I am a Christian, but I also agree with you on "the enforcement of hardline Christian morality." What good does it do to shove your morals down the throat of someone who doesn't believe in the same God as you? Absolutely none. I believe that morality cannot be legislated, although there are basic codes of human conduct that should be supported.
Average users are trained to click every "Yes" and "OK" button that they see pop up on their screen just like the average motorist tends to ignore the "Check Engine Soon" lights in their vehicles after the mechanic fixed it the first time. It couldn't possibly be broken again, could it?
Sounds about right! I work for a small college IT department, and we routinely have to tell students that if their online games work, they should consider themselves fortunate.
We have an incredibly limited amount of bandwidth provided the number of users we service. A local cable company provides 3Mb to each user on its service; we are able to provide 6Mb to 1600+ users. Through the use of QoS, regular activities such as web surfing are bearable, although not blazingly fast.
... and you are relying on the internet as a valid source of information why again?
What I am failing to understand is this: why the current generation of students equates the amount of bandwidth available for (whocareswhat) with the quality of the academic institution.
Please remember that the primary purpose for the existence of higher education systems is not to be your high-tech babysitter. Colleges and universities are not designed for the entertainment of students. They are learning facilities.
That said, you should check out the available bandwidth of your library! You'd be astounded!
Bitter much? Unfortunately, most colleges and universities do not have an unlimited cash flow to feed your bandwidth urges. Most of them aren't sitting on the internet backbone like the ISPs they buy their bandwidth through.
Time to take a few steps back and breathe deeply at least ten times.
I can understand you being upset about VoIP traffic because communication is important. Video conferencing could be included in there too. Games, however, are highly questionable on the scale of the usage of resources in academic pursuits.
Also, I highly doubt that Portland is blocking your VoIP and video conferencing to force you to use their own services. It's not like your local ISP which can pretty much guarantee you a certain amount of bandwidth - never forget that you're sharing the total with everyone else on that campus. Have 100Mb divided by 10,000 students? You're very lucky, that's 1Mb for you. The college I'm at has a 6Mb pipe divided by 1600 regular users. Do the math.
I'm certainly not surprised. Most users around here (at the college I work for) get the deer-in-headlights look when I ask them to "right-click" their mouse. On the same token, these users tend to freeze up when you ask them to "click" the mouse. They don't seem to equate the buttons on the mouse as being buttons, either. It's borderline traumatic. I'm not even a desktop support person..
My employer. Other than that, I can't think of anything.:) Actually, Iowa is just as full of idiots as any other place. I just didn't like the insinuation that we are all backwater hicks here. Thanks for the fun!
If you start crying because of someone you're chatting with who you will never meet, then you have a problem.
That's one point I have to disagree with you on. I would venture to say that such an emotional response can be triggered by the person realizing that there's another person on the other end of the wire. It's not ok to treat another person like a lump of crap just because you can pretend you're talking to an intelligent machine.
I find your assumption regarding science in Iowa to be both arrogant and incorrect. I have lived in Iowa for my entire life, so you could call me biased.
I agree with what you said before/after that statement, but there's really no need for you to denigrate Iowa.
I am employed by a small college IT department, and let me tell you - it's very frustrating to contact students to let them know that you've repaired their account when the phone number listed in the directory doesn't have a phone attached.
Every dorm room has a landline provided at no additional cost to the students, yet it seems that only about 20% of the students actually have phones connected. I'm sure it doesn't help that students must provide their own phones.
... until you start exploring the MSDN portion of the site, and realize that the sample code blocks are nearly completely unreadable outside of IE.
Re:Parent is flamebait and trollish. Mod down.
on
LokiTorrent Shut Down
·
· Score: 1
I don't know, maybe he's just been reading BOFH. I'd like to confiscate the hardware from more than a few of my users.. It's not because they're doing illegal things, it's just that many of them shouldn't have a computer. Sometimes I think it would be nice if people needed licenses to operate computers!
Maybe you find it ironic and contradictory, but in this case it is neither.
