Wait, this place is only about 1100 km from the North Pole, and they have to run refrigeration to get the temps down to 25 degrees Celsius? Man, that global warming is brutal!
You conveniently left out the rest of Section 8, which defines what is meant by "general Welfare":
No.
There is no distinction within the text of the Constitution that would suggest that the points in Article I, Section 8 following the first are meant to define the terms of the first point. All items contained in Article I, Section 8 are of equal standing.
There are essentially two options out there that I would be willing to use: Zimbra and iCal Server (Darwin Calendar Server). Zimbra is sort of in limbo right now due to the Yahoo! acquisition, and Apple has not yet released a packaged version of iCal Server outside of Mac OS X Server 10.5 (you can, however, get it from the Subversion system).
I hope that Yahoo follows through on their stated intention to keep the open source version of Zimbra.
The other problem is clients. Right now, there aren't many clients that interoperate with Darwin Calendar Server. Apple's iCal is probably the only one ready for prime-time, though supposedly Mulberry works, as well. Mozilla Sunbird will hopefully catch up at some point. Zimbra doesn't have a stand-alone client package, last time I checked, but the Zimbra Desktop package is a good start, even though it itself is actually a web application running against an embedded web server with database synchronization.
This has been a long-term interest of mine. C&S competition to Exchange is one of the key areas that the industry has consistently failed to address.
I've been arguing for a long time now that control over the DNS should pass to the ITU, the International Telecommunications Union. There's no real reason, IMO, why the United States needs to maintain control over the Internet. The Internet has become critical infrastructure for the entire world, and governance over telecommunications standards should be handled by an international agency. Coincidentally, we already have such an agency responsible for telecommunications standards. Why not allow the ITU to take over?
I would have expected someone with the sobriquet "bmwm3nut" to at least know the compression ratios of recent BMW M3 engines. The E46 333bhp inline six was 11.5:1, and the current V8 is 12.0:1.
Except for one thing. Liberalized CCW came at approximately the same exact time frame. The tip off for CCW was Florida in 1987, after which Florida experienced a *rise* in the murder rate for a couple of years...until the early 1990's, when the crime rate began dropping. Suspiciously about the same time as this study observes/predicts.
And when did the UK start enacting strict gun control? 1988, with a handgun ban in 1997. Meanwhile the violent crime rate has risen in the UK, from what I understand. Yet, the UK didn't ban lead petrol additives until the 1980's, meaning they should soon begin to see a crime rate drop, even absent liberalized firearms ownership laws. Should be interesting to see if this theory holds.
Despite my agreement with the basic libertarian tenets of this post, I find it utterly appalling that on a site like Slashdot that this post could be modded up, "Insightful". This post displays such a fundamental lack of knowledge about radio technology, the purpose of the FCC, and the functions of government and private enterprise, that I wonder if the post isn't just a troll, in the end.
IEEE 802.11b and similar technologies aren't licensed services. They operate under Class B rules, which severely limit the usefulness of these devices to relatively short distances. Class B rules are in no way suitable for wide-reaching wireless services. Before anyone starts talking about Pringles can antennae, you should know that such modifications are, technically, not FCC-compliant.
Radio specturm is a resource which is in very limited, fixed supply. Without regulation, there would be utter chaos. Granted, the regulation could be more efficient, but there are smarter, more knowledgable people in this world than the parent poster who understand the function of licensed services.
We don't like Hitler, Stalin and Mao not because they were great leaders, but because they led countries other than America.
Wow, you don't really know much about Hitler, Stalin, and Mao, do you? Or world history? Or philosophy, apparently, despite your mention of the Tao?
We don't like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao because they violated the principles of morality, not because they weren't American. For fsck's sake, man, get an education.
This is nothing more than Apple being nice enough to warn people who are hacking their own phones that Apple cannot predict the interaction of, and is in no way obligated to test such interaction with, third-party software running on iPhones. Apple isn't even under any legal obligation to provide firmware updates in the first place. If you want to take advantage of the new firmware, wither don't modify your phone into an unsupported configuration, or put it back to the way in came when you got it (and don't complain when the restore process, as above, bricks your iPhone).
Nothing to see here, move along. You want some cheese to go with that whine?
