But, things are not transparent like that in the US. The mainstream media controlled the 'buzz' around Ron Paul and continued to act like he had little chance. The google trends and Twitter followers were ignored. The Internet buzz was discounted.
Maybe this article will be accurate in the future as the Internet takes over (and more so the Internet Generation takes over).. But if you tried to predict the last election based on Twitter, you would either be thinking there was massive fraud or there somehow was a huge amount of the US population that never heard of the Internet.
I'm tired of this 'arguably' and 'allegedly' garbage. James Clapper has already apologized for lying to Congress. HE LIED TO CONGRESS AND HE ADMITTED IT. There is no more 'arguable' or 'allegedly' any more. It is misinformation to keep taking black and white concrete facts and use gray words in their place. It's like there's a hidden agenda somewhere to try to keep people confused on the simplest of facts.
Therefore, Obama appointed the man in charge of the NSA, who already lied to Congress, to investigate possible reforms for the NSA. But then again, Obama also lied about the extent of the NSA's surveillance. The day after Snowden's original revelations, Obama stated that they only collect 'meta' data - but not actual phone calls. Then, recently, he states that they make copies of everything but do not look at it. Therefore, Obama's original statement was a lie.
But that's how our country works.. Obama can lie directly to our faces. James Clapper can lie directly to Congress. And the media will say 'they may have lied.'
The governments' reaction to 9/11 - using it as an excuse for more corruption, more surveillance, more wars, and more curtailing of the Constitution - should be enough to question the motivations behind the event. Calling a person crazy for questioning the 'official story' which itself says it fails to explain multiple events like Building 7 falling is calling a person crazy for attempting rational thought.
It would be crazy not to have questions about that whole sequence of events.
Anti-terrorism is the excuse for spying. Business is the real purpose. When the countries we spy on the most can be ranked in terms of size of economy, there is no fucking way the government can keep claiming that the purpose for these spying programs is anything other than to keep the powerful people powerful.
Yes, NSA spying will hurt California's business.. and it should. Instead of giving in to the secret government's secret demands, Google, Microsoft, Apple, and everyone else should be fighting these anti-democratic efforts tooth and nail.
After multiple instances of lying or 'lying the least they could', they have given us zero reason to believe yet another explanation of the system. My belief is that this is a system used by the 'powers that be' to keep promoting the political and financial dominance of the powers that be. Whereas, the 'powers that be' is defined as those people with enough financial and political influence that set the agenda and policies of the entire world.
The reason I believe this is because reports show that Germany was one of the countries that was spied on the most. If this was a system used only to 'combat terrorism', it would make zero sense to spy on the country that has repeatedly been shown to be an ally in the 'War on Terrorism'. But, if this was a system used for financial and political gain, it would make sense to keep the most records on the countries with the largest amount of financial competition.
All power structures must answer to the law. In order to prevent the continued movement of the US towards fascism, it is our duty (the peoples') to continually be skeptical of those in power. We need to question this, shine a light on this, get it audited - and even shut it down - if this is a system that violates the US Constitution.
We should find out who 'some people in Congress' are, post their names, and make sure constituents in their voting jurisdiction fill their inboxes. And, parade their names all over the Internet so the other people in Congress will see them be vilified. Nobody here wants to see us continuing in the direction of a totalitarian police state.
According to the article, the people in Congress that are named are 'Republican head of the House intelligence committee, Mike Rogers' and 'Peter King, the chairman of the House homeland security subcommittee'.
Seriously, what the fuck does it accomplish by calling anyone conspiracy theorists? It's in mainstream media now - and you're still calling them conspiracy theorists? It was leaked, reported on, and it is out there.. and it's even being shown on TV news in the US.
You're living uninformed and in a bubble if you cannot see the obvious direction the US is headed.. You're sitting there with your head in the sand calling the people that are most vocal about it derogatory names.
This is just what is reported.. A conspiracy theorist would say that most likely the actual truth is more damming.
Apple made it so MP3 devices became mainstream. Until Apple, no electronics manufacturer would touch the 'evil mp3.' Sony should have been the ones to make mp3 players, but their electronics division and music media divisions had their heads in the sand. Apple was simply unafraid to be disruptive (since they were dying at the time anyway.)
