Copyright law is unjust as it places unnecessary restriction on actions that the public want to participate in, namely, copying.
If you leave off the first and last words of your sentence you can pretty much apply that to every single law ever written from the time of Hammurabi to the present. Here's a few examples:
Theft laws are unjust as they place unnecessary restriction on actions that the public want to participate in, namely, stealing from others.
Rape laws are unjust as they place unnecessary restriction on actions that the public want to participate in, namely, fucking anyone they want.
Murder laws are unjust as they place unnecessary restriction on actions that the public want to participate in, namely, killing that asshole who just cut them off.
Amazing. Aside from being the most inane thing posted in quite a while, it really fails to capture the idea you really want to express:
Copyright law is unjust as it places unnecessary restriction on actions that the public, eg. QuantumG, wants to participate in, namely, personal profit with minimal effort and outlay.
Btw, no law stops you from the act of copying. You can go around copying all day and all night long. What copyright prevents you from doing is copying others' work without their permission. Sounds about right to me.
We all have a natural right to copy whatever we like..
Do you mean like credit reports, purchasing habits, medical histories, dead bolt keys, telephone conversations, looks, social security numbers, home addresses, photos taken with a telephoto lenses,credit card numbers, bank account numbers, names, email?
Or do you just mean you want to get free shit? That you don't want to pay for other peoples' hard work?
Um. Did I espouse that idea? No, I pointed out that the GP's idea that the business' "failure" to jump into action to follow some (possibly) moral / ethical action isn't wrong or inappropriate. Businesses are people. Those people don't have any responsibility to spend their limited daytime hours performing deep psychological analysis of some idiot's astonishingly poorly thought out words.
What people should be taking from this isn't that some employer somewhere was mean to a webcomic author, but that said webcomic author is a perfect counter example of the phrase "don't be stupid."
I have no idea why you are addressing your questions at me, as I took no position. I answered the question as to why someone might want to ban pot flavored candy. Whether it's the answer that such proponents actually believe I don't know. I don't really care. I just pointed out that banning one thing does not criminalize a related idea. Ie. banning downed cattle from human consumption is absolutely nothing at all like criminalizing the idea of eating meat.
Desensitization is a real phenomena. Your spastic response doesn't change that particular truth.
Every time I point out that someone is showing evidence of being completely stupid the "delicate flower, can't we all just get alone" (and the "I disagree but am incapable of forming a cogent argument") mods hammer me down as flame bait or troll, but you know what? You appear to be exceptionally stupid. I say this to help you. Now you can review the several flaws in your thinking that led to your post and better yourself. To give you an example of the stupidity you exhibit and the basic flaw in your post, I will address to you a question that implies a position you never claimed:
"You want to have anal sex with six year old boys, is that what you are trying to say?"
An answer to your question: the only thing I'm trying to say is that I get tired of reading morons with some paranoid agenda spewing logically inconsistent crap.
Of course, now I have to add that it's laughable how freakishly monomanic you are about your video games that conversations that have nothing whatsoever to do with them cause you to leap into a passive aggressive defense. Why don't you save your energy for the next Jack Thompson story?
Whatever. If you to peel the onion go ahead. But the point is, whatever enterprise people get up to for whatever reason, it usually has a specific purpose. That purpose usually isn't a debating society for whatever the social ill du jour happens to be. People saying that the business should turn into a support system for this possible dumb ass, just don't get it. The individuals that make up the business have better things to do with their time than analyze one idiot who lacks the insight into society to realize it's pretty fucking stupid to talk about having to shoot someone in the face repeatedly to kill them on the same day that some other asshat murders a bunch of people. He doesn't have an entitlement to be understood. If he does something that makes the people around him think he's not worth having around, then he just CLM-ed himself. Now he's gone one better and demonstrated that he lacks discretion. What employer is going to want to hire this guy if this is his response to being fired?
And you have no idea whether he was actually considered a terrorist. You might want to look into the phenomena of copycat crimes. And the statistics that such events trigger other similar events. So it is smart for the po-po to take it a little more seriously in the period after some fucktard does something stupid.
Um. When people have experiences those experiences have a way of desensitizing people. We pull way back from the line of child sex in order to make sure people are able to feel a sense of disgust by the idea. May be a stupid plan to ban the taste of pot in candy, soda, whatever, but it's not criminalizing the idea of smoking pot.
If you don't believe me do this. Go somewhere where the flavor has been banned from candy and find a cop and tell him you just thought of someone smoking pot. You're not going to get arrested.
Um. he's getting paid Big Bucks(tm) as a contractor because he's supposed to work harder, with greater knowledge and more attention to details and staying on task. Blabbing about how hard it'll be to kill somebody with your teeny-tiny pop gun isn't likely in scope.
