Actually they would find tobacco in the stomach you total moron. Think through your plans to kill someone before you post them. A much better and less detectable way is to boil down 3-5 tins of dip (aka snuff), mix with some DMSO and add it into a pair of brand new dyed brown leather shoes. The slight discoloration would be chalked up to the shoes bleeding off the dye and the DMSO would cause the nicotine concentrate to be absorbed through the skin at an alarming rate.
Furthermore 10 cigarettes consumed through the mouth and absorbed through the stomach would make one sick, but very rarely kill them. They would have to have a pre-existing heart condition for that amount of nicotine to kill them. To top it all off they would throw up all the tobacco in their stomach long before theu absorbed enough to die. Yeah you learned something in jail, how to run your mouth and play big shot, good show!
Why must it be open source? That is logistically stupid. it would be best served with a completely closed solution, for any number of security reasons. The entire pro-open source argument for this is tainted with politics and total bullshit. A closed (more than likely non-ms) solution, devised by the government, and tested before being used would be the most secure solution.
Open source is only more secure because of the work put into it, not because of any inherent benefit of it being open. If you had a closed source system, that had been tested to the levels the current open solutions have been, it would be more secure by definintion and design. When it comes to voting, security is paramount and the whole clammoring for open source software in eveyr application make you look like an activist and nothing more. More people will discount any argument beyond that because simply put it taints your every thought and obviously so!
You were the one claiming civil disobedience by anonymously downloading off the p2p networks, not I. I never said it would work, only that it could. Your vain attempt to put words into my mouth means nothing. All that downloading off of hese networks shows is that you are too cheap to buy the album, it gives you no moral high ground whatsoever. You are not side stepping the law, you are breaking it.
There are solutions to shutting down distributed p2p, one is very simple. THe packets are indentifiable, all the feds have to do is require the backbone providers to drop those packets and you can no longer share the files. The FCC could easily regulate it. You will note I never said I agree with the laws, or didn't break them myself, the main difference is that I admit I am a cheap bastard and have no need to justify my actions to myself. There is no moral high ground for you in what you do. Admit you are a cheap bastard who doesn't want to rightfully pay for what they have and move on, most of the rest of us are willing to
Furthermore the majority of users of Kazaa and the like are not educated and most of them ae un-aware that what they are doing is not legal, they are not silently protesting. Your assertation that the stats prove you point is total bunk!
The law will remain on the books until openly challenged. The sodomy laws are being challenged becuase someone got caught, not because they were disobeyed. To change the law it is necessary to make your voice heard. You cannot do that an remain anonymous. If the only voice in the argument is the opposition, then they will win. You apparently have a total lack of clue of how the government works. You have to be willing to be caught in order to fight. If you are not, you are no better than a common thief. However if you are willing to stand up and challenge the law you believe to be unjust then you have some strength behind you. Laws have the full backing of the government, prisons, and monetary fines. They do have authority whether they are right or wrong, until they are challenged and changed.
Cowards hide, heros fight; it is that simple really. If you hide behind the anonymity of a p2p network and claim moral high ground just because you disagree with the law then you are a fool. Thoureau turned himself in and was angry that someone paid his taxes for him. That is the spirit and motivation that changes laws. Sitting at home in your comfy chair listening to stolen music changes nothing at all. Posting on/. and thinking you are a revolutionary because you download music for free makes you nothing more than you were before. If you had the guts to stand and fight you could garner some respect, possibly a following, and maybe change something. As it stands right now, you are just a cowardly thief with a huge online ego!
You are so dead wrong about civil disobedience! If you cannot prove that the law is being broken than you cannot change it. To prove it you have to offer real hard evidence. The essential ideals of civil disobedience is a willingness to accept the consequences of your actions.
Prohibition was NOT repealed due to civil disobedience so using it as an example is just silly.
You really should read "On The Duty Of Civil Disobedience" before you spout off. If you are not willing to be caught and punished then you have no moral high ground, it is only when you are willing to publicly stand and say "I disagree with this law, and choose not to follow it" that you are going to make a change. Being anonymous and breaking the law makes you nothing more than a coward. Your entire argument is based outside of reality. The concept of civil disobedience, and how it works demands that you do not hide from the law, and that in fact you willingly accept the consequences of your actions. If you are not willing to do that, then you are simply a criminal.
advertising with banners is proving to be a model that does not return a decent revenue. look at the free isp's; they are starting to limit users. a banner ad model might work, but with the hatred for banners how soon before a crack is out and the banners go away for free. with alternatives that are based on napster (winmx etc) napster will not be bale to recover the money they would like to. why pay when you can napigate? napster as a business model for profit will not work.
