It exists and it can be shown and explained as the oddity it is. Children are not stupid. Age rating for any knowledge is a reflection of our misguided overprotective culture. There is nothing evil or traumatic in knowledge as long as the proper context is offered, and if you only try you will find out that children's minds are far more resilient than you think, and far less filled of prejudice than yours.
So, instead of explaining what needs to be explained in order for your children to understand the world around them, you treat them as mindless idiots and make the thinking for them. Censure is NEVER the way to do anything right. And children do not need to be protect from seeing one of the most natural acts living beings do. Sex is not evil, and sex is not inadequate for the minds of children. Lack of information is, and you are doing an excellent job keeping your children ignorant. Please, let me know when they do stupid things on your back because you were too afraid to give them the proper knowledge they needed to develop.
Even if I feel for the girls, it is not US or anybody's place to police another country, especially in US usual way of invading, destroying and then losing interest and leaving the country to mend itself, usually worse than it was before.
And you do understand that there wasn't a single example of communist regimen that worked in the real World, don't you? Maybe you need to ask yourself if communism is really a pure and benevolent philosophy that has been corrupted by poor implementation or if it is indeed what the results of the attempted implementations show.
I couldn't care less about what the "law" says. When the law does not reflect the moral consensus of the majority of people it is a bad law, it is tyranny. And the moral consensus of the majority of people is that "stealing" copyrighted material is NOT wrong. Moral is not absolute and that is why the "law" is radically different in different places and in different times. Copyright is harmful to most people in our world and as such it will die, sooner or later, regardless of the interests or the money behind it.
This is a flamebait but I will answer either way. Men fight and punch it other on occasion. It is part of our nature. As long as NO REAL damage is done, and nobody ends in a hospital bed or in the cemetery, nobody goes to jail for any meaningful amount of time. On the other hand if one of the guys is gay, now you do. I do not care how much you think gays are discriminated, that is a double standard and creates a special class of people with special privileges. That is not the way to solve hatred. It just adds to it.
I do not argument with absolutely no study, I argument with the fact that no study made in this field brings conclusive results, to say otherwise is to want to see things where they do not exist. I also argument that the fact they do not exist, considering the political will to make them exist, is evidence enough that there is no such thing.
The "studies" you post are no more than opinions with no data and no scientific method behind them to bring any conclusion. They are as valid as any argument I or you make her in Slashdot.
There will never ever ever be equality as long as are laws discriminating, positively or negatively, any group. One example in my country are criminal laws against violent acts. If you beat another guy in a fight you will spend maybe a few days in prison as long as it is nothing serious. Now if this guy is gay you can end being charged with a 'hate crime' and end with several years of confinement.
Whenever there are privileges hatred follows. It is part of human nature. You end making things worse in the end.
The link you post is a pitiful badly done study and the article conclusions were tremendously overblown from data that would be inconclusive to any real scientist. Girls do not face any uphill battle. If anything it is the other way around. They are too protected.
A hundred years ago most professions were inaccessible for women. Today, almost anything is accessible, but there will ALWAYS be things that are better done by one gender or another, physically AND mentally.
This ridiculously demented politically correct hypocrisy that demands from us to ignore facts and reshape our perceptions of reality to conform to misguided notions is ridiculous. Things are as they are and it is past time for us to start to deal with them instead of blatantly ignoring them when they hurt our fantasies of what should be.
That is not exactly true. Both are required to show evidence that enough research was made and no evidence of its being harmful has been found. I am not a big fan of corporations, but I am a big fan of accuracy in arguments.
And yet it's still walking slower in that direction than anyone else.
I beg to disagree. I am Brazilian and although my country has a LOT of problems it is certainly not going in this direction faster than US. The same can be said about a lot of developing countries and even most of the European countries, with some exceptions (UK comes to my mind). US certainly has a lot of laws protecting free speech and such, but laws are useless if the price of justice is not affordable and its decisions are each day less technical and more political. Add that to the fact that even these failing laws are being eroded each day by absurd amendments and acts and you have a very bleak picture.
It is true that the US is still nowhere near North Korea police state, yet, but it is walking at a very good pace in that direction. It won't likely get all the way to there, at least I hope not, but it will probably go far enough in that direction to be a considerable threat to the world, and considering what US can do and what North Korea can do, US is a much greater threat than North Korea could ever dream to be.