While he was a "contractor", the contract was likely not between him and the ultimate recipient of his work. Eg. the feds have a contract with his boss, not with him.
You know, just because you have two or more people in a room together, it doesn't mean that it is a perfect time to consider all the moral, ethical, rational, political, or environmental challenges that face society today. Businesses have a specific purpose: to provide a particular service or product. It's not always appropriate (or ever appropriate) that a business completely goes off track and pursues some tangent because there is some miniscule possibility that somebody on slashdot might think that spending efforts psychoanalyzing some dork who doesn't have the social filters of a skunk will finally uncover the difference between an idiot and a sociopathic fuckwad who went and shot everybody they were jealous of because they felt bad for themselves.
For all you know this guy spent several hours a day shooting the shit with the clown in the next cubicle and had half the productivity that they expect. And finally he just pushed it over the edge.
Regardless of your position on induced stupidity-- err, i mean, smoking pot habitually, you've got some poor logic there. While the opponents of the ban you mention are against the idea of smoking pot and making candy that tastes like pot, they're not banning the idea. They're banning a product with a particular taste. Therefore your conclusion that "ideas and presumed intentions" are becoming criminal is completely illogical.
Now, let's face it, digital media is a special case where production truly *is* free (hence, the stealbots downloading their precious copies of Spiderman-3, later this afternoon).
Except production of digital media isn't free. The cost of reproduction of digital media is almost free. What I want to know is this: how many of the people on here who think music, software, movies, etc. should all be free to them, produce a tangible, physical product. My guess is very very few. And those that do produce a product, the odds are that it is in a very light industry. Now, if you aren't planning on paying people when you consume their services and easily copied products, who is going to pay you for your non-tangible products and services? You're going to need to talk to your congress folks and about making sure that you have some kind of realistic heavy industry in your neighborhood. Otherwise, just like you are treating all the people who create movies, music and other content, you will be of zero value to the world.
The infant mortality rate of the US comes up a lot. And the reason the US is so "high" is because of differences in how it's measured. Here are a couple of links for you: Op ed piece and something more scientific.
Aside from that, how long before this treatment is available to people in the US? Will insurance companies even cover it, or will they order the doctors to perform the usual quick revival, knowing that if I wake up, they'll probably have to pay more in order to fix whatever killed me in the first place
First, there's no specific treatment involved. It's a line of research. Second, when a particular regimen is developed it is highly likely that insurance will cover it. Paying medical bills for non-terminal conditions is much cheaper than paying life insurance policies.
Are you claiming that this is the only positive thing positive to come from an American in recent years? If not then your post is pitiful. If so, then I'd like some supporting evidence.
Section of Emergency Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
You would need to do more research to say the nationality of the authors of the particular paper you referenced. Then you might notice that that is a position paper highlighting the lack of usage of a particular approach to cardiac arrest treatment. Which is quite different from the conclusion that it is the resumption of oxygen that is the cause of cell death. How about you provide us with a cite for the research that is the topic of this story?
That's ok. "How our school's aren't producing scientifically oriented graduates." isn't even a complete sentence.
Re:Makes a little bit of sense. . .
on
Treating the Dead
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Less breath == less oxygen. You'll still be doing roughly the same number of compressions per minute:
bcccbcccbcccbcccbcccbcccbcccbcccbccc...
bccccccccccbccccccccccbccccccccccb...
Re:Traditional Chinese Medicine Recognizes This
on
Treating the Dead
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
While I agree that traditional Chinese medicine has disagreed with western treatments, I'd be very interested in seeing any kind of supporting documentation that this specific bit of knowledge has been know to Chinese practitioners for any length of time that would be considered long.
This was discovered in the US?
on
Treating the Dead
·
· Score: -1, Troll
Amazing. Given how many studies have shown that the US is backward technologically. How our medicine is falling further and further behind the socialized countries of Europe. How our school's aren't producing scientifically oriented graduates. It's unfathomable how this kind of thing could come from the shores of North America. Or possibly everyone with their reports of fucked US tech, meds, and science is just pushing an agenda.
There was a much better approach that I'm sure Mr. Maass would have been pleased to be subjected to. In the exact same fashion that he developed this software and kept the whole situation to himself until his "planned" notification to Cisco this summer, the university could have let him finish out his degree then "planned" on releasing the confirmation that he had done so until sometime in 2020. I'm sure that would fit perfectly within Maass' code of ethics.
And, btw, university code of conduct, aups and the like are meant to be vague. Not so they can stick it to anybody they don't like, but because it's impossible to enumerate the entirety of stupid behavior. University students should have the brains to not need an itemized list of good and acceptable behavior.