Yeah, there are things about the iPhone (and Apple) that piss me off sometimes (see my journal entries on the iPhone). Yes, I got one anyway when the opportunity presented itself. I was going to hold off to see if future software functionality was forthcoming, but I got the opportunity, and I'm enjoying my iPhone. I sincerely hope Apple addresses some of my issues, but I'm not holding my breath. I've done that in the past and been burned by Apple, so now I'm a bit older and a bit wiser.
Honestly, if $300-600 bucks is going to hurt that badly, you shouldn't be hacking in the first place.
His Starship Troopers was about genuine duty to man...
I heartily beg to differ with that characterization, although it does seem to me that you hold Starship Troopers in high regard. Starship Troopers was a treatise on the origins and construction of morality. Those here who are familiar with my posts on the book will know that I believe this book to be one of the most important books of the 20th Century, and very possibly one of the most important philosophical works of all time, whose premises are being borne out more and more in later years by continuing research into the ecological and biological bases of morality and how it impacts the evolution of societies.
I think it is self-evident from the text that nothing about Starship Troopers was intended to apply solely to Homo sapiens. Indeed the very conflict presented by the Bug War is the epitomy of the moral conflict faced by two intelligent species in the ultimate competition for survival. If you posit Heinlein's "Theory of Scientific Morality" and take it to its extreme ends, you must inevitably come to the implied conclusion that the highest aim of morality is the preservation and furtherance of all life.
You can see why I despise Paul Verhoeven for what he did to Starship Troopers with the cinematic adaptation.
we need to have a 'pendantic olympics'. the top prize would be a kick in the teeth....totaling: 24.0, er...23.99999999 if we're going by the metric standard.
Oh, for Dog's sake, *please* do not start up the 0.9999...=1 argument again!
You seem to display a remarkable lack of understanding of Stallman's philosophies, the purpose of the GPL, and the real world, in general.
Stallman's central thesis is that restrictions on communication of knowledge reduce the sum total of intelligence available to humankind. Advocacy of software freedom is his selected method of ensuring that he contributes to the removal on such restrictions because this is an area in which he has gained considerable expertise. Insofar as you would use the efforts of others, freely given, to enrich yourself without contributing a similar benefit to the community, you are willfully denying the human race the ability to build upon your wisdom. The GPL is, to date, the most effective means devised that channels the individual's propensity toward selfishness into a community good.
While I applaud your attempt at articulating what is essentially a libertarian argument, you should recognize that no political or philosophical theory can be considered well-grounded if it does not take human nature into account, and human nature includes the instinct toward community preservation at least as much as it includes the instinct toward self-preservation.
You really shouldn't assume that every person who advocated for the de-criminalization of marjuana (or other currently illegal drugs) is a user of those substances. I am a fervent advocate of the legalization of both marijuana and opium poppies. I partake of neither. I did smoke some pot in college (aggravated my migraine attacks), and I have used prescription opiates for pain, but I have no intention of using either recreationally even if they are eventually legalized.
My main interest is in seeing hemp production in the United States for textile, food, and oil production, and increased availability of opiate pain medications for medical practitioners the world over.
but I have to call you on claiming a moral high ground
Perhaps he is claiming a moral high ground. Perhaps he inhabits the moral high ground.
I think principled disobedience of laws is a valid form of protest, and is perhaps even beneficial to the larger cause.
As do I, but the subject at hand is not "principled disobedience", its the acts of willful violation.
If say, the infringment in question were based upon a belief that the continual extension of copyright cannot be morally justified, nor considered lawful beyond the original terms of the constitution, then there *is* a strong basis for disobedience...but that would limit infringing any work less than the age of those original terms. Otherwise, there's simply no basis at all.
You will find very, very few people who think copyright should be abolished altogether.
That is such an egregiously simplified version of the composition of our government(s) that I find myself wonder whether or not you ever paid attention in class.
First of all, the electoral college only applies to the Presidential/Vice-Presidential election. Second of all, you still have two Senators that represent your state and a Representative for your specific district. Next, most states in this country have two legislative houses *and* a governor that you vote for. Then, there is the question of your municipal forms of government, which may include your specific locality *plus* a regional (county) government, all of whom pass laws and regulations that directly affect your life. This doesn't even begin to cover elected judges and prosecutors, or even those appointed positions which you are in a position to affect.
