once one kind of offensive speech is deemed illegal how long does it take for other speech that is offensive to some but not all people to become illegal?
measuring the general public's offense level is impossible. therefor any laws outlawing any specific offensive speech are flawed because no matter what you say, someone will be offended and some will not be.
who they marketed to is not at question. how programmers, artists, and story writers can be held accountable when someone mimicks OBVIOUSLY illegal and immoral acts is at question.
i decided to go through some training myself. i played some GTA for 8 hours straight and then went out to pick a fight, but when i started fighting i thought back to my training and all i could do is twitch my fingers and thumbs... i got my ass kicked.
i don;t fast forward through commercials because i have something against ads... i fast forward through them because i do not want to wait through them to get back to my show. if they want to run banners they can go ahead. i can ignore them while i fast foward through the other commercials.
it's the fact that a 3 minute long break 5 times an hour takes me out of the show. fast forwarding for 10-20 seconds 5 times in 46 minutes, even with banners on the screen, is tolerable for me.
Then why do people buy Red Hat and Suse when it is legally and socially acceptable to get them for free? Why has Red Hat released so much code under GPL? (Above and beyond modifications to GPL products; like Cygwin and eCos.) Why did Suse (well, Novell) GPL YaST when it was their differentiating factor? Why did Netscape open source Mozilla and why did Star Office open source OOo?
if cds were a dollar per track yeah. but it's rare that i find a cd that has 17.95 tracks on it. mostly it's in the 12 region. and the songs worth listening to on that cd far less.
why does life have to be "going out"? what if you enjoy watching TV? i never understood how watching TV was a waste of time. what if that is what you want to do with your time? there is no guarantee of an afterlife full of bliss and happiness so why not just do what you enjoy while you're here?
the os x take on apache is no different than any other. it's just apache. httpd.conf is the file you edit to configure it, just as if you were running it on win32 or unix (in fact it is exactly like running it on unix because mac os x is a unix system)
if this HD was delivered via satellite or digital cable you are still subject to mpeg compression / artifacting. the only way to get full quality HDTV is to get it via an over-the-air antenna, and you must till have an extremely good signal to not get artifacts.
Yes they had voyaged (hehe) home for 7 years but right when they see earth it's a shock to the system. None of them actually believed they would make it. When they finally did it was a surprise. I believe I would react in the same way. Perhaps I am thinking too much about it, but also, for 7 years voyager had become their new home. I know I would get off the ship, but I would miss it, just like moving to a new city, you miss aspects of the old one you never thought you would.
Yes i am aware it is just a TV Show, but i just disagree with your interpretation of the final episode.
I learned the word on PBS's kids show Square One, a show that (usually unsuccessfully) attempted to make math fun.
They had a segment called "Mathnet" that was a takeoff of Dragnet.
Also a movie theatre on the Simpsons called "Googolplex" made me grin a bit.
(I'm not a math geek. never liked it)
I call bullshit
every city i have lived in has HOV lanes. Minneapolis, Denver, Los Angeles, Orange County, Houston, Seattle, Stockholm...
Any place with a traffic problem will have HOV lanes.
it would make the regular 10 o'clock news that there is a virus going around that actually destroys everything. Their computer may get screwed up before the news comes on so they will think it's broken, UNTIL they see it on the news, hear someone talking about it at work, etc... When the mydoom virus hit even the most computer illiterate people i know were taking their computers offline (albeit only until it became overly inconvenient). What I am saying is, a few MAJOR viruses that wipe out people's hard drives will make the news and maybe JUST maybe wake people up enough to get their geek friends and family to install norton antivirus for them and set up automatic updates and scans.
why don't you guys get it? here, i'll play it out for you:
Steve: How are the new macs coming along?
Engineer: great with OS X, but we are still waiting forr the OS 9 team to put together an enabler for the new machine, since we've made so many changes to the archetecture.
Steve: Why are we waiting for an enabler for an operationg system we end-of-lifed last year?
Engineer: We have made signifigant changes to the archetecture like a new system bus and new DDR ram and such with this new xserve archetecture being used in the new power mac g4s
Steve: well we no longer supprt, nor develop the operating system, so we won't develop new enablers either.
Engineer: But sir, won't that reduce choice???