All in all it sounds like their being pretty nice to the guy. He's just been suspended, he could have been expelled.
Slashdot Mirror
If you leave off the first and last words of your sentence you can pretty much apply that to every single law ever written from the time of Hammurabi to the present. Here's a few examples:
Theft laws are unjust as they place unnecessary restriction on actions that the public want to participate in, namely, stealing from others.
Rape laws are unjust as they place unnecessary restriction on actions that the public want to participate in, namely, fucking anyone they want.
Murder laws are unjust as they place unnecessary restriction on actions that the public want to participate in, namely, killing that asshole who just cut them off.
Amazing. Aside from being the most inane thing posted in quite a while, it really fails to capture the idea you really want to express:
Copyright law is unjust as it places unnecessary restriction on actions that the public, eg. QuantumG, wants to participate in, namely, personal profit with minimal effort and outlay.
Btw, no law stops you from the act of copying. You can go around copying all day and all night long. What copyright prevents you from doing is copying others' work without their permission. Sounds about right to me.
Do you mean like credit reports, purchasing habits, medical histories, dead bolt keys, telephone conversations, looks, social security numbers, home addresses, photos taken with a telephoto lenses,credit card numbers, bank account numbers, names, email?
Or do you just mean you want to get free shit? That you don't want to pay for other peoples' hard work?
Um. Did I espouse that idea? No, I pointed out that the GP's idea that the business' "failure" to jump into action to follow some (possibly) moral / ethical action isn't wrong or inappropriate. Businesses are people. Those people don't have any responsibility to spend their limited daytime hours performing deep psychological analysis of some idiot's astonishingly poorly thought out words.
What people should be taking from this isn't that some employer somewhere was mean to a webcomic author, but that said webcomic author is a perfect counter example of the phrase "don't be stupid."
I have no idea why you are addressing your questions at me, as I took no position. I answered the question as to why someone might want to ban pot flavored candy. Whether it's the answer that such proponents actually believe I don't know. I don't really care. I just pointed out that banning one thing does not criminalize a related idea. Ie. banning downed cattle from human consumption is absolutely nothing at all like criminalizing the idea of eating meat.
Desensitization is a real phenomena. Your spastic response doesn't change that particular truth.
Every time I point out that someone is showing evidence of being completely stupid the "delicate flower, can't we all just get alone" (and the "I disagree but am incapable of forming a cogent argument") mods hammer me down as flame bait or troll, but you know what? You appear to be exceptionally stupid. I say this to help you. Now you can review the several flaws in your thinking that led to your post and better yourself. To give you an example of the stupidity you exhibit and the basic flaw in your post, I will address to you a question that implies a position you never claimed:
"You want to have anal sex with six year old boys, is that what you are trying to say?"
An answer to your question: the only thing I'm trying to say is that I get tired of reading morons with some paranoid agenda spewing logically inconsistent crap.
Of course, now I have to add that it's laughable how freakishly monomanic you are about your video games that conversations that have nothing whatsoever to do with them cause you to leap into a passive aggressive defense. Why don't you save your energy for the next Jack Thompson story?
Whatever. If you to peel the onion go ahead. But the point is, whatever enterprise people get up to for whatever reason, it usually has a specific purpose. That purpose usually isn't a debating society for whatever the social ill du jour happens to be. People saying that the business should turn into a support system for this possible dumb ass, just don't get it. The individuals that make up the business have better things to do with their time than analyze one idiot who lacks the insight into society to realize it's pretty fucking stupid to talk about having to shoot someone in the face repeatedly to kill them on the same day that some other asshat murders a bunch of people. He doesn't have an entitlement to be understood. If he does something that makes the people around him think he's not worth having around, then he just CLM-ed himself. Now he's gone one better and demonstrated that he lacks discretion. What employer is going to want to hire this guy if this is his response to being fired?
And you have no idea whether he was actually considered a terrorist. You might want to look into the phenomena of copycat crimes. And the statistics that such events trigger other similar events. So it is smart for the po-po to take it a little more seriously in the period after some fucktard does something stupid.
Um. When people have experiences those experiences have a way of desensitizing people. We pull way back from the line of child sex in order to make sure people are able to feel a sense of disgust by the idea. May be a stupid plan to ban the taste of pot in candy, soda, whatever, but it's not criminalizing the idea of smoking pot.
If you don't believe me do this. Go somewhere where the flavor has been banned from candy and find a cop and tell him you just thought of someone smoking pot. You're not going to get arrested.
