While I agree that this is the current state of the law, I don't agree that this SHOULD be the current state of the law - it's an obvious attemtp to undermine consumers rights in the name of profits. Analagous, to, say, corportations fileing thier SEC papers in an underground bunker, locked with a key that is then destroyed, and guarded by rabid guard dogs. Sure, you can get to them if you really WANT to, but it clearly violates the spirit of the law.
except, of course, you have a legal right to your space & time shifting WITHOUT paying an additional royalty. So you're paying this extra royalty for NO reason, moral or legal. You might as well just buy data CDs and then send Hillary Rosen a check directly (note: no artist sees any of the money from blank media taxes).
The use of the word "age" negates the term "arbitrary".
I'm not sure where you get this idea. Lets take the drinking age - you can't legally drink until you're 21. Completely aside from the issue of whether or not someone who's a full citizen of the US, who pays taxes, can be called up on to shed blood in defense of the state, and can be legally held responsible for thier own actions should be restricted from drinking alcohol, it's a totally arbitrary age with no basis whatsoever in anything concrete. It's basically an age picked out of a hat. I can't think of any age-limited activities that aren't similiary arbitrary, perhaps you can.
Some rich dude who I can't remember once said "You can make a million dollars and still be an ethical man. But you can't make a billion." Or words to that effect. My memory wants me to think he was talking about Bill Gates at the time.
well, my own experience with win98... it's fine as long as you don't ask too much of it. It IS really bad about reclaiming memory from crashed apps, or apps that don't properly shut down, but if you only run well-behaved apps on it, and don't try to really abuse it, performance should be pretty good. That said, win2k seems to outperform 98 in just about every arena except startup/shutdown times. (You might want to consider that there's no good reason that Netscape 3.0 should crash, no matter what website you look at, and even if it does theres no reason the OS should go down with it)
I can confirm what the parent says. The little close button just takes you to the ad page. However, (in win2k) you can close the ad by right clicking on it's icon in the taskbar and selecting close. Alt-f4 also works.
People who WANT to help out with "family friendly" policies such as the one you describe are more than welcome to do so. REQUIRING, under threat of legal action, someone who has no desire, and no moral obligation, to do so is an infringment of that persons moral rights. Incidently, nothing you have posted disputes this. As for children rebelling - if YOU can't be there to look after your kids, why is that _I_ have to enforce it? Regardless of how little extra effort you think it takes. For what it's worth, I'm unusually anti-social and therefore don't consider my neighbors my community. I certainly don't consider people who might do buissness at my place of employment my community. A video arcade is not a daycare. If you want a daycare, you can go to one of those. They usually have video games, and will be happy to monitor your childrens use of them.
Disclaimer: I neither work at nor own a video arcade. I'm just speaking in that voice for the sake of argument. The opinions I post are my own, however
Yeah, go ahead and keep thinking that the pictures just go away. And believe the FBI when they promise that they NEVER read the content part of the emails carnivore sniffs. I think you are grossly optimistic about what would cause a very very large public outcry (example: well documented evidence of ongoing wiretap abuse by the LAPD. No public outcry at all).
We should hold public servants to a (much) higher moral standard than we hold private individuals, and there should be signifigant oversight. I also don't agree that there IS a legitimate use for widescale monitoring of innocent, private people - one of the (theoretical) keystones of our legal system is that people are innocent until they are PROVED guilty, and that it's better to let 100 guilty people go than convict 1 innocent person. The modern corporate/government culture of assuming people will be criminals unless you stop them cuts at the foundations of our society.
(because public property is technically owned by a government)
A common misconception, and untrue (granted, it's true enough in a practical sense). The government administers public lands, and holds them in trust for the public. Always remember, the goverment is YOUR servant, not the other way around. Public land is exactly that, public. You've heard of the Boston Commons? So called because it's help in common by the residents of Boston.
Well, I could still see a number of problems. One is that (arguably, and the judge obviously disagrees) they should have gotten a wiretap order, not a search warrant. Second, I would question whether or not the first warrant applied to his computer. Third, how did they decide that a file name "factors" had anything illegal in it? I'll give you 10 to 1 odds that the "probable cause" was simply the fact that it was encrypted.
Of course, it's more or less an open secret that wiretaps are often done without a wiretap order, and the order is either gained after the fact, or just never at all. And with a sympathetic judge (and don't think that the FBI doesn't know which ones to call), you can get a search warrant on vanishingly little evidence. Of course, the evidence from the search may get tossed in trial, but trial evidence isn't neccesarily what they need, either.
Re:..I think we just Slashdotted their server
on
LindowsOS Marches On
·
· Score: 2
Of course, but it's when you CAN connect to the site and get stuff like "ASP blahblah cannot connect to SQLServer: Too many connections", thats a REAL slashdotting.
a) There's quite a large difference between watching my arcade so your kids don't break my machines, and watching your kids so they don't break your rules.
b) If you don't feel that your kids can make the kind of decisions they need to make, why are they in my arcade without you? Parents cetainly are fallible. It's not my job to go around cleaning up after thier mistakes, however.
