That's exactly what we'd outlaw. Libertarians are entirely consistent, it is today's "liberals" who are inconsistent. How more consistent do you want, "you can't use force".
why do you need a government to tell you what is right and what is wrong. The government is there to put people in jail and you have to justify why someone should be put in jail before it is any of the government's concern. Your calls to "protect the children" are thinly vailed calls for paternalistic government and you can read my rather extensive thoughts about this on half-empty. As for whether a newspaper can pass lies off as truth, we'll we seem to have a pretty good system in place right now which hardly ever involves the use of liberal law suits. If you scream loud enough, people will know that said newspaper is not very credible and will soon go out of business. As for someone following you around, sending you letters and calling you in the middle of the night, up to a few years ago there was nothing you could do about this and people survived. Deal with it.
Libertarianism is a political theory. The Liberterian Party, like all political parties, has a strategic goal and they make compromises to achieve that goal. There are a lot of people who call themselves liberterians, but they all agree on one thing, you may not use force (including the force of the state) to forward your views and it is the responsibility of government to hold the only force in society, and that is the force to jail those who use force on other members of the society. This is called the "minimalist state" or the "night watch-man of the libertarian state".
Just because the bill was turned down once doesn't mean a similar bill wont be brought before congress again. Besides that, his post "Knowing how to make illegal substances is not illegal" would not be illegal if this bill had past either. The point is, with bills like this passing through congress it may very well be illegal to even think about illegal substances in the near future.
Sounds like a plan, but can we find someone a little more likeable to invade? Maybe what we should do is pass the hat around and put together some money to buy these rebels a few guns, but then again, I'm sure the CIA is doing that:) Hmm, timewasting.. I'm thinking that there was just as much timewasting before as there is now. We just did things like outfish lakes.
You dont have to tell me that this isn't the way it has been throughout history. Some people have made the concious choice to deny the past and live life free. The rest of the flock have just bummed along, we have to fight for them too.
it's not absurd at all. It's a violation of my god given rights that I have to grin and bear on a daily basis. If my opinions are absurd then so are those of your founding fathers. So are those of the men who wrote for free markets and a free press. I have the right to do and say as I please. If I physically harm you or your property then I forfiet these rights. Nothing more, nothing less. Your "reputation" is something you will have to work out with your peers. Once upon a time the majority voted to put a short mad dictator in power who commited some of the worst atrocities our collective memory has ever seen. The majority can go off and herd itself without me, thank you very much.
I cant believe you just said "decency" without a moking tone. Beliefs about decency vary so drastically within the same community that even members of the same family cant agree on them. As for every other "crime" you have stated there, neither I, nor any libertarian agree that they should be matters that result in someone being thrown into jail, which is the purpose of government. This is not the responsibility of night watchman of the libertarian state, this is some conservative mother knows best now go to your room crap. For these reasons the Internet was declared a "pure anarchy" where physical harm is impossible and government is obsolete.
I'm reminded of some friends of mine who were handing around a petition to send UN troops into Afganistan to stop the mistreatment of women. I refused to sign and they were very upset. Thinking I was a woman hater, they demanded that I explain why I wouldn't sign. I quietly informed them that a country bordered by Iran and Pakistan and responsible for a majority of the poppy supply of europe is not exactly a good place to start flexing military muscle. That said, I hardly think anything I say on Slashdot will have anything to do with national powers invading other countries.
Well the question really is, are there more english speakers (not just native speakers) in the world than chinese speakers? I think if you cruise around Asia you will find that chinese is a damn good language to know and if, as you say, english is spoken widely all through Europe then I guess I've got it covered cause I already speak english! So really, about the only other language that I should wish to learn based on this popularity thing is spanish. Personally I'd like to learn german because the german language is everywhere in our society. You can watch popular movies and hear german, but for similar reasons it makes sense to learn chinese, so I dont have to read the subtitles on Jacky Chan flicks.
