Not sure whose fault it was? What are you, the fucking apologist for Exxon? Let's try "whoever the fuck was steering the boat". How's that for whose fault it was?
Unless you want to apologize for the acting bridge officer as well as Exxon and Hazelwood?
Ah, so as long as Exxon employees didn't go about killing people *themselves* then everything is just fine and dandy. The fact that Exxon funded the death squads has nothing whatsoever to do with the activities of those death squads because hey! A company is *never* responsible for the actions of its employees!
No doubt you'll pratter on next as to why there's no such thing as a 'crime by omission'....
You're talking about Microsoft. I'm talking about Dell, and have been the entire time (re-read my posts if this somehow escaped you). Dell has every right to spread out its costs for Windows across *all* PCs, even those that don't come with Windows. They are under no obligation whatsoever to cut a break to people who don't want the OS.
Child porn is unique in that it is fairly straightforward both to define (as depiction of minors engaged in sexual activity) and to establish the harm that it causes (since engaging kids in sexual activity tends to harm them, whether or not the activity is recorded or not).
Except that in American anyone under the age of 18 is considered to be a 'child'. In most other First World nations the age is between 12 and 16.
Your child porn might be Holland's 17 Magazine.
Of course, if Pennsylvania feels like pulling these sorts of shenanigans then who am I to say otherwise? I don't live there, and with this sort of knee-jerk legislative response to a perceived problem, now I never will.
A good, straight-forward horror flick. Nothing more, nothing less. But watch as we get deconstructive commentary on this piece from armchair critics, as well as these two inevitable comments:
1) "Milla Jovovich - great tits but sucks as an actress"
2) "Like Tomb Raider with Angelina Jolie - who has great tits but sucks as an actress"
No doubt by the same people who think that Drew Barrymore is the height of talent.
Just three things, little boys:
a) whether or not they're good or bad, they're still better actors than you'll ever be;
b) Angelina, Milla, and their tits: laughing all the way to the bank. Shrewd ladies; smarter than most slashdotters, apparently; and
c) no matter what happens at any time during your pathetic lives, *you* will never have the opportunity to touch *those* tits.
Microsoft is another vendor, not a f*cking government. If only n-1 Dell customers want Windows, they have no business charging that last customer for Windows.
They have every right to do so. If you think otherwise, please point out the legislation that supports your assertion.
In point of fact, the only thing we know for sure is that the environment is changing, and it appears to be doing so at a markedly faster rate than one would expect without the addition of a trigger like, say, an impact event.
That's all that we know. We do *not* know if this is a natural condition, an unnatural condition (i.e., human caused) or a combination of the two. Furthermore we don't know if there's any way to halt, slow down, or lessen the change, or what actions could be taken should such a thing be possible. Or even if such actions are necessary or desirable.
Now, the typical moron argument here on slashdot falls into two camps. Camp A consists of the Priests of Gaia, the folks who adamantly state that changes in the ecosystem are bad, that humans are the undeniable cause of all change, and therefore that humans are essentially evil and should be punished for their sins - according to the dictates of the Priests, of course (e.g., "reduce emissions of gas x to levely y, screw the economy"). Camp B is composed of the Ostriches, who insist that there's nothing to see, move along now, sticking their heads in the sand and insisting that everyone else join them in ignorant bliss.
Real scientists - those who recognize the basic truths in paragraphs 1 and 2 above - want to spend money doing research on the questions posed to see what the answers are. Why? Because if we listen to the Priests and take corrective measures without basis in fact we could end up wasting a great deal of resources, or worse - altering things in an undesirable way. If we listen to the Ostriches and do nothing then we could end up with a scenario which involves later having to build dikes around every port city in the world as the least expensive option for adaption.
The sensible thing is to ignore both the Priests and the Ostriches, conduct the necessary studies to see exactly what's going on, what the effects will be, and what we might do to stabilize the situation - assuming it needs to be stabilized. Which is precisely why you see very little of this kind of attitude on "science meets Jerry Springer" slashdot.
It's if ICANN *isn't* dissolved tomorrow that it might affect your rights online. Remember, this is the same organization that proposed seizing all the absolute root servers, world-wide (all thirteen or so), because only it was qualified to run them....
Next up is what? A law stating that you can only point your DNS to an ICANN-approved root server?
A good many non-profits have been pulling just this kind of scam for quite some time - paying out some small portion on the dollar to their cause while pocketing the rest to spend on 'management', 'consulting fees to relative x', and so forth. They're essentially money-making ventures cloaked in non-profit status for tax purposes.
