Re:Let them talk forever, it's what the EU is for
on
Bye ACTA, Hello CETA
·
· Score: 1
That's one THOUSAND, four HUNDRED, and eighty years, which is hardly the life span of a failed state.
Does it exist now? No. Then it's a failed state.
Don't be thick headed. This's reality we're talking about. Assuming (generously) fifty year life spans, that works out to four thousand, nine hundred and sixty life spans. That's a pretty damned good run as states or civilizations go and I wouldn't call that failure, especially considering the legacy it left when it did finally collapse and splinter.
Why do I continue to come here and read the drivel that gets posted or the ridiculous responses that such trivial matters illicit from the great Slashed masses?
Masochism? Either that, or it gives you some sort of right to yell up the stairs to your Mom "I'm busy!" when she calls you to come and take out the garbage.
The Chinese sharks smelled bl$$d with the whole "ipad" name debacle...
That's exactly what I was thinking. "Hey, they fell for that. We got a mark! What else have we got that we can shake 'em down for?" Now they're pouring over everything in their patent and copyright portfolio to see what else applies. I wonder if they have rounded corners in there.
I used to think the reports of timothy's failures at reporting were overblown. Now I know better. Talk about an epic failure. Why does this guy still have a job?
I don't know why you're singling out "timothy" here. Almost every story's summary, regardless of "editor", obviously suffers from a lack of proofreading at the very least, not to mention other obvious faults (misleading or inaccurate titles, spelling mistakes, fanboi-ism,...).
We have no idea what is in the job description or list of duties or SOP for the position of/. "editor." They may actually be doing it just as their overlords specify it to be done. This is a web forum, driven by page views and advertising, so perhaps they think boneheaded controversy is a good thing for their intended goal.
For some odd reason it works fine for drying Pekingese dogs.
No matter how much you hate Pekingese, no it's not right to do this to to them. They are dogs, after all. On the other hand, a magpie in a microwave could be entertaining, in a sick (though justified) sort of way.
What's wrong with this picture? You asked a question, and s/he replied that the answer is in TFA, which I have to assume you didn't bother to read if so. How is that rude?
You'd probably also need to get rid of top-down authoritative structures and place a lot more emphasis on the individual's responsibility in decision making, since war never looks good to the individual.
What turnip truck did you just fall off? People have always clamoured to sign up to go off to war. Canadians even signed up to fight in VietNam. Prior to the US entering the war, US citizens came to Canada to sign up for WWII. Patriotism and nationalism are powerful motivators, and besides, it's an adventure.
No one will care much outside Syria anyway, at least not for more than 5 minutes and a tweet or 2.
Are you joking? That regime has been a seeping wound on the face of mankind for a long time now. They had hit squads roaming the world assassinating their opponents during the Cold War. Assad & Co. have done far worse things than Gaddafi even dreamed of.
I will dance when that bunch gets hung up on meathooks.
Indeed. But they can demonstrate substantial non-infringing use. Although in many countries, as a compromise, a tax is levied to compensate the cartels for the infringing use.
Yes, and that tax is levied across the board on everyone including me, someone who advocates boycotting them instead. I don't infringe copyrighted works, yet I have to pay them as if I do. I've read a lot of stories from self-described pirates who buy legal media who then download copies to use due to the many impediments (DRM, un-skippable FBI warnings, region encoding,...) the MafiAA insists on placing in their way. I consider that non-infringing.
The DoJ effort in this is driven by an ex-MafiAA employee.
I think your opinion would hold more weight if you didn't announce your bias quite so blatantly.
I willingly admit I am biased. The MafiAA are corrupting politicians and whole countries' electoral and justice systems, buying draconian legislation, and suing kids into poverty for using their computers as they expect to be able to. It's disgraceful. A quarter of a million dollar fine for copying a DVD?!? That's insanely out of proportion to the actual damage caused.
Surely the DOJ is responsible for protecting American companies from criminal harm.
They're responsible for criminalizing civil copyright infringement because the MafiAA is too "stick in the mud" to learn to adapt to *any* new technology (from sheet music and player pianos through BlueRay), is too lazy to fight their own battles, and can buy our justice systems from greedy politicians.
You bet I'm biased. This's atrocious! The MafiAA cannot win this war but they're willing to destroy everything in their way trying. The sooner they're consigned to the dustbin of history, the better.