Oh, and here I was thinking I could get through a single day of posting on slashdot without having someone insult me. Check your attitude dude and try to show some repect for your fellow man.
it's a quote. click on the link. I think it is accurate in Australia, though no-one smokes anything but skunk weed here (ok, sometimes you can get someone who buys leaf but they're morons or they are just buying it to cut buds with). Prohibition leads to dealing, dealing leads to expensive pot, expensive pot leads to crime, crime leads to suffering.
have you read the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act of 1999?
Funny how you can be breaking the law without even knowing it. Maybe in 5 years time we will all receive daily email updates from the government on what is and is not illegal now.
not to mention that you must run a government approved operating system and all software on your computer must be registered with the federal government.
There's one slight problem here. In my understanding of government, laws serve the purpose of jailing people who hurt other people or their property. Actual real physical harm. If someone makes me cry or offends my moral code, I have no right to call upon my government to protect me, because I have not been physically harmed and neither has my property. Now I would dare to say that physicial harm is not possible on the Internet. Even the damage done to my computer during a hacker attack is not physical harm. So why do we need government? Let's face it, not everyone agrees with this. Lots of people want governments to protect them from every little thing, tell them what to do and ensure they can't hurt themselves. These are the people calling for Internet regulations.
In Myanmar, formerly Burma, access to the web is banned. To enforce this, the country's military regime imposes jail terms of up to 15 years for unauthorised use of a modem.
Anyone in Myanmar care to comment on this? But seriously, I can't believe this. 41 million people are living in this country under a military regime. 30% of the population is under 15 years of age. They have adequate and wide spread communications including long distance communications. Neighbouring India, do these folks a favour, invade and give em some net access!
you dont have the pthread library installed. Go get it, install it and try again. This is nothing like the trouble you have getting stuff to compile on *BSD.
it's not like it isn't trivial to move the directories out of modules/2.4.0/kernel into modules/2.4.0 and make a symlink from modules/2.4.0 to modules/2.4.
Slashdot Mirror
That's exactly what we'd outlaw. Libertarians are entirely consistent, it is today's "liberals" who are inconsistent. How more consistent do you want, "you can't use force".
Nozick, Robert. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. read it, then read a few more.
why do you need a government to tell you what is right and what is wrong. The government is there to put people in jail and you have to justify why someone should be put in jail before it is any of the government's concern. Your calls to "protect the children" are thinly vailed calls for paternalistic government and you can read my rather extensive thoughts about this on half-empty. As for whether a newspaper can pass lies off as truth, we'll we seem to have a pretty good system in place right now which hardly ever involves the use of liberal law suits. If you scream loud enough, people will know that said newspaper is not very credible and will soon go out of business. As for someone following you around, sending you letters and calling you in the middle of the night, up to a few years ago there was nothing you could do about this and people survived. Deal with it.
Libertarianism is a political theory. The Liberterian Party, like all political parties, has a strategic goal and they make compromises to achieve that goal. There are a lot of people who call themselves liberterians, but they all agree on one thing, you may not use force (including the force of the state) to forward your views and it is the responsibility of government to hold the only force in society, and that is the force to jail those who use force on other members of the society. This is called the "minimalist state" or the "night watch-man of the libertarian state".
Just because the bill was turned down once doesn't mean a similar bill wont be brought before congress again. Besides that, his post "Knowing how to make illegal substances is not illegal" would not be illegal if this bill had past either. The point is, with bills like this passing through congress it may very well be illegal to even think about illegal substances in the near future.
Sounds like a plan, but can we find someone a little more likeable to invade? Maybe what we should do is pass the hat around and put together some money to buy these rebels a few guns, but then again, I'm sure the CIA is doing that :) Hmm, timewasting.. I'm thinking that there was just as much timewasting before as there is now. We just did things like outfish lakes.
heh. I'm not a US citizen :)
"The cost of liberty is eternal diligence"
You dont have to tell me that this isn't the way it has been throughout history. Some people have made the concious choice to deny the past and live life free. The rest of the flock have just bummed along, we have to fight for them too.
it's not absurd at all. It's a violation of my god given rights that I have to grin and bear on a daily basis. If my opinions are absurd then so are those of your founding fathers. So are those of the men who wrote for free markets and a free press. I have the right to do and say as I please. If I physically harm you or your property then I forfiet these rights. Nothing more, nothing less. Your "reputation" is something you will have to work out with your peers. Once upon a time the majority voted to put a short mad dictator in power who commited some of the worst atrocities our collective memory has ever seen. The majority can go off and herd itself without me, thank you very much.