This network needs no global management at all. In fact it's built to work without this sort of management. The only people who insist on such a thing are:
a) businesses who want to impose some sort of model on the internet they can profit from,
b) folks who want to legislate their morality world-wide, or
c) the anal-retentive types who can't *stand* anything that doesn't smack of clean, orderly, centralized control.
We don't need any sort of international, world-wide agreements re the net. Everything will sort itself out just fine without such interference. Well, it may not please any of the three groups above, but really - fuck the lot of them. Business can adapt, the morality shits are assholes in need of a good bullet between the eyes, and the anal-retentive types should be on Prozac anyway.
In part because in most civilized countries it's perfectly legal for folks under the age of 18 to have sex with just about anyone they please (ages ranging from 12-16 across most of the First World). Here in the good ol' U.S., where morality rules and biology is for fools, a site in the.kids section devoted to discussing the sexual issues of teens in detail - especially if it involved sexuality with someone *over* the age of 18, a criminal act in all 50 states - would cause a major uproar.
If that happened we'd have to openly admit that the U.S. is, indeed, a country of blind prudes and that our European compatriots are a bunch of oversexed heathen scum out to corrupt our children with their 'loose' morals. Might even have to brand the sons-of-bitches 'terrorists', devil-worshippers, or whatever the hell my countrymen seem to be enthralled with at the moment.
Even Canada is a nation of perverion where it's legal for a 14-year-old to have sex with anyone who isn't in a position of authority over him or her (e.g., teachers are off-limits, the next-door-neighbor isn't). If the Canadians started setting up sites like this in the.kids section we might have to invade or something, all to save our chiiillllddren!
While I can see how this might affect sales to the average Joe (assuming he's buying Linux or even knows what it is in the first place), how does this affect the knowledgeable geek? How many geeks actually buy premade machines to begin with?
I prefer to buy all of my parts individually and put the machine together myself - as simple as this I don't see why you wouldn't want to, if only to control the quality of the workmanship (talking about home machines here, not corporate lot purchases). Just how many people who *really* know what they're doing buy a machine whole, unless it's something specific like a laptop?
No, as has undoubtedly been pointed out to the good judge, the last two justices to punish Microsoft had their careers ruined. What Kotar-Kelly does now will most likely be based on self-preservation, not on any finer point of law.
the machine arrived with Windows installed anyway -- even though I was not charged for it.
Of course you were - it's incorporated into the price of every PC. If it weren't then Dell would be a band of idiots dispersing company profits to the wind instead of looking out for their shareholders.
The same kind of argument is used against renters when it comes to property tax, i.e., "you don't own property so you don't pay property tax". Well, unless the property owner is brain-dead then the renter does indeed pay the property tax on the rental - spread out over 12 months in rental payments. That's how property owners make *profits*. And Dell makes profits on the pcs it sells by spreading out the cost of Windows across all of its machines in the same way, except that you pay for Windows *even if it doesn't come with your machine*.
No employee has the right to surf or dick around on their computer. They might have the *privilege*, but this is entirely at the discretion of the company and *not* the employee. The company can set any fucking rule it pleases with respect to their equipment. If the employee doesn't like the fact that he can't screw around on company time anymore, then it's time to fire this sorry shit-sack of a loser and force him to get a *real* job in the *real* world. Let the whining little pusbags work on the line for awhile and see what they think of company-sponsored internet access *then*.
Christ, but look at the number of fuckwit morons who jump out of the woodwork to defend their 'rights' to mess around on company time with one lame excuse after another. Yeah, you, you pathetic little loser scumbag, the guy who sits in his office downloading Natalie Portman pics while reading slashdot when he should be doing some actual work. If you don't like company policy then start your own damned company.
Oh, but wait - that would be *work*, right? And we've already established that the whiners don't think they need to put in 8 hours on somebody else's dime; god knows they won't put the effort required for this endeavor. It might cut into their Portman or porn or slashdot time....
It's obvious your mama should be bitch-slapping you more than she does. Given the shitty job she's done so far you're going to turn into a *real* asshole once you hit puberty.
A rule is a rule. You either change the rule or decide not to play the game - you can't decide to play the game by your own rules.
Wake up and smell the coffee, mama's boy, or you're going to get the shit kicked out of you in the real world. Because out here rules are only enforced against those who don't have the power or the wealth to resist them, and anyone with half a brain can tell you that 'justice' is purely theoretical.