Recounting only solves miscounting problems, which at least in paper elections is more likely just noise resulted from human errors, and not any malicious tampering. All malicious tampering in paper voting is not detectable by recounting at all.
It increases the difficult of tampering, but also increases the difficult in auditing it. So yes, it is harder to do things in a grand scale, but it is easier to do things in a smaller scale, and not all elections are for president.
Not necessarily. You may tamper with paper ballots and leave no evidence at all. Elections take time, people get tired, and not all places are in evidence. Some places are remote, others are very confuse, people take breaks. Urns may be exchanged, votes may be destroyed, and the results can be miscounted. Happens a lot. and most of this stuff is not detectable.
The ONLY detectable paper trail is miscounting, which is usually the result of non malicious human error. Any malicious manipulation on paper voting does not leave trails.
Even if you have a paper record the negative proves nothing, that is, if you don't find any evidence of tampering you cannot assume there wasn't any. In the very same way that happens with electronic systems. On the other hand, you can find trails of tampering in electronic system (like happened in this very case) in the same way you can find trails of tampering in paper voting, on occasion, and if the tampering was badly done.
What you are saying is that you can do it more often and easier with paper than with electronic machines, and I tell you that neither of the methods is tamper proof and neither is intrinsically more secure. All depends on implementation.
And who will prevent your purple finger people from voting more than once? And who those people from voting as much as they like?
Paper as ANYTHING else is far from being tamper proof. One may argue that it is even easier to tamper with it than to tamper electronically if you know what you are doing. Your "paper trail" won't be of any use to you if it is tampered with from the start.
In the end the problem is that people are corruptible and the whole process depend on them. You fix that making enough redundancies to minimize any tampering, be it on paper or electronically.
It is WAAAAY easier to alter the result of paper elections. It is far from being tamper proof and costs a lot more money and time.
Brazilian or not, please refrain from spilling paranoia until you have at least a hint of evidence to justify that. Brazilian elections are clean and fast.
Our politicians, on the other hand, are another story, but that is not very different from US or basically any country in the world...
The fact that the supreme court ruled that patents to be valid within US needed to be invented within US should be enough to answer your question. The congress had to amend the law in 1946 in order to change that. In the meantime during most of WWII and a few years after it no foreign patent claim held ground in US.
At principle you would think that in 1946 everything was fixed, but when the law was amended, there were a myriad of local patents (registered in the previous years) conflicting with foreign ones, which made very difficult to win in court with any foreign patent. The complex rules of US patents, made even more complex after 1952 made it even more unpractical. Basically the 1946 amendment was made in order to have a political instrument to enforced the newly acquired German patents over the world, while passing a image of reciprocity, while in practice this reciprocity was anything but real.
Most foreign companies didn't even bother to go to court to try to enforce their patents, firstly because their chances were slim, and secondly because they were broke (both financially and physically) due to the WWII. There were a few court cases like the one I posted above that started it all, but they are not very easy to find, and the results were the same.
If you doubt me, try to find cases where European or any foreign companies sued in US and won between 1929 and 1952.
"1946 – In order to receive a patent one had to be the “first to invent,” in the world. This was amended to “first to invent” within the US. (Storage Battery v. Shimadzu)[2]"
After that anything that was not patented in US became unusable in court. Between 1939 and 1946 (when the law was amended), no external patent held a claim in US courts.
In addition to that, yes, US stole any patent they could from Germany after WWII:
That was in part why US amended the law in 1946. Now they had a lot of valuable patents as war spoils and they needed the rest of the world to acknowledge them.
After WWII US had taken minimum damage and had a good industrial base. On the other hand, Europe was devastated but its countries held most of the profitable patents. US solved the problem by voiding any non-US patent and allowing its companies to produce whatever they wished regardless of any European claim to their products (not unlike what China does today). That is what in good part made US the greatest economical superpower in the world.
US was not the first and won't be the last to realize that ignoring external patents is the way to go if you really want to develop your country.
The problem most people overlook is that you can't make plans for the next 30 years based on the current scenario. A lot of thing scan happen in such a large time span.
Slashdot Mirror
Google Maps Mobile. It lacks the route override option of the PC application and waypoints.