Copyright infringement is against the law. Aggregating and posting links is not against the law
This is why he's on trial for facilitating copyright infringement and not Aggregating and posting links.
Selling someone a computer or blank media could be construed as facilitating then. Are they to go after BestBuy or Intel next? Certainly they're both aware that people use their wares to infringe copyrighted works.
The DOJ believes it has adequate evidence to prove intent.
The DoJ effort in this is driven by an ex-MafiAA employee. I can't believe you can't see how dirty (and co-opted) this process appears. How is anyone to be expected to respect the law when it's misused in this manner?
But since the law makes this illegal, and they're clearly knowingly breaking the law, according to the law, they should go to jail.
Copyright infringement is against the law. Aggregating and posting links is not against the law, regardless of how much the MafiAA wishes it to be. It's hard to believe that anyone can justify the expense of so many taxpayers' money to police civil copyright infringement, not to mention tangentially related parties. That's not even touching on the morality or ethics of this foolishness.
I guess the "freetards" are right. US Congresscritters have been bought, lock stock and barrel, and the US' DoJ is on the MafiAA's dog leash.
The effect of this crime was that someone in the USA ended up with a copy of software or movies or music that they didn't pay for, and that happened in the USA.
That is the person guilty of infringement, yet that's not the person who's in trouble here. You don't even need to extradite the person who infringed, yet they go after third parties in other countries for "facilitating." Do you honestly think this is going to change anything?
Let me ask you this - Do you genuinely believe, that O'Dwyer set up tvshack without being aware that most people were going to use it to infringe copyright?
I think it's equally likely that he didn't care what anyone did with it and just set it up to make some partying cash from embedded ads. He wasn't infringing. He was just posting/aggregating links, just as many web search portals do. What others did with it was not his problem. Is the US going to repeal freedom of speech next?
My corner store sells drug paraphenlia. They know what the stuff's for. Should they go to jail for that?
I never did understand the reasons why so many young people these days rally behind the Progressives, rather than a more libertarian view.
The Hippies of the Sixties and Seventies grew up to be the Progressives. There's not a lot of difference between the two. Both believe Freedom is best enacted via Big Government edict. After all, it was the Feds who forced desegregation on the South. How else could it have been done? They equate Libertarian with Big Business corporatism. They're shallow thinkers with little to no comprehension of history.
Yes. It's just a shame that it seemed to be only useful for finding copyright infringing sites.
So? Was he infringing copyright? No. Can he read the minds of those looking at his website results? No. Many of them were likely MafiAA employees or academic researchers. If a (unbeknownst by you) bank robber asks you for directions to the nearest bank and you tell him, are you going to jail for criminal conspiracy?
You can find this same stuff in many search engines, I hear.
Faster and more powerful hardware? Are you kidding me? Maybe not right now because Apple doesn't release some...
Interesting. I distinctly remember seeing just this anti-Android, pro-iBauble screed in another thread yesterday. How much do they pay you for your copypasta, shill?
Yep. She has heroines as well as heroes. She's well aware of Marie Curie, Maria Goeppert-Mayer
I love that woman!
Ingrid Daubechies
Never heard of her. Thank you!
... and many others. The appalling thing is, this video was supposed to inspire females to become scientists, and was made on behalf of the European Commission. Now that really sucks.
I'm not certain how my oldest daughter will react to this, even if it's presented in a neutral way. Pointing this video out to her without giving away my own views will be difficult, as it's so appalling.
Don't. Tell her about Marie Curie instead.
It's not really all that appalling; just silly/stupid. It's not like you're watching Madonna or the Bieber, after all.
Slashdot Mirror
That's one THOUSAND, four HUNDRED, and eighty years, which is hardly the life span of a failed state.
Does it exist now? No. Then it's a failed state.
Don't be thick headed. This's reality we're talking about. Assuming (generously) fifty year life spans, that works out to four thousand, nine hundred and sixty life spans. That's a pretty damned good run as states or civilizations go and I wouldn't call that failure, especially considering the legacy it left when it did finally collapse and splinter.
Why do I continue to come here and read the drivel that gets posted or the ridiculous responses that such trivial matters illicit from the great Slashed masses?
Masochism? Either that, or it gives you some sort of right to yell up the stairs to your Mom "I'm busy!" when she calls you to come and take out the garbage.
If you don't agree with what Pakistan did, you're a racist.
