" The fact that we have found 1 fossil that probably died from a fall out of a tree doesn't mean that these people necessarily lived in trees or did things we don't do now-a-days"
No... but their upper body structure suggests they were built for climbing and spent at least part of their time in trees. Much more so than modern humans who may "climb some 30 meters up in the canopy to gather honey from wild bees" or "build their homes in tall trees".
I think you are spot on in that we cant say Lucy's folks were tree-dwelling exclusively, though.
The argument is that he had a presence in the US (server) which violated "US's stupid copyright rules". If I was in another country and remote controlled a drone in to the US and blew something up I would be violating US law. Yeah, it's a horrible analogy but it's about as close as you can get where you can visualize the argument.
I don't think it's going to be an easy thing for the prosecutors to prove WHERE he violated US law but that is kind of not an issue any more. KAT is down and essentially gone. The message has been sent -- you dip your toe in the torrent waters above a certain level and your life will be turned upside-down.
I don't necessarily agree with this. A male dog is not SOCIALLY a male dog because in dog society that is what he learned.
"The question you're posing is a false analogy."
I'm not so sure. You say "gender is a social construct". I say "gender RULES are a social construct". Completely different things.
Lastly, your argument seems to suggest (correct me if I'm wrong) that "social constructs" are either "bad" or "OK to be ignored". If that is the argument you are making, I think you are mostly wrong. I would argue that social rules are behaviors that have evolved because they have some benefit. I think it's ok to stretch them -- and over time they change -- but to abruptly ignore them all together can be damaging to a society not ready to embrace those changes.
"But you know, if he believes he is a woman then he is a woman, I guess?"
This is probably an ignorant question (I have no problems claiming ignorance on topics of which I know next to nothing), but what is the difference to believing oneself is a woman and believing oneself is Napoleon? Does the belief that one is Napoleon actually *MAKE* them Napoleon?
I'm sure anyone who pays youtube to watch/rent a movie would be subject to the tax. They would also be subject to the tax if they watch free videos. Because 6% of zero is.... carry the one.... Um... zero.
That is true. But that "news" doesn't "flash" very brightly when there's an "D" after the a-hole's name. And with an "R" after the name? Flashes, bells whistles, chimes and horns...
I have no idea what the hell you are ranting about. The DNC will set whatever rules they want -- just like the RNC. Both are "rigged" to a degree. What offends me is the content and attitude of the lead organization which 'claims' to look out for 'protected' groups.
BTW, I support neither Clinton nor Trump. Nor would I support Bernie or Cruz. They are all tea party guests (as in Mad Hatter).
if Cue wore a red jump suit, captain pips, refereed to network CEOs as "mon capitaine" and their respective board members as a "dangerous, savage child board".
"I don't want a movie theater to be a social experience"
That was my first reaction, too -- but after giving it some thought I don't think Cameron MEANT it literally or he picked the wrong word. I think a better word would be a "community" experience. A good crowd can make a good movie great as they react to the film (laughter, cheers, etc).
It also doesn't account for housing cost (rent/mortgage). You need a place to WATCH it. It also doesn't account for the cost of a TV averaged out over the life of the TV. You need something to watch it on.
I'm pretty sure we're at a point where we can consider internet access a 'given'. We can argue the point if you like -- but most people don't have internet access to JUST watch netflix, nor do they have running water to JUST get a drink. I think those costs are negligible in virtually all cases.
"But I'm not ignoring it, I'm enforcing it. I do not have to assist them in their search."
I think you are confusing "unreasonable search and seizure" with "any search and seizure". Swiping a finger is non-intrusive. Swabbing a cheek is non-intrusive. Maryland V King is a fairly recent example.
"Exactly. I am very disappointed that people think it's okay to compel anyone to assist in any way one's own prosecution,"
I knew the wording of this would toss up responses like yours.
This is no different than an order to produce blood/cheek swab or even passwords. The accused have the right to remain silent -- they do not have the right to ignore lawful search warrants. If you really want to keep information that the law cannot touch then either memorize it or have a trusted spouse memorize it.
"That's democracy for you. Sometimes the 51% passes laws that the 49% doesn't like. I'm sorry you don't like it."
And thats why our founders thought it was very dangerous -- about as scary as monarchy. It's a good thing they set up a republican (little "R") form of government and a constitution which is difficult (not impossible) to modify.
Oh wait -- many of their safe-guards have been tossed out the window for current popular opinion... I guess you are right.
" At a minimum you send robots to a place before you send humans there.."
Yes. I didn't think it was necessary to make that point -- but it's a good point. I was just countering the claim that the last 40 years of humans in space produced nothing.