There is a difference between following public opinion because you feel pressured to do so in order to fit in, and in agreeing with public opinion on a matter because you feel that sentiment is right or just. In this case, my opinion voices the latter; it just happens to align with common public opinion on the subject. No contradiction here.
Someone tried to kidnap me when I was younger by driving up to me beside me as I was walking home from school in the rain. "Hey, I've got pizza. If you want a ride home I'll let you hold it."
I'm not frustrated by not being able to entice children into my porn lair, you fucktard. I'm frustrated by how little people around here care about the plight of others. See replies to my original comment below.
I understand your sentiment, but if copyright infringement were theft, it would have been called theft and not infringement. You're right to say that theft is theft. If I walk into a store and walk out with an item under my coat without paying, that's theft. The line is blurred when the item in question is simply duplicated and is not taken.
Me walking off with your video collection would constitute theft.
Me copying your video collection is infringement. You still have your video collection, but I've decided to take the copyright as meaning nothing and I make my own copies instead of allowing the rights-holder to dictate how and/or by whom copies are made.
What's the deal here? Are governments throwing up their hands and telling us that they can't catch people doing hard crime? Is this just another ploy to make everyone a criminal?
Next time you see that guy, punch him in the head for me and thank him for keeping our vehicle insurance rates higher than they should be. It drives me nuts when people are destructive to property that is not their own when they think they can get away with it, no consequences.
Perhaps the photos of the perpetrator are not initially released in order to prevent a lynching. Just a thought, and I don't know if there's really any weight behind it. There's always the possibility, as others have suggested, that the originally obtained photo was well-edited to have someone else take the place of the actual perp.
I think the poster wasn't referring to the people that aren't being hurt by looking at the picture, as you say. I think it was rather the poster (myself included) being upset about the lack of sensitivity on the part of the people making jokes about it.
I have my suspicions that most people would not think that nobody is hurt by joking about such a picture if it were a close family member of theirs.
RANT Most of the off-handed comments that are joking about the story seem to be due to a lack of maturity in regards to talking about the subject matter. I personally find it offensive and disgusting that so many people can make light of such abuse.
Where is the intelligent discussion? Right, I forgot where I am. It seems like most people here don't handle real-world issues very well. This isn't intended as a troll or flamebait, but if you want to think it is, be my guest.
I encourage you, the jokers, to actually discuss the story topic and not make barely-related jokes about how bad the photo edit was or how the whole thing would have been ok to you if it were a young boy getting on with an older woman. The whole point isn't to demonstrate 1337 photoshop sk1lz. It's to help police to track down sexual and violent offenders that happened to document their damage../RANT
Replying to myself here. Upon further reading of the comments, I have discovered the "something big" that I missed - advertising regulations in other parts of the world. I didn't realize that a lot of countries don't permit comparative advertising. Now it makes sense why this lawsuit happened, at least under those rules. If you're asking me, and I know you're not, it's still stupid that things like this can happen.
Then again, it makes a product sell on its own merits so that it can't ride on the coattails of some other product's success. For that, you have my applause. Let people use their brains instead of being fed everything by people they shouldn't be so trusting of anyway. Very good plan of action.
Isn't this lawsuit in the same vein as a company buying advertising on a television network, and abusing one of its competitor's trademarks? Unless I'm missing something big here, it just doesn't make sense to me that you would hold the advertising distributor liable for fact-checking advertisement not created by itself.
I understand your point here, but I would disagree in calling the GPL'd code "property."
I think the GPL'd code would be more like to (not to be diminutive) playground equipment. The creator of the equipment dictates what form the equipment takes and allows other equipment makers to use the blueprints to make their own. They can choose to sell the equipment if they wish, or so can others. However, nobody can have the blueprints for the equipment that will not abide by the creator's license terms.
This type of system helps to promote healthy competition. For competitors to do well, they must add value to the original plans. Maybe the improvements are aesthetic. Maybe it's the explicit insurance you get when you pay into it.
Makes sense to me, I hope it makes sense to others.
Slashdot Mirror
I am a Christian, but I also agree with you on "the enforcement of hardline Christian morality." What good does it do to shove your morals down the throat of someone who doesn't believe in the same God as you? Absolutely none. I believe that morality cannot be legislated, although there are basic codes of human conduct that should be supported.
