if neutrinos really travel that much faster than the speed of light, then we would have expected the neutrino burst from the 1987a supernova to arrive months, rather than hours, before the light came.
People I've spoken with who attended big protests in the 60s did these sort of things.
People you've spoken with who attended big protests in the 60s weren't going through Great Depression 2: Foreclosure Boogaloo.
Do the math. There are altogether fewer couches. People big-hearted enough to open their homes to protesters likely already have their homeless friends on the couch...
It's only broken if you assume general purpose device like a PC... It's only a matter of time before some $25 machine becomes all you need, and the only way, to play your media content, but that $25 machine is encased in epoxy and has no user accessible data of any kind...
Yes, you can achieve perfect DRM by totally controlling the hardware. However, this is not a technological solution. It is exactly as effective as having no DRM and punishing people who break the rules. "all you need" is technological; "and the only way" is 100% social. What's to stop someone from creating a $25 dollar box that sits between your box and the mothership, and commands it to do whatever you wish? Law enforcement, that's all.
Computers run arbitrary code. It's WHAT THEY DO. Everything else is frosting. Which is why, when you absolutely, positively don't want someone you don't approve of running arbitrary code on your computer, you deny them access to the hardware. Denying someone access to the hardware is not a technological solution.
There are people out there, right now, for whom the $25 epoxy box is a difficult but not impossible challenge. Make its secrets desirable, and it becomes a fun and interesting challenge. And it only takes one.
Not really; the Federal government absolutely has the authority to stop state governments from claiming ownership of the bodies of living adult citizens, which is essentially what abortion bans do (along with punishments for possessing recreational drugs, and anti-sodomy laws).
And what's best for the stockholders is, almost always, increased profits.
Bullshit.
Two words: "externalized costs." Your whole post was talking about profits versus profits. Nowhere did you even start to think about, say, profits versus social destabilization, or profits versus gigantic tax-funded bailouts, or profits versus poisoning large numbers of human beings, or profits versus destroying our own food supply.
There's something wrong, here, but I can't quite put my finger on it.
They're not out there hunting because that is their 'purpose' in their ecosystem, it's strictly selfish biology and self-preservation...
Actually, they ARE out there hunting because that is their purpose in the ecosystem. Ecosystems without carefully balanced predation fail, in much the same way that a body without working T-cells has problems.
Now, you could say that those T-cells are just selfishly going around eating what they're programmed to, and from one perspective that's true. But it's a philosophical perspective, and it's not automatically correct. When dealing with immune system problems, for example, it's super-handy to treat them as if they have a purpose.
As to what lions do or do not feel, well, that's also purely philosophy. Avoiding anthropomorphism is a behavioral science tool, not some sort of mathematical truth...
So, the post-bubble situation is normal? What the fuck ever.
"I don't have money but other people have money, that's unfair!" is bullshit spin and you know it. People are complaining that they have less money than they used to, and that the people with money are at fault, which is, in every meaningful way, true.
Worker productivity has been going up steadily since the Industrial Revolution, but the same workers' wages, in real dollars, have leveled off and stayed flat for the past thirty or forty years. The country is getting richer, but the people actually doing the work to make it so haven't been. And look, the whole time, the people RUNNING the country have been getting richer FASTER THAN THE COUNTRY HAS. Gee, wherever shall we point the finger of blame?
Meanwhile, recent college grads haven't been able to get jobs regardless of their degree, because companies are only hiring people whoalready have jobs. Companies run by those aforementioned People With Money.
In short: "I don't have money because powerful people took it from me." Sounds like a legitimate gripe to me. You can try to prove it's not true, but you can't just dismiss it out of hand.
Sorry, but if you think making pot legal will stop organized drug crime in any way, you're mistaken.
You're right, it's far too late to ever stop organized drug crime. Our only solution is to keep their black market going for ever and ever.
Or, we could cut off their main supply of income and wait seventy years for them to start running out of steam, like we did with the alcohol mobs. The sooner we start, the sooner our great-grandchildren can enjoy a world without powerful drug-fueled organized crime.
And if you think a pot tax is going to raise significant revenue, you're also mistaken.
Since alcohol was legalized, we've made a fuckton of tax money off of it. Your argument is incorrect. You will choose not to see that it is incorrect. You will ignore any evidence or historical precedent that shows it to be incorrect.
Like I said, heard it before.
You've ignored it before. Not the same. In fact, it's the definition of willful ignorance.
Slashdot Mirror
if neutrinos really travel that much faster than the speed of light, then we would have expected the neutrino burst from the 1987a supernova to arrive months, rather than hours, before the light came.
...unless they slow down over great distances.
Google Music will also let users buy albums and songs from all major music labels, except Warner.
Will they let users buy albums and songs from other Google+ users who record their own albums and songs?
People I've spoken with who attended big protests in the 60s did these sort of things.
People you've spoken with who attended big protests in the 60s weren't going through Great Depression 2: Foreclosure Boogaloo.
Do the math. There are altogether fewer couches. People big-hearted enough to open their homes to protesters likely already have their homeless friends on the couch...
It's only broken if you assume general purpose device like a PC... It's only a matter of time before some $25 machine becomes all you need, and the only way, to play your media content, but that $25 machine is encased in epoxy and has no user accessible data of any kind...
