A number of slavic languages still have (or not so long ago had) similar forms, but in most cases these went out of use. Also, some other languages had specific form for triple and quadruple.
This isn't about Congress and it's not limited to the US.
This is about US Congress and govt, while it is not limited to US. It was US Cogress that applied wrong and evil modifications to copyright laws, which then US government pushes onto the other countries as condition of trade agreements. So, YOU Americans started this plague and YOU spread it all over the world.
Well, some time ago a second rate actor was elected... and it turns out he wasn't that bad, compared to career politicians. Far from ideal, but not bad at all.
Plastic is fine. Less expensive than copper, doesn't rust like steel, the downside is that it is rated for lower pressures so there's some limit. Due to excessive cost of copper I have plastic installations for heating, water and sewage. Works just fine and is expected to last at least 25 years.
...and shoots buckets of inkjet ink, reaching other shore of the ocean from that nice timeshare house... even while she works at home, earning $5000 for just one hour a day while wearing "original imitation" rolex on each hand.
Only downside being runny shits after trying 157 types of herbal v1agra pills.
Imagine a web site where you can see each artist's past works and new proposals, contribute money, and get recommendations from other fans.
That's definitely an interesting idea, I'll grant you that. I still think you'd have creating anything other than small films via this method, but I would be very interested to see someone try this concept.
I think "Wreck A Movie" people are trying something in this vein. These are the same people who made "Star Wreck" series and now will be releasing "Iron Sky", their first "big" budget production.
I don't know how popular this law is in France, but it seems to me that if it's unpopular by the majority of people, it simply won't work. If the majority want it, they'll make it (for the most part) work.
That would be fine, anyone not wanting to see something should be free to not look at it. Or free to get some pussified internet feed instead of the real thing.
However, if I understand this correctly, the system will not work this way. No majority opinion, no vote - just some little bureaucrat reviewing anonymous(?) tips and putting whatever he feels nasty on the black list. I bet there will be a small group of self-righteous people with a mission to find, report and demand any site they find objectionable be blacklisted, closed or otherwise destroyed. Problably we'll find there "think of the children" crowd together with "destroy non-PC views" hatemongers with some religious nuts sprinkled on top (lots of islamic fanatics immigrating).
education is often free to the individual (and you even get a small stipend by the government to go to school)
It's NOT FREE. I pay for that. And a lot of people pay even more, so that the goverment can waste half of it on idiocy and then give away the rest.
The much-touted "freedom" of America is more for large corporations and the few people that
And in Europe too, those free to do whatever they want are the rich and the corporations. Not much difference.
(Hint: you may soon have federal police knocking on your door for sharing the wrong file)
Let's see how long it will take EU to implement that? It will take a bit longer, due to the bureucracy, but they want to do the same - they're being bought by the same corporations. It takes a bit longer also because corporations first buy EU officials and then also local govts, so first we get a crap like EUCD and then we get worst possible local implementation.
With TLS (which at least some browsers (FF) support) you don't. It will send initial headers (including "Host:") in plain text and then switch on encryption. Or at least it should be able do that - I've never bothered to check which web servers can do it.
Do you realize, that "state funded" means "paid with remains of the money taken from the citizens (after most of it were wasted)"?
Back to the topic - it seems Sweden had a great luck and avoided the kind of scum most countries have in their governments. It's not only USA where people distrust their rulers, and most of the time rightly so.
You've been lucky, but can you be sure it will continue? I'm not American yet I share a belief that the governemt should not know too much about it's subjects. Too much knowledge causes abuse, both small by some official and big, by the state itself. Besides, most of these thing they do not need to know - your health is your business and it should be a secret between you and your doctor, not something any petty clerk could look up when he's bored - like it happened not so long ago in Ireland.
They just need to print on the cover, in large type something like "THIS DISC WILL SELF-DESTRUCT IN 48 HOURS". All those Mission:Insensible fans will buy them by the crate;-)
In Europe when you want a new phone you have to shell out several hundred dollars, there are no free phones or discounts.
Bullshit.
I happen to accidentally know it's bullshit, because I live in Europe. Higher than basic contracts have subsidies on phones up to the point of practically free (in some places you cannot give a phone free becuse it would be... taxable profit (for the customer), so they "sell" it for one unit of local currency). Lowest contracts have subsidy on cheapest crappiest phones only, more expensive ones have better options.