For years, people were begging for good mp3 players.. Maybe you remember 'Braun radio' but I and everyone else sure doesn't.
You obviously don't know Texas or Florida.. Here in the Gunshine State, you can walk right into any gun show, find a person carrying a gun to sell, and pay cash for it and get it on the spot.
America also breeds more leaders than the rest of the world. As an American, I believe the only areas where violence is excessive is our militarized police force and our movies..
I think it would send the strongest message if they could see the following:
- sales rates go up when games have less DRM - piracy goes up when games have more DRM independent of sales rate - EA sales would increase if EA stops being assholes - EA does not see any of this because EA's head is in its ass
Cancer.. the perfect ailment to keep the health industry's profits healthy.. just as long as they keep anyone from actually curing cancer without a long drawn-out expensive process.
Yes, first sale doctrine applies in this case. It's a no-brainer. Nobody here or in the court will be thinking about whether or not the foreign student stole the textbooks - because he did not. Nobody is accusing him of copying. Nobody is saying the items are counterfeit. The whole point of this case will be to try to figure out a tricky legal way to accuse the student of stealing. That is the only reason for debate. The 'under this title' part of the reasoning for debate is moot anyway since the law is meant to be applied equally - and equal application would mean 'lawfully made under this title' when the law agrees in both governing states (which is not even being argued.)
The doctrine of first sale is a simple idea and concept - one that can apply easily in courts around the country and the world. The biggest problem we are all worried about is if our corrupt Surpreme Court will once again come up with complicated 'reasoning' to decide yet another case where the big corporation beats the young entrepreneur. If I want to copyright my apples and sell them for 1 penny in China and $3000 in Canada, why should I have any further control over the people in China realizing my ridiculous pricing? Free market capitalism and globalism needs to go both ways. If a corporation is free to charge different prices, the consumers or middle men should be free to resell them - until the price points meet market demands.
What the Supreme Court should do is morally, lawfully, and reasonably easy to decide. What they will do is a big fucking can of worms because of the current move toward corporatism.
I call you out on your demagogue word 'socialism' and you replace it with 'Marxist' like that is somehow a good argument. It's just name-calling. I'm not worried about socialism or communism.. Like I said earlier, I am worried about facism.
And, since I will be the one voting, I will decide whether or not I am losing by casting a losing vote. Perhaps my only goal is to influence the scope of discussion and open up both 'sides' to the ideas that only Gary Johnson is talking about. My choice is to expand the scope of discussion. My choice is for a better Republican candidate than the one the Establishment dictates to me. My choice is that it would be better for the Republicans in the long run to lose the election to a bad President than to win the election with a bad candidate.
My vote is for Gary Johnson. Obama is simply not better than Romney by enough of a margin for me to vote for him; and vice-versa. Gary Johnson is on the ballot and my choice is for him.
No.. Third party votes do count. When the Republicans and Democrats are working together to divide the people in half as evenly as possible, and only winning by small margins, a small-margin of third-party votes has a huge effect.
Nice try Anonymous Coward.. But most of the Slashdot readers here are educated enough to know that Obama is only slightly less authoritarian than Romney and 'socialism' is just a word used in the wrong context to demagogue Obama. Further, most Slashdot readers are smart enough to see that Romney changes his rhetoric for whatever crowd he's entertaining and either candidate just continues the march towards facism.. It's just that Obama seems to want to march slower.
I'll be voting Gary Johnson. Even though I think Obama is the slightly lesser of two evils, I am sick of voting for evil.
No, it is introducing competition in currency. Free market capitalism is based on competition. The point of Bitcoin is not to dump the entire currency system - but rather to introduce a currency that is aimed at holding value better than existing currencies.
Everyone keeps talking about the economy like it's okay that a few people at the top control it and put modifiers on our currency (that is supposed to be the result of our hard work) that push us to spend it rather than save it. Maybe it really is not okay that we get paid in a paper that states a value but is under the control of a few and is regularly handed to banks at zero percent interest. If the situation today were described to the economists of 1913, there is not one that would say it is functioning inside the scope of its original intent.
So.. you can talk about how gold or Bitcoin is 'bad for the economy.' But, I will say that a manipulated fiat currency is bad for freedom and liberty. I would prioritize freedom and liberty over a good economy.
