Well you (and I) feel that the world would be great if no one hated anyone just because of their race. Not everyone shares this ideal, Why shouldn't their speech be protected? I could be wrong, but what good is free speech if only causes you like get to have it? According to John Mills people are happier if they are alloud to shape their own belifs and, that socity in genereal is better off if we can have free discourse between opposing sides.
I know that slavery and the pledge of allegiance are two totally different things BUT the fact remains that a seperation of church and state is constiutional and we should respect those laws to their fullest extent
Which part of the constitution would the seperation of church and state be in, It's cool if it is, but I thought that seperation of curch and state was federal law not constitutional law.
Yes/. is a good example of everyone having their say, but what if you don't want or have the bandwith (or the $$ to do it). Should I be required to put a forum on my page so that people can disagree with me? It's my page. I should be able to decided what goes there, it is my speach. As I understand it, this law would require me to ammend someone else's veiws to my speach, possibly at cost to me. I see that as a restrition to free speach
When did I slip through the rift? What strange world am I in where the government of the USA does great things like this? More power to them, I hope they succeede.
I have to disagree, the system was designed because people where sick of paying taxes to England. This is how it was until FDR messed things up and pushed us closer to being as red as China. I don't see how it is the governments job to provide for the poor, that is the job of charity (disclaimer I am in no way earning enough to worry about inflated income tax). Even if you don't like good ol' Bill Gates he did something to get where he was why should he or anyone else should be forced to pick up the slack of anyone else.
An Ip monger infringes on the patents of a company who makes DRM software! Stars collaps into themselfs and make black holes. What do bad ideas collaps into?
I'd say that this is an example of how the american government does not work, it took the money from the community in the form of taxes, and then gave it back with restrictions.
Unless there is a freak accident a gun cannot kill you, just like in most cases a hammer will not kill you. However there are evil people who are willing to point a gun in someone's direction and shoot. do you honestly belive anyone willing to break the murder laws would flinch about violating gun laws? "Oops I can't kill him because I don't have a firearm licenses". But if person 2 has a gun it's far more likely that we will have a dead killer, it at least gives person number two a fighting chance if he is armed too. is some beautiful writing on the subject
Europe is the birthplace of the Web, with a wealthy, technically literate population, a network infrastructure that rivals that of the US and a rich cultural and political tradition which can counter US constitutional imperialism.
Won't Al Gore(sarcastic) and all the government workers who actually developed the net be surpised
'anti-censor' software is routinely provided to enable citizens of other countries to break local laws
So WE are terribly opressvie, trying to let people have free speach
and US companies like Yahoo! disregard the judgements of foreign courts at will.
I wonder if it hurts to be that clueless, hmm maybe the reason yahoo didn't listen to Frace is because Yahoo agreed to obey US laws not French laws
the majority of Internet users, who want a network that allows them to express their own values, respects their own laws and supports their own cultures and interests. So when an US company wants to obey the laws they are evil, but when the US dosen't stop regulate things in other countries we are evil.
These are clearly not the people who should be setting the rules for the Net's evolution. Unfortunately today's Internet, with its permissive architecture and lack of effective boundaries or user authentication, makes it almost impossible to resist this technological imperialism.
Can't resist freedom, all that freedom imprisons us!
In the mapped network we will not have the absolute freedom of speech which cyberlibertarians claim they want
Except in countries where you can't say what you want, like nazi stuff in France (I don't care for nazi's but I defend the right of others to say whatever they want)
Many will see this as a loss of freedom, as some people aren't blind. but the freedom they value so much is also the freedom to act irresponsibly, to undermine civil authorities and to escape liability.Yep freedom means responcibility It is the freedom to release viruses, abuse personal data, send unlimited spamI'm looking in your direction China and undermine the copyright bargain. It is not a freedom we need.Freedom needs to be controlled or it's not...free
An important factor in Europe's favour is that we retain a belief that governments are a good thing, that political control is both necessary and desirable, and that laws serve the people. These beliefs are now lacking in the United States, rendering it incapable of acting to create any sort of civic space online or allowing its government to intervene effectively to regulate the Net.
War is Peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is Strength
(pg 7 of 1984 by George Orwell)Big Brother is watching you for your own good
A few good points drowned out by so so much babbel
I can see now that the government will try very hard to ban pictures or picture reading devices so no one puts copywrited quotes in pictures. Quick someone shut-down picture serch engines for distributing encrypted work!