Steve: pulls out his iRay laser pistol and blows off the engineer's head with a grape, tangerine, and lime beam of light.
the difference is that MS is restricting. apple is not restricting. the new hardware is simply incapable of booting os 9. the mac os has needed "enablers" to get them working on machines released after the release of the OS. they no longer support os 9 and have moved all of their efforts to os x. why continue to make enablers for a product that is no longer supported and has been end-of-lifed?
they don't BLOCK the booting of OS 9. The ability to boot OS 9 was holding back the hardware development so they scrapped that ability. It's not like they said "ok, let's fuck the users of new machines that wish to use OS 9". they just thought that better hardware was more important than backwards compatibility with an obsolete operating system
i have been taken the wrong way twice here. I said that the hobbyist linux users won't pay for photoshop however there arent enough corporate users of linux that would be interested in using photoshop for adobe to port photoshop to linux. sure linux is being used by governments everywhere, but not every one of those installations 9and in fact very few) would actually be using a photoshop-like application.
sure adobe would make enough money to pay for the port, but still it is not in their best interest to port and manufacture software that a very small portion of the market is going to buy.
As for the special effects houses, I am sure there is a mac or a pc there so people can use photoshop. not EVERY machine there is a unix workstation. and adobe knows that. if there is a pc there they can use photoshop on, why port it?
again i don't agree with this stuff in any way (except that linux is extremely far from being a viable desktop OS)
It would be nice if adobe would have made photoshop for linux. if they had, i would not have switched from linux to OS X. however if they had the downside would be that I would not have switched from linux to OS X;)
ok the real reason adobe won't port it to linux is simple. there is no money in it. the hobbyists won't pay because they are used to getting stuff for free, so it will be widely pirated in that group (as it is on windows/mac). this wouldn't be a big deal if linux had a large share of desktop users in corporate environments. but it doesn't. they would not be able to recoup the losses suffered for porting it or their percieved losses (a completely different discussion) for the hobbyist users pirating it.
so there are the reasons. adobe doesn't see any money in making their software work on linux.
Slashdot Mirror
once one kind of offensive speech is deemed illegal how long does it take for other speech that is offensive to some but not all people to become illegal? measuring the general public's offense level is impossible. therefor any laws outlawing any specific offensive speech are flawed because no matter what you say, someone will be offended and some will not be.
too bad there is no "clueless" mod.
who they marketed to is not at question. how programmers, artists, and story writers can be held accountable when someone mimicks OBVIOUSLY illegal and immoral acts is at question.
i decided to go through some training myself. i played some GTA for 8 hours straight and then went out to pick a fight, but when i started fighting i thought back to my training and all i could do is twitch my fingers and thumbs... i got my ass kicked.
i don;t fast forward through commercials because i have something against ads... i fast forward through them because i do not want to wait through them to get back to my show. if they want to run banners they can go ahead. i can ignore them while i fast foward through the other commercials. it's the fact that a 3 minute long break 5 times an hour takes me out of the show. fast forwarding for 10-20 seconds 5 times in 46 minutes, even with banners on the screen, is tolerable for me.
Why? Mindshare of course.
gladly. i've never heard of the little guys so their music must not be worth downloading.
if cds were a dollar per track yeah. but it's rare that i find a cd that has 17.95 tracks on it. mostly it's in the 12 region. and the songs worth listening to on that cd far less.
most cable boxes with firewire ports don't actually have the firewire ports enabled.
why does life have to be "going out"? what if you enjoy watching TV? i never understood how watching TV was a waste of time. what if that is what you want to do with your time? there is no guarantee of an afterlife full of bliss and happiness so why not just do what you enjoy while you're here?
the os x take on apache is no different than any other. it's just apache. httpd.conf is the file you edit to configure it, just as if you were running it on win32 or unix (in fact it is exactly like running it on unix because mac os x is a unix system)
all the time actually. it's not 1987 any more dude. macs and PCs are very interoperable.
if this HD was delivered via satellite or digital cable you are still subject to mpeg compression / artifacting. the only way to get full quality HDTV is to get it via an over-the-air antenna, and you must till have an extremely good signal to not get artifacts.
