It is also a fact that raising children is expensive and is a big financial burden on families that singles don't have and they can use some help.
"It is also a fact that owning a Hummer is a big financial burden on people that those without Hummers don't have, and they can use some help."
See how ridiculous that sounds? People have choice on whether or not to breed, as do they have a choice to own a Hummer. I don't feel pity for the financially strapped family in either camp.
(posting from Utah, where 5+ kids is too damn common for my comfort)
I tend to agree with you here. I've recently found some stuff that would never/rarely be played on the radio that I find to be of good quality. Hell, even *some* of the stuff that makes it to radio is pretty good (IMHO), like the album "American Idiot". I've discovered Rilo Kiley (I can't decide if Jenny Lewis's voice is pleasing or annoying, but the lyrics are good) and The Beautiful Girls (talk about some great music to just hang out and listen to), who have both been around for a while but also have new stuff. That's a small sample -- I've found a lot of other good stuff out there.
Personally, while I love my music from those eras I mention, I love a good album from current artists just as much. Sure, nolstalgia is fun and all -- we all love to listen to a good tune from our youth to get us pumped up or to wind down to -- but those of us who truly enjoy music aren't afraid (and actually crave) good stuff from the present.
I'm sure the comfort of familiar musical ground goes a long way the older one gets, especially with purchases. But I'm not sure that's what's really going on here.
Once you've downloaded the good stuff, it is not like there is anything new coming out to make you want to keep downloading more and more.
As much as many people here pooh-pooh the "everything sucks today" argument, an honest person has to take a hard look and see whether or not it's true. I know it's hard -- no, impossible -- to quantify the 'quality' of music. It's obviously a changing beast, dependent on the audience, and other variables.
I submit, as one small data point, the "Top Searches" page on allmusic.com. Notice a trend? Yup -- a good chunk of the artists on that list were in their prime is 10-to-40 years ago.
So what does that *particular* list say? It's a tough call. It may just be that AMG's site is too un-cool for the covetted tween to mid-20's music demographic, leaving us 30+ folks (I'm 34) who were weaned on 60's and 70's rock by our baby boomer parents who went on to be influenced by the 80's and 90's in our teen years. Perhaps there are sites more used by the younger generations that has a "top serach" function that other readers can add to the mix, for comparison.
But maybe -- just maybe -- that today there are fewer artists that actuall make good *albums* that won't sound dated in 10 years and can be listened to over and over in their entirety. Maybe the majority of entertainers that get radio play are optimized for one-hit-wonderhood, who get their 15 minutes and go out in a blaze of glory until they'll featured in ten years on "Where Are They Now?".
Or, perhaps, hind-sight is 20/20 and it's much easier to find the gems from 10+ years ago than it is to find the few that exist today but are lost in the crap that's been on the airwaves since the dawn of radio.:)
So you're saying that since SGI didn't sue ATI years ago, they should just roll over and let their patent rights evaporate?
No, he's saying that SGI is being a chump of a sore loser in the marketplace. Rather than trying to actually *do* something with that big fat IP portfolio, they're taking the evil route. They're a dying company with a bunch of IP that they can't produce and provide for a competitive price. They should just cash out and liquidate the IP and other assets they own. Having supported/administered SGI products (from Indigo workstations to 64-node Origin 2000's), I know their products were once kick-ass, but SGI's products are so overpriced (they even make Sun and IBM big iron look pretty cheap -- and at least IBM has decent support beyond the 1st tier) as to be silly. This lawsuit is, like others have pointed out, the same route to the Dark Side as SCO has taken. Will SGI's stock become a penny stock before too long?
If my neighbor has been letting his dog dump on my front lawn for years, does that mean that I lose my right to ask him to pick it up or take the dog elsewhere? I don't think so.
I mostly agree with you. But... if you've ignored the problem when you were on good terms with said neighbor, you're an ass if you decide to make an issue of it *after* you've had a falling out with your neighbor.
In some states, I believe that squatters on private property can acquire the title if they can prove they've been living on the property unchallenged for ten years. (Note: I had a couple of real estate agents tell me this, though I've been unable to back that up by digging through the Utah state legal code.) I think other forms of IP should have somethings similiar to this (like trademarks). If you choose not to pursue (in good faith) copyright and patent violations for so long, then you should forfeit your right to your exclusive rights. That would stop stupid submarine patent lawsuits, like the GIF compression, where the IP holder conveniently decides to pursue only after *years* have passed and they notice that their idea is actually making *someone* (not them, obviously) some money. Of course, this would increase legal costs for the IP holders, and some may say that this will put small businesses at a disadvantage. However, I think the history of trademarks shows that this is not the general case.
