I think science is created to try to help understand what life is. Out of fear of the unknown, or curiosity of life, they create, out of nothing, the most beliveable and logical thing at that time. I suppose that deterministic, mathematical laws of physics that lead to the creation of life and what not, or ensures that the sun works or whatever, is as good as any creative idea. Then again I've never met anyone that has written a law of physics. But you know the thing, people are afraid of the unknown, so they either destroy it or turn it into something they can understand (or helps them try to understand). The thing is that you can have unwavering faith in anything imaginable, logic, science, religion, whatever. But what good would that do? I can easily belive aliens created me just as well as that evolution did. Or just as fair, I can belive I was created by mighty powerfull trees. I can't prove it but I can belive it. But to what end? Why would I be any better beliving the laws of physics led to my creation independant of a god, instead of beleving that god exists?
They do it because the US legal system makes them. Look up "due dilligence" in regards to copyright. If you don't strictly enforce your copyrights and trademarks you can lose them. If a company knows that you're violating their IP rights and turns a blind eye then they may not be able to legally stop anyone else from using that IP in the future. This is to prevent a company from allowing a term to come into widespread use only to later start suing people who they've been implicitly allowing to use the term for damages.
This is like argueing which is a more important part of a car the tires on the right side or the tires on the left. The tires on each side are vitally important.
Three facts:
1) People kill people without guns.
2) People kill people with guns.
3) Guns don't often kill people without the interaction of a human.
I find it interesting that nobody seems to be asking the simple question "Why?"
The US constitution specifies that US Citizens must be enumerated within every ten year period. Nowhere does the constitution authorize such detailed data collection, nor is it "necessary and proper."
This update program is called
MAF/TIGER. An optional feature request in this update would involve merging these GPS coordinates with something like the Realsite program. This would give a textured 3D model that is geospatially accurate to within 1 meter, based off of aerial, satellite and hand held photography.
Thinking in paranoid mode I can't help but think of government surveillance via satellite and robot and cruise missiles targeting specific GPS coordinates.
I'm not seriously worried about anything in particular, but it's the abuse that I cannot foresee that truly worries me. As I cannot conceive of any benefit that this program would bring to the average citizen I have to ask, why are we doing it?
Under point number one you forget that spilled ink on a page has no intrinsic meaning. It is only through interperitation that any meaning can be concieved of. This flows into point number two under which saying that there is any defenite point to a story at all is ridiculous. An individuals interperitation of a story determens what the story is about to that individual. No conrete meaning can be assigned to any written work as there can always be different interperitations.
Writing "Never believe an author when they say "It's just a book." They're just trying to get you to go away" seems as insulting to an author as writing "Never believe someone when they say a book is about something other than the author intended. They're just trying to make themselves feel intelectually superior."
If we shouldn't take at face value an author's statement that a book have a partcular meaning then why should we listen to any other indivual, or group, that claims a particular meaning?
Once you show me any evidence that the US is not doing everything in its power to reduce civilian casualties, other than refraining from going after the declared bad guys, then you can start comparing the morality of this issue.
As a matter of fact the US is spending millions of dollars and quickly depleting our surprisingly small stores of smart weapons in an effort to not kill civilians. This depletes our capabilities to fight a full scale war. This monetary cost isn't comparable to lost lives, but you can't compare the deliberate targeting of tens of thousands of civilians to the US efforts.
I guess you're right. The motives of those who have voted for patent/copyright laws appear to have been, at least in this century, to offer protection to individuals based on potential financial gain. Presumably all such laws would still have to promote the progress of science and useful arts, but it's a "living document" so we can just ignore it right?
Actually in the US the point of patents is "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries" At least thats what the constitution says. I guess you might b able to argue common law, but I think the constitution just might trump that.
Of course I use this to argue for a completely new patent/copyright system, but that is neither here nor there...
Quotes
"Even if the supreme court had allowed a several county recount bush still would have won. If the democrats had asked for an entire state recount and got it (which seemed like a bad idea at the time) Gore would have won.
Are saying that Gore *did* win but you have no problem with GWB being president? Are you mad?
However, when it's so close, it's more important that somebody win sooner rather the right person 6 months after the election.