No, we're not. I discriminate against stupid, willfully ignorant, foolish, and evil people all the time and I'm proud to do so.
Speaking of which (you), since when is Pakistani a race?
The Chinese sharks smelled bl$$d with the whole "ipad" name debacle...
That's exactly what I was thinking. "Hey, they fell for that. We got a mark! What else have we got that we can shake 'em down for?" Now they're pouring over everything in their patent and copyright portfolio to see what else applies. I wonder if they have rounded corners in there.
I used to think the reports of timothy's failures at reporting were overblown. Now I know better. Talk about an epic failure. Why does this guy still have a job?
I don't know why you're singling out "timothy" here. Almost every story's summary, regardless of "editor", obviously suffers from a lack of proofreading at the very least, not to mention other obvious faults (misleading or inaccurate titles, spelling mistakes, fanboi-ism, ...).
We have no idea what is in the job description or list of duties or SOP for the position of /. "editor." They may actually be doing it just as their overlords specify it to be done. This is a web forum, driven by page views and advertising, so perhaps they think boneheaded controversy is a good thing for their intended goal.
I'm getting used to it.
For some odd reason it works fine for drying Pekingese dogs.
No matter how much you hate Pekingese, no it's not right to do this to to them. They are dogs, after all. On the other hand, a magpie in a microwave could be entertaining, in a sick (though justified) sort of way.
The rudeness quite obviously lies in the 'F' of RTFA.
Not so obvious. Old farts like me remember when it could be parsed as either "Fine" or the f-bomb, user's choice.
How is that rude?
"TFA" instead of "TA".
"The Fine Article" instead of "The Article"?
Physician, heal thyself. You're the one who's needlessly reaching for the F-bomb.
Does anyone know the history of this issue?
RTFA.
No need to be rude.
What's wrong with this picture? You asked a question, and s/he replied that the answer is in TFA, which I have to assume you didn't bother to read if so. How is that rude?
Your epidermis is way too thin.
You'd probably also need to get rid of top-down authoritative structures and place a lot more emphasis on the individual's responsibility in decision making, since war never looks good to the individual.
What turnip truck did you just fall off? People have always clamoured to sign up to go off to war. Canadians even signed up to fight in VietNam. Prior to the US entering the war, US citizens came to Canada to sign up for WWII. Patriotism and nationalism are powerful motivators, and besides, it's an adventure.
There is no perfect usable substitute for Linux.
Depending on hardware, sure there is. The *BSDs may even be better in a lot of ways. pf is a lot better than iptables, for instance.
No one will care much outside Syria anyway, at least not for more than 5 minutes and a tweet or 2.
Are you joking? That regime has been a seeping wound on the face of mankind for a long time now. They had hit squads roaming the world assassinating their opponents during the Cold War. Assad & Co. have done far worse things than Gaddafi even dreamed of.
I will dance when that bunch gets hung up on meathooks.
Europe is once again reborn as a democracy, of the people, for the people.
That's our line, you damned socialist hippies.
Not anymore. You're in the process of repudiating it, you damned fascist toadie sheep.
Indeed. But they can demonstrate substantial non-infringing use. Although in many countries, as a compromise, a tax is levied to compensate the cartels for the infringing use.
Yes, and that tax is levied across the board on everyone including me, someone who advocates boycotting them instead. I don't infringe copyrighted works, yet I have to pay them as if I do. I've read a lot of stories from self-described pirates who buy legal media who then download copies to use due to the many impediments (DRM, un-skippable FBI warnings, region encoding, ...) the MafiAA insists on placing in their way. I consider that non-infringing.
The DoJ effort in this is driven by an ex-MafiAA employee.
I think your opinion would hold more weight if you didn't announce your bias quite so blatantly.
I willingly admit I am biased. The MafiAA are corrupting politicians and whole countries' electoral and justice systems, buying draconian legislation, and suing kids into poverty for using their computers as they expect to be able to. It's disgraceful. A quarter of a million dollar fine for copying a DVD?!? That's insanely out of proportion to the actual damage caused.
Surely the DOJ is responsible for protecting American companies from criminal harm.
They're responsible for criminalizing civil copyright infringement because the MafiAA is too "stick in the mud" to learn to adapt to *any* new technology (from sheet music and player pianos through BlueRay), is too lazy to fight their own battles, and can buy our justice systems from greedy politicians.