Well sir, I will answer your question in brief, if you would like a more in depth explanation I will be happy to discuss it with you over email @ mpotter88@hotmail.com. The law against working on the Sabbath is covered under the Law Of Moses. Which as Christians we are no longer governed by. Since this is off topic I will not go into more detail right now. Please do e-mail I would be happy to explain further. If you choose not to e-mail me then the best reference for you to check out on your own is the book of Galatians in the New Testament.
I think that printed manuals are still a necessity, in a very real sense. For one there are times when you can study a printed manual and don't have access to a computer, for instance on a plane (no laptop) etc. Secondly (looking at my bookshelf) learning a new piece of software or hardware sometimes requires stepping away from the CRT and taking a break, which is a great time to RTFM. Thirdly you could move on to learning to program, yeah it's great to have a reference on your hard drive, but it is a real bitch to keep switching screens or windows to find what you need. Having a good old book laying on the desk, or in my case the floor, next to you is invaluable. In my mind there is no question, always provide a printed manual.
I would dis-agree with your 99% chance. I figure none of my comments made it, but that is not the point at all. The point is none of the posters had a say at all, and that is as bad as schools searching kids, armed security, etc in my opinion. If I thought any of my comments might have made it, I would be seeking an injunction and not posting here about it. I trust that the/. crew is going to add the option later to find out what we think, but they don't care much this time. Katz and everyone at/. and Andover can say they aren't making any money all they want to, but can we trust them ? We couldn't trust them to do what was right about the comments posted here in the past so how can we trust that. It is not about credit or money at all, it is about the rights of the individual posters. If I was included I wouldn't want money or credit, I would have said yes, given the option, but in light of the events I think I would seek leagal counsel now. This was done the very wrong way, and frankly the whole scenario offends me.
I would have had sympathy, and do, for those that are persecuted and endure it every day, but it is not ever anyones right to take life in the way that they did. The reasons are simple, you first look at how they were raised (the parents), the fact the school didn't stop what was being done to them (the school) but they had no right to do what they did, and simply put IMHO they lose all victim status and sympathy when they start killing people. You last comment justifies noting, by stepping on our rights in publishing this book, we are having done to us what is being done to geeks and outcasts in schools everywhere. It is obvious that while I might even agree with what is in the book it is being published whether any of the posters want their comments in it or not, and geeks are being searched at school whether they want to or not. Welcome to reality, Katz is a part of the exact same thing he is griping about, proving that neither he nor anyone else involved in this book cares about anyones point, or feelings, or rights, but their own. I wonder if someones comments got printed, they went into andover and shot people would be make them out to be victims ?
If a person who posted does not like Katz then they should have the say as to whether or not he gets to take credit from their work, or have his name anywhere near it. This book including a single comment from someone who opposes the content violates their freedom, all your babble about ensuing battles and such just proves points that have been made over and over again, the people publishing the book care nothing about our singular opinions only about getting their point across.
I could see using the anonymous comments and any sent to Mr. Katz that were not first posted here, but those that were posted under a user ID should not have been chosen, if the author is not given credit at all then it is even worse. IANAL but I have spoken with one (not in regards to this, but another incident) if you are required to login (which we are not here) then it is not a "public forum" however I am sure there are lawyers out there who could argue that since logging in gives you benefits that this is not a "public forum". I would like to see Andover and Mr. Katz prove they care what we think by posting the chosen comments in their original form and allowing any user that does not want their comments re-produced to say so in advance, silence could be considered permission.
Now before you say that the method I have suggested would be publishing the book electronically, I am only talking about the comments posted here on/.
