"Agreed, though unfortunately, most people don't understand that without the coercive force of government backing these government-creations known as 'corporations', they'd just be a bunch of spoiled brats that would quickly go out of business, in favor of companies with better business models."
Some will, some won't. The RIAA would use their ill-gotten money to hire an army and police force to force their will on people, establishing themselves as a de-facto government
While I certainly agree a large overbearing government is terrible and oppressive, the following also act as governments to lesser extent, and if we just suddenly made the government go away, they'd gain more power to the point they'd simply replace the government
Mafias(of all sorts) gangs(of all sorts) Large corporations Unions In some areas tribes and large extended families. Church/Mosques/Temples(of all sorts)
when I say I want no authority, I say I want no authority, not another type of authority.
at this point we don't have to, they get a steady revenue stream of blank media to include CD-Rs. Thats right, everytime I burn a CD with a linux distro, or buy a CD-R of an independant artist at a show, the RIAA gets a cut. They can fuck off.
Try joining any culture scene that doesn't involve the RIAA/MPAA, its about 10 min before you get put on some "list", and the next time you get in some form of trouble they will come down hard on you.
If you don't play ball with them, they come for you. This is EXACTLY what this rootkit is about, its the people who pay the least money for their shit, will be targeted. You know it.
There are entire culture scenes that live without the RIAA and MPAA, you need to know where to look. They are repeatedly slammed in the mainstream news and media because of this, and they will be targeted.
I was trying to talk about how a "free market" really means, that the large players want to regulate the same markets in the same way, only in their own best intrests.
Free markets only work on small scales, when they become large, they let the large players take over and become their own governments.
In any case, there is rarely a "free" market, we instead go from centrally or government regulated, to being regulated by the largest players in the market.
But never is there "no regulation", this is always a myth.
Whoever does the regulating does it in their own best intrest. The markets should be regulated by the people via democratic election, with transparent, simple, easy to follow commonly agreed rules.
The last stripes of a so called "free market" are being washed away into corporte feudalism, where the corporations now take over law enforcement, and soon after, law creation and destruction.
Denying citizens all due proccess of a Jury of their peers, set up by a democraticly elected republican government is an assault on everything we stand for as a nation. This moves beyond the scary police state, dirrecty into feudalism. No longer do corporations control us with soft power, but they not have the right to directly interfere in our lives in place of the government, without the shred of due process the former has afforded us. This even gives them more power than the NSA/FBI, who to date have yet to request or start putting root kits on people's hard drives.
It should go without saying that the RIAA will likely use this based on past actions to:
1. Falsely labeling people as pirates, due to apathy. Don't give a damn who's really a pirate or not.
2. Falsely label random people as pirates due to malice.
3. Black Hat activities against critics. They could plant evidence of serious crimes(kiddie porn, bomb making materials, terrorist manefestos, etc..) on the hard drives of victims. They could also remotely wipe hard disks, spy, and delete or manipulate selective files, making it harder for people to mount a defense against their
4. Set people up. I.e. open connections to whatever machine they want and do whatever activity they want. They want someone to say something terrorist related they can now.
and locking there machines, wiping their hard drives, deleting files related to criticism, giving them virrii, planting evidence, setting them up for criminal activity, etc....
Just went you thought SOPA and PIPA cannot be worse.
I think we need to propose our own laws permanently banning the practice across the board, and stiff penalties for everyone who would try. The laws need to have the CEOs, and corporate officers go to jail. The law also needs to make whoever wrote that, go to fucking jail.
By go to jail I mean
1. Pre-dawn raid where they shoot they're pets, smash their houses, and intimidate their family 2. Denied bail, intimidated into making confessions with ridiculous sentences. 3. Freeze their bank accounts so they can't pay for lawyers. 4. at least 15 years in federal prison in general population.
open as in the specifications are posted, and free to use, but you can still demand rigorious testing before you let people stick the label on boxes.
USB does this. There is a USB foundation, and your device needs to be certified before it can be called "USB", and for what speed and substandard compliiance.
how am I supposed to move to a new area where I don't know anyone, just to get a job with a union where again, I don't know anyone.
and I still don't know where I'd move.
