Better still would be to enforce the ban socially.
If everyone agrees that spreading scurrilous rumors prior to a vote is self-outing as the loser, then there is a negative feedback loop, to minimize the behavior.
Governments run open loop; law begets law begets law. Society arrives at results opposite to the original intent. All lose.
Don't mean to go all Four Yorkshiremen on you, but you'd be hard-pressed to find an Internet connection worse than Afghanistan.
Everything is via satellite, filtered, over-subscribed, and frequently wrecked by weather.
Talk about making the inner child frown.
I think that another crucial point is that there is a time parameter on the needs/many/few breakdown.
It's amusing to revisit these ideas, especially entitlements, and watch needs/many/few be less constant than the purportedly smart people would have it.
In the future, who will be so crass as to steal identities?
Look for a whole surreality TV show genre, as the new sport becomes hacking and making subtle changes to others' pages. Goal: drive them crazy, at a (NSFW) medium pace.
yet through their constant monitoring of users they do little to promote freedom
The monitoring is a technical feature of the code implementation.
Freedom is a matter of configuration and usage.
Sure, you can argue some overlap in a Venn diagram sort of way, but to argue cause/effect seems likely to blow by the really important mechanism/policy distinction.
If we fret the government living in our underwear, and we should, then that also requires effort directed at the ballot box.
Source code fixes are necessary, but not sufficient.
I have a wife in pharma.
We have a perverse, byzantine system meant to employ as many people as possible beyond those with actual roles as patient, doctor, or medical supplier.
There is a correlation between (a) being demonized, and (b) failing to pay kickbacks to the political/media complex.
So, the problem isn't legitimate competition among multiple companies, overseen by a reasonable, fair government,
and the distorted system of legal warfare currently pillaging a wallet very, very near you.
It sure is good to know that all of the OWL people http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/ have been fannying about until now.
We really should take all of this stuff seriously.
Oh, wait: is that a codephrase indicating that we should commence the final assault on/.?
http://reason.com/blog/2010/02/06/video-nick-gillespie-debates-c
I think Lessig's fundamental problem is a belief that government ennobles.
Virtue adds like resistance in parallel, and an organization is measurably worse that its biggest cretin.
Trust government, but verify.
Look, the lid is blown off a scam of Große Lüge proportions.
Deal with it like an adult, or deal with it like a leftist.
You're lovely either way, PMF, and we love you you for it.
Slashdot Mirror
What's good for GE shows up as legislation in America.
"never did suffer data visualization fools gladly" == "Few despises bad charts"
"got Few's dander up" == "Few lost patience."
Recommendation: steer clear of the writings of William F. Buckley, Jr. There is a difference between business English and literary English.
Actually, I'm in Mazar E Sharif. For internet service, Kabul is a veritible paradise.
Some of the FOBs suck still more.
Better still would be to enforce the ban socially.
If everyone agrees that spreading scurrilous rumors prior to a vote is self-outing as the loser, then there is a negative feedback loop, to minimize the behavior.
Governments run open loop; law begets law begets law. Society arrives at results opposite to the original intent. All lose.
Don't mean to go all Four Yorkshiremen on you, but you'd be hard-pressed to find an Internet connection worse than Afghanistan.
Everything is via satellite, filtered, over-subscribed, and frequently wrecked by weather.
Talk about making the inner child frown.
Cybercheat?
Your brain is beat.
You're only as smart
As whiskers neat.
Burma Shave
Would that Scotch,
Were so cheap by the DRAM,
A shave, a shot, a gig;
Still change for the tram.
Burma Shave
. . .will be kind to your package, as long as there is not too much junk in it.
I think that another crucial point is that there is a time parameter on the needs/many/few breakdown.
It's amusing to revisit these ideas, especially entitlements, and watch needs/many/few be less constant than the purportedly smart people would have it.
Why do you hate PacMan? That code base was far more reliable than Win3.0.
Q: How many Russians does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
A: Two, but don't ask me how they got there.
In the future, who will be so crass as to steal identities?
Look for a whole surreality TV show genre, as the new sport becomes hacking and making subtle changes to others' pages. Goal: drive them crazy, at a (NSFW) medium pace.
The monitoring is a technical feature of the code implementation.
Freedom is a matter of configuration and usage.
Sure, you can argue some overlap in a Venn diagram sort of way, but to argue cause/effect seems likely to blow by the really important mechanism/policy distinction.
If we fret the government living in our underwear, and we should, then that also requires effort directed at the ballot box.
Source code fixes are necessary, but not sufficient.
I have a wife in pharma.
We have a perverse, byzantine system meant to employ as many people as possible beyond those with actual roles as patient, doctor, or medical supplier.
There is a correlation between
(a) being demonized, and
(b) failing to pay kickbacks to the political/media complex.
So, the problem isn't legitimate competition among multiple companies, overseen by a reasonable, fair government,
and the distorted system of legal warfare currently pillaging a wallet very, very near you.
It sure is good to know that all of the OWL people http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/ have been fannying about until now. /.?
We really should take all of this stuff seriously.
Oh, wait: is that a codephrase indicating that we should commence the final assault on
Yes, but government can rightfully protect, except when it, too, gets into the suppression business.
http://reason.com/blog/2010/02/06/video-nick-gillespie-debates-c
I think Lessig's fundamental problem is a belief that government ennobles.
Virtue adds like resistance in parallel, and an organization is measurably worse that its biggest cretin.
Trust government, but verify.
When you're perfectly free to photograph things, and security shuts you down
http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/65326/
Law has become something about which those in power can emote.
Game distribution
A tragic solution
The most horrid trick
Since the disposable Bic
Burma Shave
Freedom of speech
Beyond prison reach
Societal deportment
So hard to teach
Burma shave
Anglia's Great Wank.
Look, the lid is blown off a scam of Große Lüge proportions.
Deal with it like an adult, or deal with it like a leftist.
You're lovely either way, PMF, and we love you you for it.
By the archaeological evidence, there was a difference, as Diamond explored in the book.