Side note: Hey Taco, I am offended that you dare to say that after Columbine that the measures taken were worse on anyone than being shot in the face after being asked to confirm your religion. Columbine was a tragedy and yes there was over-reaction, but no-one has been killed by the schools. YOu are so concerned about not repressing the so called geeks, (this is not my opinion just an illustration) what do you call not allowing someone to say whats on their mind ? The kids that were killed did just that, so are you willing to violate their freedom ? There is somewhere a happy medium. I went to high school as a punk, I am white and it was an all black school (the ratio was 5:1) I was an outcast, but it is a choice, I suffered being spit on, poked fun at, and beat up, sometimes three or four times a week. I could have changed but didn't. The killers at Columbine are not now nor ever will be victims, they gave up that right when they started pulling the trigger, they became judge, jury and executioner and I have no sympathy for them. I lay the blame at the feet of their parents first, and then the school, but in the end they made their own decision and should not ever be heroes to anyone. You have vilified innocent victims, maybe not totally innocent but they did nothing that they deserved to die for.
My apologies for the redundancy, by the time I composed, and posted on my 28.8 you had indeed answered the questions, when I started you hadn't. My fault, and thanks for answering my other posts near the top.
You did everything you could, hrmmm, except maybe asking a general opinion before you went ahead with this project. I am not saying that you are the target at all, just that rights are being stepped on and all that seems to matter is this book not the people that made is possible in the first place. Face it without the posters here at/. "Voices From The Hellmouth" would not have been possible. Many of us disagreed with Katz wholeheartedly and would be offended to have our comments published in a book by him even if we got no credit for them whatsoever. The obvious issue with money isn't the only problem here. It goes much deeper than that. I know that I am opposed to my comments being published (Although I figure none of mine were used), I am offended at the correlation of the announcement and the annivesary of the tragedy, and now even more so that the posters aren't even going to get credit at all. This adds up to someone not caring about anything but getting their point across, unless you published all the comments and didn't abridge, the only logical conclusion is you chose only the comments that illustrate your position on the issue when it was a discussion of tremdous magnitude and multiple viewpoints. If people are e-mailing they obviously have internet access and could come read the whole thing. You say you did everything you could, I don't even think you did half of what could be done. I agree with another poster that/. needs to have an option for the users that don't want their comments to appear in print.
Yet another issue, what if some of the posters have political beliefs that oppose the charity you choose, then they have without their consent helped someone they disagree with, and you still hold to having done everything you could ? What about our right to not support something we disagree with ?
I re-read the posts above my first one and well it wasn't redunant so oh-well I get hacked at the mod monsters now...
I have seen both Hemos and Katz respond to selective questions yet neither of them has responded to the most obvious, the ones about OUR comments. This disturbs me highly. Quite a few of us that post here might not want our comments published espicially if Katz's name is on the book. So how about an answer guys, are our comments in it, and if so did you bother to think about the adverse effects it could have on some of us if a parent or manager read the book and recognized one of us ?
I may be totally out of place suggesting one of these but I feel he is at least good enogh for this list
INPO (In No Particular Order)
1. William Gibson 2. Leonardo DaVinci 3. Albert Einstien 4. Alexander Graham Bell 5. Bejamin Franklin 6. Steve Wozniak 7. Bill Gates (Flame me all you want he did change the face of modern comuting) 8. Marie Curie 9. Albert Schwietzer 10. Linus Torvalds (I can't stop at ten that is really to few, maybe it should be a top 50 after all 11. Henry Ford (Hacked a car that the common man could afford) 12. Adolf Hitler (Maybe an asshole but his engineers pioneered Jet aircraft under his ideas. I could be wrong on who actually order the research so feel free to correct me but many people under Nazi command made great contributions to modern science) 13. Wright Brothers
Tahts all for now, I expect flames very soon, but I stand by my post.
I actually see many parallels between the Nazi party and big business in America. In fact too many to list but if you really want me to I will list some of them, just ask. In fact I could go one further and relate our current leadership in this country to the Nazi party also, but that would be really really off topic.
First off the poem was meant to illustrate a point not to show any political beliefs.
Now lets get to the meat of the issue, this IS about DVD on the surface, but the court case will set a precedent (IANAL) that other cases will be tried by for years to come. This is about free speech, free exchange of information, and freedom in general. While I am not necessarily completely opposed to IP/Copyright/Patent laws I do think they need some revising and cases like this one will set the standards by which they are or are not revised. If you can't be troubled to look just under the surface of issues then what can you be troubled for ?
Oh and if you can't respond to this post without being assonine and accusing me of supporting Nazis or something along those lines then don't bother, well on second thought do bother...after all free speech is what this all boils down to, that is if you can worked up about something enough to post.