Given the list of periodicals I've subscribed to in the past, the fact that I was once an NRA member, and a few other things such things, I'm sure red flags went up long ago. If anyone wants to snoop on my life, they won't be able to ping Wells Fargo or Visa for my transaction records anymore. They'll have to pay a grunt or two to tail me. More power to 'em -- Feds would stick out like a drag queen wearing hot pink around here.;)
Don't forget Know Your Customer. The Wiki article seems to tie this to the PATRIOT Act, but I recall privacy groups bemoaning this law during Clinton's time in office.
I actually ditched my checking account a couple of weeks ago. No more checks, no more ATM/check card. I've been credit card free for a few years, but cutting up the cash card (smells and acts like a credit card, and uses the same transaction network) was kinda cool. Living a cash-only life is fun. You simply can't spend more money than you have -- plus you collect far more pocket change in that jar on your mantle for the rainy-day fund.:) Oh, and The Spooks have no paper trail on me other than the paychecks I cash at the credit union (I have a mortgage with them, so they have my vitals on file anyway). After that, it's under the radar. If I want to buy a bunch of teddy bears and propane cylinders over a period of time, I'm anonymous. (Yes, I know he used cash, be he was a dumb-ass who appears to have purchased everything all at once.)
Sure, no more Netflix, hotel stays, car rentals, or instant online orders (well, I have used Wal Mart gift cards to order a few DVDs), but I've now got a stack of cool catalogs that I can pay with US Postal money order should I decide that I really need/want something.
There's something to be said for slowing down your life's pace a bit. Living cash-only is one way to do it.
The last 10 years of my life have been spent seeing my paychecks gouged for pork and other useless crap on all levels of government. I finally had enough and decided to take back what's mine. Hey, if *you* want to make the lifestyle changes of going ftom $60k/yr to around $20k/yr like I have, I say more power to you. Go for it. The world would be a better place if all families could actually *enjoy* their lives together because both parents are home full-time and they're not stressed about the next paycheck.
My family and I can live without most expenses of the typical American and afford to work half-time and live technically near the poverty level *without* enjoying the benefits of that level of income (free lunches, earned income tax credit, etc.). I *chose* to take advantage of these things to say "fuck you" to the system of taxation that screws everyone. Sure, if everyone did what I do, the country would be in a world of fiscal hurt until we figured out a better system than the bloated, corrupt one we currently employ. The more people who opt out of the system, the more pressure is on those who remain in the system. That's a *good* thing becasue eventually, people just *might* figure out that a free life is more important than shiny things and collectively buck the system.
There's no law that says I have to work to the fullest of my income potential, dude.
Insurance? Why the fuck should I pay for it when The Man takes so much of my paycheck (past and present)? If there are medical hardships, there's state aid and there's bankruptcy. Insurance is a political boogeyman ("Think of teh children!") If my granparents could get compound fractures w/o going bankrupt, the fact that you cannot today means something's seriously fucked with the system now.
Go ahead and consider me a leech -- I'm a bitter, disenfranchised leech. If I can legally work the system after years of doing my part and seeing it all pissed away on bloated government, I will. I got sick of this game, and I checked out. I encourage you to do the same -- it's liberating. I'm not free-loading white trash who cranks out kids, doesn't work because they're ignorant and lazy, and makes new car payments with the welfare check. I live within my means quite easily, while technically qualifying for loads of government help. I take advantage of some to make a point. The only reason I'm not getting welfare and/or food stamps is because I don't want some state caseworker looking up my ass and through my bank statements every month -- plus I hate paperwork. I file taxes anywhay, so I may as well get the earned income child credit. My kids are already in school, so I may as well get the free lunches.
I can't call what I do civil disobedience, because it's all legal and there's no risk to me. But it is a way to thumb my nose at a government (and an apathetic population) that needs to change before things will improve for everyone.
This year is the first in the past 4 that our kids weren't homeschooled. We may well pull them out come winter break, as the school system is as bad as I remember it to be.
