Of course not. That's the whole point. If some authority doesn't like you, and decides not to like the words you use, that's all it takes to make a case.
A great many newer laws seem to be written along these lines.:(
We're nearing the endgame for the "tough on crime" meme, where minimal transgression equals maximal penalty. Expect ultimately life in prison for jaywalking.
Seriously, this is the new trend -- extreme sentences for relatively trivial offenses, across the board.
The real question is the point at which the lossiness in a particular kind of music bothers you the listener, and that's going to vary on both counts, and may be affected by personal tastes in music as well.
Frex, I (who to varying degrees like almost everything but rap) can enjoy fairly lossy rock or country, provided the bass and any unusual effects aren't munged. But I find even "CD quality" orchestral music unlistenable, because so much is *missing* (and I was once accustomed to studio tape versions, which are vastly richer in sound).
Oddly enough, most of the people I know who listen ONLY to classical music, and who hate rock and/or country, cannot hear the difference between tape/LP and CD quality.
So -- to rephrase what you're saying, the loss is relevant only in context. Sometimes it matters; other times it doesn't. Sometimes it annoys; other times it doesn't. Ain't all one single solution for everyone's tastes and every listening situation!
Or under my scenario above, where the watermark is used for micropayments and commissions on "resold" (shared via associated FS networks) tracks -- person A is an idiot and person B has money falling from heaven.
But I've been saying for years, the best thing they can do for their business is 1) make content available *cheaply* and *easily*, and 2) if they're worried about piracy, watermark it.
But rather than prosecute -- it would make a lot more sense to use this watermark, in conjunction with filesharing networks, to set up a system of micropayments AND commissions, so the content owners get paid AND there is incentive to distribute thru these affiliated FS networks -- because you'd get a commission every time someone downloads AND pays for the file from you. Even a couple cents apiece would add up fast, and would attract the very cash-strapped kids who are the bulk of "pirates" today.
"God has no place in that process other than to remain elusive."
Good point. So the religious scientist says, "I don't think there's anything back there, but we'd better keep looking, just in case something new turns up."
IMO no emergency access, or access likely to be used in an emergency, should EVER lack a mechanical override -- especially since "emergency" frequently entails no power. (And I gather most modern municipal water systems are pump-driven rather than gravity-fed. Ooops...) But as you say, we've become so accustomed to these high-tech modern systems, and so unaccustomed to thinking in terms of low-tech backup systems, that there are likely *many* such potential failures waiting to bite us.
And as to those fire trucks... newer vehicles have electronic ignition. What's the chance that it would get fried along with whatever else??
You and I will do okay in the wake of such a disaster, but I'd hate to be city folk.:(
Picky, picky... They did -- but that infrastructure can be recreated without benefit of electronic technology. And that was my point.
The main problem would be sufficient people who still know HOW to recreate it, should electronic tech be killed off for the long term (unlikely as that is).
Actually, I was walking down to the river to catch fish, and digging potatoes. And chopping wood for heat. And boiling drinking water. Sometimes I didn't see the infrastructure at all for several weeks at a time.
Remember, up to a certain point ALL our ancestors survived living like this; otherwise we wouldn't be here:)
Trouble is, there are now too many people to support without that infrastructure; as I mention in another post, the most likely result of a catastrophic infrastructure failure is... riot.
I've lived rough -- no electric, no running water, if I wanted heat I had to chop wood, if I wanted dinner I had to hie myself to the river and catch it. The problem is that now we have too many people for the land to support in that way. I'd be fine, but what the majority would do... probably riot.
Cue that old song, "Got along without you before I met you -- gonna get along without you now..."
(Unlike most folk here, I've actually lived without electricity or running water or telephone service. It's sometimes inconvenient, but it's hardly, uh, the end of the world:)
How is the online game's economy fundamentally different from playing Monopoly? It also uses virtual money, and you can buy and sell stuff which then you use to make a profit within the game.
IMO the only difference is that the IRS sees that its possible to enforce tracking of virtual income in online games, whereas it'd be tough to do with tabletop games (unless they started coming with a built-in Big Brother).
Well, no problem.. just have the IRS set up a virtual tax office within the online game, and they can get paid in virtual money.
Tho I do kinda like your point about draining resources from the copyright cops.;)
Re:This will actually reverse the cost of health c
on
My Genome, My Self?
·
· Score: 1
Same principle as everywhere else -- middlemen may be a convenience in some cases, but generally they serve mainly to increase costs -- after all, they want a cut of the profits too!!
Slashdot Mirror
Of course not. That's the whole point. If some authority doesn't like you, and decides not to like the words you use, that's all it takes to make a case.
A great many newer laws seem to be written along these lines. :(
We're nearing the endgame for the "tough on crime" meme, where minimal transgression equals maximal penalty. Expect ultimately life in prison for jaywalking.
Seriously, this is the new trend -- extreme sentences for relatively trivial offenses, across the board.
Thank you! I needed a new cuss phrase; the ones I have are all worn out.
Same here... They were, to me at least, equally great in their field. I mourn them both.