Re-read yor first amendmanet..this is no gauranty on movement, and only PEACEABLE assmebly is permitted, marching down public streets and blocking other honest citizens passage is just as wrong as the gov't doing it no matter what the cause. So still...not illeagle (next please)
2. None of the laws that were broken are unjust Point: The protesters kept people who did not agree with them from using gov't provided roads to get to and from their jobs, and thus taking away freedom from law abiding citizens. Point: Privately owned businesses were damaged by the "peaceful" protester, thus hurting even more law abdiing citizens.
3. Most of the population does not agree with your analogy that "The British are indeed comming, what will you do?" You will probably say "then they are blind" or some other commonly used statement that implies nothing more than thos who do not agree with you are wrong no matter why they disagree.
I could rant on and on but will stop here for now.
You know what you are right. And we are coming to take your countries lunch money. Why you ask, I qoute the great Dennis Leary: "Two words, Nuclear Fuckin' Weapons. We go the bomb"
Get a life, other countries would be doing the same things if they had the same power. At least the US bullies it's own citizens less than say, oh CHINA !! Asshole don't knock it until you have lived here, America is the best and if you think otherwise then why do we have the highest immigration rate of any country in the entire world...I'll make it real easy because everyone wnats to live here.
calming the nerves of worried parents" is absolutely NOT "a perfectly valid reason" to invade the privacy of kids with unproven technology
You make the mistake of thinking that children have a "right to privacy". When someone other person or thing is respnsible for your actions then you have no right to privacy. Parents have a right to search their childrens rooms, schools have a right to search their lockers etc..etc. Simply put, their is no invansion when there is no right.
It is not a valid reason to spend time and money categorizing, separating and splitting kids into profile groups, rather than actually providing them with the support they need to be unique individuals.
You stop the children from categorizing each other on sight by requiring uniforms in schools, this has already been proven to lower gang violence in metropolitan schools. But you would probably disagree with me saying that children have a right to wear what they want to wear to school.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually they would find tobacco in the stomach you total moron. Think through your plans to kill someone before you post them. A much better and less detectable way is to boil down 3-5 tins of dip (aka snuff), mix with some DMSO and add it into a pair of brand new dyed brown leather shoes. The slight discoloration would be chalked up to the shoes bleeding off the dye and the DMSO would cause the nicotine concentrate to be absorbed through the skin at an alarming rate.
Furthermore 10 cigarettes consumed through the mouth and absorbed through the stomach would make one sick, but very rarely kill them. They would have to have a pre-existing heart condition for that amount of nicotine to kill them. To top it all off they would throw up all the tobacco in their stomach long before theu absorbed enough to die. Yeah you learned something in jail, how to run your mouth and play big shot, good show!
Why must it be open source? That is logistically stupid. it would be best served with a completely closed solution, for any number of security reasons. The entire pro-open source argument for this is tainted with politics and total bullshit. A closed (more than likely non-ms) solution, devised by the government, and tested before being used would be the most secure solution.
Open source is only more secure because of the work put into it, not because of any inherent benefit of it being open. If you had a closed source system, that had been tested to the levels the current open solutions have been, it would be more secure by definintion and design. When it comes to voting, security is paramount and the whole clammoring for open source software in eveyr application make you look like an activist and nothing more. More people will discount any argument beyond that because simply put it taints your every thought and obviously so!
You were the one claiming civil disobedience by anonymously downloading off the p2p networks, not I. I never said it would work, only that it could. Your vain attempt to put words into my mouth means nothing. All that downloading off of hese networks shows is that you are too cheap to buy the album, it gives you no moral high ground whatsoever. You are not side stepping the law, you are breaking it.
There are solutions to shutting down distributed p2p, one is very simple. THe packets are indentifiable, all the feds have to do is require the backbone providers to drop those packets and you can no longer share the files. The FCC could easily regulate it. You will note I never said I agree with the laws, or didn't break them myself, the main difference is that I admit I am a cheap bastard and have no need to justify my actions to myself. There is no moral high ground for you in what you do. Admit you are a cheap bastard who doesn't want to rightfully pay for what they have and move on, most of the rest of us are willing to
Furthermore the majority of users of Kazaa and the like are not educated and most of them ae un-aware that what they are doing is not legal, they are not silently protesting. Your assertation that the stats prove you point is total bunk!