You want to stop paying for *my* kids to eat free? Bring your income down to a near poverty level and you'll not only pay no taxes, you'll actually get free money! How cool is that? Trust me, you won't die. It's pretty damned liberating living on the fringe of impoverished class. As Janis Joplin once sang, "Freedom is just another word for 'nothing left to lose'." Oh, how true that is! Give up your shiny things and be free.:)
Doing your part within the system just doesn't work. Voting doesn't work. Those who govern us only care that they can tax us as much as they can and that we piss away the rest on shiny things. If you discard the consumer/capitalist way of thinking (and no, I don't mean adopt Communism -- simply provide for your own necessities and happiness will soon follow), then the system has no sway over you.
As a wise machine in a movie once said: "The only way to win is not to play."
No, the right thing to do would be to own up to the consequences of compulsory education and pay for medical expenses incurred as result of that requirement. I qualify for a per-mile stipend to drive my kids to/from school, as there is no bus service to our house. Rightly so, the school system offsets the financial burden (the gas costs are roughly $1US round-trip, twice a day -- about $40/month) of transporting the kids to school. I don't know how common that is (we live in a very rural part of Utah), but reduced/free lunch programs have been a corner stone of every school system I've been a part of (as a student and as a parent of one), and I've lived all over the US. Same principle.
Sure, they'll sue the services into oblivion (nevermind the users right now), but until they are out of business, they'll happily try to make income off the network. Wasn't one of the main themes of the lawsuits that these companies were supposedly making money from copyright infringement? And now big media is doing the same thing? WTF?!?
I hope this backfires. If the media companies can make a legitimate try at making money from P2P networks, then why not the companies they're taking to court?
So, would I stop kids from playing tag because they might hurt themselves? HELL NO. It's a ton of fun, it gets kids out and running. Which, when you consider all of the health risks of kids being obese, I'll take the trade off of one or two of them getting knocked cold now and again. Also, any parent who sues over this sort of thing should be taken out and shot. Kids are going to run around and play, they are going to fall and get cuts, bruises, they will require stitches and they will break the occasional bone. This is why you have health insurance, to keep those occurances from breaking the bank. Use it as a teaching opportunity to explain why you need to be careful and GET OVER IT!
Just to add some prospective (and play devil's advocate), try this on for size: Most children are required to attend school. That includes those too poor to afford the one-off medical expense or insurance. What happens when one of those kids winds up in a freak collision with a pole or another kid? The parents are pretty much screwed.
Now my family has chosen a lifestyle of voluntary simplicty. I work (from home) enough to pay the bills, put food on the table, and a little extra for misc expenses. We don't have insurance for ourselves or our two kids. While it's not really necessary for us to take advantage of, the kids receive free lunches (to put the financials into perspective). Near the start of school this year, we got this private insurance thingy just for while the kids are in school. It read (paraphrased): "Your school does not cover medical expenses for incidents on school grounds, so for $72/year, you can insure for yadda-yadda-yadda...".
I declined. Not that I couldn't afford it, but out of principle. I said, "Fuck that! They make school compulsory, so they will cover any any injuries as a result of them being there." I don't loose any sleep over it -- kids are tough and all but the most sever injuries would result in a confrontation with the school district over whether they should cover the expenses. If it's a result of my kids being stupid, then I'll suck it up. But if it's from some *other* kid being dumb, or negligence on the school's part (ice on the sidewalk, wet floor, class-time activities like P.E.),then I'll pursue it.
Sure, shit happens. Kids will be kids, and my own offspring (8 and 11) do dumb-assed things like all kids. However, the fact is that some kids are real monsters (I'm sure we've all seen a peer of our kids and thought, "Someone needs to put that little shit over their knee and teach them some manners!"), and being artifically exposed to an unnaturally high concentration of kids will statistically result in more injuries. Given that, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the schools to cover medical expenses from such injuries.
So, in the context of my post, I can see why a school my make the fiscal decision to ban rough forms of play. Hell, it may even be the result of a pain-in-the-ass liability insurance policy the school uses. I still think it's stupid, though. Shit happens, and misc medical expenses should just be in the school district's budget. The relatively high availability of insurance is the reason such stupid-simple medical cost so damned much, as it artificially raises what the consumers can bear, but that's best left for another rant.
I love how people like you seem believe that only THIS batch of politicians
is bad and if we change for others, it will change.
