I'm not talking "legal system" (maybe I did?) I'm talking laws
and there's nothing inherently wrong with religion screwing with the state, so long as everybody gets to vote for whom they want.
Well, what happens when you can't play cards because your governer is baptist or you can't visit the psych-doctors because your mayor is a Scientologists.
We must maintain a system that doesn't let a group of believers control and/or destroy the un-believers.
That my friend is wrong... not believing could simply be your religion. (so could GPL software, kiddie pr0n etc..)
"Don't you ever feel lucky and thankful that you have rights that you might not have somewhere else? Do you feel lucky to have been born here instead of some place where you're trapped in poverty, squalor and filth? America might not be the best country on Earth, but there are a plenty of places that are a helluva lot worse."
Do I feel thankful? No. It's somewhat selfish to I think, so I don't. I'd rather worry about the people that don't have.
But how do you know I'm not trapped in poverty, squalor and filth? My cities streets are filled with garbage and we don't get the treatment from the city that other parts do.
Not every part of America is the "Heartland". I haven't worked in two (+) years. And I've heard your responses a million times - I'm not lazy, no you lie you wouldn't take any job, etc...
I've seen people get beat up for protesting police actions. I've seen citizens of voting age locked out of council meetings for being verbal. I've lived in areas where food can't be stored (by law,commercially) and I've seen cops spit (literally) on people.
Our society isn't the best place on Earth, but many times I wished I was elsewhere. The problem is we've gone and fucked up a lot of places on our own.
More and more I'm reminded of Ancient (and not so Ancient) Rome.
Sorry my 2 liberal cents... fucking let the flames rip.
While the Civil War was about the preservation of the Union, which is the United States of America - the secession of states and later the Confederacy wasn't about Despotism it was about slavery pure and simple.
The southern states wanted to dodge proposed federal laws which would make the act of slavery illegal.
(actually to a lesser extent the idea was kind of about federal tariffs, but the other states left because of slavery)
"Compassionate Conservatism" is a joke, can I say that? It's not even directed at you. It's just that in the real world Conservative means you only care about yourself and liberal means you only care about everyone else.
I take Bible wisdom on a case by case basis, and with a grain of salt, but I think you missed my point entirely.
Huh? It's just a story (if you want to look at it that way). The point of the story was that if you don't take care of your neighbors then you will alone forever. We need to realize that "our" best interests are usually "theirs" also.
New Yorkers, for example, joke about taxi drivers, being mugged, that "smell," but when John Rocker does it, he's reguarded as a jackass (and rightfully so). Likewise Americans make fun of and criticize Bush (not enough actually), but when Europeans do it they're (verbally) attacking America.
When New Yorkers make fun of taxi drivers it's racism, when Rocker does it's also racism. When we criticize Bush (you are right, he's turning into a dictator) we are trying to bring about change. When anyone in other nations do it they are usually right, usually have a right to say those things but they aren't attacking the U.S.A. They are allowed to bitch and moan and try to get their country to back out of relations with us. If their Premier/Prime Minister/Presidente etc does it then it's kinda wrong but if we can't respect their right to say what they like we are hypocrits.
My comment about the "far, far right" should have pointed out the depth to the "horizontal line". Our two party system has either evolved us into, or evolved from the polarity of issues. While both "sides" are very deep and add that 3D effect you must side with one to get people on your side.
My point over the Marines isn't a threat, just a simple political statement. (Hope "carnivore isn't watching") I wan't thinking about the people in Cuba, but speaking of the importance of treaties.
It seems that Bush hasn't stood up to one treaty to date. We do have those people in Cuba who were completely legal combatants. We are having this "war" on terror. The "war" went to Afghanistan and we toppled their government. If they were with the Taliban they are an army - so what they can't afford to put patches on their arms. Hell, we even defined them as the majority gov't in Afghanistan (read the export laws and the oil pipe plans pre-Sept 11th).
About the nukes... You don't take a gun fight to the Smith -)
My point is that we hold the world to a higher standard than what we ourselves.
You want a random group of men captured by their enemies?