The law will remain on the books until openly challenged. The sodomy laws are being challenged becuase someone got caught, not because they were disobeyed. To change the law it is necessary to make your voice heard. You cannot do that an remain anonymous. If the only voice in the argument is the opposition, then they will win. You apparently have a total lack of clue of how the government works. You have to be willing to be caught in order to fight. If you are not, you are no better than a common thief. However if you are willing to stand up and challenge the law you believe to be unjust then you have some strength behind you. Laws have the full backing of the government, prisons, and monetary fines. They do have authority whether they are right or wrong, until they are challenged and changed.
/. and thinking you are a revolutionary because you download music for free makes you nothing more than you were before. If you had the guts to stand and fight you could garner some respect, possibly a following, and maybe change something. As it stands right now, you are just a cowardly thief with a huge online ego!
Cowards hide, heros fight; it is that simple really. If you hide behind the anonymity of a p2p network and claim moral high ground just because you disagree with the law then you are a fool. Thoureau turned himself in and was angry that someone paid his taxes for him. That is the spirit and motivation that changes laws. Sitting at home in your comfy chair listening to stolen music changes nothing at all. Posting on
You are so dead wrong about civil disobedience! If you cannot prove that the law is being broken than you cannot change it. To prove it you have to offer real hard evidence. The essential ideals of civil disobedience is a willingness to accept the consequences of your actions.
Prohibition was NOT repealed due to civil disobedience so using it as an example is just silly.
You really should read "On The Duty Of Civil Disobedience" before you spout off. If you are not willing to be caught and punished then you have no moral high ground, it is only when you are willing to publicly stand and say "I disagree with this law, and choose not to follow it" that you are going to make a change. Being anonymous and breaking the law makes you nothing more than a coward. Your entire argument is based outside of reality. The concept of civil disobedience, and how it works demands that you do not hide from the law, and that in fact you willingly accept the consequences of your actions. If you are not willing to do that, then you are simply a criminal.
advertising with banners is proving to be a model that does not return a decent revenue. look at the free isp's; they are starting to limit users. a banner ad model might work, but with the hatred for banners how soon before a crack is out and the banners go away for free. with alternatives that are based on napster (winmx etc) napster will not be bale to recover the money they would like to. why pay when you can napigate? napster as a business model for profit will not work.
Well sir, I will answer your question in brief, if you would like a more in depth explanation I will be happy to discuss it with you over email @ mpotter88@hotmail.com. The law against working on the Sabbath is covered under the Law Of Moses. Which as Christians we are no longer governed by. Since this is off topic I will not go into more detail right now. Please do e-mail I would be happy to explain further. If you choose not to e-mail me then the best reference for you to check out on your own is the book of Galatians in the New Testament.
I think that printed manuals are still a necessity, in a very real sense. For one there are times when you can study a printed manual and don't have access to a computer, for instance on a plane (no laptop) etc. Secondly (looking at my bookshelf) learning a new piece of software or hardware sometimes requires stepping away from the CRT and taking a break, which is a great time to RTFM. Thirdly you could move on to learning to program, yeah it's great to have a reference on your hard drive, but it is a real bitch to keep switching screens or windows to find what you need. Having a good old book laying on the desk, or in my case the floor, next to you is invaluable. In my mind there is no question, always provide a printed manual.
I would dis-agree with your 99% chance. I figure none of my comments made it, but that is not the point at all. The point is none of the posters had a say at all, and that is as bad as schools searching kids, armed security, etc in my opinion. If I thought any of my comments might have made it, I would be seeking an injunction and not posting here about it. I trust that the /. crew is going to add the option later to find out what we think, but they don't care much this time. Katz and everyone at /. and Andover can say they aren't making any money all they want to, but can we trust them ? We couldn't trust them to do what was right about the comments posted here in the past so how can we trust that. It is not about credit or money at all, it is about the rights of the individual posters. If I was included I wouldn't want money or credit, I would have said yes, given the option, but in light of the events I think I would seek leagal counsel now. This was done the very wrong way, and frankly the whole scenario offends me.