To concentration of power in the same boys' club is the problem. Turn things upside-down, and mix things up a little -- like the whole Tower of Babel thing.
The new blood in the House and Senate may very well be as potentially corrupt (some day) as the current batch of incumbants. However, the incumbants (many have been around for seemingly forever -- see my Utah's Orrin Hatch as an example) have spent years acquiring power and connections.
Throwing out the baby with the bath water this election would bring the government to a screeching halt, which is just what we need.
My voting philosophy in 2004 was: 1) Vote 3rd party if there is such a candidate; 2) Vote Democrat if between Democrat vs Republican; 3) If between candidates of the same party, vote out the incumbant. I'll do the same this election
After using Kopete, Gaim, and Psi (all great programs, btw), I've settled on Kopete. It just *feels* better within the context of my KDE desktop.
That said, I have 2 gripes.
Firstly, it seems to take up a relatively large amount of memory for what it does. I *just* fired it up, and it's allocating 121M with 45M resident (FreeBSD/AMD64). And that's with *only* 2 accounts being active (one Yahoo! and one Google). And after a day's work with those 2 accounts, it sometimes get way out of hand and I need to restart it.
And last, it seems to lag/spinlock (or whatever it's called) all the time. Every time, without fail, I initiate a chat window w/ someone, it hangs for 5-to-15 seconds (giving me the KDE "not responding -- terminate or keep running?" dialog 50% of the time). Every single time. Never any such lag with the other 2 apps mentioned above. I've used Kopete 100% for over a year on 3 different machines, i386 and AMD64, but all of them FreeBSD.
Anyone know of any solutions to these?
(WTF is up with still needing 2 paragraph tags between the 1st and 2nd paragraphs?!?)
That's the beauty of class-action suits (to the lawyers, anyway) -- you don't even have to *know* you're a participant. You can be one more body to enrich the lawyers' pockets and not even be informed of the fact. Of course, you *sometimes* get notice and are allowed to opt-out, but that's even more effort than to default to being part of the class.
The only suit I explicitly went out of way to take part in was the RIAA (damn them!) CD price-fixing suit, and I never saw a cent from that. I never even heard of the AT&T and insurance suits until I got a check in the mail. And while I knew of the Netflix suit (covered on/. several times), I didn't actively become a part of it -- I just received an email from Netflix stating that I was entitled to 1 month's free rental -- which I opted in for, but never received, either.
Trust me, I'm thrilled for those of you who received more than a feel-good token check or lowsey credit for services/products. Companies that fuck up in ways that may hurt/kill people (bad tires, batteries, etc.) deserve to get bent over the barrel. However, it seems that the more white-collar crime type of class actions suits (like when you've been getting unfairly/unreasonably overcharged for insurance/electricity/rents for most of your relationship with the company) result in a token settlement to the individuals.
(WTF is the deal with *still* needing 2 paragraph tags to make the 2nd paragraph stand apart from the 1st?!?)
Let's see... I got a check from AT&T one time for a class-action settlement. The check was for less than postage, but still.... Then the Netflix scam settlement entitled me to 1 free month of rentals. Big whoop. I think I once got a big check from an insurance class-action suit -- something like $1.68. I'm *still* waiting for my share of the RIAA price-gouging settlement.
Seems every other Redbox DVD I rented wasn't able to be played under FreeBSD, so I quit renting from them. While not as bad, Netflix rentals with this problem are popping up more frequently. In fact, I ditched Netflix, too. Not like movies are a necessity for my life -- just a luxury that I'm happy to ditch when the companies I pay money to start treating me like a thief.
I guess there are Windows tools to deal with these new protections, but I'm not going there. So unless Linux/FreeBSD open source options are created, I just won't play ball anymore.
Sorry, MPAA -- you're pissing off (and loosing) legit customers. Not like you care about us, anyway.
Aside from the many SSNs resulting from this search, there are good number of names, addresses, and phone numbers in the same query! Hello, identity fraud?
I hope some major lawsuits result from this and AOL dishes out some major payola for this mistake.
There is the slight possibility that someone at AOL actually has a conscience and did this intentionally to highlight the detail which these databases can yield on common, everyday people. I mean, really, how likely is it that after the AT&T/NSA/etc. wiretapping scandals that a huge corp like AOL would allow something like this to actually happen given the probable public opinion damage? This "goof" has woken up a lot more people than the theoretical privacy rants from computer geeks every time some government agency is caught with their hand in the cookie jar. This hits close to home in a way that is very easy for the general public to grasp.