Yes they had voyaged (hehe) home for 7 years but right when they see earth it's a shock to the system. None of them actually believed they would make it. When they finally did it was a surprise. I believe I would react in the same way. Perhaps I am thinking too much about it, but also, for 7 years voyager had become their new home. I know I would get off the ship, but I would miss it, just like moving to a new city, you miss aspects of the old one you never thought you would.
Yes i am aware it is just a TV Show, but i just disagree with your interpretation of the final episode.
I learned the word on PBS's kids show Square One, a show that (usually unsuccessfully) attempted to make math fun. They had a segment called "Mathnet" that was a takeoff of Dragnet. Also a movie theatre on the Simpsons called "Googolplex" made me grin a bit. (I'm not a math geek. never liked it)
I call bullshit every city i have lived in has HOV lanes. Minneapolis, Denver, Los Angeles, Orange County, Houston, Seattle, Stockholm... Any place with a traffic problem will have HOV lanes.
it would make the regular 10 o'clock news that there is a virus going around that actually destroys everything. Their computer may get screwed up before the news comes on so they will think it's broken, UNTIL they see it on the news, hear someone talking about it at work, etc... When the mydoom virus hit even the most computer illiterate people i know were taking their computers offline (albeit only until it became overly inconvenient). What I am saying is, a few MAJOR viruses that wipe out people's hard drives will make the news and maybe JUST maybe wake people up enough to get their geek friends and family to install norton antivirus for them and set up automatic updates and scans.
why don't you guys get it? here, i'll play it out for you: Steve: How are the new macs coming along? Engineer: great with OS X, but we are still waiting forr the OS 9 team to put together an enabler for the new machine, since we've made so many changes to the archetecture. Steve: Why are we waiting for an enabler for an operationg system we end-of-lifed last year? Engineer: We have made signifigant changes to the archetecture like a new system bus and new DDR ram and such with this new xserve archetecture being used in the new power mac g4s Steve: well we no longer supprt, nor develop the operating system, so we won't develop new enablers either. Engineer: But sir, won't that reduce choice??? Steve: pulls out his iRay laser pistol and blows off the engineer's head with a grape, tangerine, and lime beam of light.
that date happened to be the date they would stop developing enablers for a dead operating system.
the difference is that MS is restricting. apple is not restricting. the new hardware is simply incapable of booting os 9. the mac os has needed "enablers" to get them working on machines released after the release of the OS. they no longer support os 9 and have moved all of their efforts to os x. why continue to make enablers for a product that is no longer supported and has been end-of-lifed?
they are replacing the bios with hacked, copyrighted microsoft code. that is why the DMCA gets involved
they don't BLOCK the booting of OS 9. The ability to boot OS 9 was holding back the hardware development so they scrapped that ability. It's not like they said "ok, let's fuck the users of new machines that wish to use OS 9". they just thought that better hardware was more important than backwards compatibility with an obsolete operating system
i have been taken the wrong way twice here. I said that the hobbyist linux users won't pay for photoshop however there arent enough corporate users of linux that would be interested in using photoshop for adobe to port photoshop to linux. sure linux is being used by governments everywhere, but not every one of those installations 9and in fact very few) would actually be using a photoshop-like application.
;)
sure adobe would make enough money to pay for the port, but still it is not in their best interest to port and manufacture software that a very small portion of the market is going to buy.
As for the special effects houses, I am sure there is a mac or a pc there so people can use photoshop. not EVERY machine there is a unix workstation. and adobe knows that. if there is a pc there they can use photoshop on, why port it?
again i don't agree with this stuff in any way (except that linux is extremely far from being a viable desktop OS)
It would be nice if adobe would have made photoshop for linux. if they had, i would not have switched from linux to OS X. however if they had the downside would be that I would not have switched from linux to OS X
keep living in that dreamworld dude. linux is not and never will be a viable desktop operating system no matter how many governments choose to use it.
ok the real reason adobe won't port it to linux is simple. there is no money in it. the hobbyists won't pay because they are used to getting stuff for free, so it will be widely pirated in that group (as it is on windows/mac). this wouldn't be a big deal if linux had a large share of desktop users in corporate environments. but it doesn't. they would not be able to recoup the losses suffered for porting it or their percieved losses (a completely different discussion) for the hobbyist users pirating it.
so there are the reasons. adobe doesn't see any money in making their software work on linux.