It will be the legal owner, who may not even know that his gun was stolen, who will have his door kicked in.
If someone has a gun stolen and they don't notice or report it, they probably deserve to have their door kicked in. They're responsible for it. Police aren't complete idiots anyway, if it's a suburban dad registered to a gun and the killing was drug related a thousand miles away, they will probably knock rather than kick the door down.
Only Mao of them was actually Communist -- the rest at most paid lip service to some Communist ideas.
If you're going to redefine communism to leave out the ones you don't like, you're on the way to Newspeak yourself.
No, 1984 is specifically about Communists because it was specifically written about Communists.
Despite the word never appearing in it.
Orwell wasn't an idiot. He was writing about totalitarianism, not just communism. He probably felt sentimental about "real" communism, as you seem to. But he had seen where it goes in practice. Communism isn't the only route to totalitarianism. Nazi Germany, Czarist Russia, both did pretty well in that regard. East Germany seemed to switch over from one form of totalitarianism to another without missing a beat.
Actually, no.
Actually yes. Seems we won't agree on much. So let's just call it a day and leave it. I will anyway.
Stalin is one politician, harshly denounced by his successors. While he achieved iconic status, he is no more relevant to Communism than your local friendly bicycle thief to the rest of Black people.
Stop this invocation of racism. It's insulting.
Stalin wasn't exceptional. Mao. Kim Il Sung. Pol Pot. Its hard to name a communist leader in power for a decade or more, who wasn't a paranoid tyrant who sent millions to labor camps, or just had them killed. Only after the leader is dead, the system has collapsed economically, do his successors dare to change his policies.
Orwell's works were kept unchallenged in European and American cultures, and were widely promoted for anti-Communist propaganda value.
Of course they were.But again, "1984" doesn't ONLY apply to communism. This article shows that it is still invoked, correctly, to point out the implications of things in our own society.
The obesity worriers don't think that fruit juice is actually better. Does it really matter whether you drink 1600 calories a day of grape juice or corn juice?
I doubt anyone would drink the same volume of fruit juice as soft drink, it's much more filling.
And I thought in this thread we were talking about cigarettes. I'm not sure what the healthy thing that you can smoke to stimulate your nicotine receptors is.
I was responding to a post about meth. Anyway, you can take nicotine without smoking it. Plenty of people do, it's a lot less lethal.
It was not "unmotivated", it was "misdirected". In the same way how fear of black people is misdirected, even though there are plenty of violent criminals among black people.
Yeah, right. Thinking Stalinism was evil is the same as being a bigoted racist. Because most communist states were actually so nice and benevolent. Its only the exceptional ones, like USSR, Maoist China, North Korea, Romania, Albania, that gave all the the others a bad name.
My own politics are very liberal, in American terms, even socialist. But real communism is to be feared. They probably never were a threat to the US in the "Red Menace" way, but they certainly were to their own citizens.
Not only it's absolutely definitely was intended to refer to the society under Communist, or specifically Stalin rule, most Americans' idea of USSR is actually closer to Orwell's fiction than to reality.
Americans' ignorance isn't the fault of Orwell. If he had wanted to pillory communism specifically, he would have done so. He fought against the fascists in Spain, he knew how evil both extremes were. Big Brother could have been a Fascist as easily as a Communist. The labels are irrelevant once they get into power.
In general, I think that Orwell did the mankind a great disservice when his own fear of Communists made his work focused on oppressive societies with Communist attributes.
It wasn't unmotivated "fear". It was based on what Stalin was doing when Orwell wrote it. In any case, the word "communist" isn't in the book. It was just "The Party'. Orwell had recognised that dictatorships end up the same, whatever the philosophy they start with.
For meth, there isn't a huge range of healthy alternatives that satisfy the same appetite.
It's just that producing a sugary drink with artificial flavouring is cheaper than making a healthy pure fruit juice, for example. Raising the cost, or just eliminating them as in NY, of the sugary drink, doesn't leave the consumer going thirsty. After all, they can always drink free water.
Also, if "healthy" drinks market is increased, there will be more volume, more competition, and lower prices; though not as low as untaxed sugar water.
The UN has no authority over any country, especially those that are members. The UN was designed as a method of dispute mediation without armed conflict
True
There is a recent push (20 years or so) that wants the UN to be presented as the NWO Government, and make everyone in the world a subject. This rhetoric should bother you very much.
Yes, hearing that kind of loonie conspiracy theory presented with a straight face does bother me very much.
I'm currently watching "Deadwood" and "Battlestar Galactica".