Average users are trained to click every "Yes" and "OK" button that they see pop up on their screen just like the average motorist tends to ignore the "Check Engine Soon" lights in their vehicles after the mechanic fixed it the first time. It couldn't possibly be broken again, could it?
Sounds about right! I work for a small college IT department, and we routinely have to tell students that if their online games work, they should consider themselves fortunate.
We have an incredibly limited amount of bandwidth provided the number of users we service. A local cable company provides 3Mb to each user on its service; we are able to provide 6Mb to 1600+ users. Through the use of QoS, regular activities such as web surfing are bearable, although not blazingly fast.
... and you are relying on the internet as a valid source of information why again?
What I am failing to understand is this: why the current generation of students equates the amount of bandwidth available for (whocareswhat) with the quality of the academic institution.
Please remember that the primary purpose for the existence of higher education systems is not to be your high-tech babysitter. Colleges and universities are not designed for the entertainment of students. They are learning facilities.
That said, you should check out the available bandwidth of your library! You'd be astounded!
Bitter much? Unfortunately, most colleges and universities do not have an unlimited cash flow to feed your bandwidth urges. Most of them aren't sitting on the internet backbone like the ISPs they buy their bandwidth through.
Time to take a few steps back and breathe deeply at least ten times.
I can understand you being upset about VoIP traffic because communication is important. Video conferencing could be included in there too. Games, however, are highly questionable on the scale of the usage of resources in academic pursuits.
Also, I highly doubt that Portland is blocking your VoIP and video conferencing to force you to use their own services. It's not like your local ISP which can pretty much guarantee you a certain amount of bandwidth - never forget that you're sharing the total with everyone else on that campus. Have 100Mb divided by 10,000 students? You're very lucky, that's 1Mb for you. The college I'm at has a 6Mb pipe divided by 1600 regular users. Do the math.
I'm certainly not surprised. Most users around here (at the college I work for) get the deer-in-headlights look when I ask them to "right-click" their mouse. On the same token, these users tend to freeze up when you ask them to "click" the mouse. They don't seem to equate the buttons on the mouse as being buttons, either. It's borderline traumatic. I'm not even a desktop support person..
Actually, Iowa is just as full of idiots as any other place. I just didn't like the insinuation that we are all backwater hicks here.
Thanks for the fun!
That's one point I have to disagree with you on. I would venture to say that such an emotional response can be triggered by the person realizing that there's another person on the other end of the wire. It's not ok to treat another person like a lump of crap just because you can pretend you're talking to an intelligent machine.
I find your assumption regarding science in Iowa to be both arrogant and incorrect. I have lived in Iowa for my entire life, so you could call me biased.
I agree with what you said before/after that statement, but there's really no need for you to denigrate Iowa.
I am employed by a small college IT department, and let me tell you - it's very frustrating to contact students to let them know that you've repaired their account when the phone number listed in the directory doesn't have a phone attached.
Every dorm room has a landline provided at no additional cost to the students, yet it seems that only about 20% of the students actually have phones connected. I'm sure it doesn't help that students must provide their own phones.
... until you start exploring the MSDN portion of the site, and realize that the sample code blocks are nearly completely unreadable outside of IE.
I don't know, maybe he's just been reading BOFH. I'd like to confiscate the hardware from more than a few of my users.. It's not because they're doing illegal things, it's just that many of them shouldn't have a computer. Sometimes I think it would be nice if people needed licenses to operate computers!
Oh well, can't win them all ;-) Maybe the guy just needs some concrete shoes instead *wink wink*
I do agree with you, and thank you for bringing a little extra reason to the table. Too bad you posted AC!
Maybe you find it ironic and contradictory, but in this case it is neither.
There is a difference between following public opinion because you feel pressured to do so in order to fit in, and in agreeing with public opinion on a matter because you feel that sentiment is right or just. In this case, my opinion voices the latter; it just happens to align with common public opinion on the subject. No contradiction here.
Fuck you.
