Come on man, can you with a straight face really claim that any amount of ordinance you could possibly have would win out against the government? You and your shotgun or handgun against an entire police department? The FBI? National Gaurd? State Police? US Military?
So just how effective could you be against the government I ask you?
I'm not quite sure I want to limit my options in life based on what would make other people more comfortable according to tradition. I can pretty much knock down all of your objections.
1. Designer children: We already have that. When you decide what content a child is exposed to you are "designing" them. Tinkering with genes is just an extension of this, not a new beginning. Besides, as a parent you have an obligation to do the best you can for your children. If you can afford to give them better genes and choose not to then that would be neglect. 2. Genetic Improvements for the rich: See my response to #1. 3. Eliminating the biological need for traditional families: If traditional families really are as great as apple pie then they'll continue to appeal even when one does NOT need them to have children. Keeping something around just because you need it but not because you want it doesn't actually mean the thing in question is a good thing. The embrace of non-traditional families is a simple sign that there's no one size fits all solution for every person or couple on Earth. 4. Depopulation: Stem cell therapy will result in a net gain as while birth rates will continue to fall, death rates will fall much MUCH faster. 5. Islamification of Europe: I don't know where I stand on this one. I'm not racist, but I'm not fond of folks who tend to blow up other folks either. I think in the long run we as a world will figure out how to deal with the radical islam issue.
I personally would rather have the same governmental standards i.e. contracts apply to everyone than have various rules between various bond companies tripping people up here and there with their little fine print exceptions. It would be less efficient in the long run because the cost of doing business would be HIGHER and less economic activity would occur. By knowing that anyone can sue anyone else anywhere in the country a large amount of comfort and security is added to the market. Without it not as much business would get done.
Going further down your road why stop at contract enforcement? Every service the government currently provides could be privitized. And instead of paying one big tax bill at the end of the year, you can itemize 500 different but each smaller bills at the end of the year just to make sure you'er "saving money". That sounds like something everyone would love to do............NOT!
You can't remove the influence of money from politics unless you remove money from society. Your proposed amendement would violate a corporation's first amendment rights to freedom of speech. (The first amendment doesn't just apply to individuals but also to groups of individuals that congregate, like in companies! A company has a right to lobby any politician it wants to. This is a free country, you can't put borders on who can be lobbied by whom. It would be irrelevant in any case because companies would just setup lobbying centers in all 50 states instead of just in DC as they do right now.
Identity theft is a real concern but it doesn't mean we have to go bonkers over it. There's no need to go all Anarchist Cookbook over piracy concerns. Face it, you just want to be destructive no matter what and this privacy thing is a convienent excuse. Go on, admit it!
What gives them the right is that we the people have elected officials who have made that determination.....and then we voted them back in for re-election the following term.
As per the rest of your comments. Drama Queen much?
This brings up the question of can you ever truly be free in a dangerous situation. In the state of nature you are exposed to the elements and to predators. What kind of freedom is that? What you call freedom others would refer to as a living nightmare.
Why should the public have to deal with a myriad of small bond companies when everyone can just deal with the government? I'm not seeing exactly what would be gained by for example ME by going with your way of doing things.
You are mistaking "abused" for "directly affected" The examples you just stated in no way shape or form get in the way of a person's daily business or leisure activities. If you aren't protesting something then how do you even KNOW you can't protest it anymore?
What, everyone is supposed to use cash on the off chance that they might kill their spouse so that it will be harder for the police to figure out if you really did it or not?
Even for slashdot thats some fucked up logic.
Re:You need to work it out...
on
IT and Divorce?
·
· Score: 1
This is assuming your marriage survies though isn't it?
Why can't the men stay home and the women work? If you want to fuck equality, then mother fuck you!
Re:You need to work it out...
on
IT and Divorce?
·
· Score: 1
The way you describe marriage I have to ask.....what are the benefits? What do you get in return for all the misery that you can't get from an unmarried relationship?