No. I also don't want us to go around destroying the world for a few bucks. Let's not fool ourselves we don't bother going into action until our dollar weight is affected.
Now this urge to claim the solar system for the USA may threaten humanity. What a cruel joke it would be if the Klan or some other group moved to that 51st state in the sky and just nuked the mother planet. (Joke's on them of course if you know anything about genetic drift...)
The reason I typed what I did was to get people to wake up. It's easy to say something threatens your soverignty when you want to something inhumane.
We speak of life and liberty but we don't fucking care one bit about anyone. Liberty is liberty. If we are only talking liberty for us then we've missed the point.
George Lucas has been the one in the past to push people into accepting new technologies. It's not that he has a vested interest (maybe he does). It's because his movies, no matter if they are Star Wars or not, have been just "cooler" technology-wise.
The reason that THX, Dolby Digital and the rest exploded is because they are cool.
Now if they can only make the sound in the theater sound good and surrounding and not just LOUD
No doubt the prices could come down as more items are sold. I remember seeing DVD ads for over a grand but you can pick one up for less than $50 at CompUSA (even plays MP3's too).
All your cries about "soverignty" fall on deaf ears.
U.S.A. has been giving marching orders for years. We are no longer that backwards nation that needed to fight for it's own rights.
Wake up to the fact that you have no problem walking on the rest of the world. Are you your brother's keeper? Yes, that was the moral of that story... remember what happened to Cain?
On Lindh: "but he should feel lucky that he has the right to a trial"
Why? Because he committed a crime under U.S. law? You go in circles. Remarks like these (always from the far, far right which you seem not be from) are always odd to me because he is considered to be a citizen so they can try him - of course he gets his 5th Amendment rights.
Why bother with international treaties at all? I hope some Afghan warlords start taking hostages of U.S. Marines.
It's simple, the U.S. can't always have it her way. The Earth isn't Burger King. Other nations will get fed up and just destroy us if we don't implode first.
As far as the ABM... no one is going to nuke us. Face it, you don't have a gun fight at the Smith & Wesson factory. The only ones who would are the ones we need treaties with in the first place.
But since we can't and won't be subjected to fairness and these goobly-gook of living together nicely then we... well... fuck it.
So they signed the treaty to raid the coffers of NASA and put that money to an Eartly use.
Now that we have signed it we have given up our "birthright"? Are we talking Manifest Destiny here?
Who said the USA has a right to be the sole colonizers the moon? I take comfort in the fact that we can't and other nations can't either.
While this long standing treaty may throw a wrench in the works of China's plans it will still keep the moon open to anyone who wants to visit, explore or settle. (that is if China wanted to Nationalize it's effort which isn't the case)
Space isn't for one group or another. Hell, I don't think the Earth is either but I'm usually alone in this thought.
What bothers me is below.
The Bush administration has shown that it is willing to reject politically correct international agreements which harm America's interests -- such as the recently repudiated agreement creating an International Criminal Court, and the ABM treaty. Given the Bush administration's commendable interest in favoring American interests over the opinions of the post-national bureaucrats and chattering classes, the Bush administration should revisit Article 2 of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967.
Commendable? What about everyone's interests? Now this is an issue of right vs. left. Many think the ABM treaty is a Good Thing, and I personally think the International Criminal Court is something that scares U.S. politicians because they create more international crime more than anyone else. The ABM treaty is more of, ICBM's vs. " The Shield".
So really this article is a front for reasons we should basically "take over" space? Not us as people but as a nation. Why is it a Good Thing to open the flood gates? You think wars are bad now, just wait.
I mean, many people think this planet is just becoming insane (like this post) but if you can't escape it then sheesh, why bother exploring space.
In Article 16, the Treaty specifically provides for states to withdraw from the treaty, by providing one-year advance notice. At the same time, the United States could announce that it would continue to adhere to the provisions of the treaty that still make sense, such as Article 4's prohibition of nuclear weapons in space.
Once again... we can just take from it what we want? Sounds like a treaty we signed with Native Americans to me.
It is time for President Bush to ensure that humanity's new frontier will enjoy constitutional freedom rather than U.N. despotism.