We're not a direct democracy. We never have been, and we were never intended to be a direct democracy. Direct democracy is a bad idea--it leads to the tyranny of the masses.
Sodomy laws are *both* illegitimate and stupid, but I suspect you know that already, so I'll take your question at face value.
Illegitimate laws are those laws which have been enacted without passing through a process which ensures that they embody a presumption of a moral duty to obey their strictures.
Stupid laws can be of the above type, but also incude many other types of laws, such as laws which cannot possibly be enforced, laws which are redundant, and laws which are simply annoying, among others.
I will state my premise again: for civil disobedience to be rightly justified, it is not enough that a law merely be considered stupid. There are many stupid, and yet still *legitimate* laws on the books which we may presume carry a moral duty of obedience, because they in no way (or in some insignificant fashion) abridge our natural liberty.
Yeah, that's worked real well for the proponents of marijuana legalization.
Well, the problem with marijuana is that not only do a large proportion of people in this country not have any problem with attempting to enforce their stunted versions of morality upon the general population, but that those nanny-state proponents generally do not have the mental capacity to understand the actual issues involved, whether those issues are corporate welfare/pork sponsorship of Cannabis criminalization, the costs to our society for attempting the subsequent "War On Drugs", the incredible loss of revenue and resources due to our inability to legally grow Cannabis sativa, or other problems that result from these misguided policies, such as the suffering inflicted upon those whose use of marijuana (and while we're at it, we may as well include Papaver somniferum) whose greatly reduce the physical pains of dealing with chronic disease. I would hesitate to place marijuana in the same category as copyright infringment.
Civil disobedience should only be used in cases where the law is illegitimate, not merely stupid. You'd be more believable as a patriot if you understood this better. Besides which, if violating stupid and/or illegitimate laws is so fscking important to you, there are much greater priority causes that need addressing in this country before we start quibbling over copyright.
I can not get television, cable or satellite TV where my house is situated in Alaska. I can barely get 1 Mb/s DSL.
I have to assume here that you didn't move to, or remain in, Alaska because of the excellent quality of the communications services, so I have to wonder why it is that you're so pissed off about this. I can think of any number of advantages to living in Alaska that make good TV service pale in comparison, and I'm sure if you put your mind to it, that you can, too. But seriously, you're going to turn to copyright infringement just because you have difficulty obtaining television content? You're going to break civil laws just because you're pissed off that you can't spend money on a faceless corporation who is under no obligation to provide *you* with entertainment? Your priorities seem at little strange to me.
Yeah, you just have to go to a community without a HOA. Whoops! They don't exist unless you want to drive 2 hours to work every day.
Perhaps you need to get out of the house more often?
I live 6 miles from Center City Philadelphia. I can be at work, or get home, *during rush hour* within 15-20 minutes. I own a 3-bedroom, single family, detached home, on a 50x175' lot with a 3-car detached garage. I have a nice front lawn and a nice backyard. And, I paid less than $100,000 for it. Granted, the market has gone up, but there are plenty of properties in my neighborhood for sale all the time, with maximum prices of about $250,000 currently. You will find, if you look around, that there are many similar communities all across the country. We have a nice downtown area with locally-owned businesses, a supermarket (and bank, and gas station, and good hardware store) about half a mile away. The neighbors are nice, and crime is not a problem.
I have a nice 60-meter dipole antenna stretching between my house and my garage, that also functions well down to 80 meters with my matching device.
If you buy into a restrictive covenant, you have only yourself to blame.
Then I wonder how it would compare to a single 8-core Mac Pro running the same software. The Mac Pro might be limited in memory bandwidth, but if you're not going out over Ethernet and handling the overhead of Beowulf, it should be faster, no? If the Mac Pro can double the performance of this cluster, then it's PPR is even lower.
Slashdot Mirror
Wait, this place is only about 1100 km from the North Pole, and they have to run refrigeration to get the temps down to 25 degrees Celsius? Man, that global warming is brutal!
I assume you meant to say 20 to 30 K, no?