Slashdot Mirror
I'd love one too, but dosen't Microsoft currently own the rights to shadowrun as a videogame? I don't want to see Haloized shadowrun.
Well you (and I) feel that the world would be great if no one hated anyone just because of their race. Not everyone shares this ideal, Why shouldn't their speech be protected? I could be wrong, but what good is free speech if only causes you like get to have it? According to John Mills people are happier if they are alloud to shape their own belifs and, that socity in genereal is better off if we can have free discourse between opposing sides.
I know that slavery and the pledge of allegiance are two totally different things BUT the fact remains that a seperation of church and state is constiutional and we should respect those laws to their fullest extent Which part of the constitution would the seperation of church and state be in, It's cool if it is, but I thought that seperation of curch and state was federal law not constitutional law.
Yes /. is a good example of everyone having their say, but what if you don't want or have the bandwith (or the $$ to do it). Should I be required to put a forum on my page so that people can disagree with me? It's my page. I should be able to decided what goes there, it is my speach. As I understand it, this law would require me to ammend someone else's veiws to my speach, possibly at cost to me. I see that as a restrition to free speach
When did I slip through the rift? What strange world am I in where the government of the USA does great things like this? More power to them, I hope they succeede.
I have to disagree, the system was designed because people where sick of paying taxes to England. This is how it was until FDR messed things up and pushed us closer to being as red as China. I don't see how it is the governments job to provide for the poor, that is the job of charity (disclaimer I am in no way earning enough to worry about inflated income tax). Even if you don't like good ol' Bill Gates he did something to get where he was why should he or anyone else should be forced to pick up the slack of anyone else.
An Ip monger infringes on the patents of a company who makes DRM software! Stars collaps into themselfs and make black holes. What do bad ideas collaps into?
I'd say that this is an example of how the american government does not work, it took the money from the community in the form of taxes, and then gave it back with restrictions.
Unless there is a freak accident a gun cannot kill you, just like in most cases a hammer will not kill you. However there are evil people who are willing to point a gun in someone's direction and shoot. do you honestly belive anyone willing to break the murder laws would flinch about violating gun laws? "Oops I can't kill him because I don't have a firearm licenses". But if person 2 has a gun it's far more likely that we will have a dead killer, it at least gives person number two a fighting chance if he is armed too. is some beautiful writing on the subject
if it seems mocking it's mine not his.
Won't Al Gore(sarcastic) and all the government workers who actually developed the net be surpised
'anti-censor' software is routinely provided to enable citizens of other countries to break local laws
So WE are terribly opressvie, trying to let people have free speach
and US companies like Yahoo! disregard the judgements of foreign courts at will.
I wonder if it hurts to be that clueless, hmm maybe the reason yahoo didn't listen to Frace is because Yahoo agreed to obey US laws not French laws
the majority of Internet users, who want a network that allows them to express their own values, respects their own laws and supports their own cultures and interests.
So when an US company wants to obey the laws they are evil, but when the US dosen't stop regulate things in other countries we are evil.
These are clearly not the people who should be setting the rules for the Net's evolution. Unfortunately today's Internet, with its permissive architecture and lack of effective boundaries or user authentication, makes it almost impossible to resist this technological imperialism.
Can't resist freedom, all that freedom imprisons us!
In the mapped network we will not have the absolute freedom of speech which cyberlibertarians claim they want
Except in countries where you can't say what you want, like nazi stuff in France (I don't care for nazi's but I defend the right of others to say whatever they want)
Many will see this as a loss of freedom, as some people aren't blind. but the freedom they value so much is also the freedom to act irresponsibly, to undermine civil authorities and to escape liability.Yep freedom means responcibility It is the freedom to release viruses, abuse personal data, send unlimited spamI'm looking in your direction China and undermine the copyright bargain. It is not a freedom we need.Freedom needs to be controlled or it's not...free
An important factor in Europe's favour is that we retain a belief that governments are a good thing, that political control is both necessary and desirable, and that laws serve the people. These beliefs are now lacking in the United States, rendering it incapable of acting to create any sort of civic space online or allowing its government to intervene effectively to regulate the Net.
War is Peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is Strength
(pg 7 of 1984 by George Orwell)Big Brother is watching you for your own good
A few good points drowned out by so so much babbel
On one hand security is good in the wake of events in the close past, but on the other hand when does an event miss it's point for security?
I can see now that the government will try very hard to ban pictures or picture reading devices so no one puts copywrited quotes in pictures. Quick someone shut-down picture serch engines for distributing encrypted work!