Oh, and it's on the table for everyone to see. The author of this article assumes that you want that "Constitutional Freedom". What if you don't? Let's look at John Walker Lindh. A boy who appeared to have his mind set on leaving the USA and going after the fundamentalist life he wanted. But even though he went half way around the world he was still trapped under U.S. law.
What do you have to do? Walter Williams wrote that every law on the books is a attack on our freedoms. In his last article it ends; "Governments are not only the enemy of personal libery but of economic prosperity as well". How true.
Maybe they just want to insure you can't defect to Mars and not pay that precious tax. What if I want to smoke pot on Mars? The list can go on for years...
I believe the point of the story is Amazon was somewhat a facade. It was trying to compete with the "big boys" of book sales and actually screwed over some customers along the way.
In situations where customer service is counted in seconds and not quality you have zero chance of improving that problem at hand.
I worked for a Gannett newspaper a while back. While I wasn't in the CS department, I heard many complaints. The problem was the CS calls were short and no one ever bothered to fix the problem... it was just reassure the person and send them on their way.
Now I understand if you have a million (plus now) customers you can't give them the "mom-and-pop" treatment but you can turn people away pretty quick. Now that information can spread like wildfire one bad experience with a company can make that company loose thousands of sales.
Good thing you haven't had a problem yet with amazon (or like store). You will find it hard to get things resolved. [Of course I'm speaking in theory only, amazon may now have great customer services. After knowing they contract their CS to India I'm not so sure I want to buy anything from there to find out. I put my morals over prices.]
If the U.S. can use it's purchasing power to promote innovation then it's a good thing.
More competition will create better competition and more innovation (it is the reason we have a capitalist system; right? It is the reason that we have anti-trust laws; true?).
It isn't too far fetched that we ask for some changes in the way our government works. I mean, why vote/write congress-people/have Fr1st Amendment?
This is a task that we can undertake. Using software which doesn't cause us to spend more tax money is a Good Thing. We could start by not using Microsoft's Office software because it's viral and it becomes a situation where everyone has to have it. An open, standards based document sharing format, even on those costly Windows machines would be a start. [Use a WYSIWYG HTML editor, RTF, OpenOffice,...]
I really hope your comment was a pure joke. Of course marijuana could be legal...
At least someone is trying to do something instead of just crying about what won't happen.
Verisign, a company which sells secure communications methods is now in the business of wiretapping?
A quick look at their product page shows that they are pretty vested in their SSL, PKI (public key infrastructure) and other privacy products.
Why then would you announce you are working with the Federal(?) government to tap communications. Sure to the stockholders it sounds great, but what about those customers.
Now they are just another notch up on the scale of slimey companies who will do anything for a buck.
Slashdot Mirror
Latency yes, but all of my cable stations (and all of my neighbors' cable stations) come over satellite.
Satellite mixed with a few good lines would work nicely.
It's true... if my girl friend didn't pay the Cable modem bill I think I would leave
You are right,... I've only been to the theaters in my city (well, one in Myrtle Beach but that wasn't bad).
Every single one (many owned by a national chain) suck...
300+ when I went.. very good I would say.
Good idea giving your ipaq the stress test this way. Very, very cool hack.
In other news the CEO of DaimlerChrysler found dead today shot behind the ear with a .22 bullet.
Police say it's a mystery as to who would have motive to commit such a horrible crime. Back to you John....
I'm not talking "legal system" (maybe I did?) I'm talking laws
and there's nothing inherently wrong with religion screwing with the state, so long as everybody gets to vote for whom they want.
Well, what happens when you can't play cards because your governer is baptist or you can't visit the psych-doctors because your mayor is a Scientologists.
We must maintain a system that doesn't let a group of believers control and/or destroy the un-believers.
That my friend is wrong... not believing could simply be your religion. (so could GPL software, kiddie pr0n etc..)
Very stick issue wouldn't you say?
This whole subject is (Score:5 Crazy)
That is funny, the pope claims he and the church single handedly took the whole thing down.
Seems everyone takes all the credit. Bush Sr., Reagan, the Pope...
hrm.. unholly trinity?
