step out of the litter box for a moment and start using your noggin.
you truly think that the only option other than mindless jobs is corporate slaveboy? you don't think most of those are mindless also?
i think the whole idea is a vision of a future, better society where instead of having the lifeincentive be to accumulate wealth and material items, it is to better yourself and mandkind.
that doesnt mean everyone will be a rocket scientist or concert pianist, but they could do what they love. some people love cooking. some people love making clothes.
and mabe some people love flipping burgers, but id bet most of them hate it and are only doing it to pay the rent or feed their family or maybe even buy those chrome rims.
There you go again arguing your retort with some fantastical, irrelevant scenario.
You invented some fantasy penalty for forgery, and then tried to argue that my point was invalid because of your fantasy statement. If you're going to argue my point, at least start with truths.
If someone made $1million forging checks, then they should have to pay $1million or more in penalties. BUT, I think it is ridiculous that they would face 400 years in jail for ANY amount of forging checks or emails.
That is exactly what I'm talking about. If, in the caucus of legislators that think about the bill and the people who watch the process unfold before them, people think about what punishments would fit the crime in 1 and any amount, then it would prevent the abuse of the law by overzealous and undereducated officials, and would help to relinquish the growing mistrust of the people, by installing consistency that truly makes justice blind.
You make it sound as if the only option available in writing a law is to determine a singular sentence for 1 infraction. Did it ever occur to you that they could account for multiple instances in the law itself? 0->x emails, 0->x targets, 0->x frequency...
My argument is that they should think about these scenarios and build it into the law DURING THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS, rather than relying on varying individuals to use their discretion.
No one's arguing that the law should stand on its own. But it shouldn't leave gaping holes for random interpretation based on whatever social or religious or political views the prosecutor or judge has. That is not their role. Their role is to defend the laws, including the constitution.
Social change comes from the people infuencing and voting for the lawmakers and law enforcers; if it is also in the judicial process, then our system of checks and balances is a fallacy.
it is exactly that kind of thinking that leads to subjective sentencing and state extortion. If you've been following Ashcroft, you know that they're trying to force the courts to follow the law when sentencing and mandating minimum sentences.
If it is ridiculous to be sentenced to 471 years in jail for whatever number of disgruntled emails sent, then it should NOT BE IN THE LAW. It is the same with contracts and leases, etc, when there are wholly one-sided clauses that are just their for one party's 'protection', 'the lawyers make us put that there' -- It is the people's fault for not complaining when things get added or signed into law in the first place.
The point is, for a system of law to be effective and respected, it has to be consistent and fair. If the sentencing is the judge's discretion, then you deal with issues of race and sexuality & politics, etc. But if they are included into the law in the first place, and everyone agrees, then everyone can agree later to accept the punishments or work to change them again. If you want room for extenuating circumstances, think of what they could be, and add them into the law. It may make for a wordy penal code, but the clarity will help prevent discrimination and promote a sense of equality in the people.
It is ridiculously simple to influence the politicians, as you saw with the Do-not-call registry. All you have to do is contact them. They even make it easy for you, they give you their phone number, address, and email address. If a large enough amount of people want something, they do it, because above-all, they don't want to lose their seat.
when i find a particularly twisted problem, i'll think about it, then do something else or nothing at all for a day or two.. get some sleep... then when it comes to me, or time is running out, i sit down and write it out, talking outloud, sometimes explaining it to people who may or may not understand, and then i write it.
I don't know if all of that could be condensed into just talking/writing it out in the first place and doing it, though i often convince myself i need the "back burner" thinking time.
as for the environment, when im just starting, i need absolute silence, not a lot of people moving around, and i need to be at a desk or similar setup.
but once I start going, it doesn't really matter.. the biggest part is getting the 'mindshare', and then you can just live in your own little world and pump it out.
In school, as in life, when other people get you down, just sing a little song, and you'll feel much better.
.. "Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me. Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me. Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me."..
But if you would like another free lesson, it is this:
Life is about figuring everything out, forgetting/dismissing it, then figuring it all out again.
Of course, people take different paths each time, but they usually come to similar conclusions in the end... I've come to think that only the process is fulfilling; there really are no fulfilling goals. There's always something else just beyond your reach that you aspire for.
THEREFORE, as long as you're challenged and you enjoy what you're doing/think you're working towards some newly shaped goal, then go for it.
If you're not, then stop what you're doing and do something else. Whether that something else is switching majors, going on a trip, picking up a new hobby/reading new books, playing a game, or just staying up for a while, or sleeping for a while, it doesn't matter.. the point is to just find a new perspective and check out the view from there [ if the bills are piling up, getting a silly job could be just as effective - the more things you know you dont want to do, the easier it is to decide what you want to do ].
But i will take the time to emphasize this: do this before you continue doing what you don't like, whether it be school or work. Don't commit yourself to 4 or 2 more years of school just because you don't know what you want to do. You still won't know what you want to do when you get out, you'll just have less time to figure it out.
Go to school because you found something you want to do, and you need time/resources to study it.
Work because you know how to do the thing you want to do, and you found a way to implement/commercialize it.
If that doesn't make cents, then read one of the 83823974982189321 other posts. something is sure to "inspire" you.
I think a lot of you are missing one of the main points:
"The file names on your hard drive are your personal property and should not be monitored by anyone without your permission. The Aimster Pig Encoder makes it more difficult for anyone to monitor the file names on your computer. "
The idea is that the filenames are a copyright of the user & thus attempts to decrypt the filename fall under that clause. There is no mention of the actual content of the file, nor is there any attempt to modify it.