First of all, you can keep saying it is completely worthless, but every time I check the exchange and see that a single Bitcoin currently sells for more than $11 it invalidates your statement.
Also, you could not do a lottery to assign bitcoins. Perhaps if it was a centralized currency a lottery would work.. But with Bitcoins' decentralized nature, the mining actually helps to solidify the security of the Bitcoin network.
I too am sick of seeing companies focus on the short-term.. But the problem for AMD is that now the short-term means 'can't pay our fucking bills.' I have said this over and over.. When AMD spent years with a huge R&D budget to leapfrog Intel, while focusing on the long-term, they accomplished that goal. What they did not accomplish was the political goal of forcing Intel to compete fairly. For years, AMD had the best processors and Intel were simply second-best.. but through monopolistic competition, AMD was held back - prevented from selling at Dell and HP.
For this, I hate Intel. Their processors might be the fastest right now.. They might own the future.. but I still hate them.
AMD is in a shitty situation.. If they produce 2nd best processors, they slowly fade into oblivion. If they produce 1st rate processors, Intel threatens the pc-makers.
Just last week, Janet Napolitano testified before a congressional committee about the state of terrorism in America. She was testifiying exactly how you would expect the head of a government agency with endless authority and no clear-cut goal to testify. She was.. asking for more money, saying the terrorist threat is greater than ever before, and saying the DHS has helped to curb the terrorist threat.
So.. the DHS: - We need more taxpayer money - The terrorist threat is greater than ever before - The DHS does a great job
So, while working to change both the Republican and Democrat parties within, we should all be voting for a an anti surveillance-state candidate like Gary Johnson.
Slashdot Mirror
In the 2008 election, there was an enormous interest in Ron Paul. His google searches were higher than any other Republican nominee for most of 2007 and 2008. His Twitter interest was huge.. http://www.nethosting.com/buzz/blog/ron-paul-wins-gop-nomination-if-twitter-votes-counted/
But, things are not transparent like that in the US. The mainstream media controlled the 'buzz' around Ron Paul and continued to act like he had little chance. The google trends and Twitter followers were ignored. The Internet buzz was discounted.
Maybe this article will be accurate in the future as the Internet takes over (and more so the Internet Generation takes over).. But if you tried to predict the last election based on Twitter, you would either be thinking there was massive fraud or there somehow was a huge amount of the US population that never heard of the Internet.
I'm tired of this 'arguably' and 'allegedly' garbage. James Clapper has already apologized for lying to Congress. HE LIED TO CONGRESS AND HE ADMITTED IT. There is no more 'arguable' or 'allegedly' any more. It is misinformation to keep taking black and white concrete facts and use gray words in their place. It's like there's a hidden agenda somewhere to try to keep people confused on the simplest of facts.
Therefore, Obama appointed the man in charge of the NSA, who already lied to Congress, to investigate possible reforms for the NSA. But then again, Obama also lied about the extent of the NSA's surveillance. The day after Snowden's original revelations, Obama stated that they only collect 'meta' data - but not actual phone calls. Then, recently, he states that they make copies of everything but do not look at it. Therefore, Obama's original statement was a lie.
But that's how our country works.. Obama can lie directly to our faces. James Clapper can lie directly to Congress. And the media will say 'they may have lied.'
The governments' reaction to 9/11 - using it as an excuse for more corruption, more surveillance, more wars, and more curtailing of the Constitution - should be enough to question the motivations behind the event. Calling a person crazy for questioning the 'official story' which itself says it fails to explain multiple events like Building 7 falling is calling a person crazy for attempting rational thought.
It would be crazy not to have questions about that whole sequence of events.
Anti-terrorism is the excuse for spying. Business is the real purpose. When the countries we spy on the most can be ranked in terms of size of economy, there is no fucking way the government can keep claiming that the purpose for these spying programs is anything other than to keep the powerful people powerful.
For example, revelations were made that we target Germany for spying. It only makes sense if you look at the size of the economies. http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/nsa-spies-on-500-million-german-data-connections-a-908648.html
Yes, NSA spying will hurt California's business.. and it should. Instead of giving in to the secret government's secret demands, Google, Microsoft, Apple, and everyone else should be fighting these anti-democratic efforts tooth and nail.
