if i get the sense i'm talking to someone who is driving, i will say "are you driving? i'll get off the phone"
it's not about being a hyperactive boy scout, it's not about the law, it's about living with myself. because if i am on the phone with someone while they are driving and i am AWARE of it, then i am responsible for continuing the conversation, and helping to keep the driver distracted
i have to live with myself. and i have to respect myself
that comment correctly refers to the first porn they film in space, which hasn't happened yet, but will soon because some doofus just raised $40 million for the endeavour on kickstarter
the only difference between your vision and the other guy's vision is the other guy's vision is a hell of a lot more appealing. motivation: the missing concept in your words
So you can't make a law applied only to trucks and not cars?
You can't make a law applied to dogs and not cats?
You can't make a law applied to porn sites but not news sites?
Here, let me help you in this impossible endeavour: "The scope of this law is specific to forums that are local in nature, focusing on one city or town or municipality."
you are telling me that people would or should be able to blithely ignore vicious anonymous slander in a small community? you are telling me the problem is not real?
when you are in Syria, where there are death squads, you should be anonymous
when you are fighting large multinational corporations or political representatives, where there is a power imbalance, you should be anonymous, like Anonymous
when you are probing the workings of spy agencies, like wikileaks, you should be anonymous
when you are posting on a national or statewide board, like slashdot, you might as well be anonymous, because your actual name doesn't matter, isn't paid attention to, and only the force of your ideas matter
but on local boards, anonymous hate is really ridiculous and highly personal:
here you have people who hide and pick out neighbors by name and viciously lie and attack them, constantly, always carefully from hiding
you have a right in a court of law to know who is accusing you of a crime, right? well in local forums you have people hiding and hating and constantly and viciously slandering real world people in a small community. this requires that the person doing this attack be identified, do you not agree? the court of public opinion is being manipulated, someone is using anonymity to do evil
anonymity is just a tool, it can be used for good and evil. so in SOME ways, such as small local forums, anonymity is not a good thing, when it is used to attack and hide, attack and hide, constantly
ONLY in this scenario, do i support this legislation
cyberbullying is real and has real consequences. the problem can't just be ignored and it goes away. the victims might be teenagers or people on the psychological edge, and the cyberbullying has real and awful consequences. if you don't like this legislation, fine. then what is YOUR answer to cyberbullying in small local communities? ignore it? really? that's your answer? sorry, the cyberbully knows it works, the victim knows it works. you need to understand anonymous cyberbullying is a real problem in small local forums and you must find a way to stop it
or is it whenever i see "legal" analysis on slashdot i see tons of posts by people who don't consider the notion of intent
is it a psychological thing?
that is, the relationship between aspergers syndrome and technological inclination is well-established, this is a tech site, aspergers renders one unable to appreciate and take into account other minds at work out there outside of your own. and just because you aren't clinically diagnosed with aspergers doesn't mean you aren't somewhere along the spectrum of a mild inability to have a decreased capacity to have a good working model of "theory of mind" going on in your head:
anyway, this is just a long-winded way of saying: INTENT. understand it, please
if you judge other's actions, or develop an opinion of other's actions without applying or appreciating the concept of intent, at least understand that the rest of the world will consider your opinion invalid, if you can't understand yourself why intent is important
the only logically and morally defensible position on rights and freedoms is that of the individual
when people act as a group with a command and control structure and talk about rights and freedoms, the subject ceases to be valid because the command and control structure of organized religion, in the process of imposing edicts on its members, is breaking the rights and freedoms of the individual
you can only talk about rights and freedoms of the individual. "religious freedom" in this context is an oxymoron because "religious freedom" is really just about imposing on the rights of freedoms of individuals born into a religion and unable to choose for themselves
you have to talk about rights and freedoms from the point of view of the individual. all other perspectives are not logically coherent point of views to take and therefore are false and immoral
society is only able to maintain true freedom when organized religion ceases to think it has the right to impose its will on others. as long as it does, it is an enemy of rights and freedoms. you should be able to worship your god as you choose, convert to any religion you want, as an individual. the organized religion has no right to dictate your choices, as an individual. or it is a force of authoritarianism and oppression
does that justify highway robbery? kidnapping? extortion? murder?
if something is wrong to do, it is wrong to do. that it might put food on the table is the only justification needed? ever hear of morality? civilization? fuck you you parasite
not think that patents are utterly useless and absurd?
The "invention" in question is laughable beyond belief.
The defendent and plaintiff are mutlinational corporations. Not a little guy that needs protecting.
How do the lawyers whose lifework is this nonsense make sense of their lives? At the end of the day, in your old age, what is the value of your life's work? Did you make anything? Did you help anyone? Or did you shuffle words around a disgusting nonsensical argument foisted on some other lawyers for the sake of absurd privations? What a completely and utterly useless and despicable existence.