You can always decide to play the game by your own rules. Whether you get stomped on or not is determined entirely on how much wealth or power you have - it has nothing to do with 'justice' or the 'law' or any naive notion of 'fairness'. If you think otherwise you're going to need some serious dental work after you turn eighteen - given how many times you'll get kicked in the teeth for being such a blazing idiot.
Except that there aren't any "cool new XBox games", just MS-promoted rehashes of old ones. Microsofts utter lack of 'innovation' with respect to any kind of software whatsoever seems to extend to its partners as well.
Really, these folks are the Borg. Assimilation without differentiation. The fantasy MS world would be utterly anal, utterly controlled, and utterly fucking BORING.
Well, unless you too were a billionaire and could ignore the law whenever you pleased....
What bullshit. Brush up on the law, junior; anti-trust activity is a *criminal*, not civil, act, therefore prosecutable by the government. Civil matters are torts between citizens; the government doesn't get involved at all in either prosecution or defense.
Microsoft was accused and convicted of *criminal* activity. Repeat that to yourself until it sinks in.
This might not be such a big deal because Linux is going to have to standardize their UI before they even reach 5% market penetration of the desktop OS market.
Cites? Sources? Any empirical evidence to back your claim?
Riiiiight...the money is being used "efficiently" for the "public good". Sure it is. We all know that the words 'efficient' and 'government' go hand in hand, and that when anyone mentions the word 'public good' it doesn't really mean 'what I believe is right, and everyone else should too'.
I don't think so. If money was owed here, it was to the people deceived and actually harmed by the claims made by the tobacco industry, or to their descendents or relatives if they've already died. The government was owed *nothing*; the people who weren't harmed by the deception shouldn't get a goddamned dime, whether directly or indirectly through government spending of the proceeds.
The settlement was one of the biggest fucking ripoffs in history as far as victims were concerned. And the government did it to keep the tobacco industry from being sued out of existence, not out of any concern for the 'public good'.
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure whose fault it was? What are you, the fucking apologist for Exxon? Let's try "whoever the fuck was steering the boat". How's that for whose fault it was?
Unless you want to apologize for the acting bridge officer as well as Exxon and Hazelwood?
Max
Ah, so as long as Exxon employees didn't go about killing people *themselves* then everything is just fine and dandy. The fact that Exxon funded the death squads has nothing whatsoever to do with the activities of those death squads because hey! A company is *never* responsible for the actions of its employees!
No doubt you'll pratter on next as to why there's no such thing as a 'crime by omission'....
Max
So, where do I go sign up for this 'essential information-gathering service' where I get to sit on my ass and surf the web all day?
Max
You're talking about Microsoft. I'm talking about Dell, and have been the entire time (re-read my posts if this somehow escaped you). Dell has every right to spread out its costs for Windows across *all* PCs, even those that don't come with Windows. They are under no obligation whatsoever to cut a break to people who don't want the OS.
It's that simple.
Max
Child porn is unique in that it is fairly straightforward both to define (as depiction of minors engaged in sexual activity) and to establish the harm that it causes (since engaging kids in sexual activity tends to harm them, whether or not the activity is recorded or not).
Except that in American anyone under the age of 18 is considered to be a 'child'. In most other First World nations the age is between 12 and 16.
Your child porn might be Holland's 17 Magazine.
Of course, if Pennsylvania feels like pulling these sorts of shenanigans then who am I to say otherwise? I don't live there, and with this sort of knee-jerk legislative response to a perceived problem, now I never will.
Max
A good, straight-forward horror flick. Nothing more, nothing less. But watch as we get deconstructive commentary on this piece from armchair critics, as well as these two inevitable comments:
1) "Milla Jovovich - great tits but sucks as an actress"
2) "Like Tomb Raider with Angelina Jolie - who has great tits but sucks as an actress"
No doubt by the same people who think that Drew Barrymore is the height of talent.
Just three things, little boys:
a) whether or not they're good or bad, they're still better actors than you'll ever be;
b) Angelina, Milla, and their tits: laughing all the way to the bank. Shrewd ladies; smarter than most slashdotters, apparently; and
c) no matter what happens at any time during your pathetic lives, *you* will never have the opportunity to touch *those* tits.
Ever.
Max
Microsoft is another vendor, not a f*cking government. If only n-1 Dell customers want Windows, they have no business charging that last customer for Windows.
They have every right to do so. If you think otherwise, please point out the legislation that supports your assertion.