Re:Strange way to prosecute in the US
on
The Future of ReiserFS
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Here in the US we just think its good public policy to have the police declare WHY they have charged someone with a crime BEFORE the trial instead of AFTERWARDS so that if anyone knows anything they can come forward DURING the trial to reveal the truth. And make no mistake, US police do withhold certain details from the public so they can verify that certain people who "confess" aren't just making it up. But from the way you describe the UK criminal justice system the police can just arrest anyone they want and not have to declare why until the person has already been convicted. Is my interpretation correct because if it is that sounds like a dictatorship, not a democracy.
The thing is, no one is going to die if any particular nation HAS to buy MS products. Even in poor countries the cost of software licenses is a very small proportion of the national budget.
No one _cares_. They just want computers. They can learn to be producers later, AFTER their infrastructure is set up. The only people who care about software being open source are people who basically want to recieve software that is hard to produce for free. Thats basically whats behind the entire open source movement. The "many eyeballs" thing fell flat on its face for code quality and sabotage protection. That only leaves just getting the stuff for free. Lots of people want stuff for free but deep down most people also acknolwedge that you have to pay to get something of value. This is why the business world is not run by geeks, but by businessmen. Gates, Jobs, Ellison? Yeah they're technical folks, all past programmers but to their cores their businessmen much more than they're geeks.
I understand where you are going with your argument. Its akin to third world nations starting with cell towers for telephony instead of laying copper.
IMO its a bit different with computers. OSS just isn't up to par yet with Windows and Mac OS X from a regular user standpoint. There's also a bit of pride and prestiege. Just because these people are the poorest people on Earth does not mean they want to use what to them are "second class operating systems" that can't run the software that their friends and families in developed countries can run. I've actually read stories of third world charities asking people to STOP sending them 3 and 4 year old computers because they were tired of using that old junk. They want the newest and most popular products just as badly as Americans and Europeans do(perhaps even moreso) because they are deprived, and I'm sorry but Linux and BSD just don't top Windows/OS X in regular software and ease of use. Plus I figure OSS is a hobby of convienence. If I'm worried about my next meal or water safety or paramilitary rebels I'm not going to have the time or patients to get NDISwrapper to work right or try to figure out why Ubuntu doesn't have media players enabled by default. I'm going to want my device to "Just Work."
On a side note, did you know that during Romania's communist regime the president of the country played tapes of the US soap drama "Dallas" in a bid to get his people to realize how broken families can become in a corrupt capitalist system? The attempt backfired as the impoverished Romanians were entranced by the lavish lifestyles, big houses and cars and gadgets that were on display on the show. It hastened his regime's downfall. The reason was the show Dallas provided a stark contrast between their lives and that of Americans. Well Africa has had TV for some time now. They know how a computer is supposed to look like, what its supposed to be capable of and how easy its supposed to be to use. I don't think any of them are looking forward to a Linux/Unix command line prompt.
Do you really think that the point behind getting a laptop in every child's hands is to get them to start programming source code? I personally don't think it is. Its to just get them a computer in the first place. Computers existed in the United States before Windows you know but their usage didn't explode until Microsoft created an operating system that was easy enough to use for just about anyone to pick up. The bulk of the population of the United States didn't become programmers. Not even half became programmers. Nor a quarter or a 20th. I predict the very same course of events for India. The OLPC is just something to USE not program on. Thus it being open source or not is irrelevant.
By the way, hasn't the Slashdot population learned yet that the overwhelming majority of humans in any nation are never ever ever going to be programmers?
On the whole you are correct but there are exceptions. For instance, the sentiments of a geek regarding the "security" of his own computer systems pales in comparison to society's interests in solving crimes. You won't die and the government isn't going to put the contents of your boring hard drive on the 11 o'clock news so in cases like this your complaints will fall on many many deaf ears (and I'm not just counting the ears that are totally computer illiterate and thus won't care because they don't understand whats going on in the first place either).
There's this thing called a "court order" you see. Sometimes its referred to as a "search warrant." Its scope can also apply to people's computers. So no, despite all your righteous indignation, your computer CAN be altered without your permission and even without your knowledge at the time it is altered.
Slashdot Mirror
Please reply to this comment.