Truth is since the recession hit getting a job in being either a plumber or an electrician has become really hard, because everyone has had the same idea, and everyone wants those jobs. I really don't blame them.
Still waiting for the local IBEW to get back to me, its been 2 years. You basicly need to know someone. I don't know anyone.
1. Most polls are only of around 1000 people are so, they are done statisticly to reflect the demographic they are meant to represent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_%28statistics%29#Sampling_methods
2. Speaking of 1, given the poll was done by "reason.com" themselves, i want to know the sampling method used and its error rate.
3. the results of the poll where 53-44, so the reality is public opinions are really "mixed".
I think it'd be great if we could get google, red hat, and any other companies to start a foundation, and a charity to help Free/Open Source devs get their works patented, and hold patents that are by RULE licensed under either the BSD/MIT license, or the GPL, or any of the OSL approved licenses.
There needs to be some legal oversight to guarauntee these patents are held under the license the inventor wants, and the license has to be approved(OSI for example).
We could then start a non-profit, activists who like Free software(the movement), AND companies who depend on Open Source(the business model), to legally defend this.
Open Source and Free Software need to come together on this and work towards a common goal.
there are enough programs like noscript that work just as well, and are Free/Open.
ghostery breaks things just like noscript does, and I think noscript gives you more control. Also, it comes down to trust, do you TRUST a closed source app to provide you privacy?
If its free to use, and closed source, its still a commericial, or a wannabe commericial product, which means they have to make money on it somehow. If your not paying for it, how are they making money? Either there its gimped or hobbled in an obnoxious way that makes you want to buy the pro-version, or they are selling "you, the consumer" somehow.
If its Free as in speech, or open source, its most likely a community project worked on as a collorberative effort by people who want functionality, or as value added by a company who's not looking to directly profit off it.
wrong, the original progressives where middle and upper middle moraliists railing against the problems created by industrialization, it started around the 1870s.
There were a distinct group from socialists, european in nature, 60 years older, who proposed a grass roots worker led solutions to worker problems.
Socialism was secular, progressivism was based on christianity. socialism was worker led, proggresivism was led by the uber educated middle class as a charge the robber barrons had no values except money. Hence, proggressivism not only pushed for the 40 hour work week, and living wage, but also alcohol prohabtion, and a strict regime on control of working class society. Socialism was dovish, against nationalist wars. Proggresvies saw national conflicts as a way to enforce their morales on other countries.
Progressivism is not the same as liberalism(American, NOT English), or socialism, all diffrent ideaologies that seem the same with diffrent motives and goals.
Progressivism lasted from the time of FDR, until it got smashed to bits over the war in Viet-Nam and the presidency of LBJ. For 30 over years, it was the de-facto political view of America.
After proggressivism went down in flames, its former followers were split between American Liberalism(Jefferson Style, not Adam Smith Style English Liberal), and neo-conservatism.
Neo-Conservatism, the "new right", was a social conservative anti-liberal branch of proggressivism, that put more emphasis on social purity, and social conservative goals, than social justice. As time wore on, they gradually eroded or didn't care about social support, but still supported a Big Government for enforcing their agenda, which became more and more business oriented to attract more backers.
Neo-Conservatism exploded at the end of the Bush II's presidency, much in the similar fashion as Proggresivism did with LBJ.
The people who call themselves "proggresive" today, I label "neo-progressives", as they are just as much liberal as they are progressive.
If you need a better example of progressive vs liberal. Think LBJ vs Eugene McCarthy
thats fear mongering. Your not addressing how the uber rich became uber rich in the first place.
We give all economic control back to the people who do the work.
The government is run by the uber rich, for the uber rich, and there is no denying it. They merely crack down on eachother in bids for more power. The 99% have no fucking say. Making government more powerful is only going to enfranchise the %1 who got involved with the government vs those who didn't.