Max
In point of fact, the only thing we know for sure is that the environment is changing, and it appears to be doing so at a markedly faster rate than one would expect without the addition of a trigger like, say, an impact event.
That's all that we know. We do *not* know if this is a natural condition, an unnatural condition (i.e., human caused) or a combination of the two. Furthermore we don't know if there's any way to halt, slow down, or lessen the change, or what actions could be taken should such a thing be possible. Or even if such actions are necessary or desirable.
Now, the typical moron argument here on slashdot falls into two camps. Camp A consists of the Priests of Gaia, the folks who adamantly state that changes in the ecosystem are bad, that humans are the undeniable cause of all change, and therefore that humans are essentially evil and should be punished for their sins - according to the dictates of the Priests, of course (e.g., "reduce emissions of gas x to levely y, screw the economy"). Camp B is composed of the Ostriches, who insist that there's nothing to see, move along now, sticking their heads in the sand and insisting that everyone else join them in ignorant bliss.
Real scientists - those who recognize the basic truths in paragraphs 1 and 2 above - want to spend money doing research on the questions posed to see what the answers are. Why? Because if we listen to the Priests and take corrective measures without basis in fact we could end up wasting a great deal of resources, or worse - altering things in an undesirable way. If we listen to the Ostriches and do nothing then we could end up with a scenario which involves later having to build dikes around every port city in the world as the least expensive option for adaption.
The sensible thing is to ignore both the Priests and the Ostriches, conduct the necessary studies to see exactly what's going on, what the effects will be, and what we might do to stabilize the situation - assuming it needs to be stabilized. Which is precisely why you see very little of this kind of attitude on "science meets Jerry Springer" slashdot.
Max
It's if ICANN *isn't* dissolved tomorrow that it might affect your rights online. Remember, this is the same organization that proposed seizing all the absolute root servers, world-wide (all thirteen or so), because only it was qualified to run them....
Next up is what? A law stating that you can only point your DNS to an ICANN-approved root server?
Max
A good many non-profits have been pulling just this kind of scam for quite some time - paying out some small portion on the dollar to their cause while pocketing the rest to spend on 'management', 'consulting fees to relative x', and so forth. They're essentially money-making ventures cloaked in non-profit status for tax purposes.
Max
This network needs no global management at all. In fact it's built to work without this sort of management. The only people who insist on such a thing are:
a) businesses who want to impose some sort of model on the internet they can profit from,
b) folks who want to legislate their morality world-wide, or
c) the anal-retentive types who can't *stand* anything that doesn't smack of clean, orderly, centralized control.
We don't need any sort of international, world-wide agreements re the net. Everything will sort itself out just fine without such interference. Well, it may not please any of the three groups above, but really - fuck the lot of them. Business can adapt, the morality shits are assholes in need of a good bullet between the eyes, and the anal-retentive types should be on Prozac anyway.
Max
In part because in most civilized countries it's perfectly legal for folks under the age of 18 to have sex with just about anyone they please (ages ranging from 12-16 across most of the First World). Here in the good ol' U.S., where morality rules and biology is for fools, a site in the .kids section devoted to discussing the sexual issues of teens in detail - especially if it involved sexuality with someone *over* the age of 18, a criminal act in all 50 states - would cause a major uproar.
.kids section we might have to invade or something, all to save our chiiillllddren!
If that happened we'd have to openly admit that the U.S. is, indeed, a country of blind prudes and that our European compatriots are a bunch of oversexed heathen scum out to corrupt our children with their 'loose' morals. Might even have to brand the sons-of-bitches 'terrorists', devil-worshippers, or whatever the hell my countrymen seem to be enthralled with at the moment.
Even Canada is a nation of perverion where it's legal for a 14-year-old to have sex with anyone who isn't in a position of authority over him or her (e.g., teachers are off-limits, the next-door-neighbor isn't). If the Canadians started setting up sites like this in the
Or at least get rid of Terrence and Philip....
Max
While I can see how this might affect sales to the average Joe (assuming he's buying Linux or even knows what it is in the first place), how does this affect the knowledgeable geek? How many geeks actually buy premade machines to begin with?
I prefer to buy all of my parts individually and put the machine together myself - as simple as this I don't see why you wouldn't want to, if only to control the quality of the workmanship (talking about home machines here, not corporate lot purchases). Just how many people who *really* know what they're doing buy a machine whole, unless it's something specific like a laptop?
Max
No, as has undoubtedly been pointed out to the good judge, the last two justices to punish Microsoft had their careers ruined. What Kotar-Kelly does now will most likely be based on self-preservation, not on any finer point of law.