Case in point, the phone I got last year was priced at 2700PLN but sold to me for 55PLN. Of course with mandatory 2-year contract and some nasty early termination fee. And of course SP-locked to the particular network.
That very much depends on what actually we want to punish or deter. Do we want to punish some people for having socially unacceptable sex drive (but being able to control themselves to the extent of not grabbing actual child) or do we reserve punishment to those who act on it, causing harm?
I can imagine that a really disturbing montage could be made without directly hurting some kid. I agree that such thing would be disgusting. However I stand by the rule I've proposed earlier. Abuse should lead to punishment, but just appearance of abuse should not cause punishment - or at least not the same level. Copypasting some kid onto orgy photo is not the same as actually dragging the brat to said orgy and letting some pervert have his way with him/her.
Of course if such movie were made it could cause other kinds of harm, like associating someone's face with such kind of pervert porn. This is not the same as sexual abuse but still wrong and open to possible punishment.
I think pretty much any use of real live children in such materials will cause harm, either direct (filmed real abuse) or indirect (innocent photos or movies edited to look not so innocent making victim recognizable as an apparent participant). However things are much different when it comes to the core of the law we discuss here - 100% CGI and drawings are not children and their use should not be treated the same way.
The other issue is that judging appearances leads to fuzzines which leads to people getting long prison terms and "sexual predator" tags on the unclear criteria. Given my not-so-great faith in humanity I can see it leading to someone getting 25 to life for drawing two stick figures having sex - because some judge decides that these may be underage stick figures. (If you think this is madness, please read about kids being detained by the police for drawing image of a gun. This did happen.)
There was recently a law passed in UK about "violent" porn, banning about half of BDSM. This new law is not a real surprise.
This seems to be a new attempt to legislate morality. It will certainly make some things disappear - from public view, as they will go underground, totally out of control. But what eyes do not see...
I can see a reasonable argument that their purpose is to create a feedback loop for someone who already has pleasurable thoughts about child sex abuse gaining additional pleasure from looking at them, which in turn feeds future pleasurable thoughts about child sex abuse. It is also not particularly hard to think that someone who obsesses about such things might be encouraged by that loop to make the jump into real life, for example when the computer generated images are no longer "extreme" enough.
This was predominant theory half century ago, which supported bans on pornography, censorship etc. Then some countries lifted the ban under the less supported theory, that such material provides surrogate fulfilment. Statistically they were correct as the number of sex-related crimes fell sharply. Surely some of the sickos will go into feedback loop, but most of them will happily "go manual" while drooling on the pages/screens.
But a society which champions freedom of expression/thought/speech/action must perhaps still draw some limits or find some coherent basis for existence, or else risk becoming utterly dysfunctional.
The most logical limit is very simple: Was any child actually abused to make that particular material? If yes, drag the producer to the jail, lock him up and throw away the key. Punish for real crime, not thoughtcrime.
Anyway, even for people that are not into this kind of "entertainment", it's quite important to defend freedom. If it's legal to publish sick offensive shit (with a limitation as above) it guarantees the right to publish anything less sick and less offensive, like the views of average people. Larry Flynt comes to mind...
And UK is "special" (like in "special olympics") when it comes to related issues. There's very few actual cases of this kind of abuse, but the local media paint a picture of a country with violent pedophile at every corner, in every bush and three of them in every dark alley. With this level of hysteria they may very well ban photos of children whatsoever or require permits and observation by govt inspector.
Which can only result in contempt for copyright laws.
You're suggesting there is any respect for them? I don't think there is any left today. While copyright was useful tool it is no longer so - and it's getting so obvious that even the "average people" are noticing.
Which is eaxctly the reason they will not be attacked openly. Aside from that, Google has agreements with large part of MAFIAA members and nicely and friendly removes content from Youtube or Google Video on any hint of possible theoretical infringement. Why make them into enemies and spoil such convenient arrangement?
OTOH we cannot underestimate stupidity of some lawyers...
Useless toy. You can put in search terms and receive up to 50 results, said results being almost completely though not absolutely unrelated to the keywords. Definitely a new meaning to "approximate".
