Your analogy only works if everybody has access to the information TIA collects in the same way that everybody in a small town has access to scuttlebutt. If I understand TIA correctly, that's not the way it will work.
And the only people who will be safe will be those without govt assigned ID Like Blank Reg. Max Headroom is looking more like a documentary every day.
The U.S. has already invaded and conquered its first country under the Bush administration, and it's unclear at this point how long it will be before it does so again. Second. He's conquered his second country. Don't let his spell work on you. "Forget about Afghanistan and Osama. Iraq and Saddam are the real evildoers." Next it'll be, "Forget about Iraq and Saddam. The real evildoers are...(a)Iran,(b)Syria,(c)North Korea,(d)France."
and the biggest thing I haven't figured out is how Bush will remain in power beyond his allowed two terms. Won't be necessary. Once you have control of the media, the courts, and the election process you can pretty much just select who takes the reigns. He'll just hand power over to a hand-picked heir. Just like they used to do in the Soviet Union.
Hoover's Online has them listed as: Recording Industry Association Of America, Inc. 1330 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 775-0101 Fax: (202) 775-7253
You're saying the RIAA isn't an incorporated entity, nonprofit or otherwise? I believe you're wrong on that but I can't verify it because their Web site seems to be getting it's daily DOSing right now. Whatever it is, it's not a legitimate agent of the law.
So let's say everyone suspected company X was using GPL'ed code in CSS apps. Someone or some entity would go to court and demand they reveal the source to see if there is any GPL'ed code. The code would then be revealed to the person or entity filing the suit (assuming they won).
How is this different from the Verizon / MPAA example?
Well, the difference is right there in your example. In your example someone goes to court to request that an agent of the law - a judge - issue a subpoena. Under the DMCA, the RIAA is allowed to draft their own subpoena and deliver it directly to the other party, in this case Verizon. The RIAA's subpoena carries the full weight of the law even though they have no legitimate authority as agents of the law, except that which is wrongly given to them under the DMCA. That type of power and authority has the potential for massive abuse without the constraining influence of the court. Can you please pay attention here. Our democracy is at stake.
Here's what the problem is: Corporations should not be able to subpoena JACK SHIT! A subpoena is a legal action and corporations are NOT agents of the law in a democracy. But this country hasn't been a democracy for a few years now and this is further proof.
Thanks for calling me Stalin too, but I will decline the invitation to join your camp.
No problem. Thanks for acting like Stalin and proving to the world how dangerous you psychos truly are (as if we needed any more proof). Man , this is getting ugly. I feel like I'm winning a boxing match in the Special Olympics. Or like the US military blasting the shit out of an Iraqi marketplace. It's sad to go up against an unarmed opponent. I'll leave you alone now since you've obviously run out of anything to say that even approaches a point. Go lick your wounds.
What's the matter? Have you run out of arguments? Why don't you go to rushlimbaugh.com and copy some more. You know he's fully qualified to feed us his opinions, what with him going all the way through 12th grade, and all.
And YOU can fiddle while Rome burns. Go ahead and wallow in your ignorant bliss. One day you'll realize. The "children" example was in relation to the state of knowledge we have before the media pushes THEIR knowledge to the majority of us. I kind of figured that argument would be too complex for a conservative to grasp. Yes we can change the station but, once again, your simple shouting ignores the complexity of the situation. What shall we change it to, oh wise one? Another station owned by the same corporation? Yeah, that's a good choice. And why do you choose some wacky conspiracy story and assume that's what I'm talking about when I ask for truth in broadcasting? Can't you see that's a non sequitor and makes for an invalid argument? Once again, oversimplification rules. Also, you assume I want to ban things I don't approve of (as in your Cartoon Channel rant). How did you get that? If anyone is banning anything it's the corporate media who is banning quality information in favor of infotainment. As an example, how much did you hear on the networks or Fox News about the FCC vote? (See? Look at that right there. That's what's knows as a valid argument as compared to a rant.) And as for sending me to North Korea, Cuba, blah, blah, blah . . . Damn, Stalin! Are you calling for exiles for people whose opinion you don't approve of? What kind of country is this turning into? You people are scary.
Maybe more people would listen if they stopped the whining and started programming that more people want to hear?