After I watch an episode, I like to look up reviews and commentary. But it takes some work, as many sites that were active when they came out have gone or reorganised and when I do find interesting comments, often they have spoilers. And of course, I can't ask questions or join in threads years old.
When I download and watch shows like "Walking Dead" or "Game of Thrones" within a day of broadcast, I can participate in the online discussions and easily find relevant reviews.
No, there isn't a natural right that I'm being deprived of, but it's important to me. Actually in a few years I'll probably pick (as in "buy", not shoplift) the Blueray of Thrones.
Watch out when you are propagandized like this. Once you accept that this is "Science"
Right. Don't believe any of this "science" crap. It's obviously all a scheme by a bunch of atheists who want to use the United Nations to install Al Gore as President-for-Life and take away all your guns and SUVs.
If it were true, why isn't it in the Bible? Those commies can't answer that, can they.
data mining alerts of a highly probably hit. Law enforcement, or preferably a social service person, shows up to ask the person some questions.
What a completely idiotic idea.
The moment that this happened:
1) Bored teenagers would start doing these searches.
2) Hackers would write Trojans to do them on targets' PCs.
3) Real killers would use an anonymising method to find whatever they wanted and not raise a flag.
Exactly the same kind of security theatre that most of the post 9/11 precautions are. Complete waste of time and money in achieving their stated aims and huge invasion of privacy for innocents caught in the net.
my girlfriend still brings up a browser with google as the home page, then types in Yahoo Mail. And she's not the only one. I die a little every time I see that.
It's not actually a dumb thing to do. Of course, if you have bookmarked a site, you use that. But if it's not your PC and you want a page with some degree of security -- mail, banking, Amazon, etc -- if you just type in the URL, you have the risk of making a typo and hitting a phishing site. If you type the URL into Google, the top link is usually what you intended to type, even if you made such a mistake. If the site is malware, you'll usually see indications of that in the links too.
iPhones come with Safari and few people ever install another browser. Android phones come with a stock browser and few people install another browser. Opera has little potential to help Facebook crack the smart phone marketing problem.
Unless they pay vendors to preinstall it. Anyway, if they brand it as the "Facebook browser" and promote it on their site, it will certainly get installed on a lot of phones.
Damn. I've been using Opera for several years now. If it comes under the thumb of Facebook, I'll jump ship. I don't want those fuckers backdooring themselves into everything I do online.
I wouldn't be surprised if most pirates use Google
I thought "pirates" were those who made the files available. Not those who download them.Anyway,it's still trivial to download any MS software. The hassle is you have to look out for malware and then find a WGA crack. Rather than go through all that crap, when I was given a used corporate laptop with a heavily passworded Vista setup and faced wiping and reinstall to get a useful system, I just said "fuck all that" and got Ubuntu. My daughter complained, but she got used to it.
Well, when the first amendment was written, pretty much all speech was not anonymous. The first amendment was passed in 1789.... . The people who have caused political change have done so by being intentionally not anonymous.
Wrong. Very wrong.
The Federalist Papers
The Federalist Papers are a series of 85 articles or essays promoting the ratification of the United States Constitution written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. Seventy-seven of the essays were published serially in The Independent Journal and The New York Packet between October 1787 and August 1788....At the time of publication, the authorship of the articles was a closely guarded secret
there are plenty of times you don't carry a phone, but would wear a watch.....
Really? Like what. I cannot think of one. That even includes swimming!
Swimming? That's when I really appreciate my watch. A cheap 100 m waterproof stainless steel analog with a bezel to time my laps. What else would I do? Keep a phone in a plastic bag in my briefs? Leave it on the beach to be stolen? Other times, like riding my bike, I need to make a connection, and keep track of time.
I really hate the idea of having to have a phone in one hand at all times. Too easy to lose, get damaged or distract me.
Surely there are options on the table. However, the fact that Vixie concluded that "these will be very difficult to re-program" when a group of Estonian hackers managed to do it through a completely illegitimate virus, completely remotely, is troubling. Something about the process must have been irreversible otherwise a simple "undo" page distributed through DNS forwarding could have taken care of it as soon as the servers were under FBI control.
I suspect the "difficulty" is more legal than technical. The Estonians don't care if they brick an occasional device, and they don't try to get the users' legal consent. And people and governments in other countries might not be happy to trust the FBI to reprogram their router/modem.
Hong Kong was never an independent country. For 150 years it was a British colony, now its China's again. But it has independent taxes, judiciary, customs, immigration, its own TLD (.hk).
Slashdot Mirror
It will be the legal owner, who may not even know that his gun was stolen, who will have his door kicked in.