No, you are very very wrong. A thorough transparent COMPLETE recounting of EVERY ballot is the sole acceptable solution. To be hurried - for what reason i dont know, the president isnt inaugurated for months after the vote - makes no sense. Why not take your time and be thorough, NOT doing so could only end up casting questions onto the legitimacy of your democracy, your president, your entire system? Very big stakes, for what reason were these things chanced? (aside: Bush's brother and his cronies were in charge of the re-count, this casts EVEN MORE doubt on the legitimacy of the event... very sad day for "american democracy")"
First we're not a democracy, we're a Republic that elvolved from a confederation of sovereign states. The US is one f'ed up mutt and it shows.
The comment about being in a hurry shows a lack of in depth understanding of the issues, there were timetables imposed by law and the constitution, and to throw those out the window based on our concepts of fair play would be pure folley. Here's how I understand it, but I could be wrong too. Under federal law each state decides by constitution/law how it will select the number of electors appointed to it. In Florida, and most/all other states, each party/candidate on the ballot selects a bunch of electors. When you "vote for the president" you're actually just telling the state of Florida which electors you'd like to see sending their votes to D.C. to be counted (and these electors may not even be legally bound to vote for a certain candidate). According to the constitution electors for all states MUST cast their ballots on a date set by congress (not sure what it's currently set to). However under Florida law if there is an election controversy and no elector has been chosen by a certain date then the state congress (might be Senate only) gets to chose the electors. iirc when Gore threw in the towel we were less than a week from that day. If the republican controlled congress of Florida would have excercised this power we can presume Bush's electors would have been picked.
Quite frankly as I see it our laws worked as written, simply not as we'd have like them to work. Kinda like writing code eh? Sure it wasn't fair, but imho our courts put to much emphasis on being fair over being just. In the end, Bush won and that was the most likely result as soon as the whole problem erupted.
I'd be very concerned if this law were ever passed, it gives the Supreme court WAY to much power, and opens them up to make more blatantly political acts. Say there are 5 Judges from one party on the court, all they need to do is find 3 seperate bills that were recently voted on along party lines and declare them unconstiutional. Bam, you've just removed an entire party (or most of it) from congress.
On the other hand the Supreme Court would also be hamstrung if a senior politician already had 2 strikes and a law that they had voted for was under review. Either way the court decides they'd be accused of taking this into consideration.
The first case would probably be very unlikely, but I'd have said the same thing about the DMCA and Roe v Wade descision.
The basic idea of getting congresspersons to actually have some concern about constitutionality when voting is a good one, but I can't think of a good system to apply it.
This song jumped into my head today, after I read the lyrics I was weirded out...
"That's great, it starts with an earthquake, birds and snakes, an aeroplane -
Lenny Bruce is not afraid. Eye of a hurricane, listen to yourself churn -
world serves its own needs, don't misserve your own needs. Feed it up a knock,
speed, grunt no, strength no. Ladder structure clatter with fear of height,
down height. Wire in a fire, represent the seven games in a government for
hire and a combat site. Left her, wasn't coming in a hurry with the furies
breathing down your neck. Team by team reporters baffled, trump, tethered
crop. Look at that low plane! Fine then. Uh oh, overflow, population,
common group, but it'll do. Save yourself, serve yourself. World serves its
own needs, listen to your heart bleed. Tell me with the rapture and the
reverent in the right - right. You vitriolic, patriotic, slam, fight, bright
light, feeling pretty psyched.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine.
Six o'clock - TV hour. Don't get caught in foreign tower. Slash and burn,
return, listen to yourself churn. Lock him in uniform and book burning,
blood letting. Every motive escalate. Automotive incinerate. Light a candle,
light a motive. Step down, step down. Watch a heel crush, crush. Uh oh,
this means no fear - cavalier. Renegade and steer clear! A tournament,
a tournament, a tournament of lies. Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives
and I decline.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine.
The other night I tripped a nice continental drift divide. Mount St. Edelite.
Leonard Bernstein. Leonid Breshnev, Lenny Bruce and Lester Bangs.