"the hallmark of progressives progress. A focus on a better way of life for everyone. The second feature of progressivism is applying the scientific method to society and politics. Specifically observation and a willingness to change you're mind (See Tim Minchin's Storm [youtube.com] for a better (and funnier) explanation of science, and apply that to politics and society."
applied top down, by the %1. They also address problems as percieved by the top of society, and only by the top of society. Are we talking about the actually "progressive" movement of the late 19th, early 20th century, or the "neo-progressives" of today?
The problem is your trying to apply "science" to human nature which often fails because of blatant and obvious biases of soft science, and either refusal or inability to weed the cranks and quacks out of said fields. Sociology was started by none other than Karl Marx, to promote his ideas as "scientific", and other early sociological schools of thought were feminist, or "social darwinism", echoing conservative political statements of the time. I will not get into the merits of various political systems, but it seems to me that most "scientific" aprasails of society are done from predijudiced platforms, unworthy of being called science, and little more than political shills.
"What progressives have observed, time and again, is that power collects at the top. No matter what. No matter what. People pass the advantages they have to their offspring, who use those advantages to increase their share of wealth and power at everyone else's expense. "
"So if power is going to gather at the top we're left with two choices. Either a strong central government that can stand up to that power, or hoping against hope that the money and wealth 'trickle's down'. We've also seen that money and wealth don't do that. "
There are certainly more solutions than those too. You seem to think, like most proggressives, the valid forms of government are strong top down solutions run by a handful of elites.(its either banks or government)
And proggressives do not challenge that. And they never will. Progressivism still proports that people on the top are there because they are inherently better. Its just that is rooted in morralism that that top should help the bottom. But no progressive ever wants to their positition of power and prestige reduced even close to the point it can be questioned.
They just replace one set of problems with another, leaving the same methods of power in place, just transfering them to themselves.
"I'm open to alternatives (I'm a progressive after all)" No, if you were a proggressive, you're looking to attack, intimidate, and slander the opposition until they are too beaten to continue.
Here is an alternative. We create a grass roots democratic system, were the people, to mean invidual people, not corporations and not governments, get to vote on how things are done, and how to run their lives. We don't let self-proclaimed experts start off on fear mongering tirades to distract us from their power grabs.
We decentralize the system so there is no real central authorities to take over.
We make work place democracy a reality, as well as bring real democracy, and the transparency needed to run both economic and government institutions.
we deprussianize our school systems, lets have a good conversation about education reform that doesn't have to do with how much money we spend.
also big on my list are proportional represenation, and ballot iniatives at the federal level.
I heat about that. There is this concept of "critical mass of the universe"
if the universe was started by a "big bang", then at one point, all matter was infintesmally close, and started acceralting away from eachother, the universe as a whole still has its own gravity, and if the engergy was not enough to produce escape velocity from itself, it will eventually start falling into itself like a ball thrown in the air, and comming back down.
And the point is, they are making it harder and harder. taking 8 years to get a 4 year degree should not happen.
your "smart" way to doing college isn't smart, its an ugly hack of the education system, thats going to break the next point release.
The problem is that treat school like a business, more students, higher tuition, and then make the coursework easier so everyone who can PAY will get a degree. Then you can't default on loans when you can't find a job.
A college degree has been the new nobility for some time. Its a status symbol who's supreriority over the plebians is purely rhetorical and asthetic(with the exception of a few programs notable in engineerings and hard sciences).
Its a thinly vield justification for how people on top of society explain why they are treated better by those on the bottom.
Now they are trying to make it more like old fashion nobility. Your earn it by birth, and nothing else.
Slashdot Mirror
"Agreed, though unfortunately, most people don't understand that without the coercive force of government backing these government-creations known as 'corporations', they'd just be a bunch of spoiled brats that would quickly go out of business, in favor of companies with better business models."
Some will, some won't. The RIAA would use their ill-gotten money to hire an army and police force to force their will on people, establishing themselves as a de-facto government
While I certainly agree a large overbearing government is terrible and oppressive, the following also act as governments to lesser extent, and if we just suddenly made the government go away, they'd gain more power to the point they'd simply replace the government
Mafias(of all sorts)
gangs(of all sorts)
Large corporations
Unions
In some areas tribes and large extended families.