The reason I believe this is because reports show that Germany was one of the countries that was spied on the most.
Citations or it didn't happen.
http://rt.com/news/germany-spied-nsa-snowden-515/
After multiple instances of lying or 'lying the least they could', they have given us zero reason to believe yet another explanation of the system. My belief is that this is a system used by the 'powers that be' to keep promoting the political and financial dominance of the powers that be. Whereas, the 'powers that be' is defined as those people with enough financial and political influence that set the agenda and policies of the entire world.
The reason I believe this is because reports show that Germany was one of the countries that was spied on the most. If this was a system used only to 'combat terrorism', it would make zero sense to spy on the country that has repeatedly been shown to be an ally in the 'War on Terrorism'. But, if this was a system used for financial and political gain, it would make sense to keep the most records on the countries with the largest amount of financial competition.
All power structures must answer to the law. In order to prevent the continued movement of the US towards fascism, it is our duty (the peoples') to continually be skeptical of those in power. We need to question this, shine a light on this, get it audited - and even shut it down - if this is a system that violates the US Constitution.
We should find out who 'some people in Congress' are, post their names, and make sure constituents in their voting jurisdiction fill their inboxes. And, parade their names all over the Internet so the other people in Congress will see them be vilified. Nobody here wants to see us continuing in the direction of a totalitarian police state.
According to the article, the people in Congress that are named are 'Republican head of the House intelligence committee, Mike Rogers' and 'Peter King, the chairman of the House homeland security subcommittee'.
Seriously, what the fuck does it accomplish by calling anyone conspiracy theorists? It's in mainstream media now - and you're still calling them conspiracy theorists? It was leaked, reported on, and it is out there.. and it's even being shown on TV news in the US.
You're living uninformed and in a bubble if you cannot see the obvious direction the US is headed.. You're sitting there with your head in the sand calling the people that are most vocal about it derogatory names.
This is just what is reported.. A conspiracy theorist would say that most likely the actual truth is more damming.
Apple made it so MP3 devices became mainstream. Until Apple, no electronics manufacturer would touch the 'evil mp3.' Sony should have been the ones to make mp3 players, but their electronics division and music media divisions had their heads in the sand. Apple was simply unafraid to be disruptive (since they were dying at the time anyway.)
For years, people were begging for good mp3 players.. Maybe you remember 'Braun radio' but I and everyone else sure doesn't.
You obviously don't know Texas or Florida.. Here in the Gunshine State, you can walk right into any gun show, find a person carrying a gun to sell, and pay cash for it and get it on the spot.
America also breeds more leaders than the rest of the world. As an American, I believe the only areas where violence is excessive is our militarized police force and our movies..
I think it would send the strongest message if they could see the following:
- sales rates go up when games have less DRM
- piracy goes up when games have more DRM independent of sales rate
- EA sales would increase if EA stops being assholes
- EA does not see any of this because EA's head is in its ass
Cancer.. the perfect ailment to keep the health industry's profits healthy.. just as long as they keep anyone from actually curing cancer without a long drawn-out expensive process.
This case is not arguing piracy one bit. That is introducing a new scope into the discussion.
Yes, first sale doctrine applies in this case. It's a no-brainer. Nobody here or in the court will be thinking about whether or not the foreign student stole the textbooks - because he did not. Nobody is accusing him of copying. Nobody is saying the items are counterfeit. The whole point of this case will be to try to figure out a tricky legal way to accuse the student of stealing. That is the only reason for debate. The 'under this title' part of the reasoning for debate is moot anyway since the law is meant to be applied equally - and equal application would mean 'lawfully made under this title' when the law agrees in both governing states (which is not even being argued.)
The doctrine of first sale is a simple idea and concept - one that can apply easily in courts around the country and the world. The biggest problem we are all worried about is if our corrupt Surpreme Court will once again come up with complicated 'reasoning' to decide yet another case where the big corporation beats the young entrepreneur. If I want to copyright my apples and sell them for 1 penny in China and $3000 in Canada, why should I have any further control over the people in China realizing my ridiculous pricing? Free market capitalism and globalism needs to go both ways. If a corporation is free to charge different prices, the consumers or middle men should be free to resell them - until the price points meet market demands.