"Don't you ever feel lucky and thankful that you have rights that you might not have somewhere else? Do you feel lucky to have been born here instead of some place where you're trapped in poverty, squalor and filth? America might not be the best country on Earth, but there are a plenty of places that are a helluva lot worse."
Do I feel thankful? No. It's somewhat selfish to I think, so I don't. I'd rather worry about the people that don't have.
But how do you know I'm not trapped in poverty, squalor and filth? My cities streets are filled with garbage and we don't get the treatment from the city that other parts do.
Not every part of America is the "Heartland". I haven't worked in two (+) years. And I've heard your responses a million times - I'm not lazy, no you lie you wouldn't take any job, etc...
I've seen people get beat up for protesting police actions. I've seen citizens of voting age locked out of council meetings for being verbal. I've lived in areas where food can't be stored (by law,commercially) and I've seen cops spit (literally) on people.
Our society isn't the best place on Earth, but many times I wished I was elsewhere. The problem is we've gone and fucked up a lot of places on our own.
More and more I'm reminded of Ancient (and not so Ancient) Rome.
Sorry my 2 liberal cents... fucking let the flames rip.
Ok, ok. No.
While the Civil War was about the preservation of the Union, which is the United States of America - the secession of states and later the Confederacy wasn't about Despotism it was about slavery pure and simple.
The southern states wanted to dodge proposed federal laws which would make the act of slavery illegal.
(actually to a lesser extent the idea was kind of about federal tariffs, but the other states left because of slavery)
States rights == slavery
I would claim that, practically, church and state are more closely tied in America than in the UK
So you know what is going on in the U.S.A. huh? Serious - Church and State are the same here. Everything about every law is based on Christian ideas.
"Compassionate Conservatism" is a joke, can I say that? It's not even directed at you. It's just that in the real world Conservative means you only care about yourself and liberal means you only care about everyone else.
I take Bible wisdom on a case by case basis, and with a grain of salt, but I think you missed my point entirely.
Huh? It's just a story (if you want to look at it that way). The point of the story was that if you don't take care of your neighbors then you will alone forever. We need to realize that "our" best interests are usually "theirs" also.
New Yorkers, for example, joke about taxi drivers, being mugged, that "smell," but when John Rocker does it, he's reguarded as a jackass (and rightfully so). Likewise Americans make fun of and criticize Bush (not enough actually), but when Europeans do it they're (verbally) attacking America.
When New Yorkers make fun of taxi drivers it's racism, when Rocker does it's also racism. When we criticize Bush (you are right, he's turning into a dictator) we are trying to bring about change. When anyone in other nations do it they are usually right, usually have a right to say those things but they aren't attacking the U.S.A. They are allowed to bitch and moan and try to get their country to back out of relations with us. If their Premier/Prime Minister/Presidente etc does it then it's kinda wrong but if we can't respect their right to say what they like we are hypocrits.
My comment about the "far, far right" should have pointed out the depth to the "horizontal line". Our two party system has either evolved us into, or evolved from the polarity of issues. While both "sides" are very deep and add that 3D effect you must side with one to get people on your side.
My point over the Marines isn't a threat, just a simple political statement. (Hope "carnivore isn't watching") I wan't thinking about the people in Cuba, but speaking of the importance of treaties.
It seems that Bush hasn't stood up to one treaty to date. We do have those people in Cuba who were completely legal combatants. We are having this "war" on terror. The "war" went to Afghanistan and we toppled their government. If they were with the Taliban they are an army - so what they can't afford to put patches on their arms. Hell, we even defined them as the majority gov't in Afghanistan (read the export laws and the oil pipe plans pre-Sept 11th).
About the nukes... You don't take a gun fight to the Smith -)
My point is that we hold the world to a higher standard than what we ourselves.
You want a random group of men captured by their enemies?
No. I also don't want us to go around destroying the world for a few bucks. Let's not fool ourselves we don't bother going into action until our dollar weight is affected.