When people's unhealthy habits hit them in the pocketbook, they'll adjust.
Yeah, that worked so well with the skyrocketing taxes imposed on tobacco and booze.
Morons are morons are morons. Bad health choises will not make 99.99% of the populace change their bad habbits. They'll just go on the public dole instead. We're screwed no matter what.
Just like the federal government can withhold highway funding if the States don't standardize the speed limit or drinking age? Or how the federal government threatens to withhold education funding if the States don't adopt No Child Left Behind?
You mean that kind of coercion?
Granted, I don't think those examples rise to restricting free speech, but I have a hard time seeing how the KSU case does as well.
Governments can (and does) coerce people and/or institutions because when they're supplying the teat you're sucking in (in this case, scholaships), they have you by the proverbial balls.
I sooooo wish the States would get some balls and tell the Fed to fuck off when they pull that highway/education funding bullshit. But no, they like their money too much. However, if enough high-profile jocks rally the alums to threaten to withhold their donations, KSU will fold in a hearbeat. Damned politics.
Slashdot Mirror
"It is also a fact that owning a Hummer is a big financial burden on people that those without Hummers don't have, and they can use some help."
See how ridiculous that sounds? People have choice on whether or not to breed, as do they have a choice to own a Hummer. I don't feel pity for the financially strapped family in either camp.
(posting from Utah, where 5+ kids is too damn common for my comfort)
I tend to agree with you here. I've recently found some stuff that would never/rarely be played on the radio that I find to be of good quality. Hell, even *some* of the stuff that makes it to radio is pretty good (IMHO), like the album "American Idiot". I've discovered Rilo Kiley (I can't decide if Jenny Lewis's voice is pleasing or annoying, but the lyrics are good) and The Beautiful Girls (talk about some great music to just hang out and listen to), who have both been around for a while but also have new stuff. That's a small sample -- I've found a lot of other good stuff out there.
I'm sure the comfort of familiar musical ground goes a long way the older one gets, especially with purchases. But I'm not sure that's what's really going on here.
(WTF? - that page makes my browser slow to a crawl, almost as bad as myspace.)
As much as many people here pooh-pooh the "everything sucks today" argument, an honest person has to take a hard look and see whether or not it's true. I know it's hard -- no, impossible -- to quantify the 'quality' of music. It's obviously a changing beast, dependent on the audience, and other variables.
I submit, as one small data point, the "Top Searches" page on allmusic.com. Notice a trend? Yup -- a good chunk of the artists on that list were in their prime is 10-to-40 years ago.
So what does that *particular* list say? It's a tough call. It may just be that AMG's site is too un-cool for the covetted tween to mid-20's music demographic, leaving us 30+ folks (I'm 34) who were weaned on 60's and 70's rock by our baby boomer parents who went on to be influenced by the 80's and 90's in our teen years. Perhaps there are sites more used by the younger generations that has a "top serach" function that other readers can add to the mix, for comparison.
But maybe -- just maybe -- that today there are fewer artists that actuall make good *albums* that won't sound dated in 10 years and can be listened to over and over in their entirety. Maybe the majority of entertainers that get radio play are optimized for one-hit-wonderhood, who get their 15 minutes and go out in a blaze of glory until they'll featured in ten years on "Where Are They Now?".
Or, perhaps, hind-sight is 20/20 and it's much easier to find the gems from 10+ years ago than it is to find the few that exist today but are lost in the crap that's been on the airwaves since the dawn of radio. :)
No, he's saying that SGI is being a chump of a sore loser in the marketplace. Rather than trying to actually *do* something with that big fat IP portfolio, they're taking the evil route. They're a dying company with a bunch of IP that they can't produce and provide for a competitive price. They should just cash out and liquidate the IP and other assets they own. Having supported/administered SGI products (from Indigo workstations to 64-node Origin 2000's), I know their products were once kick-ass, but SGI's products are so overpriced (they even make Sun and IBM big iron look pretty cheap -- and at least IBM has decent support beyond the 1st tier) as to be silly. This lawsuit is, like others have pointed out, the same route to the Dark Side as SCO has taken. Will SGI's stock become a penny stock before too long?