If someone has a gun stolen and they don't notice or report it, they probably deserve to have their door kicked in. They're responsible for it. Police aren't complete idiots anyway, if it's a suburban dad registered to a gun and the killing was drug related a thousand miles away, they will probably knock rather than kick the door down.
That's my vote. Make it annoying to carry (it already pretty much is) and law abiding citizens will just not do it.
Okay, just how is having a microscopic pattern on a fining pin "annoying" to the end user? He won't know or care, unless he kills someone.
Only Mao of them was actually Communist -- the rest at most paid lip service to some Communist ideas.
If you're going to redefine communism to leave out the ones you don't like, you're on the way to Newspeak yourself.
No, 1984 is specifically about Communists because it was specifically written about Communists.
Despite the word never appearing in it.
Orwell wasn't an idiot. He was writing about totalitarianism, not just communism. He probably felt sentimental about "real" communism, as you seem to. But he had seen where it goes in practice. Communism isn't the only route to totalitarianism. Nazi Germany, Czarist Russia, both did pretty well in that regard. East Germany seemed to switch over from one form of totalitarianism to another without missing a beat.
Actually, no.
Actually yes. Seems we won't agree on much. So let's just call it a day and leave it. I will anyway.
Stalin is one politician, harshly denounced by his successors. While he achieved iconic status, he is no more relevant to Communism than your local friendly bicycle thief to the rest of Black people.
Stop this invocation of racism. It's insulting.
Stalin wasn't exceptional. Mao. Kim Il Sung. Pol Pot. Its hard to name a communist leader in power for a decade or more, who wasn't a paranoid tyrant who sent millions to labor camps, or just had them killed. Only after the leader is dead, the system has collapsed economically, do his successors dare to change his policies.
Orwell's works were kept unchallenged in European and American cultures, and were widely promoted for anti-Communist propaganda value.
Of course they were.But again, "1984" doesn't ONLY apply to communism. This article shows that it is still invoked, correctly, to point out the implications of things in our own society.
The obesity worriers don't think that fruit juice is actually better. Does it really matter whether you drink 1600 calories a day of grape juice or corn juice?
I doubt anyone would drink the same volume of fruit juice as soft drink, it's much more filling.
And I thought in this thread we were talking about cigarettes. I'm not sure what the healthy thing that you can smoke to stimulate your nicotine receptors is.
I was responding to a post about meth. Anyway, you can take nicotine without smoking it. Plenty of people do, it's a lot less lethal.
Loonie.
It was not "unmotivated", it was "misdirected". In the same way how fear of black people is misdirected, even though there are plenty of violent criminals among black people.
Yeah, right. Thinking Stalinism was evil is the same as being a bigoted racist. Because most communist states were actually so nice and benevolent. Its only the exceptional ones, like USSR, Maoist China, North Korea, Romania, Albania, that gave all the the others a bad name.
My own politics are very liberal, in American terms, even socialist. But real communism is to be feared. They probably never were a threat to the US in the "Red Menace" way, but they certainly were to their own citizens.
Not only it's absolutely definitely was intended to refer to the society under Communist, or specifically Stalin rule, most Americans' idea of USSR is actually closer to Orwell's fiction than to reality.
Americans' ignorance isn't the fault of Orwell. If he had wanted to pillory communism specifically, he would have done so. He fought against the fascists in Spain, he knew how evil both extremes were. Big Brother could have been a Fascist as easily as a Communist. The labels are irrelevant once they get into power.
In general, I think that Orwell did the mankind a great disservice when his own fear of Communists made his work focused on oppressive societies with Communist attributes.
It wasn't unmotivated "fear". It was based on what Stalin was doing when Orwell wrote it. In any case, the word "communist" isn't in the book. It was just "The Party'. Orwell had recognised that dictatorships end up the same, whatever the philosophy they start with.
That has worked out so well with meth.
For meth, there isn't a huge range of healthy alternatives that satisfy the same appetite.
It's just that producing a sugary drink with artificial flavouring is cheaper than making a healthy pure fruit juice, for example. Raising the cost, or just eliminating them as in NY, of the sugary drink, doesn't leave the consumer going thirsty. After all, they can always drink free water.
Also, if "healthy" drinks market is increased, there will be more volume, more competition, and lower prices; though not as low as untaxed sugar water.
The UN has no authority over any country, especially those that are members. The UN was designed as a method of dispute mediation without armed conflict
True
There is a recent push (20 years or so) that wants the UN to be presented as the NWO Government, and make everyone in the world a subject. This rhetoric should bother you very much.
Yes, hearing that kind of loonie conspiracy theory presented with a straight face does bother me very much.