That's an oversimplified way to look at the media with regard to market forces and consumer choice. The automobile manufacturer comparison is also oversimplified. Here's why. When we shop for a car we can be relatively well informed about what a good car is and what a bad car is. We can take that information with us to the dealer when we go to purchase a car and be relatively well assured that we are making a good decision when we purchase. With the media, THEY make choices about what to tell us and what not to tell us. Most people have no way to know whether they are giving us quality information or crap, so there goes our informed choice. Further, since people aren't informed before the media chooses to inform us, we're (as a whole) rather like children when it comes to choosing what to consume. A better analogy would be letting children choose what to eat. They'll choose a diet of Super Sugar Rush cereal and Bogo-Bars and wind up with rotten teeth just as we'll wind up choosing Rush Limbaugh and having rotten minds, just because he's entertaining and offers simple solutions that don't require much thinking on the listener's part. You can see that play out on shows like "American Idol" as what I'll call the Simon Cowell effect. Some "singer" will get up on stage and deliver some kind of god-awful rendition of a tired old top-40 song and Simon will rightfully tell them that it sucked. Then the audience goes ape-shit with their boos and catcalls toward Simon for delivering the painful truth. It's as if the people don't want to hear anything meaningful as much as they want to hear platitudes and feel-good pablum. But they NEED to hear the truth no matter how unpleasant or unprofitable because otherwise our democratic republic will falter and die. And it's not the media's option to tell them the truth - it's their responsibility under the law. More intense market forces will only further distort an already skewed media toward more pablum and feel-good crap rather than keeping citizens in charge of their government. People will only realize this after the damage has been done and millions of people are suffering while the top few percent wall off their mansions from the pissed-off mobs.
I wouldn't call SCO's suit frivolous. I would call it arrogant, aggressive, and desperate. "Frivolous" is the code word used by those who want to close the court house doors to the citizens and protect corporations from having to account for the crimes that they will inevitably commit when their greed overruns their conscience. If you truly believe that the main function of a contract is to refresh everyone's memory later, then you should be careful about throwing the word "naive" around too much. The contract is there to document the agreement so that, should anyone attempt to circumvent the agreement, they can be held accountable in some way. Court is the ultimate (legal) form of resolution when a dispute arises, and the contract is the legal document that the court uses to determine what was agreed to by the parties involved. A simple receipt or list of deliverables would suffice to refresh memories. Why go to the trouble of writing a contract for that? When you are involved in the world of business, you must realize that the prime motivation driving the parties toward an agreement is profit. The profit motive will attract those with the most greed. The greater the potential profit, the greater the force of that greed. Greed often drives people to do nasty things. We have contracts, backed by civil courts, to constrain peoples' behavior. I would very much like to live in a world where contracts were for refreshing peoples' memories and business partners acted in good faith, where the government represented the people and spoke the truth to us instead of treating us with contempt, and where people don't kill other people who are no threat to them. But it's rough-and-tumble out there. People will act selfishly and unfairly if not held accountable. Surely, only the naive would dispute that.
That's funny because wasn't it Stalin who perfected the use of exile to silence his political foes? Sounds like you would like to revive Stalin's technique. Oh, and since you haven't been keeping up with current events, Gorbachev opened up Russia to capitalism and the crooks gutted the economy. Just like they did here. Can someone save us from the "true believers?" Pure capitalism doesn't work any better than pure socialism or pure anything. All ideologies need a tempering factor. You're probably suffering from a hardening of the ideologies. You might want to get that checked.
"Well, I see you picked up this 5 Euro note as change for your purchase of Zovirax on May 12th at the BogoPharm pharmacy on the South Side. You know, you really should be more careful about who you sleep with, Mrs. Zambezi."
The Wall Street Journal of December 1st, 2000 page one states:
"`Madame Butterfly' Theresa Le Pore wasn't always an embattled Palm Beach ballots chief. In the 1980s she moonlighted as a flight attendant on private planes owned by Saudi weapons dealer Adnan Khashoggi, a middleman in Reagan administration arms sales to Iran."
I'm sure that's just a coincidence, though. Read more here.
Homo Sapiens, that is. As proof, just read most of the above messages. Our planetary siblings are about to be wiped out (due primarily to our own greed) and the idiots come out of the woodwork to make jokes about it. The weakness of your education in biology is showing when you make light of a critical issue like this. You betta' recognize. All of life is woven together. Start plucking out the threads and pretty soon it falls apart. Or, if you've ever played the game called "Don't Break the Ice" where you knock out the blocks until, suddenly, the whole platform collapses, you can see the analogy. We're just busy as hell knocking out blocks trying to get richer than the other guy. Stop, already. Just look around (outside preferably) if you want truth, beauty, and riches. We already have it all and we're just shit-canning it.