You conveniently left out the rest of Section 8, which defines what is meant by "general Welfare":
No.
There is no distinction within the text of the Constitution that would suggest that the points in Article I, Section 8 following the first are meant to define the terms of the first point. All items contained in Article I, Section 8 are of equal standing.
There are essentially two options out there that I would be willing to use: Zimbra and iCal Server (Darwin Calendar Server). Zimbra is sort of in limbo right now due to the Yahoo! acquisition, and Apple has not yet released a packaged version of iCal Server outside of Mac OS X Server 10.5 (you can, however, get it from the Subversion system).
I hope that Yahoo follows through on their stated intention to keep the open source version of Zimbra.
The other problem is clients. Right now, there aren't many clients that interoperate with Darwin Calendar Server. Apple's iCal is probably the only one ready for prime-time, though supposedly Mulberry works, as well. Mozilla Sunbird will hopefully catch up at some point. Zimbra doesn't have a stand-alone client package, last time I checked, but the Zimbra Desktop package is a good start, even though it itself is actually a web application running against an embedded web server with database synchronization.
This has been a long-term interest of mine. C&S competition to Exchange is one of the key areas that the industry has consistently failed to address.
I've been arguing for a long time now that control over the DNS should pass to the ITU, the International Telecommunications Union. There's no real reason, IMO, why the United States needs to maintain control over the Internet. The Internet has become critical infrastructure for the entire world, and governance over telecommunications standards should be handled by an international agency. Coincidentally, we already have such an agency responsible for telecommunications standards. Why not allow the ITU to take over?
I would have expected someone with the sobriquet "bmwm3nut" to at least know the compression ratios of recent BMW M3 engines. The E46 333bhp inline six was 11.5:1, and the current V8 is 12.0:1.
"An armed society is a polite society." - Robert A. Heinlein
Except for one thing. Liberalized CCW came at approximately the same exact time frame. The tip off for CCW was Florida in 1987, after which Florida experienced a *rise* in the murder rate for a couple of years...until the early 1990's, when the crime rate began dropping. Suspiciously about the same time as this study observes/predicts.
And when did the UK start enacting strict gun control? 1988, with a handgun ban in 1997. Meanwhile the violent crime rate has risen in the UK, from what I understand. Yet, the UK didn't ban lead petrol additives until the 1980's, meaning they should soon begin to see a crime rate drop, even absent liberalized firearms ownership laws. Should be interesting to see if this theory holds.
Despite my agreement with the basic libertarian tenets of this post, I find it utterly appalling that on a site like Slashdot that this post could be modded up, "Insightful". This post displays such a fundamental lack of knowledge about radio technology, the purpose of the FCC, and the functions of government and private enterprise, that I wonder if the post isn't just a troll, in the end.
IEEE 802.11b and similar technologies aren't licensed services. They operate under Class B rules, which severely limit the usefulness of these devices to relatively short distances. Class B rules are in no way suitable for wide-reaching wireless services. Before anyone starts talking about Pringles can antennae, you should know that such modifications are, technically, not FCC-compliant.
Radio specturm is a resource which is in very limited, fixed supply. Without regulation, there would be utter chaos. Granted, the regulation could be more efficient, but there are smarter, more knowledgable people in this world than the parent poster who understand the function of licensed services.
We don't like Hitler, Stalin and Mao not because they were great leaders, but because they led countries other than America.
Wow, you don't really know much about Hitler, Stalin, and Mao, do you? Or world history? Or philosophy, apparently, despite your mention of the Tao?
We don't like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao because they violated the principles of morality, not because they weren't American. For fsck's sake, man, get an education.
Oh, please.
This is nothing more than Apple being nice enough to warn people who are hacking their own phones that Apple cannot predict the interaction of, and is in no way obligated to test such interaction with, third-party software running on iPhones. Apple isn't even under any legal obligation to provide firmware updates in the first place. If you want to take advantage of the new firmware, wither don't modify your phone into an unsupported configuration, or put it back to the way in came when you got it (and don't complain when the restore process, as above, bricks your iPhone).
Nothing to see here, move along. You want some cheese to go with that whine?