It exists and it can be shown and explained as the oddity it is. Children are not stupid. Age rating for any knowledge is a reflection of our misguided overprotective culture. There is nothing evil or traumatic in knowledge as long as the proper context is offered, and if you only try you will find out that children's minds are far more resilient than you think, and far less filled of prejudice than yours.
So, instead of explaining what needs to be explained in order for your children to understand the world around them, you treat them as mindless idiots and make the thinking for them. Censure is NEVER the way to do anything right. And children do not need to be protect from seeing one of the most natural acts living beings do. Sex is not evil, and sex is not inadequate for the minds of children. Lack of information is, and you are doing an excellent job keeping your children ignorant. Please, let me know when they do stupid things on your back because you were too afraid to give them the proper knowledge they needed to develop.
If they won't be hired their services are not necessary anymore. They can adapt and go work elsewhere or be unemployed. That is the reality of life.
Even if I feel for the girls, it is not US or anybody's place to police another country, especially in US usual way of invading, destroying and then losing interest and leaving the country to mend itself, usually worse than it was before.
And you do understand that there wasn't a single example of communist regimen that worked in the real World, don't you? Maybe you need to ask yourself if communism is really a pure and benevolent philosophy that has been corrupted by poor implementation or if it is indeed what the results of the attempted implementations show.
I couldn't care less about what the "law" says. When the law does not reflect the moral consensus of the majority of people it is a bad law, it is tyranny. And the moral consensus of the majority of people is that "stealing" copyrighted material is NOT wrong. Moral is not absolute and that is why the "law" is radically different in different places and in different times. Copyright is harmful to most people in our world and as such it will die, sooner or later, regardless of the interests or the money behind it.
This is a flamebait but I will answer either way. Men fight and punch it other on occasion. It is part of our nature. As long as NO REAL damage is done, and nobody ends in a hospital bed or in the cemetery, nobody goes to jail for any meaningful amount of time. On the other hand if one of the guys is gay, now you do. I do not care how much you think gays are discriminated, that is a double standard and creates a special class of people with special privileges. That is not the way to solve hatred. It just adds to it.
I do not argument with absolutely no study, I argument with the fact that no study made in this field brings conclusive results, to say otherwise is to want to see things where they do not exist. I also argument that the fact they do not exist, considering the political will to make them exist, is evidence enough that there is no such thing. The "studies" you post are no more than opinions with no data and no scientific method behind them to bring any conclusion. They are as valid as any argument I or you make her in Slashdot.
There will never ever ever be equality as long as are laws discriminating, positively or negatively, any group. One example in my country are criminal laws against violent acts. If you beat another guy in a fight you will spend maybe a few days in prison as long as it is nothing serious. Now if this guy is gay you can end being charged with a 'hate crime' and end with several years of confinement. Whenever there are privileges hatred follows. It is part of human nature. You end making things worse in the end.
The link you post is a pitiful badly done study and the article conclusions were tremendously overblown from data that would be inconclusive to any real scientist. Girls do not face any uphill battle. If anything it is the other way around. They are too protected. A hundred years ago most professions were inaccessible for women. Today, almost anything is accessible, but there will ALWAYS be things that are better done by one gender or another, physically AND mentally. This ridiculously demented politically correct hypocrisy that demands from us to ignore facts and reshape our perceptions of reality to conform to misguided notions is ridiculous. Things are as they are and it is past time for us to start to deal with them instead of blatantly ignoring them when they hurt our fantasies of what should be.
That is not exactly true. Both are required to show evidence that enough research was made and no evidence of its being harmful has been found. I am not a big fan of corporations, but I am a big fan of accuracy in arguments.
And yet it's still walking slower in that direction than anyone else.
I beg to disagree. I am Brazilian and although my country has a LOT of problems it is certainly not going in this direction faster than US. The same can be said about a lot of developing countries and even most of the European countries, with some exceptions (UK comes to my mind). US certainly has a lot of laws protecting free speech and such, but laws are useless if the price of justice is not affordable and its decisions are each day less technical and more political. Add that to the fact that even these failing laws are being eroded each day by absurd amendments and acts and you have a very bleak picture.
It is true that the US is still nowhere near North Korea police state, yet, but it is walking at a very good pace in that direction. It won't likely get all the way to there, at least I hope not, but it will probably go far enough in that direction to be a considerable threat to the world, and considering what US can do and what North Korea can do, US is a much greater threat than North Korea could ever dream to be.