Now why couldn't it be exact keyword search, something Azureus lacks? That would be useful, while their plugin is not - at least not to me.
I've seen a good number of cheap laptops sold with FreeDOS as the officially bundled OS. So even breaking MS hold on the manufacturers is not going to magically make them all bundle Linux - and even then, it still may be the distro you don't like.
Slashdot Mirror
A number of slavic languages still have (or not so long ago had) similar forms, but in most cases these went out of use.
Also, some other languages had specific form for triple and quadruple.
This is about US Congress and govt, while it is not limited to US.
It was US Cogress that applied wrong and evil modifications to copyright laws, which then US government pushes onto the other countries as condition of trade agreements. So, YOU Americans started this plague and YOU spread it all over the world.
Well, some time ago a second rate actor was elected... and it turns out he wasn't that bad, compared to career politicians. Far from ideal, but not bad at all.
But is it virtual 3D chatroom with virtual 3D avatars? Did I mention they all should be virtual and 3D?
They have declared carrot to be a fruit. We have been thus enlightened.
Plastic is fine. Less expensive than copper, doesn't rust like steel, the downside is that it is rated for lower pressures so there's some limit.
Due to excessive cost of copper I have plastic installations for heating, water and sewage. Works just fine and is expected to last at least 25 years.
...and shoots buckets of inkjet ink, reaching other shore of the ocean from that nice timeshare house... even while she works at home, earning $5000 for just one hour a day while wearing "original imitation" rolex on each hand.
Only downside being runny shits after trying 157 types of herbal v1agra pills.
I think "Wreck A Movie" people are trying something in this vein.
These are the same people who made "Star Wreck" series and now will be releasing "Iron Sky", their first "big" budget production.
That would be fine, anyone not wanting to see something should be free to not look at it. Or free to get some pussified internet feed instead of the real thing.
However, if I understand this correctly, the system will not work this way. No majority opinion, no vote - just some little bureaucrat reviewing anonymous(?) tips and putting whatever he feels nasty on the black list. I bet there will be a small group of self-righteous people with a mission to find, report and demand any site they find objectionable be blacklisted, closed or otherwise destroyed. Problably we'll find there "think of the children" crowd together with "destroy non-PC views" hatemongers with some religious nuts sprinkled on top (lots of islamic fanatics immigrating).
It's NOT FREE. I pay for that. And a lot of people pay even more, so that the goverment can waste half of it on idiocy and then give away the rest.
And in Europe too, those free to do whatever they want are the rich and the corporations. Not much difference.
Let's see how long it will take EU to implement that? It will take a bit longer, due to the bureucracy, but they want to do the same - they're being bought by the same corporations. It takes a bit longer also because corporations first buy EU officials and then also local govts, so first we get a crap like EUCD and then we get worst possible local implementation.
With TLS (which at least some browsers (FF) support) you don't. It will send initial headers (including "Host:") in plain text and then switch on encryption. Or at least it should be able do that - I've never bothered to check which web servers can do it.
Do you realize, that "state funded" means "paid with remains of the money taken from the citizens (after most of it were wasted)"?
Back to the topic - it seems Sweden had a great luck and avoided the kind of scum most countries have in their governments. It's not only USA where people distrust their rulers, and most of the time rightly so.
You've been lucky, but can you be sure it will continue? I'm not American yet I share a belief that the governemt should not know too much about it's subjects. Too much knowledge causes abuse, both small by some official and big, by the state itself. Besides, most of these thing they do not need to know - your health is your business and it should be a secret between you and your doctor, not something any petty clerk could look up when he's bored - like it happened not so long ago in Ireland.
They just need to print on the cover, in large type something like "THIS DISC WILL SELF-DESTRUCT IN 48 HOURS". All those Mission:Insensible fans will buy them by the crate ;-)
Bullshit.
I happen to accidentally know it's bullshit, because I live in Europe. Higher than basic contracts have subsidies on phones up to the point of practically free (in some places you cannot give a phone free becuse it would be... taxable profit (for the customer), so they "sell" it for one unit of local currency). Lowest contracts have subsidy on cheapest crappiest phones only, more expensive ones have better options.