Now this urge to claim the solar system for the USA may threaten humanity. What a cruel joke it would be if the Klan or some other group moved to that 51st state in the sky and just nuked the mother planet. (Joke's on them of course if you know anything about genetic drift...)
The reason I typed what I did was to get people to wake up. It's easy to say something threatens your soverignty when you want to something inhumane.
We speak of life and liberty but we don't fucking care one bit about anyone. Liberty is liberty. If we are only talking liberty for us then we've missed the point.
They were two points, not one.
Now that we have signed it we have given up our "birthright"?
Are we talking Manifest Destiny here?
Is that better?
You had a very good point bringing up AOTC.
George Lucas has been the one in the past to push people into accepting new technologies. It's not that he has a vested interest (maybe he does). It's because his movies, no matter if they are Star Wars or not, have been just "cooler" technology-wise.
The reason that THX, Dolby Digital and the rest exploded is because they are cool.
Now if they can only make the sound in the theater sound good and surrounding and not just LOUD
No doubt the prices could come down as more items are sold. I remember seeing DVD ads for over a grand but you can pick one up for less than $50 at CompUSA (even plays MP3's too).
Why not use the PowerGlove?
I've got a book somewhere that talks about using it in your programs, although I can't find it to give you the title.
All your cries about "soverignty" fall on deaf ears.
U.S.A. has been giving marching orders for years. We are no longer that backwards nation that needed to fight for it's own rights.
Wake up to the fact that you have no problem walking on the rest of the world. Are you your brother's keeper? Yes, that was the moral of that story... remember what happened to Cain?
On Lindh: "but he should feel lucky that he has the right to a trial"
Why? Because he committed a crime under U.S. law? You go in circles. Remarks like these (always from the far, far right which you seem not be from) are always odd to me because he is considered to be a citizen so they can try him - of course he gets his 5th Amendment rights.
Why bother with international treaties at all? I hope some Afghan warlords start taking hostages of U.S. Marines.
It's simple, the U.S. can't always have it her way. The Earth isn't Burger King. Other nations will get fed up and just destroy us if we don't implode first.
As far as the ABM... no one is going to nuke us. Face it, you don't have a gun fight at the Smith & Wesson factory. The only ones who would are the ones we need treaties with in the first place.
But since we can't and won't be subjected to fairness and these goobly-gook of living together nicely then we... well... fuck it.
I have no hope for this world.
Well the funny thing is that I disagree with many laws on the books.
The legal protection you speak of seems to work in their benefit as well...
While you are rated as a Troll (conservatives moderating today?) I agree.
While the UN has a bad record maybe something more along the lines of the Jedi Council.
I mean, if the founding fathers could come up with a system that worked why can't anyone today?
Give Mars the Constitution and that is it. Bill of Rights included but skip the prohibition and anti-prohibition amendments.
So they signed the treaty to raid the coffers of NASA and put that money to an Eartly use.
Now that we have signed it we have given up our "birthright"? Are we talking Manifest Destiny here?
Who said the USA has a right to be the sole colonizers the moon? I take comfort in the fact that we can't and other nations can't either.
While this long standing treaty may throw a wrench in the works of China's plans it will still keep the moon open to anyone who wants to visit, explore or settle. (that is if China wanted to Nationalize it's effort which isn't the case)
Space isn't for one group or another. Hell, I don't think the Earth is either but I'm usually alone in this thought.
What bothers me is below.
The Bush administration has shown that it is willing to reject politically correct international agreements which harm America's interests -- such as the recently repudiated agreement creating an International Criminal Court, and the ABM treaty. Given the Bush administration's commendable interest in favoring American interests over the opinions of the post-national bureaucrats and chattering classes, the Bush administration should revisit Article 2 of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967.
Commendable? What about everyone's interests? Now this is an issue of right vs. left. Many think the ABM treaty is a Good Thing, and I personally think the International Criminal Court is something that scares U.S. politicians because they create more international crime more than anyone else. The ABM treaty is more of, ICBM's vs. " The Shield".
So really this article is a front for reasons we should basically "take over" space? Not us as people but as a nation. Why is it a Good Thing to open the flood gates? You think wars are bad now, just wait.