If my neighbor has been letting his dog dump on my front lawn for years, does that mean that I lose my right to ask him to pick it up or take the dog elsewhere? I don't think so.
I mostly agree with you. But... if you've ignored the problem when you were on good terms with said neighbor, you're an ass if you decide to make an issue of it *after* you've had a falling out with your neighbor.
In some states, I believe that squatters on private property can acquire the title if they can prove they've been living on the property unchallenged for ten years. (Note: I had a couple of real estate agents tell me this, though I've been unable to back that up by digging through the Utah state legal code.) I think other forms of IP should have somethings similiar to this (like trademarks). If you choose not to pursue (in good faith) copyright and patent violations for so long, then you should forfeit your right to your exclusive rights. That would stop stupid submarine patent lawsuits, like the GIF compression, where the IP holder conveniently decides to pursue only after *years* have passed and they notice that their idea is actually making *someone* (not them, obviously) some money. Of course, this would increase legal costs for the IP holders, and some may say that this will put small businesses at a disadvantage. However, I think the history of trademarks shows that this is not the general case.
You could just guve up plastic in all forms entirely. They say "cash is king" for a good reason.
It is. Come visit Provo, Utah, and you'll see. :)
Given the list of periodicals I've subscribed to in the past, the fact that I was once an NRA member, and a few other things such things, I'm sure red flags went up long ago. If anyone wants to snoop on my life, they won't be able to ping Wells Fargo or Visa for my transaction records anymore. They'll have to pay a grunt or two to tail me. More power to 'em -- Feds would stick out like a drag queen wearing hot pink around here. ;)
I actually ditched my checking account a couple of weeks ago. No more checks, no more ATM/check card. I've been credit card free for a few years, but cutting up the cash card (smells and acts like a credit card, and uses the same transaction network) was kinda cool. Living a cash-only life is fun. You simply can't spend more money than you have -- plus you collect far more pocket change in that jar on your mantle for the rainy-day fund. :) Oh, and The Spooks have no paper trail on me other than the paychecks I cash at the credit union (I have a mortgage with them, so they have my vitals on file anyway). After that, it's under the radar. If I want to buy a bunch of teddy bears and propane cylinders over a period of time, I'm anonymous. (Yes, I know he used cash, be he was a dumb-ass who appears to have purchased everything all at once.)
Sure, no more Netflix, hotel stays, car rentals, or instant online orders (well, I have used Wal Mart gift cards to order a few DVDs), but I've now got a stack of cool catalogs that I can pay with US Postal money order should I decide that I really need/want something.
There's something to be said for slowing down your life's pace a bit. Living cash-only is one way to do it.
The last 10 years of my life have been spent seeing my paychecks gouged for pork and other useless crap on all levels of government. I finally had enough and decided to take back what's mine. Hey, if *you* want to make the lifestyle changes of going ftom $60k/yr to around $20k/yr like I have, I say more power to you. Go for it. The world would be a better place if all families could actually *enjoy* their lives together because both parents are home full-time and they're not stressed about the next paycheck.
My family and I can live without most expenses of the typical American and afford to work half-time and live technically near the poverty level *without* enjoying the benefits of that level of income (free lunches, earned income tax credit, etc.). I *chose* to take advantage of these things to say "fuck you" to the system of taxation that screws everyone. Sure, if everyone did what I do, the country would be in a world of fiscal hurt until we figured out a better system than the bloated, corrupt one we currently employ. The more people who opt out of the system, the more pressure is on those who remain in the system. That's a *good* thing becasue eventually, people just *might* figure out that a free life is more important than shiny things and collectively buck the system.
There's no law that says I have to work to the fullest of my income potential, dude.
Insurance? Why the fuck should I pay for it when The Man takes so much of my paycheck (past and present)? If there are medical hardships, there's state aid and there's bankruptcy. Insurance is a political boogeyman ("Think of teh children!") If my granparents could get compound fractures w/o going bankrupt, the fact that you cannot today means something's seriously fucked with the system now.
Go ahead and consider me a leech -- I'm a bitter, disenfranchised leech. If I can legally work the system after years of doing my part and seeing it all pissed away on bloated government, I will. I got sick of this game, and I checked out. I encourage you to do the same -- it's liberating. I'm not free-loading white trash who cranks out kids, doesn't work because they're ignorant and lazy, and makes new car payments with the welfare check. I live within my means quite easily, while technically qualifying for loads of government help. I take advantage of some to make a point. The only reason I'm not getting welfare and/or food stamps is because I don't want some state caseworker looking up my ass and through my bank statements every month -- plus I hate paperwork. I file taxes anywhay, so I may as well get the earned income child credit. My kids are already in school, so I may as well get the free lunches.