The lady is *not* stupid.
Max
the machine arrived with Windows installed anyway -- even though I was not charged for it.
Of course you were - it's incorporated into the price of every PC. If it weren't then Dell would be a band of idiots dispersing company profits to the wind instead of looking out for their shareholders.
The same kind of argument is used against renters when it comes to property tax, i.e., "you don't own property so you don't pay property tax". Well, unless the property owner is brain-dead then the renter does indeed pay the property tax on the rental - spread out over 12 months in rental payments. That's how property owners make *profits*. And Dell makes profits on the pcs it sells by spreading out the cost of Windows across all of its machines in the same way, except that you pay for Windows *even if it doesn't come with your machine*.
Max
No employee has the right to surf or dick around on their computer. They might have the *privilege*, but this is entirely at the discretion of the company and *not* the employee. The company can set any fucking rule it pleases with respect to their equipment. If the employee doesn't like the fact that he can't screw around on company time anymore, then it's time to fire this sorry shit-sack of a loser and force him to get a *real* job in the *real* world. Let the whining little pusbags work on the line for awhile and see what they think of company-sponsored internet access *then*.
Christ, but look at the number of fuckwit morons who jump out of the woodwork to defend their 'rights' to mess around on company time with one lame excuse after another. Yeah, you, you pathetic little loser scumbag, the guy who sits in his office downloading Natalie Portman pics while reading slashdot when he should be doing some actual work. If you don't like company policy then start your own damned company.
Oh, but wait - that would be *work*, right? And we've already established that the whiners don't think they need to put in 8 hours on somebody else's dime; god knows they won't put the effort required for this endeavor. It might cut into their Portman or porn or slashdot time....
Max
It's obvious your mama should be bitch-slapping you more than she does. Given the shitty job she's done so far you're going to turn into a *real* asshole once you hit puberty.
Max
A rule is a rule. You either change the rule or decide not to play the game - you can't decide to play the game by your own rules.
Wake up and smell the coffee, mama's boy, or you're going to get the shit kicked out of you in the real world. Because out here rules are only enforced against those who don't have the power or the wealth to resist them, and anyone with half a brain can tell you that 'justice' is purely theoretical.
You can always decide to play the game by your own rules. Whether you get stomped on or not is determined entirely on how much wealth or power you have - it has nothing to do with 'justice' or the 'law' or any naive notion of 'fairness'. If you think otherwise you're going to need some serious dental work after you turn eighteen - given how many times you'll get kicked in the teeth for being such a blazing idiot.
Max
Microsoft demo cool new XBox games.
Except that there aren't any "cool new XBox games", just MS-promoted rehashes of old ones. Microsofts utter lack of 'innovation' with respect to any kind of software whatsoever seems to extend to its partners as well.
Really, these folks are the Borg. Assimilation without differentiation. The fantasy MS world would be utterly anal, utterly controlled, and utterly fucking BORING.
Well, unless you too were a billionaire and could ignore the law whenever you pleased....
Max
What bullshit. Brush up on the law, junior; anti-trust activity is a *criminal*, not civil, act, therefore prosecutable by the government. Civil matters are torts between citizens; the government doesn't get involved at all in either prosecution or defense.
Microsoft was accused and convicted of *criminal* activity. Repeat that to yourself until it sinks in.
Max
Corporations aren't people and don't have the right to due process.
Max
And still no cites from credible sources - just opinion pulled out of one's asshole, and about as relevant.
Max
And just how the hell do you know where the bar would be if MS hadn't killed off all the competition? You from some alternate universe or something?
Max
This might not be such a big deal because Linux is going to have to standardize their UI before they even reach 5% market penetration of the desktop OS market.
Cites? Sources? Any empirical evidence to back your claim?
Max
Riiiiight...the money is being used "efficiently" for the "public good". Sure it is. We all know that the words 'efficient' and 'government' go hand in hand, and that when anyone mentions the word 'public good' it doesn't really mean 'what I believe is right, and everyone else should too'.
I don't think so. If money was owed here, it was to the people deceived and actually harmed by the claims made by the tobacco industry, or to their descendents or relatives if they've already died. The government was owed *nothing*; the people who weren't harmed by the deception shouldn't get a goddamned dime, whether directly or indirectly through government spending of the proceeds.
The settlement was one of the biggest fucking ripoffs in history as far as victims were concerned. And the government did it to keep the tobacco industry from being sued out of existence, not out of any concern for the 'public good'.
Max