"I feel it is unreasonable to expect the end user to determine if he or she should be paying for a service."
It takes an unhealthy dose of willful ignorance to fail to make that determination on your own.
And yet you're puzzled by why digital content producers try so hard to prevent their works from being 'mistakenly' acquired by people who (according to you) can't determine if they are entitled to said works for free.
I don't suppose you've considered the possibility that other people's taste differ from yours, and that you are not, in fact, the sole arbiter of what is "good" and what is "shit".
I'd never expect to find such narcissism on Slashdot!!
It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)
Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors.. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt.45 and a.38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.
Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!
Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.
I'm open to that theory. Musharaff doesn't exactly strike me as a person inclined to voluntarily give up power, expecially given how he came to power in the first place. I'm not entirely certain, though, how much real power Musharaff has (relative to Islamic clerics). Sure Pakistan isn't Iran, but I imagine the clerics still wield a lot of legislative power. This could suggest that Musharaff is trying to make good with the clerics in an attempt to get their backing for the upcoming power struggle between him and the new opposition government.
My post was not an endorsement of the Bush administration or the unjustified war. It was nothing more than a simple request for people to get a sense of perspective with regards to how awful some people seem to think things are here.
To the people here in the U.S. who consider the Bush administration an oppressive theocratic regime, pay attention. This is the sort of thing an ACTUAL oppressive theocratic regime does.
Simply put -- why aren't we hearing about a focus on education that matters -- in the languages of those who need it most?
Because we pride ourselves more on making meaningless gestures to the third-world than on producing real results. That's why we're providing them with laptop computers instead of basic infrastructure and medicine.
I think its fine, don't punish companies for doing what the NSA asks them to do, corporations are not responsible for upholding the rights of individuals.
So would it be OK for me to murder someone in cold blood if the government told me to do it?
So why wasn't the Democratic Congress' first action when they took over in 2007 to introduce articles of impeachment? If they had the evidence so many people thought they did, why hasn't that happened?
Are you saying that if the President was a Democrat, the republican congressmen would go so far as to impeach him for something as trivial as a blowjob?
I'm not going to argue that Clinton's perjury impeachment was a good investment of our congresscritters' time and effort, but comon! As long as you are going to intentionally mischaracterize the basic premise of the impeachment, you aught to stay out of the discussion entirely.
People have done a lot more shameful things than exaggerating illness to score political points. I don't see how a healthy does of initial skepticism, given the state of political discourse in the USA these days, is unreasonable.
While most of your point is valid (although unnecessarily vitriolic), I think it betrays your own hatred of Mr. Limbaugh (and probably his audience as well). It also demonstrates a reasonable concern by people with whom you disagree that you may be inclined to use your power as an editor here to silence and discourage opposing viewpoints.
Until you get your own feelings under control, you aught to re-consider passing judgement on others you perceive as fomenting hate.
I don't see how one company's use (or lack thereof) of a particular OSS application affects the use or development of said application. So Microsoft is going to switch Yahoo's web servers from Apache to IIS. So what? How does that affect how Apache works or evolves for other users? Will this make MySQL simply go away?
Of course we already have a viable, clean, relatively inexpensive energy source; we just need to invest in building more power plants.
Of course, the greens will have nothing to do with the "N-word", so instead we continue to belch pollution and radiation out of smoke stacks. Brilliant.
I can't imagine that fear mongering wackjobs like Greenpeace and the Sierra Club are actually behind our abandonment of nuclear energy. And that begs a very serious question...
Yup, let's just drop everything, scrap our entire fossil-fuel-based energy infrastructure, and replace it (overnight, of course) with wind, solar, and good intentions.
Folks wonder why reasonable alternative energy proposals never see the light of day. Perhaps it has something to do with the cause having mouthpieces like you.
Slashdot Mirror
"I feel it is unreasonable to expect the end user to determine if he or she should be paying for a service."
It takes an unhealthy dose of willful ignorance to fail to make that determination on your own.
And yet you're puzzled by why digital content producers try so hard to prevent their works from being 'mistakenly' acquired by people who (according to you) can't determine if they are entitled to said works for free.
I don't suppose you've considered the possibility that other people's taste differ from yours, and that you are not, in fact, the sole arbiter of what is "good" and what is "shit".