Um. he's getting paid Big Bucks(tm) as a contractor because he's supposed to work harder, with greater knowledge and more attention to details and staying on task. Blabbing about how hard it'll be to kill somebody with your teeny-tiny pop gun isn't likely in scope.
While he was a "contractor", the contract was likely not between him and the ultimate recipient of his work. Eg. the feds have a contract with his boss, not with him.
You know, just because you have two or more people in a room together, it doesn't mean that it is a perfect time to consider all the moral, ethical, rational, political, or environmental challenges that face society today. Businesses have a specific purpose: to provide a particular service or product. It's not always appropriate (or ever appropriate) that a business completely goes off track and pursues some tangent because there is some miniscule possibility that somebody on slashdot might think that spending efforts psychoanalyzing some dork who doesn't have the social filters of a skunk will finally uncover the difference between an idiot and a sociopathic fuckwad who went and shot everybody they were jealous of because they felt bad for themselves.
For all you know this guy spent several hours a day shooting the shit with the clown in the next cubicle and had half the productivity that they expect. And finally he just pushed it over the edge.
Regardless of your position on induced stupidity-- err, i mean, smoking pot habitually, you've got some poor logic there. While the opponents of the ban you mention are against the idea of smoking pot and making candy that tastes like pot, they're not banning the idea. They're banning a product with a particular taste. Therefore your conclusion that "ideas and presumed intentions" are becoming criminal is completely illogical.
Except production of digital media isn't free. The cost of reproduction of digital media is almost free. What I want to know is this: how many of the people on here who think music, software, movies, etc. should all be free to them, produce a tangible, physical product. My guess is very very few. And those that do produce a product, the odds are that it is in a very light industry. Now, if you aren't planning on paying people when you consume their services and easily copied products, who is going to pay you for your non-tangible products and services? You're going to need to talk to your congress folks and about making sure that you have some kind of realistic heavy industry in your neighborhood. Otherwise, just like you are treating all the people who create movies, music and other content, you will be of zero value to the world.
Not to mention if you lay off over 30% of your workforce you have no choice but to announce it as the law requires an announcement.
The infant mortality rate of the US comes up a lot. And the reason the US is so "high" is because of differences in how it's measured. Here are a couple of links for you: Op ed piece and something more scientific.
(Disclaimer: Unless that information is about the activists, then it's total information lock down time.)
Nope, sorry, the results tantrum over the troll post is still in place. I know because I don't get mod points.
First, there's no specific treatment involved. It's a line of research. Second, when a particular regimen is developed it is highly likely that insurance will cover it. Paying medical bills for non-terminal conditions is much cheaper than paying life insurance policies.
Are you claiming that this is the only positive thing positive to come from an American in recent years? If not then your post is pitiful. If so, then I'd like some supporting evidence.
You would need to do more research to say the nationality of the authors of the particular paper you referenced. Then you might notice that that is a position paper highlighting the lack of usage of a particular approach to cardiac arrest treatment. Which is quite different from the conclusion that it is the resumption of oxygen that is the cause of cell death. How about you provide us with a cite for the research that is the topic of this story?
That's ok. "How our school's aren't producing scientifically oriented graduates." isn't even a complete sentence.
Less breath == less oxygen. You'll still be doing roughly the same number of compressions per minute:
bcccbcccbcccbcccbcccbcccbcccbcccbccc...
bccccccccccbccccccccccbccccccccccb...
While I agree that traditional Chinese medicine has disagreed with western treatments, I'd be very interested in seeing any kind of supporting documentation that this specific bit of knowledge has been know to Chinese practitioners for any length of time that would be considered long.
Amazing. Given how many studies have shown that the US is backward technologically. How our medicine is falling further and further behind the socialized countries of Europe. How our school's aren't producing scientifically oriented graduates. It's unfathomable how this kind of thing could come from the shores of North America. Or possibly everyone with their reports of fucked US tech, meds, and science is just pushing an agenda.
Or it says that you were planning on doing something bad and just in case you got caught in the act you were preparing your story ahead of time...
There was a much better approach that I'm sure Mr. Maass would have been pleased to be subjected to. In the exact same fashion that he developed this software and kept the whole situation to himself until his "planned" notification to Cisco this summer, the university could have let him finish out his degree then "planned" on releasing the confirmation that he had done so until sometime in 2020. I'm sure that would fit perfectly within Maass' code of ethics.
And, btw, university code of conduct, aups and the like are meant to be vague. Not so they can stick it to anybody they don't like, but because it's impossible to enumerate the entirety of stupid behavior. University students should have the brains to not need an itemized list of good and acceptable behavior.
All in all it sounds like their being pretty nice to the guy. He's just been suspended, he could have been expelled.