Church/Mosques/Temples(of all sorts)
when I say I want no authority, I say I want no authority, not another type of authority.
why?
thats how they treat most other criminals in this country. I'm just saying they deserve equal treatment.
its highly likely that Apple writes the port themselves, and/or does it for them.
Easier said than done
at this point we don't have to, they get a steady revenue stream of blank media to include CD-Rs. Thats right, everytime I burn a CD with a linux distro, or buy a CD-R of an independant artist at a show, the RIAA gets a cut. They can fuck off.
Try joining any culture scene that doesn't involve the RIAA/MPAA, its about 10 min before you get put on some "list", and the next time you get in some form of trouble they will come down hard on you.
If you don't play ball with them, they come for you. This is EXACTLY what this rootkit is about, its the people who pay the least money for their shit, will be targeted. You know it.
There are entire culture scenes that live without the RIAA and MPAA, you need to know where to look. They are repeatedly slammed in the mainstream news and media because of this, and they will be targeted.
this.
I was trying to talk about how a "free market" really means, that the large players want to regulate the same markets in the same way, only in their own best intrests.
Free markets only work on small scales, when they become large, they let the large players take over and become their own governments.
In any case, there is rarely a "free" market, we instead go from centrally or government regulated, to being regulated by the largest players in the market.
But never is there "no regulation", this is always a myth.
Whoever does the regulating does it in their own best intrest. The markets should be regulated by the people via democratic election, with transparent, simple, easy to follow commonly agreed rules.
no, I'm blaming the government
I'm saying we are way past capitalism into feudalism
The last stripes of a so called "free market" are being washed away into corporte feudalism, where the corporations now take over law enforcement, and soon after, law creation and destruction.
Denying citizens all due proccess of a Jury of their peers, set up by a democraticly elected republican government is an assault on everything we stand for as a nation. This moves beyond the scary police state, dirrecty into feudalism. No longer do corporations control us with soft power, but they not have the right to directly interfere in our lives in place of the government, without the shred of due process the former has afforded us. This even gives them more power than the NSA/FBI, who to date have yet to request or start putting root kits on people's hard drives.
It should go without saying that the RIAA will likely use this based on past actions to:
1. Falsely labeling people as pirates, due to apathy. Don't give a damn who's really a pirate or not.
2. Falsely label random people as pirates due to malice.
3. Black Hat activities against critics. They could plant evidence of serious crimes(kiddie porn, bomb making materials, terrorist manefestos, etc..) on the hard drives of victims. They could also remotely wipe hard disks, spy, and delete or manipulate selective files, making it harder for people to mount a defense against their
4. Set people up. I.e. open connections to whatever machine they want and do whatever activity they want. They want someone to say something terrorist related they can now.
and locking there machines, wiping their hard drives, deleting files related to criticism, giving them virrii, planting evidence, setting them up for criminal activity, etc....
Just went you thought SOPA and PIPA cannot be worse.
I think we need to propose our own laws permanently banning the practice across the board, and stiff penalties for everyone who would try. The laws need to have the CEOs, and corporate officers go to jail. The law also needs to make whoever wrote that, go to fucking jail.
By go to jail I mean
1. Pre-dawn raid where they shoot they're pets, smash their houses, and intimidate their family
2. Denied bail, intimidated into making confessions with ridiculous sentences.
3. Freeze their bank accounts so they can't pay for lawyers.
4. at least 15 years in federal prison in general population.
open standard does not imply "no regulation".
open as in the specifications are posted, and free to use, but you can still demand rigorious testing before you let people stick the label on boxes.
USB does this. There is a USB foundation, and your device needs to be certified before it can be called "USB", and for what speed and substandard compliiance.
This is very fair.
the worst part is that most level 1 tech support doesn't either.
the even worst part is that like auto workers, this is going to destroy a fuckton of tech jobs putting the rest of the industry on notice.
move where?
how am I supposed to move to a new area where I don't know anyone, just to get a job with a union where again, I don't know anyone.
and I still don't know where I'd move.
Truth is since the recession hit getting a job in being either a plumber or an electrician has become really hard, because everyone has had the same idea, and everyone wants those jobs. I really don't blame them.