I agree with that 100% (as long as we define iggymanz as the "old").
Re:A short history of how the U.S. got into this m
on
4l-j4z333ra 0wn3d
·
· Score: 1
Do you really think that Caligula is a good model to be following?
Nope. Just pointing out the policy that our shadow government (The Project for the New American Century) is pursuing. Calling a spade a spade as it were and also pointing out that we, as a species, have been at this point before. It's kind of ironic, as well, that the last remnant of the Roman Empire (The Roman Catholic Church) is speaking out against our recklessness. Their institutional memory gives them a little better perspective on the exercise of power, I guess. So, as South Park Saddam would say, "Relax, big fella." No Roman Emperor will ever be a role model for me (wish I could say the same for our so-called leaders).
Re:A short history of how the U.S. got into this m
on
4l-j4z333ra 0wn3d
·
· Score: 1
So what this statement amounts to is, "if I decide that I don't like you, fear my wrath!" This sounds like an extremely unreasonable message to be broadcasting to the rest of the world, and I think the world has reacted to it as such.
oderint dum metuant: Let them hate so long as they fear. (A favorite saying of Caligula.)
Re:A short history of how the U.S. got into this m
on
4l-j4z333ra 0wn3d
·
· Score: 1
If they think that the current operations in Iraq will diminsh the threat from terrorism and make the world safer for the US, they must be smoking something really really bad...
They know that. It's actually part of the plan. They need to keep poking the hornet's nest to make sure there are plenty of "evildoers" out there who "hate freedom" and want to do us harm. Then they can sell us their extreme foreign and domestic policy agenda that wouldn't fly in a peace-time U.S.
Slashdot Mirror
Your analogy only works if everybody has access to the information TIA collects in the same way that everybody in a small town has access to scuttlebutt. If I understand TIA correctly, that's not the way it will work.
And the only people who will be safe will be those without govt assigned ID
Like Blank Reg. Max Headroom is looking more like a documentary every day.
The U.S. has already invaded and conquered its first country under the Bush administration, and it's unclear at this point how long it will be before it does so again.
Second. He's conquered his second country. Don't let his spell work on you. "Forget about Afghanistan and Osama. Iraq and Saddam are the real evildoers."
Next it'll be, "Forget about Iraq and Saddam. The real evildoers are...(a)Iran,(b)Syria,(c)North Korea,(d)France."
and the biggest thing I haven't figured out is how Bush will remain in power beyond his allowed two terms.
Won't be necessary. Once you have control of the media, the courts, and the election process you can pretty much just select who takes the reigns. He'll just hand power over to a hand-picked heir. Just like they used to do in the Soviet Union.
The RIAA isn't a corporation.
Hoover's Online has them listed as:
Recording Industry Association Of America, Inc.
1330 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 775-0101
Fax: (202) 775-7253
So, once again, please pay attention.
The RIAA isn't a corporation.
You're saying the RIAA isn't an incorporated entity, nonprofit or otherwise? I believe you're wrong on that but I can't verify it because their Web site seems to be getting it's daily DOSing right now. Whatever it is, it's not a legitimate agent of the law.
So let's say everyone suspected company X was using GPL'ed code in CSS apps. Someone or some entity would go to court and demand they reveal the source to see if there is any GPL'ed code. The code would then be revealed to the person or entity filing the suit (assuming they won).
How is this different from the Verizon / MPAA example?
Well, the difference is right there in your example. In your example someone goes to court to request that an agent of the law - a judge - issue a subpoena.
Under the DMCA, the RIAA is allowed to draft their own subpoena and deliver it directly to the other party, in this case Verizon. The RIAA's subpoena carries the full weight of the law even though they have no legitimate authority as agents of the law, except that which is wrongly given to them under the DMCA. That type of power and authority has the potential for massive abuse without the constraining influence of the court.
Can you please pay attention here. Our democracy is at stake.
Here's what the problem is:
Corporations should not be able to subpoena JACK SHIT! A subpoena is a legal action and corporations are NOT agents of the law in a democracy. But this country hasn't been a democracy for a few years now and this is further proof.
Thanks for calling me Stalin too, but I will decline the invitation to join your camp.