Birthday party, cheesecake, jelly bean, boom! You symbiotic, patriotic,
slam, but neck, right? Right.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine...fine...
(It's time I had some time alone)"
-It's the End of the World as we Know it (and I Feel Fine) by REM
Slashdot Mirror
So.... You believe in God right? Or a least a god as the creator of the universe, first cause, prime mover etc?
Nice meme you've got there, too bad it's false as well.
There is no way that every Iraqi will celebrate when US forces leave. There are just too many of them to be that homogeneous.
I think science is created to try to help understand what life is. Out of fear of the unknown, or curiosity of life, they create, out of nothing, the most beliveable and logical thing at that time. I suppose that deterministic, mathematical laws of physics that lead to the creation of life and what not, or ensures that the sun works or whatever, is as good as any creative idea. Then again I've never met anyone that has written a law of physics. But you know the thing, people are afraid of the unknown, so they either destroy it or turn it into something they can understand (or helps them try to understand). The thing is that you can have unwavering faith in anything imaginable, logic, science, religion, whatever. But what good would that do? I can easily belive aliens created me just as well as that evolution did. Or just as fair, I can belive I was created by mighty powerfull trees. I can't prove it but I can belive it. But to what end? Why would I be any better beliving the laws of physics led to my creation independant of a god, instead of beleving that god exists?
Just ranting, but I think you know what I mean =)
They do it because the US legal system makes them. Look up "due dilligence" in regards to copyright. If you don't strictly enforce your copyrights and trademarks you can lose them. If a company knows that you're violating their IP rights and turns a blind eye then they may not be able to legally stop anyone else from using that IP in the future. This is to prevent a company from allowing a term to come into widespread use only to later start suing people who they've been implicitly allowing to use the term for damages.
It IS cool, it would have been hot.
Of course they sold all their cool toys looking for Jimmy who was looking for Eve, so I guess they can die.
Joey Ramone lives forever though...
This is like argueing which is a more important part of a car the tires on the right side or the tires on the left. The tires on each side are vitally important.
Three facts:
1) People kill people without guns.
2) People kill people with guns.
3) Guns don't often kill people without the interaction of a human.
The US constitution specifies that US Citizens must be enumerated within every ten year period. Nowhere does the constitution authorize such detailed data collection, nor is it "necessary and proper."
This update program is called MAF/TIGER. An optional feature request in this update would involve merging these GPS coordinates with something like the Realsite program. This would give a textured 3D model that is geospatially accurate to within 1 meter, based off of aerial, satellite and hand held photography.
Thinking in paranoid mode I can't help but think of government surveillance via satellite and robot and cruise missiles targeting specific GPS coordinates.
I'm not seriously worried about anything in particular, but it's the abuse that I cannot foresee that truly worries me. As I cannot conceive of any benefit that this program would bring to the average citizen I have to ask, why are we doing it?
Then it's one-eyed fun!
Writing "Never believe an author when they say "It's just a book." They're just trying to get you to go away" seems as insulting to an author as writing "Never believe someone when they say a book is about something other than the author intended. They're just trying to make themselves feel intelectually superior."
If we shouldn't take at face value an author's statement that a book have a partcular meaning then why should we listen to any other indivual, or group, that claims a particular meaning?
They may even be willing to mail it to you, or barring that deliver it to your nearest branch if it's anywhere in the county system.
As a matter of fact the US is spending millions of dollars and quickly depleting our surprisingly small stores of smart weapons in an effort to not kill civilians. This depletes our capabilities to fight a full scale war. This monetary cost isn't comparable to lost lives, but you can't compare the deliberate targeting of tens of thousands of civilians to the US efforts.
I guess you're right. The motives of those who have voted for patent/copyright laws appear to have been, at least in this century, to offer protection to individuals based on potential financial gain. Presumably all such laws would still have to promote the progress of science and useful arts, but it's a "living document" so we can just ignore it right?
Blah,
Kerinsky
Actually in the US the point of patents is "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries" At least thats what the constitution says. I guess you might b able to argue common law, but I think the constitution just might trump that.
Of course I use this to argue for a completely new patent/copyright system, but that is neither here nor there...