Come on man, can you with a straight face really claim that any amount of ordinance you could possibly have would win out against the government? You and your shotgun or handgun against an entire police department? The FBI? National Gaurd? State Police? US Military?
So just how effective could you be against the government I ask you?
I'm not quite sure I want to limit my options in life based on what would make other people more comfortable according to tradition. I can pretty much knock down all of your objections.
1. Designer children: We already have that. When you decide what content a child is exposed to you are "designing" them. Tinkering with genes is just an extension of this, not a new beginning. Besides, as a parent you have an obligation to do the best you can for your children. If you can afford to give them better genes and choose not to then that would be neglect.
2. Genetic Improvements for the rich: See my response to #1.
3. Eliminating the biological need for traditional families: If traditional families really are as great as apple pie then they'll continue to appeal even when one does NOT need them to have children. Keeping something around just because you need it but not because you want it doesn't actually mean the thing in question is a good thing. The embrace of non-traditional families is a simple sign that there's no one size fits all solution for every person or couple on Earth.
4. Depopulation: Stem cell therapy will result in a net gain as while birth rates will continue to fall, death rates will fall much MUCH faster.
5. Islamification of Europe: I don't know where I stand on this one. I'm not racist, but I'm not fond of folks who tend to blow up other folks either. I think in the long run we as a world will figure out how to deal with the radical islam issue.
Is it not murder to delay the development of treatments for diseases?
I personally would rather have the same governmental standards i.e. contracts apply to everyone than have various rules between various bond companies tripping people up here and there with their little fine print exceptions. It would be less efficient in the long run because the cost of doing business would be HIGHER and less economic activity would occur. By knowing that anyone can sue anyone else anywhere in the country a large amount of comfort and security is added to the market. Without it not as much business would get done.
Going further down your road why stop at contract enforcement? Every service the government currently provides could be privitized. And instead of paying one big tax bill at the end of the year, you can itemize 500 different but each smaller bills at the end of the year just to make sure you'er "saving money". That sounds like something everyone would love to do............NOT!
You can't remove the influence of money from politics unless you remove money from society. Your proposed amendement would violate a corporation's first amendment rights to freedom of speech. (The first amendment doesn't just apply to individuals but also to groups of individuals that congregate, like in companies! A company has a right to lobby any politician it wants to. This is a free country, you can't put borders on who can be lobbied by whom. It would be irrelevant in any case because companies would just setup lobbying centers in all 50 states instead of just in DC as they do right now.
Identity theft is a real concern but it doesn't mean we have to go bonkers over it. There's no need to go all Anarchist Cookbook over piracy concerns. Face it, you just want to be destructive no matter what and this privacy thing is a convienent excuse. Go on, admit it!
What gives them the right is that we the people have elected officials who have made that determination.....and then we voted them back in for re-election the following term.
As per the rest of your comments. Drama Queen much?
This brings up the question of can you ever truly be free in a dangerous situation. In the state of nature you are exposed to the elements and to predators. What kind of freedom is that? What you call freedom others would refer to as a living nightmare.
We're just doing it to stop terrorists. Not to find out who you voted for in the next Eurovision contest or whatever.
Why should the public have to deal with a myriad of small bond companies when everyone can just deal with the government? I'm not seeing exactly what would be gained by for example ME by going with your way of doing things.
You are mistaking "abused" for "directly affected" The examples you just stated in no way shape or form get in the way of a person's daily business or leisure activities. If you aren't protesting something then how do you even KNOW you can't protest it anymore?
You can always just go to a library and read it there without ever checking it out and no one would know you ever read it.
What, everyone is supposed to use cash on the off chance that they might kill their spouse so that it will be harder for the police to figure out if you really did it or not?
Even for slashdot thats some fucked up logic.
This is assuming your marriage survies though isn't it?
Why can't the men stay home and the women work? If you want to fuck equality, then mother fuck you!
The way you describe marriage I have to ask.....what are the benefits? What do you get in return for all the misery that you can't get from an unmarried relationship?