Yes, you can achieve perfect DRM by totally controlling the hardware. However, this is not a technological solution. It is exactly as effective as having no DRM and punishing people who break the rules. "all you need" is technological; "and the only way" is 100% social. What's to stop someone from creating a $25 dollar box that sits between your box and the mothership, and commands it to do whatever you wish? Law enforcement, that's all.
Computers run arbitrary code. It's WHAT THEY DO. Everything else is frosting. Which is why, when you absolutely, positively don't want someone you don't approve of running arbitrary code on your computer, you deny them access to the hardware. Denying someone access to the hardware is not a technological solution.
There are people out there, right now, for whom the $25 epoxy box is a difficult but not impossible challenge. Make its secrets desirable, and it becomes a fun and interesting challenge. And it only takes one.
Not really; the Federal government absolutely has the authority to stop state governments from claiming ownership of the bodies of living adult citizens, which is essentially what abortion bans do (along with punishments for possessing recreational drugs, and anti-sodomy laws).
Nobody is giving me millions of dollars to prevent a competitor from starting up;
There would be, if you had millions of customers.
If Hollywood was a person...
You are dork because you're missing the other side's arguments completely.
He's not missing them, they're just 100% invalid.
DRM is fundamentally broken, mathematically. It seeks to grant and deny access to the same party simultaneously.
Law?
Passed?
I thought this was about FCC regulations...
Mod parent up!
According to Buddhism, death is NOT a way to escape suffering.
...which becomes logarithmically more difficult as the number of creators increases.
What part of "Four senators, including both Democrats and Republicans" makes you think they aren't all conservatives?
Well said, Guy Fawkes was a fascist who wanted to install a Catholic monarchical dictatorship and abolish Parliament.
Hear, hear!
So personally, I find it very hard to take V for Vendetta seriously.
Hear, he-- wait, what?!
"Watch out -- this is bat country!!"
Four...
Three...
And what's best for the stockholders is, almost always, increased profits.
Bullshit.
Two words: "externalized costs." Your whole post was talking about profits versus profits. Nowhere did you even start to think about, say, profits versus social destabilization, or profits versus gigantic tax-funded bailouts, or profits versus poisoning large numbers of human beings, or profits versus destroying our own food supply.
NO ONE is insulated from these things. No one.
Lions don't feel 'purpose' in what they do,
...they get hungry...
...because they need to...
...in order to...
...in order to better...
There's something wrong, here, but I can't quite put my finger on it.
They're not out there hunting because that is their 'purpose' in their ecosystem, it's strictly selfish biology and self-preservation...
Actually, they ARE out there hunting because that is their purpose in the ecosystem. Ecosystems without carefully balanced predation fail, in much the same way that a body without working T-cells has problems.
Now, you could say that those T-cells are just selfishly going around eating what they're programmed to, and from one perspective that's true. But it's a philosophical perspective, and it's not automatically correct. When dealing with immune system problems, for example, it's super-handy to treat them as if they have a purpose.
As to what lions do or do not feel, well, that's also purely philosophy. Avoiding anthropomorphism is a behavioral science tool, not some sort of mathematical truth...
"falsifiable", aka "faked".
You do not know what "falsifiable" means in this context. Therefore, the rest of your argument is invalid.
Please obtain knowledge before returning. You may begin by googling "Popper" and "scientific method".
...I suggest we take off the gloves and play hardball RIGHT BACK.
My limited sports knowledge just smacked violently up against the passenger-side window of my brain.
So, the post-bubble situation is normal? What the fuck ever.
"I don't have money but other people have money, that's unfair!" is bullshit spin and you know it. People are complaining that they have less money than they used to, and that the people with money are at fault, which is, in every meaningful way, true.
Worker productivity has been going up steadily since the Industrial Revolution, but the same workers' wages, in real dollars, have leveled off and stayed flat for the past thirty or forty years. The country is getting richer, but the people actually doing the work to make it so haven't been. And look, the whole time, the people RUNNING the country have been getting richer FASTER THAN THE COUNTRY HAS. Gee, wherever shall we point the finger of blame?
Meanwhile, recent college grads haven't been able to get jobs regardless of their degree, because companies are only hiring people whoalready have jobs. Companies run by those aforementioned People With Money.
In short: "I don't have money because powerful people took it from me." Sounds like a legitimate gripe to me. You can try to prove it's not true, but you can't just dismiss it out of hand.
I don't see any conflict inherent in telling someone else that they're wasting their time doing something that I'm doing. Do you?
'Course, just before the camera goes, it gets a pic of your plate.
Which is why you do this with your cousin's truck.
Could the food industri please stop selling addictive drugs to people?
No.
Well, I mean they could, but then someone else would do it instead.
Sorry, but if you think making pot legal will stop organized drug crime in any way, you're mistaken.
You're right, it's far too late to ever stop organized drug crime. Our only solution is to keep their black market going for ever and ever.
Or, we could cut off their main supply of income and wait seventy years for them to start running out of steam, like we did with the alcohol mobs. The sooner we start, the sooner our great-grandchildren can enjoy a world without powerful drug-fueled organized crime.
And if you think a pot tax is going to raise significant revenue, you're also mistaken.
Since alcohol was legalized, we've made a fuckton of tax money off of it. Your argument is incorrect. You will choose not to see that it is incorrect. You will ignore any evidence or historical precedent that shows it to be incorrect.
Like I said, heard it before.
You've ignored it before. Not the same. In fact, it's the definition of willful ignorance.