Slashdot Mirror
oh shut the fuck up.
step out of the litter box for a moment and start using your noggin.
you truly think that the only option other than mindless jobs is corporate slaveboy? you don't think most of those are mindless also?
i think the whole idea is a vision of a future, better society where instead of having the lifeincentive be to accumulate wealth and material items, it is to better yourself and mandkind.
that doesnt mean everyone will be a rocket scientist or concert pianist, but they could do what they love. some people love cooking. some people love making clothes.
and mabe some people love flipping burgers, but id bet most of them hate it and are only doing it to pay the rent or feed their family or maybe even buy those chrome rims.
There you go again arguing your retort with some fantastical, irrelevant scenario.
You invented some fantasy penalty for forgery, and then tried to argue that my point was invalid because of your fantasy statement. If you're going to argue my point, at least start with truths.
If someone made $1million forging checks, then they should have to pay $1million or more in penalties. BUT, I think it is ridiculous that they would face 400 years in jail for ANY amount of forging checks or emails.
That is exactly what I'm talking about. If, in the caucus of legislators that think about the bill and the people who watch the process unfold before them, people think about what punishments would fit the crime in 1 and any amount, then it would prevent the abuse of the law by overzealous and undereducated officials, and would help to relinquish the growing mistrust of the people, by installing consistency that truly makes justice blind.
You make it sound as if the only option available in writing a law is to determine a singular sentence for 1 infraction. Did it ever occur to you that they could account for multiple instances in the law itself? 0->x emails, 0->x targets, 0->x frequency ...
My argument is that they should think about these scenarios and build it into the law DURING THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS, rather than relying on varying individuals to use their discretion.
No one's arguing that the law should stand on its own. But it shouldn't leave gaping holes for random interpretation based on whatever social or religious or political views the prosecutor or judge has. That is not their role. Their role is to defend the laws, including the constitution.
Social change comes from the people infuencing and voting for the lawmakers and law enforcers; if it is also in the judicial process, then our system of checks and balances is a fallacy.
it is exactly that kind of thinking that leads to subjective sentencing and state extortion. If you've been following Ashcroft, you know that they're trying to force the courts to follow the law when sentencing and mandating minimum sentences.
If it is ridiculous to be sentenced to 471 years in jail for whatever number of disgruntled emails sent, then it should NOT BE IN THE LAW. It is the same with contracts and leases, etc, when there are wholly one-sided clauses that are just their for one party's 'protection', 'the lawyers make us put that there' -- It is the people's fault for not complaining when things get added or signed into law in the first place.
The point is, for a system of law to be effective and respected, it has to be consistent and fair. If the sentencing is the judge's discretion, then you deal with issues of race and sexuality & politics, etc. But if they are included into the law in the first place, and everyone agrees, then everyone can agree later to accept the punishments or work to change them again. If you want room for extenuating circumstances, think of what they could be, and add them into the law. It may make for a wordy penal code, but the clarity will help prevent discrimination and promote a sense of equality in the people.
It is ridiculously simple to influence the politicians, as you saw with the Do-not-call registry. All you have to do is contact them. They even make it easy for you, they give you their phone number, address, and email address. If a large enough amount of people want something, they do it, because above-all, they don't want to lose their seat.
im still undecided about this.
.. get some sleep ... then when it comes to me, or time is running out, i sit down and write it out, talking outloud, sometimes explaining it to people who may or may not understand, and then i write it.
.. the biggest part is getting the 'mindshare', and then you can just live in your own little world and pump it out.
my current method is:
when i find a particularly twisted problem, i'll think about it, then do something else or nothing at all for a day or two
I don't know if all of that could be condensed into just talking/writing it out in the first place and doing it, though i often convince myself i need the "back burner" thinking time.
as for the environment, when im just starting, i need absolute silence, not a lot of people moving around, and i need to be at a desk or similar setup.
but once I start going, it doesn't really matter
In school, as in life, when other people get you down, just sing a little song, and you'll feel much better.
.. "Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me. Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me. Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me." ..
.. I've come to think that only the process is fulfilling; there really are no fulfilling goals. There's always something else just beyond your reach that you aspire for.
.. the point is to just find a new perspective and check out the view from there [ if the bills are piling up, getting a silly job could be just as effective - the more things you know you dont want to do, the easier it is to decide what you want to do ].
But if you would like another free lesson, it is this:
Life is about figuring everything out, forgetting/dismissing it, then figuring it all out again.
Of course, people take different paths each time, but they usually come to similar conclusions in the end.
THEREFORE, as long as you're challenged and you enjoy what you're doing/think you're working towards some newly shaped goal, then go for it.
If you're not, then stop what you're doing and do something else. Whether that something else is switching majors, going on a trip, picking up a new hobby/reading new books, playing a game, or just staying up for a while, or sleeping for a while, it doesn't matter
But i will take the time to emphasize this: do this before you continue doing what you don't like, whether it be school or work. Don't commit yourself to 4 or 2 more years of school just because you don't know what you want to do. You still won't know what you want to do when you get out, you'll just have less time to figure it out.
Go to school because you found something you want to do, and you need time/resources to study it.
Work because you know how to do the thing you want to do, and you found a way to implement/commercialize it.
If that doesn't make cents, then read one of the 83823974982189321 other posts. something is sure to "inspire" you.
lol
I think a lot of you are missing one of the main points:
"The file names on your hard drive are your personal property and should not be monitored by anyone without your permission. The Aimster Pig Encoder makes it more difficult for anyone to monitor the file names on your computer. "
The idea is that the filenames are a copyright of the user & thus attempts to decrypt the filename fall under that clause. There is no mention of the actual content of the file, nor is there any attempt to modify it.