Yeah, there are things about the iPhone (and Apple) that piss me off sometimes (see my journal entries on the iPhone). Yes, I got one anyway when the opportunity presented itself. I was going to hold off to see if future software functionality was forthcoming, but I got the opportunity, and I'm enjoying my iPhone. I sincerely hope Apple addresses some of my issues, but I'm not holding my breath. I've done that in the past and been burned by Apple, so now I'm a bit older and a bit wiser.
Honestly, if $300-600 bucks is going to hurt that badly, you shouldn't be hacking in the first place.
I heartily beg to differ with that characterization, although it does seem to me that you hold Starship Troopers in high regard. Starship Troopers was a treatise on the origins and construction of morality. Those here who are familiar with my posts on the book will know that I believe this book to be one of the most important books of the 20th Century, and very possibly one of the most important philosophical works of all time, whose premises are being borne out more and more in later years by continuing research into the ecological and biological bases of morality and how it impacts the evolution of societies.
I think it is self-evident from the text that nothing about Starship Troopers was intended to apply solely to Homo sapiens. Indeed the very conflict presented by the Bug War is the epitomy of the moral conflict faced by two intelligent species in the ultimate competition for survival. If you posit Heinlein's "Theory of Scientific Morality" and take it to its extreme ends, you must inevitably come to the implied conclusion that the highest aim of morality is the preservation and furtherance of all life.
You can see why I despise Paul Verhoeven for what he did to Starship Troopers with the cinematic adaptation.
we need to have a 'pendantic olympics'. the top prize would be a kick in the teeth....totaling: 24.0, er...23.99999999 if we're going by the metric standard.
Oh, for Dog's sake, *please* do not start up the 0.9999...=1 argument again!
You seem to display a remarkable lack of understanding of Stallman's philosophies, the purpose of the GPL, and the real world, in general.
Stallman's central thesis is that restrictions on communication of knowledge reduce the sum total of intelligence available to humankind. Advocacy of software freedom is his selected method of ensuring that he contributes to the removal on such restrictions because this is an area in which he has gained considerable expertise. Insofar as you would use the efforts of others, freely given, to enrich yourself without contributing a similar benefit to the community, you are willfully denying the human race the ability to build upon your wisdom. The GPL is, to date, the most effective means devised that channels the individual's propensity toward selfishness into a community good.
While I applaud your attempt at articulating what is essentially a libertarian argument, you should recognize that no political or philosophical theory can be considered well-grounded if it does not take human nature into account, and human nature includes the instinct toward community preservation at least as much as it includes the instinct toward self-preservation.
Just smoke the spliff and be done with it
You really shouldn't assume that every person who advocated for the de-criminalization of marjuana (or other currently illegal drugs) is a user of those substances. I am a fervent advocate of the legalization of both marijuana and opium poppies. I partake of neither. I did smoke some pot in college (aggravated my migraine attacks), and I have used prescription opiates for pain, but I have no intention of using either recreationally even if they are eventually legalized.
My main interest is in seeing hemp production in the United States for textile, food, and oil production, and increased availability of opiate pain medications for medical practitioners the world over.
but I have to call you on claiming a moral high ground
Perhaps he is claiming a moral high ground. Perhaps he inhabits the moral high ground.
I think principled disobedience of laws is a valid form of protest, and is perhaps even beneficial to the larger cause.
As do I, but the subject at hand is not "principled disobedience", its the acts of willful violation.
If say, the infringment in question were based upon a belief that the continual extension of copyright cannot be morally justified, nor considered lawful beyond the original terms of the constitution, then there *is* a strong basis for disobedience...but that would limit infringing any work less than the age of those original terms. Otherwise, there's simply no basis at all.
You will find very, very few people who think copyright should be abolished altogether.
Seriously?
You wasted a post to criticize my grammar.
You could have responded to any of my points.
You didn't.
Were these sentences short enough for you to grasp?
That is such an egregiously simplified version of the composition of our government(s) that I find myself wonder whether or not you ever paid attention in class.
First of all, the electoral college only applies to the Presidential/Vice-Presidential election. Second of all, you still have two Senators that represent your state and a Representative for your specific district. Next, most states in this country have two legislative houses *and* a governor that you vote for. Then, there is the question of your municipal forms of government, which may include your specific locality *plus* a regional (county) government, all of whom pass laws and regulations that directly affect your life. This doesn't even begin to cover elected judges and prosecutors, or even those appointed positions which you are in a position to affect.