What? Not relevant to geek culture??! You're forgetting The Prisoner, which made Patrick McGoohan the patron saint of tinfoil hats.
Well, if your all-in-one harvester can sort and route produce etc. without engaging the services of Yet Another Middleman...
That's sad to hear... we'll miss you out here in the future wilderness :/
This is slashdot -- we have nothing better to talk about! ;)
Correct answer: "Which one??"
When I was in high school, we were given some sort of aptitude test that was supposed to predict which field we should study for and go into.
Mine came back marked something like "answers out of range; test invalid".
And here I am today, cluttering slashdot. ;)
The real question is the point at which the lossiness in a particular kind of music bothers you the listener, and that's going to vary on both counts, and may be affected by personal tastes in music as well.
Frex, I (who to varying degrees like almost everything but rap) can enjoy fairly lossy rock or country, provided the bass and any unusual effects aren't munged. But I find even "CD quality" orchestral music unlistenable, because so much is *missing* (and I was once accustomed to studio tape versions, which are vastly richer in sound).
Oddly enough, most of the people I know who listen ONLY to classical music, and who hate rock and/or country, cannot hear the difference between tape/LP and CD quality.
So -- to rephrase what you're saying, the loss is relevant only in context. Sometimes it matters; other times it doesn't. Sometimes it annoys; other times it doesn't. Ain't all one single solution for everyone's tastes and every listening situation!
Or under my scenario above, where the watermark is used for micropayments and commissions on "resold" (shared via associated FS networks) tracks -- person A is an idiot and person B has money falling from heaven.
Yonder is the hex editor, what more do you need??
But I've been saying for years, the best thing they can do for their business is 1) make content available *cheaply* and *easily*, and 2) if they're worried about piracy, watermark it.
But rather than prosecute -- it would make a lot more sense to use this watermark, in conjunction with filesharing networks, to set up a system of micropayments AND commissions, so the content owners get paid AND there is incentive to distribute thru these affiliated FS networks -- because you'd get a commission every time someone downloads AND pays for the file from you. Even a couple cents apiece would add up fast, and would attract the very cash-strapped kids who are the bulk of "pirates" today.
"There, God, was your mistake -- making man in your own image: fallible."
-- Bertrand Russell
Artificial plants, essentially. Don't know why we'd want those around unless we plan to harvest them..."
If you're going to all that work, why not create self-harvesting plants?
"God has no place in that process other than to remain elusive."
Good point. So the religious scientist says, "I don't think there's anything back there, but we'd better keep looking, just in case something new turns up."
IMO no emergency access, or access likely to be used in an emergency, should EVER lack a mechanical override -- especially since "emergency" frequently entails no power. (And I gather most modern municipal water systems are pump-driven rather than gravity-fed. Ooops...) But as you say, we've become so accustomed to these high-tech modern systems, and so unaccustomed to thinking in terms of low-tech backup systems, that there are likely *many* such potential failures waiting to bite us.
And as to those fire trucks... newer vehicles have electronic ignition. What's the chance that it would get fried along with whatever else??
You and I will do okay in the wake of such a disaster, but I'd hate to be city folk. :(
Picky, picky... They did -- but that infrastructure can be recreated without benefit of electronic technology. And that was my point.
The main problem would be sufficient people who still know HOW to recreate it, should electronic tech be killed off for the long term (unlikely as that is).
An AC remarks, "Why =wouldn't= you want heat and dinner?"
Well, I suppose if I'd previously frozen or starved, I'd have no further interest in either subject ;)
What happens to the patient when all of their medical data is in a system that's currently down?
What about critical patients?
Digital or not, I think paper backups are a good idea.
Actually, I was walking down to the river to catch fish, and digging potatoes. And chopping wood for heat. And boiling drinking water. Sometimes I didn't see the infrastructure at all for several weeks at a time.
Remember, up to a certain point ALL our ancestors survived living like this; otherwise we wouldn't be here :)
Trouble is, there are now too many people to support without that infrastructure; as I mention in another post, the most likely result of a catastrophic infrastructure failure is... riot.
I've lived rough -- no electric, no running water, if I wanted heat I had to chop wood, if I wanted dinner I had to hie myself to the river and catch it. The problem is that now we have too many people for the land to support in that way. I'd be fine, but what the majority would do ... probably riot.
Cue that old song, "Got along without you before I met you -- gonna get along without you now..."
(Unlike most folk here, I've actually lived without electricity or running water or telephone service. It's sometimes inconvenient, but it's hardly, uh, the end of the world :)
How is the online game's economy fundamentally different from playing Monopoly? It also uses virtual money, and you can buy and sell stuff which then you use to make a profit within the game.
IMO the only difference is that the IRS sees that its possible to enforce tracking of virtual income in online games, whereas it'd be tough to do with tabletop games (unless they started coming with a built-in Big Brother).
Well, no problem.. just have the IRS set up a virtual tax office within the online game, and they can get paid in virtual money.
Tho I do kinda like your point about draining resources from the copyright cops. ;)
Same principle as everywhere else -- middlemen may be a convenience in some cases, but generally they serve mainly to increase costs -- after all, they want a cut of the profits too!!