Case in point, the phone I got last year was priced at 2700PLN but sold to me for 55PLN. Of course with mandatory 2-year contract and some nasty early termination fee. And of course SP-locked to the particular network.
That very much depends on what actually we want to punish or deter. Do we want to punish some people for having socially unacceptable sex drive (but being able to control themselves to the extent of not grabbing actual child) or do we reserve punishment to those who act on it, causing harm?
I can imagine that a really disturbing montage could be made without directly hurting some kid. I agree that such thing would be disgusting. However I stand by the rule I've proposed earlier. Abuse should lead to punishment, but just appearance of abuse should not cause punishment - or at least not the same level. Copypasting some kid onto orgy photo is not the same as actually dragging the brat to said orgy and letting some pervert have his way with him/her.
Of course if such movie were made it could cause other kinds of harm, like associating someone's face with such kind of pervert porn. This is not the same as sexual abuse but still wrong and open to possible punishment.
I think pretty much any use of real live children in such materials will cause harm, either direct (filmed real abuse) or indirect (innocent photos or movies edited to look not so innocent making victim recognizable as an apparent participant). However things are much different when it comes to the core of the law we discuss here - 100% CGI and drawings are not children and their use should not be treated the same way.
The other issue is that judging appearances leads to fuzzines which leads to people getting long prison terms and "sexual predator" tags on the unclear criteria. Given my not-so-great faith in humanity I can see it leading to someone getting 25 to life for drawing two stick figures having sex - because some judge decides that these may be underage stick figures. (If you think this is madness, please read about kids being detained by the police for drawing image of a gun. This did happen.)
You're asking for a miracle.
No, not really.
But don't let the fact stop you from supporting the worthy attempt at putting some sick people in jail. Think of the virtual children!
There was recently a law passed in UK about "violent" porn, banning about half of BDSM. This new law is not a real surprise.
This seems to be a new attempt to legislate morality. It will certainly make some things disappear - from public view, as they will go underground, totally out of control. But what eyes do not see...
This was predominant theory half century ago, which supported bans on pornography, censorship etc. Then some countries lifted the ban under the less supported theory, that such material provides surrogate fulfilment. Statistically they were correct as the number of sex-related crimes fell sharply. Surely some of the sickos will go into feedback loop, but most of them will happily "go manual" while drooling on the pages/screens.
The most logical limit is very simple: Was any child actually abused to make that particular material? If yes, drag the producer to the jail, lock him up and throw away the key. Punish for real crime, not thoughtcrime.
Anyway, even for people that are not into this kind of "entertainment", it's quite important to defend freedom. If it's legal to publish sick offensive shit (with a limitation as above) it guarantees the right to publish anything less sick and less offensive, like the views of average people. Larry Flynt comes to mind...
And UK is "special" (like in "special olympics") when it comes to related issues. There's very few actual cases of this kind of abuse, but the local media paint a picture of a country with violent pedophile at every corner, in every bush and three of them in every dark alley. With this level of hysteria they may very well ban photos of children whatsoever or require permits and observation by govt inspector.
You're suggesting there is any respect for them?
I don't think there is any left today. While copyright was useful tool it is no longer so - and it's getting so obvious that even the "average people" are noticing.
Which is eaxctly the reason they will not be attacked openly. Aside from that, Google has agreements with large part of MAFIAA members and nicely and friendly removes content from Youtube or Google Video on any hint of possible theoretical infringement. Why make them into enemies and spoil such convenient arrangement?
OTOH we cannot underestimate stupidity of some lawyers...
Useless toy. You can put in search terms and receive up to 50 results, said results being almost completely though not absolutely unrelated to the keywords. Definitely a new meaning to "approximate".
Now why couldn't it be exact keyword search, something Azureus lacks? That would be useful, while their plugin is not - at least not to me.
I've seen a good number of cheap laptops sold with FreeDOS as the officially bundled OS. So even breaking MS hold on the manufacturers is not going to magically make them all bundle Linux - and even then, it still may be the distro you don't like.
RHEL does support it, but only for advanced users that RTFM (hint: it's enabled by "reiserfs" option at install boot).
As many as there is. They are a gift from the God and don't you dare speak against. Filthy heretic!