We're not a direct democracy. We never have been, and we were never intended to be a direct democracy. Direct democracy is a bad idea--it leads to the tyranny of the masses.
Sodomy laws are *both* illegitimate and stupid, but I suspect you know that already, so I'll take your question at face value.
Illegitimate laws are those laws which have been enacted without passing through a process which ensures that they embody a presumption of a moral duty to obey their strictures.
Stupid laws can be of the above type, but also incude many other types of laws, such as laws which cannot possibly be enforced, laws which are redundant, and laws which are simply annoying, among others.
I will state my premise again: for civil disobedience to be rightly justified, it is not enough that a law merely be considered stupid. There are many stupid, and yet still *legitimate* laws on the books which we may presume carry a moral duty of obedience, because they in no way (or in some insignificant fashion) abridge our natural liberty.
Yeah, that's worked real well for the proponents of marijuana legalization.
Well, the problem with marijuana is that not only do a large proportion of people in this country not have any problem with attempting to enforce their stunted versions of morality upon the general population, but that those nanny-state proponents generally do not have the mental capacity to understand the actual issues involved, whether those issues are corporate welfare/pork sponsorship of Cannabis criminalization, the costs to our society for attempting the subsequent "War On Drugs", the incredible loss of revenue and resources due to our inability to legally grow Cannabis sativa, or other problems that result from these misguided policies, such as the suffering inflicted upon those whose use of marijuana (and while we're at it, we may as well include Papaver somniferum) whose greatly reduce the physical pains of dealing with chronic disease. I would hesitate to place marijuana in the same category as copyright infringment.
When the law is STUPID, it should be ignored.
Bullshit.
Civil disobedience should only be used in cases where the law is illegitimate, not merely stupid. You'd be more believable as a patriot if you understood this better. Besides which, if violating stupid and/or illegitimate laws is so fscking important to you, there are much greater priority causes that need addressing in this country before we start quibbling over copyright.
I can not get television, cable or satellite TV where my house is situated in Alaska. I can barely get 1 Mb/s DSL.
I have to assume here that you didn't move to, or remain in, Alaska because of the excellent quality of the communications services, so I have to wonder why it is that you're so pissed off about this. I can think of any number of advantages to living in Alaska that make good TV service pale in comparison, and I'm sure if you put your mind to it, that you can, too.
But seriously, you're going to turn to copyright infringement just because you have difficulty obtaining television content? You're going to break civil laws just because you're pissed off that you can't spend money on a faceless corporation who is under no obligation to provide *you* with entertainment? Your priorities seem at little strange to me.
Yeah, you just have to go to a community without a HOA. Whoops! They don't exist unless you want to drive 2 hours to work every day.
Perhaps you need to get out of the house more often?
I live 6 miles from Center City Philadelphia. I can be at work, or get home, *during rush hour* within 15-20 minutes. I own a 3-bedroom, single family, detached home, on a 50x175' lot with a 3-car detached garage. I have a nice front lawn and a nice backyard. And, I paid less than $100,000 for it. Granted, the market has gone up, but there are plenty of properties in my neighborhood for sale all the time, with maximum prices of about $250,000 currently. You will find, if you look around, that there are many similar communities all across the country. We have a nice downtown area with locally-owned businesses, a supermarket (and bank, and gas station, and good hardware store) about half a mile away. The neighbors are nice, and crime is not a problem.
I have a nice 60-meter dipole antenna stretching between my house and my garage, that also functions well down to 80 meters with my matching device.
If you buy into a restrictive covenant, you have only yourself to blame.
Wrong as well. Read the regulation. It was extended to apply to renters.
Then I wonder how it would compare to a single 8-core Mac Pro running the same software. The Mac Pro might be limited in memory bandwidth, but if you're not going out over Ethernet and handling the overhead of Beowulf, it should be faster, no? If the Mac Pro can double the performance of this cluster, then it's PPR is even lower.
Here's a nice PDF from Uncle Charlie:
. pdf
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/consumerdish