Well, I don't agree with age limits on alcohol or tobacco, either. Especially the alcohol one. Rating systems for games/movies/whatever are fine, but giving legal force to these ratings oversteps the governments limits (again, IMO). Just how legally binding ARE movie ratings in the US, anyway? I know the parental warning stickers on music have no legal force.
NO! If you don't like it, DON'T move. We are NOT "obligated by that to endure any punishments the leaders we have elected decide to bring down upon us". The parent is a foreigner here under visa, so he has rather less rights, but you don't change things by running from them. He has the right, some would even say the DUTY, to challenge unjust laws. Now, for the time being, the way to work is within the system, armed resistance is a last resort and, imo, not justified by the DMCA, but, in the end, it's your decision to make.
Best Way To Keep You Kids Away From Sex and Violence(tm):
Throw away your television. In fact, throw it away before they are born. Raise your kids without it. It may take a village (thank you, Hillary), but it STARTS at home. If your HOME is a safe environment, the big bad world of violence outside won't hurt them.
Re: Violent content in public places:
Arbitrary age restictions on ANYTHING are stupid. As I said in a previous post, tell your kids they aren't allowed to play violent games. Can't trust them if you aren't watching? Why not? If you can't trust them, why are they at the arcade alone? I hate kids. _I_ am NOT responsible for YOUR children.
I think even that is the wrong approach. Lets say I operate a video arcade. When did it become MY job to police YOUR kids? Just tell your kids that they aren't allowed to play violent games. Can't trust them to obey you when you aren't watching? Why not?
I was watching Shock Video on HBO the other night, and it's odd what they'll show and what they won't - erect penises are taboo, but you can show lesbians sucking on each others nipples and close ups of female genitalia. And, as always, the disparity between how much violence is okay and how much sex is.
Maybe you could suck it up and actually spend time with your kids, so that they aren't emotionally bankrupt and are able to play pseudo-violent games and see boobs without becoming scarred, twisted depraved killers. Parents need to take some damn responsibilty.
You could use short tracks at high velocities to shoot up raw material (eg, for construction of a station), while using low velocities for manned flights. Of course, friction is still an issue... maybe if you built it going all the way up some big mountain. Now THERE is an engineering project.... Screw Niven and his beanstalks!
Also, as mentioned in earlier posts by people who actually DO know about energy consumption, you save energy in the production of the hydrocarbon fuel.
Well, we don't really want to start a Perl flamewar, but your statement is untrue for many values of "better". Also, you can certainly write a perl compiler in perl. it's been done, in fact. You might even be able to write a perl interpeter in perl, but that'd just be wacky.
Slashdot Mirror
While I agree that this is the current state of the law, I don't agree that this SHOULD be the current state of the law - it's an obvious attemtp to undermine consumers rights in the name of profits. Analagous, to, say, corportations fileing thier SEC papers in an underground bunker, locked with a key that is then destroyed, and guarded by rabid guard dogs. Sure, you can get to them if you really WANT to, but it clearly violates the spirit of the law.
except, of course, you have a legal right to your space & time shifting WITHOUT paying an additional royalty. So you're paying this extra royalty for NO reason, moral or legal. You might as well just buy data CDs and then send Hillary Rosen a check directly (note: no artist sees any of the money from blank media taxes).
The use of the word "age" negates the term "arbitrary".
I'm not sure where you get this idea. Lets take the drinking age - you can't legally drink until you're 21. Completely aside from the issue of whether or not someone who's a full citizen of the US, who pays taxes, can be called up on to shed blood in defense of the state, and can be legally held responsible for thier own actions should be restricted from drinking alcohol, it's a totally arbitrary age with no basis whatsoever in anything concrete. It's basically an age picked out of a hat. I can't think of any age-limited activities that aren't similiary arbitrary, perhaps you can.
Some rich dude who I can't remember once said "You can make a million dollars and still be an ethical man. But you can't make a billion." Or words to that effect. My memory wants me to think he was talking about Bill Gates at the time.
well, my own experience with win98... it's fine as long as you don't ask too much of it. It IS really bad about reclaiming memory from crashed apps, or apps that don't properly shut down, but if you only run well-behaved apps on it, and don't try to really abuse it, performance should be pretty good. That said, win2k seems to outperform 98 in just about every arena except startup/shutdown times. (You might want to consider that there's no good reason that Netscape 3.0 should crash, no matter what website you look at, and even if it does theres no reason the OS should go down with it)
Yes, but my browser doesn't send ANYTHING to third parties. "Whats collected in web log" is rather alot of personal info.
I can confirm what the parent says. The little close button just takes you to the ad page. However, (in win2k) you can close the ad by right clicking on it's icon in the taskbar and selecting close. Alt-f4 also works.