When I download and watch shows like "Walking Dead" or "Game of Thrones" within a day of broadcast, I can participate in the online discussions and easily find relevant reviews.
No, there isn't a natural right that I'm being deprived of, but it's important to me. Actually in a few years I'll probably pick (as in "buy", not shoplift) the Blueray of Thrones.
Watch out when you are propagandized like this. Once you accept that this is "Science"
Right. Don't believe any of this "science" crap. It's obviously all a scheme by a bunch of atheists who want to use the United Nations to install Al Gore as President-for-Life and take away all your guns and SUVs.
If it were true, why isn't it in the Bible? Those commies can't answer that, can they.
data mining alerts of a highly probably hit. Law enforcement, or preferably a social service person, shows up to ask the person some questions.
What a completely idiotic idea.
The moment that this happened:
1) Bored teenagers would start doing these searches.
2) Hackers would write Trojans to do them on targets' PCs.
3) Real killers would use an anonymising method to find whatever they wanted and not raise a flag.
Exactly the same kind of security theatre that most of the post 9/11 precautions are. Complete waste of time and money in achieving their stated aims and huge invasion of privacy for innocents caught in the net.
my girlfriend still brings up a browser with google as the home page, then types in Yahoo Mail. And she's not the only one. I die a little every time I see that.
It's not actually a dumb thing to do. Of course, if you have bookmarked a site, you use that. But if it's not your PC and you want a page with some degree of security -- mail, banking, Amazon, etc -- if you just type in the URL, you have the risk of making a typo and hitting a phishing site. If you type the URL into Google, the top link is usually what you intended to type, even if you made such a mistake. If the site is malware, you'll usually see indications of that in the links too.
Imagine typing only "google" into the address bar and getting google.
"Imagine"? With most browsers, that's what you get now.
isn't the right choice for most non-technical people. If his sister emulates Windows on OSX
Yes, just see if she actually needs any Windows-only software. If it's just Internet, media and wordprocessing, OSX is all she needs.
iPhones come with Safari and few people ever install another browser. Android phones come with a stock browser and few people install another browser. Opera has little potential to help Facebook crack the smart phone marketing problem.
Unless they pay vendors to preinstall it. Anyway, if they brand it as the "Facebook browser" and promote it on their site, it will certainly get installed on a lot of phones.
Damn. I've been using Opera for several years now. If it comes under the thumb of Facebook, I'll jump ship. I don't want those fuckers backdooring themselves into everything I do online.
I wouldn't be surprised if most pirates use Google
I thought "pirates" were those who made the files available. Not those who download them.Anyway,it's still trivial to download any MS software. The hassle is you have to look out for malware and then find a WGA crack. Rather than go through all that crap, when I was given a used corporate laptop with a heavily passworded Vista setup and faced wiping and reinstall to get a useful system, I just said "fuck all that" and got Ubuntu. My daughter complained, but she got used to it.
hey can't, that's the point. So anon comments will effectively be banned.
Too many sites try to force you to use your Facebook ID to log in now. This would make it almost compulsory.
Well, when the first amendment was written, pretty much all speech was not anonymous. The first amendment was passed in 1789. ... . The people who have caused political change have done so by being intentionally not anonymous.
Wrong. Very wrong.
Option 3 is wait a year for the DVD release.
I do this. Is this really impossible for most Slashdotters?
I wait till 5 episodes are broadcast, download them and burn to a DVD. So I get my own DVD one or two days after the finale.
there are plenty of times you don't carry a phone, but would wear a watch. ....
Really? Like what. I cannot think of one. That even includes swimming!
Swimming? That's when I really appreciate my watch. A cheap 100 m waterproof stainless steel analog with a bezel to time my laps. What else would I do? Keep a phone in a plastic bag in my briefs? Leave it on the beach to be stolen? Other times, like riding my bike, I need to make a connection, and keep track of time.
I really hate the idea of having to have a phone in one hand at all times. Too easy to lose, get damaged or distract me.
Surely there are options on the table. However, the fact that Vixie concluded that "these will be very difficult to re-program" when a group of Estonian hackers managed to do it through a completely illegitimate virus, completely remotely, is troubling. Something about the process must have been irreversible otherwise a simple "undo" page distributed through DNS forwarding could have taken care of it as soon as the servers were under FBI control.
I suspect the "difficulty" is more legal than technical. The Estonians don't care if they brick an occasional device, and they don't try to get the users' legal consent. And people and governments in other countries might not be happy to trust the FBI to reprogram their router/modem.
Hong Kong was never an independent country. For 150 years it was a British colony, now its China's again. But it has independent taxes, judiciary, customs, immigration, its own TLD (.hk).