I would have had sympathy, and do, for those that are persecuted and endure it every day, but it is not ever anyones right to take life in the way that they did. The reasons are simple, you first look at how they were raised (the parents), the fact the school didn't stop what was being done to them (the school) but they had no right to do what they did, and simply put IMHO they lose all victim status and sympathy when they start killing people. You last comment justifies noting, by stepping on our rights in publishing this book, we are having done to us what is being done to geeks and outcasts in schools everywhere. It is obvious that while I might even agree with what is in the book it is being published whether any of the posters want their comments in it or not, and geeks are being searched at school whether they want to or not. Welcome to reality, Katz is a part of the exact same thing he is griping about, proving that neither he nor anyone else involved in this book cares about anyones point, or feelings, or rights, but their own. I wonder if someones comments got printed, they went into andover and shot people would be make them out to be victims ?
If a person who posted does not like Katz then they should have the say as to whether or not he gets to take credit from their work, or have his name anywhere near it. This book including a single comment from someone who opposes the content violates their freedom, all your babble about ensuing battles and such just proves points that have been made over and over again, the people publishing the book care nothing about our singular opinions only about getting their point across.
I could see using the anonymous comments and any sent to Mr. Katz that were not first posted here, but those that were posted under a user ID should not have been chosen, if the author is not given credit at all then it is even worse. IANAL but I have spoken with one (not in regards to this, but another incident) if you are required to login (which we are not here) then it is not a "public forum" however I am sure there are lawyers out there who could argue that since logging in gives you benefits that this is not a "public forum". I would like to see Andover and Mr. Katz prove they care what we think by posting the chosen comments in their original form and allowing any user that does not want their comments re-produced to say so in advance, silence could be considered permission.
/.
Now before you say that the method I have suggested would be publishing the book electronically, I am only talking about the comments posted here on
Side note: Hey Taco, I am offended that you dare to say that after Columbine that the measures taken were worse on anyone than being shot in the face after being asked to confirm your religion. Columbine was a tragedy and yes there was over-reaction, but no-one has been killed by the schools. YOu are so concerned about not repressing the so called geeks, (this is not my opinion just an illustration) what do you call not allowing someone to say whats on their mind ? The kids that were killed did just that, so are you willing to violate their freedom ? There is somewhere a happy medium. I went to high school as a punk, I am white and it was an all black school (the ratio was 5:1) I was an outcast, but it is a choice, I suffered being spit on, poked fun at, and beat up, sometimes three or four times a week. I could have changed but didn't. The killers at Columbine are not now nor ever will be victims, they gave up that right when they started pulling the trigger, they became judge, jury and executioner and I have no sympathy for them. I lay the blame at the feet of their parents first, and then the school, but in the end they made their own decision and should not ever be heroes to anyone. You have vilified innocent victims, maybe not totally innocent but they did nothing that they deserved to die for.
My apologies for the redundancy, by the time I composed, and posted on my 28.8 you had indeed answered the questions, when I started you hadn't. My fault, and thanks for answering my other posts near the top.
You did everything you could, hrmmm, except maybe asking a general opinion before you went ahead with this project. I am not saying that you are the target at all, just that rights are being stepped on and all that seems to matter is this book not the people that made is possible in the first place. Face it without the posters here at /. "Voices From The Hellmouth" would not have been possible. Many of us disagreed with Katz wholeheartedly and would be offended to have our comments published in a book by him even if we got no credit for them whatsoever. The obvious issue with money isn't the only problem here. It goes much deeper than that. I know that I am opposed to my comments being published (Although I figure none of mine were used), I am offended at the correlation of the announcement and the annivesary of the tragedy, and now even more so that the posters aren't even going to get credit at all. This adds up to someone not caring about anything but getting their point across, unless you published all the comments and didn't abridge, the only logical conclusion is you chose only the comments that illustrate your position on the issue when it was a discussion of tremdous magnitude and multiple viewpoints. If people are e-mailing they obviously have internet access and could come read the whole thing. You say you did everything you could, I don't even think you did half of what could be done. I agree with another poster that /. needs to have an option for the users that don't want their comments to appear in print.
Yet another issue, what if some of the posters have political beliefs that oppose the charity you choose, then they have without their consent helped someone they disagree with, and you still hold to having done everything you could ? What about our right to not support something we disagree with ?
I re-read the posts above my first one and well it wasn't redunant so oh-well I get hacked at the mod monsters now...
I have seen both Hemos and Katz respond to selective questions yet neither of them has responded to the most obvious, the ones about OUR comments. This disturbs me highly. Quite a few of us that post here might not want our comments published espicially if Katz's name is on the book. So how about an answer guys, are our comments in it, and if so did you bother to think about the adverse effects it could have on some of us if a parent or manager read the book and recognized one of us ?