I can't call what I do civil disobedience, because it's all legal and there's no risk to me. But it is a way to thumb my nose at a government (and an apathetic population) that needs to change before things will improve for everyone.
This year is the first in the past 4 that our kids weren't homeschooled. We may well pull them out come winter break, as the school system is as bad as I remember it to be.
You want to stop paying for *my* kids to eat free? Bring your income down to a near poverty level and you'll not only pay no taxes, you'll actually get free money! How cool is that? Trust me, you won't die. It's pretty damned liberating living on the fringe of impoverished class. As Janis Joplin once sang, "Freedom is just another word for 'nothing left to lose'." Oh, how true that is! Give up your shiny things and be free. :)
Doing your part within the system just doesn't work. Voting doesn't work. Those who govern us only care that they can tax us as much as they can and that we piss away the rest on shiny things. If you discard the consumer/capitalist way of thinking (and no, I don't mean adopt Communism -- simply provide for your own necessities and happiness will soon follow), then the system has no sway over you.
As a wise machine in a movie once said: "The only way to win is not to play."
No, the right thing to do would be to own up to the consequences of compulsory education and pay for medical expenses incurred as result of that requirement. I qualify for a per-mile stipend to drive my kids to/from school, as there is no bus service to our house. Rightly so, the school system offsets the financial burden (the gas costs are roughly $1US round-trip, twice a day -- about $40/month) of transporting the kids to school. I don't know how common that is (we live in a very rural part of Utah), but reduced/free lunch programs have been a corner stone of every school system I've been a part of (as a student and as a parent of one), and I've lived all over the US. Same principle.
I hope this backfires. If the media companies can make a legitimate try at making money from P2P networks, then why not the companies they're taking to court?
Just to add some prospective (and play devil's advocate), try this on for size: Most children are required to attend school. That includes those too poor to afford the one-off medical expense or insurance. What happens when one of those kids winds up in a freak collision with a pole or another kid? The parents are pretty much screwed.
Now my family has chosen a lifestyle of voluntary simplicty. I work (from home) enough to pay the bills, put food on the table, and a little extra for misc expenses. We don't have insurance for ourselves or our two kids. While it's not really necessary for us to take advantage of, the kids receive free lunches (to put the financials into perspective). Near the start of school this year, we got this private insurance thingy just for while the kids are in school. It read (paraphrased): "Your school does not cover medical expenses for incidents on school grounds, so for $72/year, you can insure for yadda-yadda-yadda...".
I declined. Not that I couldn't afford it, but out of principle. I said, "Fuck that! They make school compulsory, so they will cover any any injuries as a result of them being there." I don't loose any sleep over it -- kids are tough and all but the most sever injuries would result in a confrontation with the school district over whether they should cover the expenses. If it's a result of my kids being stupid, then I'll suck it up. But if it's from some *other* kid being dumb, or negligence on the school's part (ice on the sidewalk, wet floor, class-time activities like P.E.),then I'll pursue it.
Sure, shit happens. Kids will be kids, and my own offspring (8 and 11) do dumb-assed things like all kids. However, the fact is that some kids are real monsters (I'm sure we've all seen a peer of our kids and thought, "Someone needs to put that little shit over their knee and teach them some manners!"), and being artifically exposed to an unnaturally high concentration of kids will statistically result in more injuries. Given that, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the schools to cover medical expenses from such injuries.
So, in the context of my post, I can see why a school my make the fiscal decision to ban rough forms of play. Hell, it may even be the result of a pain-in-the-ass liability insurance policy the school uses. I still think it's stupid, though. Shit happens, and misc medical expenses should just be in the school district's budget. The relatively high availability of insurance is the reason such stupid-simple medical cost so damned much, as it artificially raises what the consumers can bear, but that's best left for another rant.
To concentration of power in the same boys' club is the problem. Turn things upside-down, and mix things up a little -- like the whole Tower of Babel thing.