What the Supreme Court should do is morally, lawfully, and reasonably easy to decide. What they will do is a big fucking can of worms because of the current move toward corporatism.
I call you out on your demagogue word 'socialism' and you replace it with 'Marxist' like that is somehow a good argument. It's just name-calling. I'm not worried about socialism or communism.. Like I said earlier, I am worried about facism.
And, since I will be the one voting, I will decide whether or not I am losing by casting a losing vote. Perhaps my only goal is to influence the scope of discussion and open up both 'sides' to the ideas that only Gary Johnson is talking about. My choice is to expand the scope of discussion. My choice is for a better Republican candidate than the one the Establishment dictates to me. My choice is that it would be better for the Republicans in the long run to lose the election to a bad President than to win the election with a bad candidate.
My vote is for Gary Johnson. Obama is simply not better than Romney by enough of a margin for me to vote for him; and vice-versa. Gary Johnson is on the ballot and my choice is for him.
No.. Third party votes do count. When the Republicans and Democrats are working together to divide the people in half as evenly as possible, and only winning by small margins, a small-margin of third-party votes has a huge effect.
Nice try Anonymous Coward.. But most of the Slashdot readers here are educated enough to know that Obama is only slightly less authoritarian than Romney and 'socialism' is just a word used in the wrong context to demagogue Obama. Further, most Slashdot readers are smart enough to see that Romney changes his rhetoric for whatever crowd he's entertaining and either candidate just continues the march towards facism.. It's just that Obama seems to want to march slower.
I'll be voting Gary Johnson. Even though I think Obama is the slightly lesser of two evils, I am sick of voting for evil.
I don't see what's so funny about this.. It's so blatantly true.
No, it is introducing competition in currency. Free market capitalism is based on competition. The point of Bitcoin is not to dump the entire currency system - but rather to introduce a currency that is aimed at holding value better than existing currencies.
Everyone keeps talking about the economy like it's okay that a few people at the top control it and put modifiers on our currency (that is supposed to be the result of our hard work) that push us to spend it rather than save it. Maybe it really is not okay that we get paid in a paper that states a value but is under the control of a few and is regularly handed to banks at zero percent interest. If the situation today were described to the economists of 1913, there is not one that would say it is functioning inside the scope of its original intent.
So.. you can talk about how gold or Bitcoin is 'bad for the economy.' But, I will say that a manipulated fiat currency is bad for freedom and liberty. I would prioritize freedom and liberty over a good economy.
First of all, you can keep saying it is completely worthless, but every time I check the exchange and see that a single Bitcoin currently sells for more than $11 it invalidates your statement.
Also, you could not do a lottery to assign bitcoins. Perhaps if it was a centralized currency a lottery would work.. But with Bitcoins' decentralized nature, the mining actually helps to solidify the security of the Bitcoin network.
Sure, Bitcoin has flaws.. but so does the dollar.
I too am sick of seeing companies focus on the short-term.. But the problem for AMD is that now the short-term means 'can't pay our fucking bills.' I have said this over and over.. When AMD spent years with a huge R&D budget to leapfrog Intel, while focusing on the long-term, they accomplished that goal. What they did not accomplish was the political goal of forcing Intel to compete fairly. For years, AMD had the best processors and Intel were simply second-best.. but through monopolistic competition, AMD was held back - prevented from selling at Dell and HP.
For this, I hate Intel. Their processors might be the fastest right now.. They might own the future.. but I still hate them.
AMD is in a shitty situation.. If they produce 2nd best processors, they slowly fade into oblivion. If they produce 1st rate processors, Intel threatens the pc-makers.
Anyone want to create a GTLD blocker program?
If enough angry people install it, it won't matter if gtld's exist..
Just last week, Janet Napolitano testified before a congressional committee about the state of terrorism in America. She was testifiying exactly how you would expect the head of a government agency with endless authority and no clear-cut goal to testify. She was.. asking for more money, saying the terrorist threat is greater than ever before, and saying the DHS has helped to curb the terrorist threat.
So.. the DHS:
- We need more taxpayer money
- The terrorist threat is greater than ever before
- The DHS does a great job
Hrm.. seems like bullshit.
So, while working to change both the Republican and Democrat parties within, we should all be voting for a an anti surveillance-state candidate like Gary Johnson.