Someone tried to kidnap me when I was younger by driving up to me beside me as I was walking home from school in the rain. "Hey, I've got pizza. If you want a ride home I'll let you hold it."
I'm not frustrated by not being able to entice children into my porn lair, you fucktard. I'm frustrated by how little people around here care about the plight of others. See replies to my original comment below.
I understand your sentiment, but if copyright infringement were theft, it would have been called theft and not infringement. You're right to say that theft is theft. If I walk into a store and walk out with an item under my coat without paying, that's theft. The line is blurred when the item in question is simply duplicated and is not taken.
Me walking off with your video collection would constitute theft.
Me copying your video collection is infringement. You still have your video collection, but I've decided to take the copyright as meaning nothing and I make my own copies instead of allowing the rights-holder to dictate how and/or by whom copies are made.
Hopefully this helps to unblur the line for you.
What's the deal here? Are governments throwing up their hands and telling us that they can't catch people doing hard crime? Is this just another ploy to make everyone a criminal?
/ 121215.shtml
Here's a nice editorial piece written almost two years ago (US-centric, but still applicable I think):
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/5/7
Perhaps governments feel that they do not have sufficient control over their peoples..
Next time you see that guy, punch him in the head for me and thank him for keeping our vehicle insurance rates higher than they should be. It drives me nuts when people are destructive to property that is not their own when they think they can get away with it, no consequences.
Perhaps the photos of the perpetrator are not initially released in order to prevent a lynching. Just a thought, and I don't know if there's really any weight behind it. There's always the possibility, as others have suggested, that the originally obtained photo was well-edited to have someone else take the place of the actual perp.
I think the poster wasn't referring to the people that aren't being hurt by looking at the picture, as you say. I think it was rather the poster (myself included) being upset about the lack of sensitivity on the part of the people making jokes about it.
I have my suspicions that most people would not think that nobody is hurt by joking about such a picture if it were a close family member of theirs.
I can't say I agree with you in full.
/RANT
RANT
Most of the off-handed comments that are joking about the story seem to be due to a lack of maturity in regards to talking about the subject matter. I personally find it offensive and disgusting that so many people can make light of such abuse.
Where is the intelligent discussion? Right, I forgot where I am. It seems like most people here don't handle real-world issues very well. This isn't intended as a troll or flamebait, but if you want to think it is, be my guest.
I encourage you, the jokers, to actually discuss the story topic and not make barely-related jokes about how bad the photo edit was or how the whole thing would have been ok to you if it were a young boy getting on with an older woman. The whole point isn't to demonstrate 1337 photoshop sk1lz. It's to help police to track down sexual and violent offenders that happened to document their damage..
Replying to myself here. Upon further reading of the comments, I have discovered the "something big" that I missed - advertising regulations in other parts of the world. I didn't realize that a lot of countries don't permit comparative advertising. Now it makes sense why this lawsuit happened, at least under those rules. If you're asking me, and I know you're not, it's still stupid that things like this can happen.
Then again, it makes a product sell on its own merits so that it can't ride on the coattails of some other product's success. For that, you have my applause. Let people use their brains instead of being fed everything by people they shouldn't be so trusting of anyway. Very good plan of action.
Isn't this lawsuit in the same vein as a company buying advertising on a television network, and abusing one of its competitor's trademarks? Unless I'm missing something big here, it just doesn't make sense to me that you would hold the advertising distributor liable for fact-checking advertisement not created by itself.
I understand your point here, but I would disagree in calling the GPL'd code "property."
I think the GPL'd code would be more like to (not to be diminutive) playground equipment. The creator of the equipment dictates what form the equipment takes and allows other equipment makers to use the blueprints to make their own. They can choose to sell the equipment if they wish, or so can others. However, nobody can have the blueprints for the equipment that will not abide by the creator's license terms.
This type of system helps to promote healthy competition. For competitors to do well, they must add value to the original plans. Maybe the improvements are aesthetic. Maybe it's the explicit insurance you get when you pay into it.
Makes sense to me, I hope it makes sense to others.
I think the subject says it all. This is news?