I'd never expect to find such narcissism on Slashdot!!
It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)
Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors
Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!
Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.
I think our GIs have better things to spend their time on than trying to distill truth from the "facts" vomited by malcontents and partisan hacks.
Yeah, because if it's on the Intertubes, you know it's from a reliable, knowledgeable source.
Define "major chunk" please.
I'm open to that theory. Musharaff doesn't exactly strike me as a person inclined to voluntarily give up power, expecially given how he came to power in the first place. I'm not entirely certain, though, how much real power Musharaff has (relative to Islamic clerics). Sure Pakistan isn't Iran, but I imagine the clerics still wield a lot of legislative power. This could suggest that Musharaff is trying to make good with the clerics in an attempt to get their backing for the upcoming power struggle between him and the new opposition government.
Most intriguing!
My post was not an endorsement of the Bush administration or the unjustified war. It was nothing more than a simple request for people to get a sense of perspective with regards to how awful some people seem to think things are here.
To the people here in the U.S. who consider the Bush administration an oppressive theocratic regime, pay attention. This is the sort of thing an ACTUAL oppressive theocratic regime does.
...and probably felt that their interests would be better served by fulfilling their campaign promises during the first 100 days.
You mean like ending the war?
So "lying to congress" is only bad when it's a democrat lying to a republican, but not the other way around?
I don't recall saying any such thing.
Simply put -- why aren't we hearing about a focus on education that matters -- in the languages of those who need it most?
Because we pride ourselves more on making meaningless gestures to the third-world than on producing real results. That's why we're providing them with laptop computers instead of basic infrastructure and medicine.
So in other words, it IS an improvement!
I think its fine, don't punish companies for doing what the NSA asks them to do, corporations are not responsible for upholding the rights of individuals.
So would it be OK for me to murder someone in cold blood if the government told me to do it?
So why wasn't the Democratic Congress' first action when they took over in 2007 to introduce articles of impeachment? If they had the evidence so many people thought they did, why hasn't that happened?
Are you saying that if the President was a Democrat, the republican congressmen would go so far as to impeach him for something as trivial as a blowjob?
I'm not going to argue that Clinton's perjury impeachment was a good investment of our congresscritters' time and effort, but comon! As long as you are going to intentionally mischaracterize the basic premise of the impeachment, you aught to stay out of the discussion entirely.
People have done a lot more shameful things than exaggerating illness to score political points. I don't see how a healthy does of initial skepticism, given the state of political discourse in the USA these days, is unreasonable.
While most of your point is valid (although unnecessarily vitriolic), I think it betrays your own hatred of Mr. Limbaugh (and probably his audience as well). It also demonstrates a reasonable concern by people with whom you disagree that you may be inclined to use your power as an editor here to silence and discourage opposing viewpoints.
Until you get your own feelings under control, you aught to re-consider passing judgement on others you perceive as fomenting hate.
Why do so many people equate vigorous political discourse with HATE? Who is Limbaugh espousing and encouraging genuine hatred of?
I think most of you people accusing Limbaugh of "spreading hate" are in serious want for perspective.
Good thing this article gives partisan Slashdotters their own two minutes of hate towards Limbaugh. Thanks for your contribution.
See how that works?
DO NOT WANT!!!
Dammit, I didn't mean to post that reply as AC. Hope I get some answers anyway.
I don't see how one company's use (or lack thereof) of a particular OSS application affects the use or development of said application. So Microsoft is going to switch Yahoo's web servers from Apache to IIS. So what? How does that affect how Apache works or evolves for other users? Will this make MySQL simply go away?
Of course we already have a viable, clean, relatively inexpensive energy source; we just need to invest in building more power plants.
Of course, the greens will have nothing to do with the "N-word", so instead we continue to belch pollution and radiation out of smoke stacks. Brilliant.
I can't imagine that fear mongering wackjobs like Greenpeace and the Sierra Club are actually behind our abandonment of nuclear energy. And that begs a very serious question...
Yup, let's just drop everything, scrap our entire fossil-fuel-based energy infrastructure, and replace it (overnight, of course) with wind, solar, and good intentions.
Folks wonder why reasonable alternative energy proposals never see the light of day. Perhaps it has something to do with the cause having mouthpieces like you.