Still waiting for the local IBEW to get back to me, its been 2 years. You basicly need to know someone. I don't know anyone.
1. Most polls are only of around 1000 people are so, they are done statisticly to reflect the demographic they are meant to represent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_%28statistics%29#Sampling_methods
2. Speaking of 1, given the poll was done by "reason.com" themselves, i want to know the sampling method used and its error rate.
3. the results of the poll where 53-44, so the reality is public opinions are really "mixed".
If there was a local hiring apprentice plumbers near me, I would not think twice about ditching IT forever.
but in the meantime.
I think it'd be great if we could get google, red hat, and any other companies to start a foundation, and a charity to help Free/Open Source devs get their works patented, and hold patents that are by RULE licensed under either the BSD/MIT license, or the GPL, or any of the OSL approved licenses.
There needs to be some legal oversight to guarauntee these patents are held under the license the inventor wants, and the license has to be approved(OSI for example).
We could then start a non-profit, activists who like Free software(the movement), AND companies who depend on Open Source(the business model), to legally defend this.
Open Source and Free Software need to come together on this and work towards a common goal.
stop loss is not how it was portrayed in the movies.
It simply says, if your on a deployment, you can't get out until the deployment ends.
Once the deployment ends, they have to let you go.
there are enough programs like noscript that work just as well, and are Free/Open.
ghostery breaks things just like noscript does, and I think noscript gives you more control. Also, it comes down to trust, do you TRUST a closed source app to provide you privacy?
If its free to use, and closed source, its still a commericial, or a wannabe commericial product, which means they have to make money on it somehow. If your not paying for it, how are they making money? Either there its gimped or hobbled in an obnoxious way that makes you want to buy the pro-version, or they are selling "you, the consumer" somehow.
If its Free as in speech, or open source, its most likely a community project worked on as a collorberative effort by people who want functionality, or as value added by a company who's not looking to directly profit off it.
1. Fuck ghostery, its closed source nonsense.
2. Throw away computer, try throw away operating system. Its much easier.
tails
https://tails.boum.org/
libertre linux
http://sourceforge.net/projects/liberte/?source=directory
And there are many more, those are just too that automaticly transmit everything in TOR.
I wasn't talking about your beliefs.
I was talking about progressivism, not social democracy, nor any other form of socialism.
wrong, the original progressives where middle and upper middle moraliists railing against the problems created by industrialization, it started around the 1870s.
There were a distinct group from socialists, european in nature, 60 years older, who proposed a grass roots worker led solutions to worker problems.
Socialism was secular, progressivism was based on christianity. socialism was worker led, proggresivism was led by the uber educated middle class as a charge the robber barrons had no values except money. Hence, proggressivism not only pushed for the 40 hour work week, and living wage, but also alcohol prohabtion, and a strict regime on control of working class society. Socialism was dovish, against nationalist wars. Proggresvies saw national conflicts as a way to enforce their morales on other countries.
Progressivism is not the same as liberalism(American, NOT English), or socialism, all diffrent ideaologies that seem the same with diffrent motives and goals.
Progressivism lasted from the time of FDR, until it got smashed to bits over the war in Viet-Nam and the presidency of LBJ. For 30 over years, it was the de-facto political view of America.
After proggressivism went down in flames, its former followers were split between American Liberalism(Jefferson Style, not Adam Smith Style English Liberal), and neo-conservatism.
Neo-Conservatism, the "new right", was a social conservative anti-liberal branch of proggressivism, that put more emphasis on social purity, and social conservative goals, than social justice. As time wore on, they gradually eroded or didn't care about social support, but still supported a Big Government for enforcing their agenda, which became more and more business oriented to attract more backers.
Neo-Conservatism exploded at the end of the Bush II's presidency, much in the similar fashion as Proggresivism did with LBJ.
The people who call themselves "proggresive" today, I label "neo-progressives", as they are just as much liberal as they are progressive.
If you need a better example of progressive vs liberal. Think LBJ vs Eugene McCarthy
thats fear mongering. Your not addressing how the uber rich became uber rich in the first place.