Why do we as a society tolerate this useless sideshow? Oh, because of all the money involved, right.
rangeCheck checks if a number is within a range. ok. like if 2 is between 1 and 3. but what of 4? you did mention 4? or 5, 6, 7, or 8 for that matter. and what of 2.5? or 3.5?
how about negative numbers? how about irrational numbers? i will tell you what is irrational: that rangeCheck can be trusted to understand these complex issues and give us an answer we can trust
and 0! magic 0. you are telling me that rangeCheck understand 0 and can tell us if is between two numbers? arbitrarily chosen numbers to boot? the audacity! you mean i am going to just say "cehck if 0 is between 1 and 7" and then i'm going to cpompletely mess things up and turn around and say "oh, and check if 0 is between -2 and 3", and you are going to trust rangeCheck to do this? really? really?!
do you not see the danger here folks? do not see the threat to responsiblity, accountability, that trust that blindly putting our faith in this rangeCheck results in?
think about this serious issue very carefully folks, this is a truly tricky and grave conundrum. here be dragons
i'm not making fun of you, hearing loss is of course not cool, but on this website, the personal experience of such implanted tech is very cool and interesting
Slashdot Mirror
How do you defeat oil indistry propaganda that climate change isn't real for the faux news set?
Appeal to their nationalism and xenophobia:" China is forcing climate change on you and your beautiful country"
Now there is no question climate change is real: it's a dastardly Chinese Communist plot to destroy Amurrica!
The power of low IQ tribal paranoia.
if i get the sense i'm talking to someone who is driving, i will say "are you driving? i'll get off the phone"
it's not about being a hyperactive boy scout, it's not about the law, it's about living with myself. because if i am on the phone with someone while they are driving and i am AWARE of it, then i am responsible for continuing the conversation, and helping to keep the driver distracted
i have to live with myself. and i have to respect myself
that comment correctly refers to the first porn they film in space, which hasn't happened yet, but will soon because some doofus just raised $40 million for the endeavour on kickstarter
priorities
over "voluntary extinction" any day
the only difference between your vision and the other guy's vision is the other guy's vision is a hell of a lot more appealing. motivation: the missing concept in your words
when china has a moon base, suddenly a science education will be important in the USA again
noble motivations don't move the body politic. base motivations do. in this case, envy
So you can't make a law applied only to trucks and not cars?
You can't make a law applied to dogs and not cats?
You can't make a law applied to porn sites but not news sites?
Here, let me help you in this impossible endeavour: "The scope of this law is specific to forums that are local in nature, focusing on one city or town or municipality."
I know, far out, wacky stuff here.
banning anonymity is an appropriate solution
on local forums
only
this is the only kind of forum where anonymity is a menace
did you read the nytimes article i linked to?
you are telling me that people would or should be able to blithely ignore vicious anonymous slander in a small community? you are telling me the problem is not real?
did you read the nytimes article i linked to?
you are telling me that people would or should be able to blithely ignore vicious anonymous slander in a small community?
think about it
thank you for the object lesson
when you are in Syria, where there are death squads, you should be anonymous
when you are fighting large multinational corporations or political representatives, where there is a power imbalance, you should be anonymous, like Anonymous
when you are probing the workings of spy agencies, like wikileaks, you should be anonymous
when you are posting on a national or statewide board, like slashdot, you might as well be anonymous, because your actual name doesn't matter, isn't paid attention to, and only the force of your ideas matter
but on local boards, anonymous hate is really ridiculous and highly personal:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/us/small-town-gossip-moves-to-the-web-anonymous-and-vicious.html
here you have people who hide and pick out neighbors by name and viciously lie and attack them, constantly, always carefully from hiding
you have a right in a court of law to know who is accusing you of a crime, right? well in local forums you have people hiding and hating and constantly and viciously slandering real world people in a small community. this requires that the person doing this attack be identified, do you not agree? the court of public opinion is being manipulated, someone is using anonymity to do evil
anonymity is just a tool, it can be used for good and evil. so in SOME ways, such as small local forums, anonymity is not a good thing, when it is used to attack and hide, attack and hide, constantly
ONLY in this scenario, do i support this legislation
cyberbullying is real and has real consequences. the problem can't just be ignored and it goes away. the victims might be teenagers or people on the psychological edge, and the cyberbullying has real and awful consequences. if you don't like this legislation, fine. then what is YOUR answer to cyberbullying in small local communities? ignore it? really? that's your answer? sorry, the cyberbully knows it works, the victim knows it works. you need to understand anonymous cyberbullying is a real problem in small local forums and you must find a way to stop it
or is it whenever i see "legal" analysis on slashdot i see tons of posts by people who don't consider the notion of intent
is it a psychological thing?