I mean, many people think this planet is just becoming insane (like this post) but if you can't escape it then sheesh, why bother exploring space.
In Article 16, the Treaty specifically provides for states to withdraw from the treaty, by providing one-year advance notice. At the same time, the United States could announce that it would continue to adhere to the provisions of the treaty that still make sense, such as Article 4's prohibition of nuclear weapons in space.
Once again... we can just take from it what we want? Sounds like a treaty we signed with Native Americans to me.
It is time for President Bush to ensure that humanity's new frontier will enjoy constitutional freedom rather than U.N. despotism.
Oh, and it's on the table for everyone to see. The author of this article assumes that you want that "Constitutional Freedom". What if you don't? Let's look at John Walker Lindh. A boy who appeared to have his mind set on leaving the USA and going after the fundamentalist life he wanted. But even though he went half way around the world he was still trapped under U.S. law.
What do you have to do? Walter Williams wrote that every law on the books is a attack on our freedoms. In his last article it ends; "Governments are not only the enemy of personal libery but of economic prosperity as well". How true.
Maybe they just want to insure you can't defect to Mars and not pay that precious tax. What if I want to smoke pot on Mars? The list can go on for years...
Pax Americanus I say...
I believe the point of the story is Amazon was somewhat a facade. It was trying to compete with the "big boys" of book sales and actually screwed over some customers along the way.
In situations where customer service is counted in seconds and not quality you have zero chance of improving that problem at hand.
I worked for a Gannett newspaper a while back. While I wasn't in the CS department, I heard many complaints. The problem was the CS calls were short and no one ever bothered to fix the problem... it was just reassure the person and send them on their way.
Now I understand if you have a million (plus now) customers you can't give them the "mom-and-pop" treatment but you can turn people away pretty quick. Now that information can spread like wildfire one bad experience with a company can make that company loose thousands of sales.
Good thing you haven't had a problem yet with amazon (or like store). You will find it hard to get things resolved. [Of course I'm speaking in theory only, amazon may now have great customer services. After knowing they contract their CS to India I'm not so sure I want to buy anything from there to find out. I put my morals over prices.]
Why is this request so "Delusional".
...]
If the U.S. can use it's purchasing power to promote innovation then it's a good thing.
More competition will create better competition and more innovation (it is the reason we have a capitalist system; right? It is the reason that we have anti-trust laws; true?).
It isn't too far fetched that we ask for some changes in the way our government works. I mean, why vote/write congress-people/have Fr1st Amendment?
This is a task that we can undertake. Using software which doesn't cause us to spend more tax money is a Good Thing. We could start by not using Microsoft's Office software because it's viral and it becomes a situation where everyone has to have it. An open, standards based document sharing format, even on those costly Windows machines would be a start. [Use a WYSIWYG HTML editor, RTF, OpenOffice,
I really hope your comment was a pure joke. Of course marijuana could be legal...
At least someone is trying to do something instead of just crying about what won't happen.
Slashdot editors/authors don't have time for that what with keeping so busy being liberal reactionaries. Right, right....
The agreement only covers the service and IP rights of TiVo.
This covers a modified box, which they (ReplayTV) will damage it if found modified.
Tivo just doesn't want you to expose IP rights and/or steal service. ReplayTV doens't want you to modify the hardware in anyway.
The problem is you don't know the story (as expected). ReplayTV is using their service as a backdoor method into checking your box for 'hacks'.
If you open your VCR it's legal, if you smash your TV with a hammer it's legal.
They could say "no mo' service fo' you" but instead they are DISABLING IT!
So many jokes to make and I can't seem to think of a great one.
So make your own...
UnitedLinux ______divided_______________!
Your response is 100% in line with the situation.
Verisign, a company which sells secure communications methods is now in the business of wiretapping?
A quick look at their product page shows that they are pretty vested in their SSL, PKI (public key infrastructure) and other privacy products.
Why then would you announce you are working with the Federal(?) government to tap communications. Sure to the stockholders it sounds great, but what about those customers.
Now they are just another notch up on the scale of slimey companies who will do anything for a buck.