Here in the US we just think its good public policy to have the police declare WHY they have charged someone with a crime BEFORE the trial instead of AFTERWARDS so that if anyone knows anything they can come forward DURING the trial to reveal the truth. And make no mistake, US police do withhold certain details from the public so they can verify that certain people who "confess" aren't just making it up. But from the way you describe the UK criminal justice system the police can just arrest anyone they want and not have to declare why until the person has already been convicted. Is my interpretation correct because if it is that sounds like a dictatorship, not a democracy.
The thing is, no one is going to die if any particular nation HAS to buy MS products. Even in poor countries the cost of software licenses is a very small proportion of the national budget.
No one _cares_. They just want computers. They can learn to be producers later, AFTER their infrastructure is set up. The only people who care about software being open source are people who basically want to recieve software that is hard to produce for free. Thats basically whats behind the entire open source movement. The "many eyeballs" thing fell flat on its face for code quality and sabotage protection. That only leaves just getting the stuff for free. Lots of people want stuff for free but deep down most people also acknolwedge that you have to pay to get something of value. This is why the business world is not run by geeks, but by businessmen. Gates, Jobs, Ellison? Yeah they're technical folks, all past programmers but to their cores their businessmen much more than they're geeks.
I have 4 computers. One of them runs Kubuntu. For a Linux its extremely easy to use. Among other OS's it still behind.
The business communities in Europe would never allow that to happen.
I understand where you are going with your argument. Its akin to third world nations starting with cell towers for telephony instead of laying copper.
IMO its a bit different with computers. OSS just isn't up to par yet with Windows and Mac OS X from a regular user standpoint. There's also a bit of pride and prestiege. Just because these people are the poorest people on Earth does not mean they want to use what to them are "second class operating systems" that can't run the software that their friends and families in developed countries can run. I've actually read stories of third world charities asking people to STOP sending them 3 and 4 year old computers because they were tired of using that old junk. They want the newest and most popular products just as badly as Americans and Europeans do(perhaps even moreso) because they are deprived, and I'm sorry but Linux and BSD just don't top Windows/OS X in regular software and ease of use. Plus I figure OSS is a hobby of convienence. If I'm worried about my next meal or water safety or paramilitary rebels I'm not going to have the time or patients to get NDISwrapper to work right or try to figure out why Ubuntu doesn't have media players enabled by default. I'm going to want my device to "Just Work."
On a side note, did you know that during Romania's communist regime the president of the country played tapes of the US soap drama "Dallas" in a bid to get his people to realize how broken families can become in a corrupt capitalist system? The attempt backfired as the impoverished Romanians were entranced by the lavish lifestyles, big houses and cars and gadgets that were on display on the show. It hastened his regime's downfall. The reason was the show Dallas provided a stark contrast between their lives and that of Americans. Well Africa has had TV for some time now. They know how a computer is supposed to look like, what its supposed to be capable of and how easy its supposed to be to use. I don't think any of them are looking forward to a Linux/Unix command line prompt.
Do you really think that the point behind getting a laptop in every child's hands is to get them to start programming source code? I personally don't think it is. Its to just get them a computer in the first place. Computers existed in the United States before Windows you know but their usage didn't explode until Microsoft created an operating system that was easy enough to use for just about anyone to pick up. The bulk of the population of the United States didn't become programmers. Not even half became programmers. Nor a quarter or a 20th. I predict the very same course of events for India. The OLPC is just something to USE not program on. Thus it being open source or not is irrelevant.
By the way, hasn't the Slashdot population learned yet that the overwhelming majority of humans in any nation are never ever ever going to be programmers?
On the whole you are correct but there are exceptions. For instance, the sentiments of a geek regarding the "security" of his own computer systems pales in comparison to society's interests in solving crimes. You won't die and the government isn't going to put the contents of your boring hard drive on the 11 o'clock news so in cases like this your complaints will fall on many many deaf ears (and I'm not just counting the ears that are totally computer illiterate and thus won't care because they don't understand whats going on in the first place either).
There's this thing called a "court order" you see. Sometimes its referred to as a "search warrant." Its scope can also apply to people's computers. So no, despite all your righteous indignation, your computer CAN be altered without your permission and even without your knowledge at the time it is altered.
The people who talk the most get the most attention. Ever known RMS to be a quiet person?