Recounting only solves miscounting problems, which at least in paper elections is more likely just noise resulted from human errors, and not any malicious tampering. All malicious tampering in paper voting is not detectable by recounting at all.
It increases the difficult of tampering, but also increases the difficult in auditing it. So yes, it is harder to do things in a grand scale, but it is easier to do things in a smaller scale, and not all elections are for president.
Not necessarily. You may tamper with paper ballots and leave no evidence at all. Elections take time, people get tired, and not all places are in evidence. Some places are remote, others are very confuse, people take breaks. Urns may be exchanged, votes may be destroyed, and the results can be miscounted. Happens a lot. and most of this stuff is not detectable. The ONLY detectable paper trail is miscounting, which is usually the result of non malicious human error. Any malicious manipulation on paper voting does not leave trails.
Even if you have a paper record the negative proves nothing, that is, if you don't find any evidence of tampering you cannot assume there wasn't any. In the very same way that happens with electronic systems. On the other hand, you can find trails of tampering in electronic system (like happened in this very case) in the same way you can find trails of tampering in paper voting, on occasion, and if the tampering was badly done. What you are saying is that you can do it more often and easier with paper than with electronic machines, and I tell you that neither of the methods is tamper proof and neither is intrinsically more secure. All depends on implementation.
And who will prevent your purple finger people from voting more than once? And who those people from voting as much as they like? Paper as ANYTHING else is far from being tamper proof. One may argue that it is even easier to tamper with it than to tamper electronically if you know what you are doing. Your "paper trail" won't be of any use to you if it is tampered with from the start. In the end the problem is that people are corruptible and the whole process depend on them. You fix that making enough redundancies to minimize any tampering, be it on paper or electronically.
It is WAAAAY easier to alter the result of paper elections. It is far from being tamper proof and costs a lot more money and time. Brazilian or not, please refrain from spilling paranoia until you have at least a hint of evidence to justify that. Brazilian elections are clean and fast. Our politicians, on the other hand, are another story, but that is not very different from US or basically any country in the world...
The fact that the supreme court ruled that patents to be valid within US needed to be invented within US should be enough to answer your question. The congress had to amend the law in 1946 in order to change that. In the meantime during most of WWII and a few years after it no foreign patent claim held ground in US. At principle you would think that in 1946 everything was fixed, but when the law was amended, there were a myriad of local patents (registered in the previous years) conflicting with foreign ones, which made very difficult to win in court with any foreign patent. The complex rules of US patents, made even more complex after 1952 made it even more unpractical. Basically the 1946 amendment was made in order to have a political instrument to enforced the newly acquired German patents over the world, while passing a image of reciprocity, while in practice this reciprocity was anything but real. Most foreign companies didn't even bother to go to court to try to enforce their patents, firstly because their chances were slim, and secondly because they were broke (both financially and physically) due to the WWII. There were a few court cases like the one I posted above that started it all, but they are not very easy to find, and the results were the same. If you doubt me, try to find cases where European or any foreign companies sued in US and won between 1929 and 1952.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_United_States_patent_law
"1946 – In order to receive a patent one had to be the “first to invent,” in the world. This was amended to “first to invent” within the US. (Storage Battery v. Shimadzu)[2]"
Apparently this was the begining:
http://www.shpoonkle.com/briefs?keyed=Electric-Storage-Battery-Co-v-Shimadzu
After that anything that was not patented in US became unusable in court. Between 1939 and 1946 (when the law was amended), no external patent held a claim in US courts.
In addition to that, yes, US stole any patent they could from Germany after WWII:
http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/patents.html
That was in part why US amended the law in 1946. Now they had a lot of valuable patents as war spoils and they needed the rest of the world to acknowledge them.
After WWII US had taken minimum damage and had a good industrial base. On the other hand, Europe was devastated but its countries held most of the profitable patents. US solved the problem by voiding any non-US patent and allowing its companies to produce whatever they wished regardless of any European claim to their products (not unlike what China does today). That is what in good part made US the greatest economical superpower in the world. US was not the first and won't be the last to realize that ignoring external patents is the way to go if you really want to develop your country.
Yes, as technology increases it is expected that everything becomes better and cheaper. That has been a trend in the last few centuries at least.
The problem most people overlook is that you can't make plans for the next 30 years based on the current scenario. A lot of thing scan happen in such a large time span.