You bet I'm biased. This's atrocious! The MafiAA cannot win this war but they're willing to destroy everything in their way trying. The sooner they're consigned to the dustbin of history, the better.
Copyright infringement is against the law. Aggregating and posting links is not against the law
This is why he's on trial for facilitating copyright infringement and not Aggregating and posting links.
Selling someone a computer or blank media could be construed as facilitating then. Are they to go after BestBuy or Intel next? Certainly they're both aware that people use their wares to infringe copyrighted works.
The DOJ believes it has adequate evidence to prove intent.
The DoJ effort in this is driven by an ex-MafiAA employee. I can't believe you can't see how dirty (and co-opted) this process appears. How is anyone to be expected to respect the law when it's misused in this manner?
But since the law makes this illegal, and they're clearly knowingly breaking the law, according to the law, they should go to jail.
Copyright infringement is against the law. Aggregating and posting links is not against the law, regardless of how much the MafiAA wishes it to be. It's hard to believe that anyone can justify the expense of so many taxpayers' money to police civil copyright infringement, not to mention tangentially related parties. That's not even touching on the morality or ethics of this foolishness.
I guess the "freetards" are right. US Congresscritters have been bought, lock stock and barrel, and the US' DoJ is on the MafiAA's dog leash.
The effect of this crime was that someone in the USA ended up with a copy of software or movies or music that they didn't pay for, and that happened in the USA.
That is the person guilty of infringement, yet that's not the person who's in trouble here. You don't even need to extradite the person who infringed, yet they go after third parties in other countries for "facilitating." Do you honestly think this is going to change anything?
Let me ask you this - Do you genuinely believe, that O'Dwyer set up tvshack without being aware that most people were going to use it to infringe copyright?
I think it's equally likely that he didn't care what anyone did with it and just set it up to make some partying cash from embedded ads. He wasn't infringing. He was just posting/aggregating links, just as many web search portals do. What others did with it was not his problem. Is the US going to repeal freedom of speech next?
My corner store sells drug paraphenlia. They know what the stuff's for. Should they go to jail for that?
I never did understand the reasons why so many young people these days rally behind the Progressives, rather than a more libertarian view.
The Hippies of the Sixties and Seventies grew up to be the Progressives. There's not a lot of difference between the two. Both believe Freedom is best enacted via Big Government edict. After all, it was the Feds who forced desegregation on the South. How else could it have been done? They equate Libertarian with Big Business corporatism. They're shallow thinkers with little to no comprehension of history.
Sounds like he invented some sort of google....
Yes. It's just a shame that it seemed to be only useful for finding copyright infringing sites.
So? Was he infringing copyright? No. Can he read the minds of those looking at his website results? No. Many of them were likely MafiAA employees or academic researchers. If a (unbeknownst by you) bank robber asks you for directions to the nearest bank and you tell him, are you going to jail for criminal conspiracy?
You can find this same stuff in many search engines, I hear.
That's a fix? Other than shutting down ntp, what does it do? date `date +"%m%d%H%M%C%y.%S"` is pretty much a no-op.
Unless we're missing something, I agree. "date -s ..." might do something useful, but that command just displays current date.
Faster and more powerful hardware? Are you kidding me? Maybe not right now because Apple doesn't release some ...
Interesting. I distinctly remember seeing just this anti-Android, pro-iBauble screed in another thread yesterday. How much do they pay you for your copypasta, shill?
Yep. She has heroines as well as heroes. She's well aware of Marie Curie, Maria Goeppert-Mayer
I love that woman!
Ingrid Daubechies
Never heard of her. Thank you!
... and many others. The appalling thing is, this video was supposed to inspire females to become scientists, and was made on behalf of the European Commission. Now that really sucks.
"They're just doing their best."
I wish you were my dad. Hug your kid for me.
I'm not certain how my oldest daughter will react to this, even if it's presented in a neutral way. Pointing this video out to her without giving away my own views will be difficult, as it's so appalling.
Don't. Tell her about Marie Curie instead.
It's not really all that appalling; just silly/stupid. It's not like you're watching Madonna or the Bieber, after all.
The main issue is that this video is not an accurate depiction of lab work. It's an idiotic thing that would have been a great 80s music video.
It's a fricken PSA commercial, and a bad one at that. "Give us some glitz, then sprinkle some science on top, please."
Ick. I'm not sure I'd consider it sexist, but I do consider it bad.