The new blood in the House and Senate may very well be as potentially corrupt (some day) as the current batch of incumbants. However, the incumbants (many have been around for seemingly forever -- see my Utah's Orrin Hatch as an example) have spent years acquiring power and connections.
Throwing out the baby with the bath water this election would bring the government to a screeching halt, which is just what we need.
My voting philosophy in 2004 was: 1) Vote 3rd party if there is such a candidate; 2) Vote Democrat if between Democrat vs Republican; 3) If between candidates of the same party, vote out the incumbant. I'll do the same this election
That said, I have 2 gripes.
Firstly, it seems to take up a relatively large amount of memory for what it does. I *just* fired it up, and it's allocating 121M with 45M resident (FreeBSD/AMD64). And that's with *only* 2 accounts being active (one Yahoo! and one Google). And after a day's work with those 2 accounts, it sometimes get way out of hand and I need to restart it.
And last, it seems to lag/spinlock (or whatever it's called) all the time. Every time, without fail, I initiate a chat window w/ someone, it hangs for 5-to-15 seconds (giving me the KDE "not responding -- terminate or keep running?" dialog 50% of the time). Every single time. Never any such lag with the other 2 apps mentioned above. I've used Kopete 100% for over a year on 3 different machines, i386 and AMD64, but all of them FreeBSD.
Anyone know of any solutions to these?
(WTF is up with still needing 2 paragraph tags between the 1st and 2nd paragraphs?!?)
The only suit I explicitly went out of way to take part in was the RIAA (damn them!) CD price-fixing suit, and I never saw a cent from that. I never even heard of the AT&T and insurance suits until I got a check in the mail. And while I knew of the Netflix suit (covered on /. several times), I didn't actively become a part of it -- I just received an email from Netflix stating that I was entitled to 1 month's free rental -- which I opted in for, but never received, either.
Trust me, I'm thrilled for those of you who received more than a feel-good token check or lowsey credit for services/products. Companies that fuck up in ways that may hurt/kill people (bad tires, batteries, etc.) deserve to get bent over the barrel. However, it seems that the more white-collar crime type of class actions suits (like when you've been getting unfairly/unreasonably overcharged for insurance/electricity/rents for most of your relationship with the company) result in a token settlement to the individuals.
(WTF is the deal with *still* needing 2 paragraph tags to make the 2nd paragraph stand apart from the 1st?!?)
No, I don't think "never" is that harsh.
I guess there are Windows tools to deal with these new protections, but I'm not going there. So unless Linux/FreeBSD open source options are created, I just won't play ball anymore.
Sorry, MPAA -- you're pissing off (and loosing) legit customers. Not like you care about us, anyway.
Well, regarding one of those patents, your tongue should be somewhere other than in your cheek.
grep "[0-9][0-9][0-9]-[0-9][0-9]-[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]" *.txt
Aside from the many SSNs resulting from this search, there are good number of names, addresses, and phone numbers in the same query! Hello, identity fraud?
I hope some major lawsuits result from this and AOL dishes out some major payola for this mistake.
There is the slight possibility that someone at AOL actually has a conscience and did this intentionally to highlight the detail which these databases can yield on common, everyday people. I mean, really, how likely is it that after the AT&T/NSA/etc. wiretapping scandals that a huge corp like AOL would allow something like this to actually happen given the probable public opinion damage? This "goof" has woken up a lot more people than the theoretical privacy rants from computer geeks every time some government agency is caught with their hand in the cookie jar. This hits close to home in a way that is very easy for the general public to grasp.
Of course this isn't new. We are at war. We have always been at war. Oil production is up 13% this year...
Yeah, that worked so well with the skyrocketing taxes imposed on tobacco and booze.
Morons are morons are morons. Bad health choises will not make 99.99% of the populace change their bad habbits. They'll just go on the public dole instead. We're screwed no matter what.
You mean that kind of coercion?
Granted, I don't think those examples rise to restricting free speech, but I have a hard time seeing how the KSU case does as well.
Governments can (and does) coerce people and/or institutions because when they're supplying the teat you're sucking in (in this case, scholaships), they have you by the proverbial balls.
I sooooo wish the States would get some balls and tell the Fed to fuck off when they pull that highway/education funding bullshit. But no, they like their money too much. However, if enough high-profile jocks rally the alums to threaten to withhold their donations, KSU will fold in a hearbeat. Damned politics.
I didn't know Michael Savage read Slashdot! :)