Disclaimer: I neither work at nor own a video arcade. I'm just speaking in that voice for the sake of argument. The opinions I post are my own, however
I'll try to find some when I'm not nursing a serious migraine, but there were quite a few posted in one of the stories about the USA act.
Yeah, go ahead and keep thinking that the pictures just go away. And believe the FBI when they promise that they NEVER read the content part of the emails carnivore sniffs. I think you are grossly optimistic about what would cause a very very large public outcry (example: well documented evidence of ongoing wiretap abuse by the LAPD. No public outcry at all).
We should hold public servants to a (much) higher moral standard than we hold private individuals, and there should be signifigant oversight. I also don't agree that there IS a legitimate use for widescale monitoring of innocent, private people - one of the (theoretical) keystones of our legal system is that people are innocent until they are PROVED guilty, and that it's better to let 100 guilty people go than convict 1 innocent person. The modern corporate/government culture of assuming people will be criminals unless you stop them cuts at the foundations of our society.
(because public property is technically owned by a government)
A common misconception, and untrue (granted, it's true enough in a practical sense). The government administers public lands, and holds them in trust for the public. Always remember, the goverment is YOUR servant, not the other way around. Public land is exactly that, public. You've heard of the Boston Commons? So called because it's help in common by the residents of Boston.
Well, I could still see a number of problems. One is that (arguably, and the judge obviously disagrees) they should have gotten a wiretap order, not a search warrant. Second, I would question whether or not the first warrant applied to his computer. Third, how did they decide that a file name "factors" had anything illegal in it? I'll give you 10 to 1 odds that the "probable cause" was simply the fact that it was encrypted.
Of course, it's more or less an open secret that wiretaps are often done without a wiretap order, and the order is either gained after the fact, or just never at all. And with a sympathetic judge (and don't think that the FBI doesn't know which ones to call), you can get a search warrant on vanishingly little evidence. Of course, the evidence from the search may get tossed in trial, but trial evidence isn't neccesarily what they need, either.
Of course, but it's when you CAN connect to the site and get stuff like "ASP blahblah cannot connect to SQLServer: Too many connections", thats a REAL slashdotting.
b) If you don't feel that your kids can make the kind of decisions they need to make, why are they in my arcade without you? Parents cetainly are fallible. It's not my job to go around cleaning up after thier mistakes, however.
Well, I don't agree with age limits on alcohol or tobacco, either. Especially the alcohol one. Rating systems for games/movies/whatever are fine, but giving legal force to these ratings oversteps the governments limits (again, IMO). Just how legally binding ARE movie ratings in the US, anyway? I know the parental warning stickers on music have no legal force.
So what you're saying is that you believe in free speech and stuff, except when you don't, right?
NO! If you don't like it, DON'T move. We are NOT "obligated by that to endure any punishments the leaders we have elected decide to bring down upon us". The parent is a foreigner here under visa, so he has rather less rights, but you don't change things by running from them. He has the right, some would even say the DUTY, to challenge unjust laws. Now, for the time being, the way to work is within the system, armed resistance is a last resort and, imo, not justified by the DMCA, but, in the end, it's your decision to make.
Best Way To Keep You Kids Away From Sex and Violence(tm):
Throw away your television. In fact, throw it away before they are born. Raise your kids without it. It may take a village (thank you, Hillary), but it STARTS at home. If your HOME is a safe environment, the big bad world of violence outside won't hurt them.
Re: Violent content in public places:
Arbitrary age restictions on ANYTHING are stupid. As I said in a previous post, tell your kids they aren't allowed to play violent games. Can't trust them if you aren't watching? Why not? If you can't trust them, why are they at the arcade alone? I hate kids. _I_ am NOT responsible for YOUR children.
I think even that is the wrong approach. Lets say I operate a video arcade. When did it become MY job to police YOUR kids? Just tell your kids that they aren't allowed to play violent games. Can't trust them to obey you when you aren't watching? Why not?
I was watching Shock Video on HBO the other night, and it's odd what they'll show and what they won't - erect penises are taboo, but you can show lesbians sucking on each others nipples and close ups of female genitalia. And, as always, the disparity between how much violence is okay and how much sex is.
Maybe you could suck it up and actually spend time with your kids, so that they aren't emotionally bankrupt and are able to play pseudo-violent games and see boobs without becoming scarred, twisted depraved killers. Parents need to take some damn responsibilty.
You could use short tracks at high velocities to shoot up raw material (eg, for construction of a station), while using low velocities for manned flights. Of course, friction is still an issue... maybe if you built it going all the way up some big mountain. Now THERE is an engineering project.... Screw Niven and his beanstalks!
Also, as mentioned in earlier posts by people who actually DO know about energy consumption, you save energy in the production of the hydrocarbon fuel.
Well, we don't really want to start a Perl flamewar, but your statement is untrue for many values of "better". Also, you can certainly write a perl compiler in perl. it's been done, in fact. You might even be able to write a perl interpeter in perl, but that'd just be wacky.