs and a lot of Fanboys and Girls.
And say what you will Apple does make some good, if expensive hardware and software.
Jobs may be more than just a figurehead but he is hardly all the company has going for it.
Long bought and paid for bribed long...
Uhm certainly not. You also have to factor out user login time because some of us actually use basic security features. By that measure many computers at the university computer lab may regularly take hours to boot.
Also if you count that why not count the time it takes to start up a webbrowser, file manager, and office suit along with whatever graphics intensive game you might play...oh and for the game better add in the time it takes to actually get that first frag of the day after all you're not REALLY playing until something dies.
Also "usable desktop" depends on the user. A good shell is usable for plenty of people out there while for others nothing but the sleekest shiniest eyecandilicious gui will suffice.
The ocean is connected to the land as far as ecosystems go. A single asteroid can kill off both land and oceanic populations.
On the other hand if you had viable terrestrial and space populations then a single asteroid would have a much more difficult go at it.
And it isn't just asteroids that we have to worry about. It isn't a matter of if the surface of this planet will become uninhabitable to humans it is a more a matter of when.
Space Colonization is a matter of survival of the species and other species as well. Also we may just learn something along the way.
Who needs an erection to have sex?
You must think that a tongue is for talkin.
uhm it is an example of a bad objective theory, not of objective reasoning.
As I am arguing against the use of objectivity alone as a reason for an argument then I only need show that a line of objective reasoning can be both objective and wrong.
I am not arguing against objective reasoning.
How do you know the stagnation hasn't started happening already?
bi-opoly does allow for some innovation in the effort to keep ahead of the other guy but it requires far less than if you have many competitors.
Adding the word objective to your argument does not make it any more objective.
You need to show WHY it is objectively more or less of a monopoly than the Law says and ALSO show why we should consider your definition of monopoly rather than the legal one.
Objectively strangling an infant or elderly person should be less of a crime than strangling a young adult because the young adult is harder to replace than the infant and has more to provide to society in terms of man-hours work.
While objectivity can help justice; justice is not necessarily objective
Maybe not today, maybe not tommorow, but some times and soon...
Someone will notice that Intel has beccome a full-scale monopoly that does indeed prevent other competitors from entering the market and competing.
With AMD, Intel has a nice biopoly which it can easily and truthfully claim competition(not fair market competition mind you). AMD is all too happy to allow this and even lend a helping hand sometimes.
If AMD goes then someone will pick up the pieces, and if they don't eventually you'll get back to monopoly litigation. Might not happen within the year, but it will eventually happen. That sort of litigation can force Intel to split and worse.
Newton beats you up with Leibniz sitting in the corner waiting for the tag team.
You forgot to add "beyond a point of precision."
Turn in your physics nerd badge.
Not a problem at all. Install a second network interface and use one for internet the other for parallel processing.
It would provide a wall, a flaming wall to stop bad external network traffic, and so I dub my new invention a network "Wall of Flame."
There WAS a ruling already. This is dismissing the fight against that ruling.
not if that person had a gun...
Then I'd choose an out-of-the-way abandoned building which I have turned into my own personal torture game. I'd create a creepy doll with a recorded swazzle(google "Punch and Judy") laugh and drug all the contestants having them wake up to choose to kill one another in creative ways or die horribly.
No they are worth too much. The copyright will be extended...
He who controls the IP controlls the universe!
Except private spaceflight is one of the MAJOR goals of US space research in the first place. We ultimately on the horizon want to go into space and that means private flights.
Now that we are starting to see private flights NASA's role starts to change from primary R&D to a management and control organization part of which I think should go into the Military and FAA.
The problem is the companies often ARE the trolls.
They just do a slightly different version of trolling.
Fighting sets precedents. precedents set decisions, and while you may want a decision one day the next it will hurt you.
He may actually have a case.
It is theoretically possible that it is a good case even outside his own head.
It is possible still that he may win and status-quo be affirmed.
Oprah, Sony and Google are all powerful but they also all depend on IP laws themselves.