I may be totally out of place suggesting one of these but I feel he is at least good enogh for this list
INPO (In No Particular Order)
1. William Gibson
2. Leonardo DaVinci
3. Albert Einstien
4. Alexander Graham Bell
5. Bejamin Franklin
6. Steve Wozniak
7. Bill Gates (Flame me all you want he did change the face of modern comuting)
8. Marie Curie
9. Albert Schwietzer
10. Linus Torvalds
(I can't stop at ten that is really to few, maybe it should be a top 50 after all
11. Henry Ford (Hacked a car that the common man could afford)
12. Adolf Hitler (Maybe an asshole but his engineers pioneered Jet aircraft under his ideas. I could be wrong on who actually order the research so feel free to correct me but many people under Nazi command made great contributions to modern science)
13. Wright Brothers
Tahts all for now, I expect flames very soon, but I stand by my post.
I actually see many parallels between the Nazi party and big business in America. In fact too many to list but if you really want me to I will list some of them, just ask. In fact I could go one further and relate our current leadership in this country to the Nazi party also, but that would be really really off topic.
First off the poem was meant to illustrate a point not to show any political beliefs.
Now lets get to the meat of the issue, this IS about DVD on the surface, but the court case will set a precedent (IANAL) that other cases will be tried by for years to come. This is about free speech, free exchange of information, and freedom in general. While I am not necessarily completely opposed to IP/Copyright/Patent laws I do think they need some revising and cases like this one will set the standards by which they are or are not revised. If you can't be troubled to look just under the surface of issues then what can you be troubled for ?
Oh and if you can't respond to this post without being assonine and accusing me of supporting Nazis or something along those lines then don't bother, well on second thought do bother...after all free speech is what this all boils down to, that is if you can worked up about something enough to post.
Re-read yor first amendmanet..this is no gauranty on movement, and only PEACEABLE assmebly is permitted, marching down public streets and blocking other honest citizens passage is just as wrong as the gov't doing it no matter what the cause. So still...not illeagle (next please)
To both of my responders.......GET A SENSE OF HUMOR, it was funny, you people take life way too seriously.
Should we punish the government for blocking all access to the area around the WTO? That's not only wrong, it's illegal. Why isn't anyone complaining?
Can you tell me why it was illeagle for the gov't to block access to a building that contained world leaders and at one point The President ?
1. Follow this link and then maybe you will understand what you are talking about. On the Duty of Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau
2. None of the laws that were broken are unjust Point: The protesters kept people who did not agree with them from using gov't provided roads to get to and from their jobs, and thus taking away freedom from law abiding citizens.
Point: Privately owned businesses were damaged by the "peaceful" protester, thus hurting even more law abdiing citizens.
3. Most of the population does not agree with your analogy that "The British are indeed comming, what will you do?" You will probably say "then they are blind" or some other commonly used statement that implies nothing more than thos who do not agree with you are wrong no matter why they disagree.
I could rant on and on but will stop here for now.
However good those links could be they will no doubt be biased, just a different spin than the standard news media.
You know what you are right. And we are coming to take your countries lunch money. Why you ask, I qoute the great Dennis Leary: "Two words, Nuclear Fuckin' Weapons. We go the bomb"
Get a life, other countries would be doing the same things if they had the same power. At least the US bullies it's own citizens less than say, oh CHINA !! Asshole don't knock it until you have lived here, America is the best and if you think otherwise then why do we have the highest immigration rate of any country in the entire world...I'll make it real easy because everyone wnats to live here.
calming the nerves of worried parents" is absolutely NOT "a perfectly valid reason" to invade the privacy of kids with unproven technology
You make the mistake of thinking that children have a "right to privacy". When someone other person or thing is respnsible for your actions then you have no right to privacy. Parents have a right to search their childrens rooms, schools have a right to search their lockers etc..etc. Simply put, their is no invansion when there is no right.
It is not a valid reason to spend time and money categorizing, separating and splitting kids into profile groups, rather than actually providing them with the support they need to be unique individuals.
You stop the children from categorizing each other on sight by requiring uniforms in schools, this has already been proven to lower gang violence in metropolitan schools. But you would probably disagree with me saying that children have a right to wear what they want to wear to school.