No problem. Thanks for acting like Stalin and proving to the world how dangerous you psychos truly are (as if we needed any more proof).
Man , this is getting ugly. I feel like I'm winning a boxing match in the Special Olympics. Or like the US military blasting the shit out of an Iraqi marketplace. It's sad to go up against an unarmed opponent. I'll leave you alone now since you've obviously run out of anything to say that even approaches a point. Go lick your wounds.
What's the matter? Have you run out of arguments? Why don't you go to rushlimbaugh.com and copy some more.
You know he's fully qualified to feed us his opinions, what with him going all the way through 12th grade, and all.
And YOU can fiddle while Rome burns. Go ahead and wallow in your ignorant bliss. One day you'll realize.
The "children" example was in relation to the state of knowledge we have before the media pushes THEIR knowledge to the majority of us. I kind of figured that argument would be too complex for a conservative to grasp.
Yes we can change the station but, once again, your simple shouting ignores the complexity of the situation. What shall we change it to, oh wise one? Another station owned by the same corporation? Yeah, that's a good choice. And why do you choose some wacky conspiracy story and assume that's what I'm talking about when I ask for truth in broadcasting? Can't you see that's a non sequitor and makes for an invalid argument? Once again, oversimplification rules.
Also, you assume I want to ban things I don't approve of (as in your Cartoon Channel rant). How did you get that? If anyone is banning anything it's the corporate media who is banning quality information in favor of infotainment. As an example, how much did you hear on the networks or Fox News about the FCC vote? (See? Look at that right there. That's what's knows as a valid argument as compared to a rant.)
And as for sending me to North Korea, Cuba, blah, blah, blah . . . Damn, Stalin! Are you calling for exiles for people whose opinion you don't approve of? What kind of country is this turning into? You people are scary.
Maybe more people would listen if they stopped the whining and started programming that more people want to hear?
That's an oversimplified way to look at the media with regard to market forces and consumer choice. The automobile manufacturer comparison is also oversimplified. Here's why.
When we shop for a car we can be relatively well informed about what a good car is and what a bad car is. We can take that information with us to the dealer when we go to purchase a car and be relatively well assured that we are making a good decision when we purchase.
With the media, THEY make choices about what to tell us and what not to tell us. Most people have no way to know whether they are giving us quality information or crap, so there goes our informed choice. Further, since people aren't informed before the media chooses to inform us, we're (as a whole) rather like children when it comes to choosing what to consume. A better analogy would be letting children choose what to eat. They'll choose a diet of Super Sugar Rush cereal and Bogo-Bars and wind up with rotten teeth just as we'll wind up choosing Rush Limbaugh and having rotten minds, just because he's entertaining and offers simple solutions that don't require much thinking on the listener's part.
You can see that play out on shows like "American Idol" as what I'll call the Simon Cowell effect. Some "singer" will get up on stage and deliver some kind of god-awful rendition of a tired old top-40 song and Simon will rightfully tell them that it sucked. Then the audience goes ape-shit with their boos and catcalls toward Simon for delivering the painful truth. It's as if the people don't want to hear anything meaningful as much as they want to hear platitudes and feel-good pablum.
But they NEED to hear the truth no matter how unpleasant or unprofitable because otherwise our democratic republic will falter and die. And it's not the media's option to tell them the truth - it's their responsibility under the law.
More intense market forces will only further distort an already skewed media toward more pablum and feel-good crap rather than keeping citizens in charge of their government.
People will only realize this after the damage has been done and millions of people are suffering while the top few percent wall off their mansions from the pissed-off mobs.
I wouldn't call SCO's suit frivolous. I would call it arrogant, aggressive, and desperate. "Frivolous" is the code word used by those who want to close the court house doors to the citizens and protect corporations from having to account for the crimes that they will inevitably commit when their greed overruns their conscience.
If you truly believe that the main function of a contract is to refresh everyone's memory later, then you should be careful about throwing the word "naive" around too much. The contract is there to document the agreement so that, should anyone attempt to circumvent the agreement, they can be held accountable in some way. Court is the ultimate (legal) form of resolution when a dispute arises, and the contract is the legal document that the court uses to determine what was agreed to by the parties involved.
A simple receipt or list of deliverables would suffice to refresh memories. Why go to the trouble of writing a contract for that?