We give all economic control back to the people who do the work.
The government is run by the uber rich, for the uber rich, and there is no denying it. They merely crack down on eachother in bids for more power. The 99% have no fucking say. Making government more powerful is only going to enfranchise the %1 who got involved with the government vs those who didn't.
"the hallmark of progressives progress. A focus on a better way of life for everyone. The second feature of progressivism is applying the scientific method to society and politics. Specifically observation and a willingness to change you're mind (See Tim Minchin's Storm [youtube.com] for a better (and funnier) explanation of science, and apply that to politics and society."
applied top down, by the %1. They also address problems as percieved by the top of society, and only by the top of society. Are we talking about the actually "progressive" movement of the late 19th, early 20th century, or the "neo-progressives" of today?
The problem is your trying to apply "science" to human nature which often fails because of blatant and obvious biases of soft science, and either refusal or inability to weed the cranks and quacks out of said fields. Sociology was started by none other than Karl Marx, to promote his ideas as "scientific", and other early sociological schools of thought were feminist, or "social darwinism", echoing conservative political statements of the time. I will not get into the merits of various political systems, but it seems to me that most "scientific" aprasails of society are done from predijudiced platforms, unworthy of being called science, and little more than political shills.
"What progressives have observed, time and again, is that power collects at the top. No matter what. No matter what. People pass the advantages they have to their offspring, who use those advantages to increase their share of wealth and power at everyone else's expense. "
"So if power is going to gather at the top we're left with two choices. Either a strong central government that can stand up to that power, or hoping against hope that the money and wealth 'trickle's down'. We've also seen that money and wealth don't do that. "
There are certainly more solutions than those too. You seem to think, like most proggressives, the valid forms of government are strong top down solutions run by a handful of elites.(its either banks or government)
And proggressives do not challenge that. And they never will. Progressivism still proports that people on the top are there because they are inherently better. Its just that is rooted in morralism that that top should help the bottom. But no progressive ever wants to their positition of power and prestige reduced even close to the point it can be questioned.
They just replace one set of problems with another, leaving the same methods of power in place, just transfering them to themselves.
"I'm open to alternatives (I'm a progressive after all)"
No, if you were a proggressive, you're looking to attack, intimidate, and slander the opposition until they are too beaten to continue.
Here is an alternative. We create a grass roots democratic system, were the people, to mean invidual people, not corporations and not governments, get to vote on how things are done, and how to run their lives. We don't let self-proclaimed experts start off on fear mongering tirades to distract us from their power grabs.
We decentralize the system so there is no real central authorities to take over.
We make work place democracy a reality, as well as bring real democracy, and the transparency needed to run both economic and government institutions.
we deprussianize our school systems, lets have a good conversation about education reform that doesn't have to do with how much money we spend.
also big on my list are proportional represenation, and ballot iniatives at the federal level.
I heat about that. There is this concept of "critical mass of the universe"
if the universe was started by a "big bang", then at one point, all matter was infintesmally close, and started acceralting away from eachother, the universe as a whole still has its own gravity, and if the engergy was not enough to produce escape velocity from itself, it will eventually start falling into itself like a ball thrown in the air, and comming back down.
There is no living in NYC on minimum wage without paying for school.
And the point is, they are making it harder and harder. taking 8 years to get a 4 year degree should not happen.
your "smart" way to doing college isn't smart, its an ugly hack of the education system, thats going to break the next point release.
The problem is that treat school like a business, more students, higher tuition, and then make the coursework easier so everyone who can PAY will get a degree. Then you can't default on loans when you can't find a job.
A college degree has been the new nobility for some time. Its a status symbol who's supreriority over the plebians is purely rhetorical and asthetic(with the exception of a few programs notable in engineerings and hard sciences).
Its a thinly vield justification for how people on top of society explain why they are treated better by those on the bottom.
Now they are trying to make it more like old fashion nobility. Your earn it by birth, and nothing else.
"he looked at the GI Bill but considering how they have refused to let soldiers leave when their enlistment is up?"
What? That is a lie.