"Yeah, it's hard not to just come out and say manned exploration has accomplished exactly squat in the last 40 years."
It's not hard to say 'the sky is green'.
At the absolute minimum, we've learned how to keep people alive in space for increasingly extended periods of time. We've learned about how various living things (plants/animals) can live/survive in micro-gravity. We've learned how embryos developed in micro gravity. Why is this important? If we want to get off this rock and increase our chances of not being killed off either by each other or a space rock then we need to know how to MOVE us through space for long periods of time.
Yes, we don't NEED humans to go to Mars to learn about what makes up Mars -- but we NEED humans to go to Mars to learn how humans can SURVIVE on Mars.
I completely agree. There's a host of old movies I'd love to own on DVD/Bluray that I doubt I ever will -- because they have expired copyright. There's no money to be made by some of the holders of the only existing physical media to give it the treatment it deserves. The best I can do is find 3rd rate VHS rips to DVD.
"One of the biggest reasons some folks pirate media is because of the ADVERTISORS, but at the same time aren't willing to buy the media. So I'd still consider that 0% in lost profit."
Then you don't understand how networks charge for advertising. You watch the show live with commercials for "free" and the network makes money by selling time to COLA A. The more viewers, the more they charge. If however, you do NOT watch a show live with commercials but BUY the DVD, the network makes money from that. If, however, you just download a show and watch it clipped of commercials then the number of "live" watchers go down which means the amount they get for COMMERCIALS goes down which means lost profit.
But, as I indicated, there would be some who would be unwilling to watch a show with commercials or buy the show if there were no other avenues. I think that's on the low end of the spectrum, though.
You "KIND" of acknowledge that when you say why "some folks" pirate. Yes -- from THOSE folks it is zero. But those "some" are not all.
Slashdot Mirror
But but... I like digital watches!
" The fact that we have found 1 fossil that probably died from a fall out of a tree doesn't mean that these people necessarily lived in trees or did things we don't do now-a-days"
No... but their upper body structure suggests they were built for climbing and spent at least part of their time in trees. Much more so than modern humans who may "climb some 30 meters up in the canopy to gather honey from wild bees" or "build their homes in tall trees".
I think you are spot on in that we cant say Lucy's folks were tree-dwelling exclusively, though.
Review this comment by another user to the same comment you replied to:
https://science.slashdot.org/c...
Notice how he wasn't brow-beating the poster? He provided a very insightful that hopefully raised the overall "enlightenment" here.
You basically puffed up your chest and made this more about you being better than the original poster.
The argument is that he had a presence in the US (server) which violated "US's stupid copyright rules". If I was in another country and remote controlled a drone in to the US and blew something up I would be violating US law. Yeah, it's a horrible analogy but it's about as close as you can get where you can visualize the argument.
I don't think it's going to be an easy thing for the prosecutors to prove WHERE he violated US law but that is kind of not an issue any more. KAT is down and essentially gone. The message has been sent -- you dip your toe in the torrent waters above a certain level and your life will be turned upside-down.
"Gender is a social construct."
I don't necessarily agree with this. A male dog is not SOCIALLY a male dog because in dog society that is what he learned.
"The question you're posing is a false analogy."
I'm not so sure. You say "gender is a social construct". I say "gender RULES are a social construct". Completely different things.
Lastly, your argument seems to suggest (correct me if I'm wrong) that "social constructs" are either "bad" or "OK to be ignored". If that is the argument you are making, I think you are mostly wrong. I would argue that social rules are behaviors that have evolved because they have some benefit. I think it's ok to stretch them -- and over time they change -- but to abruptly ignore them all together can be damaging to a society not ready to embrace those changes.
"But you know, if he believes he is a woman then he is a woman, I guess?"
This is probably an ignorant question (I have no problems claiming ignorance on topics of which I know next to nothing), but what is the difference to believing oneself is a woman and believing oneself is Napoleon? Does the belief that one is Napoleon actually *MAKE* them Napoleon?
"So will YouTube and Twich be affected? "
I'm sure anyone who pays youtube to watch/rent a movie would be subject to the tax. They would also be subject to the tax if they watch free videos. Because 6% of zero is.... carry the one.... Um... zero.
That is true. But that "news" doesn't "flash" very brightly when there's an "D" after the a-hole's name. And with an "R" after the name? Flashes, bells whistles, chimes and horns...
I have no idea what the hell you are ranting about. The DNC will set whatever rules they want -- just like the RNC. Both are "rigged" to a degree. What offends me is the content and attitude of the lead organization which 'claims' to look out for 'protected' groups.