When you are involved in the world of business, you must realize that the prime motivation driving the parties toward an agreement is profit. The profit motive will attract those with the most greed. The greater the potential profit, the greater the force of that greed. Greed often drives people to do nasty things. We have contracts, backed by civil courts, to constrain peoples' behavior.
I would very much like to live in a world where contracts were for refreshing peoples' memories and business partners acted in good faith, where the government represented the people and spoke the truth to us instead of treating us with contempt, and where people don't kill other people who are no threat to them. But it's rough-and-tumble out there. People will act selfishly and unfairly if not held accountable.
Surely, only the naive would dispute that.
That's funny because wasn't it Stalin who perfected the use of exile to silence his political foes? Sounds like you would like to revive Stalin's technique.
Oh, and since you haven't been keeping up with current events, Gorbachev opened up Russia to capitalism and the crooks gutted the economy. Just like they did here.
Can someone save us from the "true believers?" Pure capitalism doesn't work any better than pure socialism or pure anything. All ideologies need a tempering factor. You're probably suffering from a hardening of the ideologies. You might want to get that checked.
Funny, I thought "Contracts" were a method for doing business in good faith with people, not just something to be used for frivolous lawsuits....
If everyone doing business operated "in good faith" then contracts wouldn't be necessary. The only use of contracts is in court when good faith fails.
P.S. You outed yourself as a corporate tool when you used the phrase "frivolous lawsuits."
"Well, I see you picked up this 5 Euro note as change for your purchase of Zovirax on May 12th at the BogoPharm pharmacy on the South Side. You know, you really should be more careful about who you sleep with, Mrs. Zambezi."
The Wall Street Journal of December 1st, 2000 page one states:
"`Madame Butterfly' Theresa Le Pore wasn't always an embattled Palm Beach ballots chief. In the 1980s she moonlighted as a flight attendant on private planes owned by Saudi weapons dealer Adnan Khashoggi, a middleman in Reagan administration arms sales to Iran."
I'm sure that's just a coincidence, though. Read more here.
Here's what the massive consumption of electricity is doing.
If Novell can bring a good, stable NDS implementation to Linux then Linux will gain a LOT in the Enterprise.
That happened three years ago. They've also ported it to Windows, Solaris, and AIX.
Get your download on and try it out.
Homo Sapiens, that is.
As proof, just read most of the above messages. Our planetary siblings are about to be wiped out (due primarily to our own greed) and the idiots come out of the woodwork to make jokes about it. The weakness of your education in biology is showing when you make light of a critical issue like this. You betta' recognize. All of life is woven together. Start plucking out the threads and pretty soon it falls apart. Or, if you've ever played the game called "Don't Break the Ice" where you knock out the blocks until, suddenly, the whole platform collapses, you can see the analogy. We're just busy as hell knocking out blocks trying to get richer than the other guy. Stop, already. Just look around (outside preferably) if you want truth, beauty, and riches. We already have it all and we're just shit-canning it.
out with old; in with the new
I agree with that 100% (as long as we define iggymanz as the "old").
Do you really think that Caligula is a good model to be following?
Nope. Just pointing out the policy that our shadow government (The Project for the New American Century) is pursuing. Calling a spade a spade as it were and also pointing out that we, as a species, have been at this point before. It's kind of ironic, as well, that the last remnant of the Roman Empire (The Roman Catholic Church) is speaking out against our recklessness. Their institutional memory gives them a little better perspective on the exercise of power, I guess.
So, as South Park Saddam would say, "Relax, big fella." No Roman Emperor will ever be a role model for me (wish I could say the same for our so-called leaders).
The Warriors
Caaan Yoooou Dig It?
SLC Punk
"Fargin' ice-hole"
to make soup?"
I couldn't believe that came out of Steve's mouth.
"'Green card' my black ass!"
So what this statement amounts to is, "if I decide that I don't like you, fear my wrath!" This sounds like an extremely unreasonable message to be broadcasting to the rest of the world, and I think the world has reacted to it as such.
oderint dum metuant: Let them hate so long as they fear. (A favorite saying of Caligula.)
If they think that the current operations in Iraq will diminsh the threat from terrorism and make the world safer for the US, they must be smoking something really really bad...
They know that. It's actually part of the plan. They need to keep poking the hornet's nest to make sure there are plenty of "evildoers" out there who "hate freedom" and want to do us harm. Then they can sell us their extreme foreign and domestic policy agenda that wouldn't fly in a peace-time U.S.