Are saying that Gore *did* win but you have no problem with GWB being president? Are you mad?
However, when it's so close, it's more important that somebody win sooner rather the right person 6 months after the election.
No, you are very very wrong. A thorough transparent COMPLETE recounting of EVERY ballot is the sole acceptable solution. To be hurried - for what reason i dont know, the president isnt inaugurated for months after the vote - makes no sense. Why not take your time and be thorough, NOT doing so could only end up casting questions onto the legitimacy of your democracy, your president, your entire system? Very big stakes, for what reason were these things chanced? (aside: Bush's brother and his cronies were in charge of the re-count, this casts EVEN MORE doubt on the legitimacy of the event... very sad day for "american democracy")"
First we're not a democracy, we're a Republic that elvolved from a confederation of sovereign states. The US is one f'ed up mutt and it shows.
The comment about being in a hurry shows a lack of in depth understanding of the issues, there were timetables imposed by law and the constitution, and to throw those out the window based on our concepts of fair play would be pure folley. Here's how I understand it, but I could be wrong too. Under federal law each state decides by constitution/law how it will select the number of electors appointed to it. In Florida, and most/all other states, each party/candidate on the ballot selects a bunch of electors. When you "vote for the president" you're actually just telling the state of Florida which electors you'd like to see sending their votes to D.C. to be counted (and these electors may not even be legally bound to vote for a certain candidate). According to the constitution electors for all states MUST cast their ballots on a date set by congress (not sure what it's currently set to). However under Florida law if there is an election controversy and no elector has been chosen by a certain date then the state congress (might be Senate only) gets to chose the electors. iirc when Gore threw in the towel we were less than a week from that day. If the republican controlled congress of Florida would have excercised this power we can presume Bush's electors would have been picked.
Quite frankly as I see it our laws worked as written, simply not as we'd have like them to work. Kinda like writing code eh? Sure it wasn't fair, but imho our courts put to much emphasis on being fair over being just. In the end, Bush won and that was the most likely result as soon as the whole problem erupted.
On the other hand the Supreme Court would also be hamstrung if a senior politician already had 2 strikes and a law that they had voted for was under review. Either way the court decides they'd be accused of taking this into consideration.
The first case would probably be very unlikely, but I'd have said the same thing about the DMCA and Roe v Wade descision.
The basic idea of getting congresspersons to actually have some concern about constitutionality when voting is a good one, but I can't think of a good system to apply it.
This song jumped into my head today, after I read the lyrics I was weirded out...
"That's great, it starts with an earthquake, birds and snakes, an aeroplane -
Lenny Bruce is not afraid. Eye of a hurricane, listen to yourself churn -
world serves its own needs, don't misserve your own needs. Feed it up a knock,
speed, grunt no, strength no. Ladder structure clatter with fear of height,
down height. Wire in a fire, represent the seven games in a government for
hire and a combat site. Left her, wasn't coming in a hurry with the furies
breathing down your neck. Team by team reporters baffled, trump, tethered
crop. Look at that low plane! Fine then. Uh oh, overflow, population,
common group, but it'll do. Save yourself, serve yourself. World serves its
own needs, listen to your heart bleed. Tell me with the rapture and the
reverent in the right - right. You vitriolic, patriotic, slam, fight, bright
light, feeling pretty psyched.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine.
Six o'clock - TV hour. Don't get caught in foreign tower. Slash and burn,
return, listen to yourself churn. Lock him in uniform and book burning,
blood letting. Every motive escalate. Automotive incinerate. Light a candle,
light a motive. Step down, step down. Watch a heel crush, crush. Uh oh,
this means no fear - cavalier. Renegade and steer clear! A tournament,
a tournament, a tournament of lies. Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives
and I decline.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine.
The other night I tripped a nice continental drift divide. Mount St. Edelite.
Leonard Bernstein. Leonid Breshnev, Lenny Bruce and Lester Bangs.
Birthday party, cheesecake, jelly bean, boom! You symbiotic, patriotic,
slam, but neck, right? Right.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine...fine...
(It's time I had some time alone)"
-It's the End of the World as we Know it (and I Feel Fine) by REM