BTW, I support neither Clinton nor Trump. Nor would I support Bernie or Cruz. They are all tea party guests (as in Mad Hatter).
No. I'm not surprised by this -- at least not the way YOU reference. I am totally surprised the media doesn't care.
It's not just about rigging the primary. Have you READ the emails? They are full of racist and misogynistic references.
Talk about hubris and hypocrisy...
if Cue wore a red jump suit, captain pips, refereed to network CEOs as "mon capitaine" and their respective board members as a "dangerous, savage child board".
You should write article summaries for /.
Seriously.
"I don't want a movie theater to be a social experience"
That was my first reaction, too -- but after giving it some thought I don't think Cameron MEANT it literally or he picked the wrong word. I think a better word would be a "community" experience. A good crowd can make a good movie great as they react to the film (laughter, cheers, etc).
"This also doesnt factor in connection cost."
It also doesn't account for housing cost (rent/mortgage). You need a place to WATCH it. It also doesn't account for the cost of a TV averaged out over the life of the TV. You need something to watch it on.
I'm pretty sure we're at a point where we can consider internet access a 'given'. We can argue the point if you like -- but most people don't have internet access to JUST watch netflix, nor do they have running water to JUST get a drink. I think those costs are negligible in virtually all cases.
"But I'm not ignoring it, I'm enforcing it. I do not have to assist them in their search."
I think you are confusing "unreasonable search and seizure" with "any search and seizure". Swiping a finger is non-intrusive. Swabbing a cheek is non-intrusive. Maryland V King is a fairly recent example.
"Exactly. I am very disappointed that people think it's okay to compel anyone to assist in any way one's own prosecution,"
I knew the wording of this would toss up responses like yours.
This is no different than an order to produce blood/cheek swab or even passwords. The accused have the right to remain silent -- they do not have the right to ignore lawful search warrants. If you really want to keep information that the law cannot touch then either memorize it or have a trusted spouse memorize it.
Lets change the name to Star Trek Intrepid.
Oh wait...
"That's democracy for you. Sometimes the 51% passes laws that the 49% doesn't like. I'm sorry you don't like it."
And thats why our founders thought it was very dangerous -- about as scary as monarchy. It's a good thing they set up a republican (little "R") form of government and a constitution which is difficult (not impossible) to modify.
Oh wait -- many of their safe-guards have been tossed out the window for current popular opinion... I guess you are right.
" At a minimum you send robots to a place before you send humans there.."
Yes. I didn't think it was necessary to make that point -- but it's a good point. I was just countering the claim that the last 40 years of humans in space produced nothing.
"Yeah, it's hard not to just come out and say manned exploration has accomplished exactly squat in the last 40 years."
It's not hard to say 'the sky is green'.
At the absolute minimum, we've learned how to keep people alive in space for increasingly extended periods of time. We've learned about how various living things (plants/animals) can live/survive in micro-gravity. We've learned how embryos developed in micro gravity. Why is this important? If we want to get off this rock and increase our chances of not being killed off either by each other or a space rock then we need to know how to MOVE us through space for long periods of time.
Yes, we don't NEED humans to go to Mars to learn about what makes up Mars -- but we NEED humans to go to Mars to learn how humans can SURVIVE on Mars.
Science usually provides citations and reproducibility.
I completely agree. There's a host of old movies I'd love to own on DVD/Bluray that I doubt I ever will -- because they have expired copyright. There's no money to be made by some of the holders of the only existing physical media to give it the treatment it deserves. The best I can do is find 3rd rate VHS rips to DVD.
"One of the biggest reasons some folks pirate media is because of the ADVERTISORS, but at the same time aren't willing to buy the media. So I'd still consider that 0% in lost profit."
Then you don't understand how networks charge for advertising. You watch the show live with commercials for "free" and the network makes money by selling time to COLA A. The more viewers, the more they charge. If however, you do NOT watch a show live with commercials but BUY the DVD, the network makes money from that. If, however, you just download a show and watch it clipped of commercials then the number of "live" watchers go down which means the amount they get for COMMERCIALS goes down which means lost profit.
But, as I indicated, there would be some who would be unwilling to watch a show with commercials or buy the show if there were no other avenues. I think that's on the low end of the spectrum, though.
You "KIND" of acknowledge that when you say why "some folks" pirate. Yes -- from THOSE folks it is zero. But those "some" are not all.
This is awesome. This technology can be used to catch pirates of this technology!
"We used NBCs piracy detection widget to ID a copyright infringement of NBCs piracy detection widget!".