I cant believe you just said "decency" without a moking tone. Beliefs about decency vary so drastically within the same community that even members of the same family cant agree on them. As for every other "crime" you have stated there, neither I, nor any libertarian agree that they should be matters that result in someone being thrown into jail, which is the purpose of government. This is not the responsibility of night watchman of the libertarian state, this is some conservative mother knows best now go to your room crap. For these reasons the Internet was declared a "pure anarchy" where physical harm is impossible and government is obsolete.
I'm reminded of some friends of mine who were handing around a petition to send UN troops into Afganistan to stop the mistreatment of women. I refused to sign and they were very upset. Thinking I was a woman hater, they demanded that I explain why I wouldn't sign. I quietly informed them that a country bordered by Iran and Pakistan and responsible for a majority of the poppy supply of europe is not exactly a good place to start flexing military muscle. That said, I hardly think anything I say on Slashdot will have anything to do with national powers invading other countries.
sad but true and here I was thinking we had a society based on freedom.
Well the question really is, are there more english speakers (not just native speakers) in the world than chinese speakers? I think if you cruise around Asia you will find that chinese is a damn good language to know and if, as you say, english is spoken widely all through Europe then I guess I've got it covered cause I already speak english! So really, about the only other language that I should wish to learn based on this popularity thing is spanish. Personally I'd like to learn german because the german language is everywhere in our society. You can watch popular movies and hear german, but for similar reasons it makes sense to learn chinese, so I dont have to read the subtitles on Jacky Chan flicks.
Oh, and here I was thinking I could get through a single day of posting on slashdot without having someone insult me. Check your attitude dude and try to show some repect for your fellow man.
it's a quote. click on the link. I think it is accurate in Australia, though no-one smokes anything but skunk weed here (ok, sometimes you can get someone who buys leaf but they're morons or they are just buying it to cut buds with). Prohibition leads to dealing, dealing leads to expensive pot, expensive pot leads to crime, crime leads to suffering.
what exactly is wrong with import/export laws?
have you read the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act of 1999?
Funny how you can be breaking the law without even knowing it. Maybe in 5 years time we will all receive daily email updates from the government on what is and is not illegal now.
not to mention that you must run a government approved operating system and all software on your computer must be registered with the federal government.
and you cant recognise sarcasm when you read it.
There's one slight problem here. In my understanding of government, laws serve the purpose of jailing people who hurt other people or their property. Actual real physical harm. If someone makes me cry or offends my moral code, I have no right to call upon my government to protect me, because I have not been physically harmed and neither has my property. Now I would dare to say that physicial harm is not possible on the Internet. Even the damage done to my computer during a hacker attack is not physical harm. So why do we need government? Let's face it, not everyone agrees with this. Lots of people want governments to protect them from every little thing, tell them what to do and ensure they can't hurt themselves. These are the people calling for Internet regulations.
hey, if a totalatarian government dressed like nazi's was good enough for Starship Troopers then it oughta be good enough for us! :)
In Myanmar, formerly Burma, access to the web is banned. To enforce this, the country's military regime imposes jail terms of up to 15 years for unauthorised use of a modem.
Anyone in Myanmar care to comment on this? But seriously, I can't believe this. 41 million people are living in this country under a military regime. 30% of the population is under 15 years of age. They have adequate and wide spread communications including long distance communications. Neighbouring India, do these folks a favour, invade and give em some net access!
yer I think it is Mandarin that's most popular.
Where you gettin' these numbers from?
you dont have the pthread library installed. Go get it, install it and try again. This is nothing like the trouble you have getting stuff to compile on *BSD.
it's not like it isn't trivial to move the directories out of modules/2.4.0/kernel into modules/2.4.0 and make a symlink from modules/2.4.0 to modules/2.4.
does it have the riva framebuffer support?