that is, the relationship between aspergers syndrome and technological inclination is well-established, this is a tech site, aspergers renders one unable to appreciate and take into account other minds at work out there outside of your own. and just because you aren't clinically diagnosed with aspergers doesn't mean you aren't somewhere along the spectrum of a mild inability to have a decreased capacity to have a good working model of "theory of mind" going on in your head:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind
anyway, this is just a long-winded way of saying: INTENT. understand it, please
if you judge other's actions, or develop an opinion of other's actions without applying or appreciating the concept of intent, at least understand that the rest of the world will consider your opinion invalid, if you can't understand yourself why intent is important
the only logically and morally defensible position on rights and freedoms is that of the individual
when people act as a group with a command and control structure and talk about rights and freedoms, the subject ceases to be valid because the command and control structure of organized religion, in the process of imposing edicts on its members, is breaking the rights and freedoms of the individual
you can only talk about rights and freedoms of the individual. "religious freedom" in this context is an oxymoron because "religious freedom" is really just about imposing on the rights of freedoms of individuals born into a religion and unable to choose for themselves
you have to talk about rights and freedoms from the point of view of the individual. all other perspectives are not logically coherent point of views to take and therefore are false and immoral
society is only able to maintain true freedom when organized religion ceases to think it has the right to impose its will on others. as long as it does, it is an enemy of rights and freedoms. you should be able to worship your god as you choose, convert to any religion you want, as an individual. the organized religion has no right to dictate your choices, as an individual. or it is a force of authoritarianism and oppression
they just built the most awesome dildo ever
does that justify highway robbery? kidnapping? extortion? murder?
if something is wrong to do, it is wrong to do. that it might put food on the table is the only justification needed? ever hear of morality? civilization? fuck you you parasite
not think that patents are utterly useless and absurd?
The "invention" in question is laughable beyond belief.
The defendent and plaintiff are mutlinational corporations. Not a little guy that needs protecting.
How do the lawyers whose lifework is this nonsense make sense of their lives? At the end of the day, in your old age, what is the value of your life's work? Did you make anything? Did you help anyone? Or did you shuffle words around a disgusting nonsensical argument foisted on some other lawyers for the sake of absurd privations? What a completely and utterly useless and despicable existence.
Why do we as a society tolerate this useless sideshow? Oh, because of all the money involved, right.
"Zuck has insisted on doing it himself and made it very clear he still doesn't give a crap about making money (and probably never will)."
you need to make a lot of money to be able to make that statement
latin for "Who watches the watchmen?"
it seems we have finally answered the ancient conundrum:
everyone, on youtube
i thought i was making a joke, but since i am rated zero, i either went completely past funny and hit insane, or people have lost their sense of humor
hello mods... no one sees the possibility that my post above is a joke?
rangeCheck checks if a number is within a range. ok. like if 2 is between 1 and 3. but what of 4? you did mention 4? or 5, 6, 7, or 8 for that matter. and what of 2.5? or 3.5?
how about negative numbers? how about irrational numbers? i will tell you what is irrational: that rangeCheck can be trusted to understand these complex issues and give us an answer we can trust
and 0! magic 0. you are telling me that rangeCheck understand 0 and can tell us if is between two numbers? arbitrarily chosen numbers to boot? the audacity! you mean i am going to just say "cehck if 0 is between 1 and 7" and then i'm going to cpompletely mess things up and turn around and say "oh, and check if 0 is between -2 and 3", and you are going to trust rangeCheck to do this? really? really?!
do you not see the danger here folks? do not see the threat to responsiblity, accountability, that trust that blindly putting our faith in this rangeCheck results in?
think about this serious issue very carefully folks, this is a truly tricky and grave conundrum. here be dragons
you really don't get intent do you?
if i leave a $100 bill on my porch, i'm an idiot
if you come and take it, you're evil
my mistake was lax security
your INTENT was to take that which was clearly not yours
time and time again, i see analysis of crimes and world events on slashdot without even the vaguest comprehension of the concept of INTENT
is this some sort psychological problem with aspergers types or something?
the inability to comprehend, understand, or otherwise incorporate the concept of intent when making judgments?
intent
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intent_(law)
learn it, incorporate it into your opinions, or your opinion is useless
i'm not making fun of you, hearing loss is of course not cool, but on this website, the personal experience of such implanted tech is very cool and interesting
any anecdotes? you can hear power transformers?
i do that with my macbook, on my chest
"nice rack" they point and laugh
yeah, it is a nice rack server, over WiMAX, neanderthals
yes