Yes, he said it would end up costing us more money in the long run.
I don't pretend to understand the right's raging hard-on for mexicans, but I can appreciate that border security and immigration control are necessary components of a functioning government. That being said, going after them in a health care bill is inappropriate. Denying someone access to health care is reprehensible. Denying it to them out of spite, knowing full well that it will cost you more money, is obscene.
You mean the revolution that has promised 100% open source, the coup on Microsoft, the end of the DMCA, copy right roll backs and unlimited cellular voice and data service for a flat fee?
It is notable that a future version of my post fell through a wormhole in time, and its quote for the GP is "a mindless tool who was the first against the wall when the revolution came."
Well when you're offered a choice between manifestly irresponsible and "bat-shit crazy" it's not exactly easy to keep your hands clean. Couple this with wildly inaccurate propaganda and it's amazing anything gets done around here.
I'm sorry, I must have missed that. I re-read the Geist piece and I'm still not seeing it.
Well the simplest point is that, by making reverse-engineering, stripping of DRM, and other circumvention measures illegal without precise technical definitions of the terms, you allow the accuser to define it as anything they see fit. Those 'double ROT-13' jokes? A little less funny now.
Honestly, just because you choose to be ill-informed about the topic is no reason for a snotty post. I'm certainly not going to write out a FAQ every time I comment. This isn't Wikipedia, and there is no real onus on me for [citation needed] ((translation: did you at least google the keywords?))
But do not overlook the benefits and fail to weigh them against the costs as you consider this discussion.
You do realize that this essentially allows corporations to write law. This is some real scary shit, and I'm amazed that it finds cheerleaders among ordinary people.
But I digress: what I meant to say was that the readily-downloaded media are something of a trap. I think we are going to be left with a whole generation that has no idea what their music is actually supposed to sound like.
So what kind of wooden knobs would you recommend for their ipods?
At best it's problematic, the officers(sic, and HILARIOUS) life is almost always on the line and you want to be treated fairly by someone who in the next minute might lose there life.
Yeah but being a construction worker is much more dangerous, and those guys generally aren't assholes.
Sounds like you're just making excuses to justify yourself.
Uh, that's exactly what he said he was doing. Nice detective work there, Sherlock.
I'm not the biggest warezing cheerleader, but there's something about people on high horses that really chaps my hide. Here's a tip: if you, or any of your choirboy pals, ever made or gave a mix tape in your life, you're just as guilty as this guy. If you ever checked out a book from a library, you're just as morally complicit. This guy's no hero, but at least he's not a self-righteous hypocrite.
I think I see what you mean, but I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around the concept of a man claiming he's straight AND wants to marry another man AND that he's somehow being discriminated against. It seems like a great deal of mental gymnastics to try and justify hatred.
Almost makes you miss the honesty and openness of the old anti-civil rights crowd last century.
2) Gay people in CA already have all the legal rights of straight people. No civil rights were stripped, only special rights unavailable to everyone else. (IE: As a non-gay, I could not marry a man. Only members of the special group had that right. It was clearly unconstitutional, and prop 8 rectified that.)
You people make us all look bad. I wish you'd stop tying your personal biases to our religion. It's mean, it's ugly, and it's ruining people's perception of us.
Actions or behavior without negative consequences may lead to new discovery, and therefore need not be avoided. Being a little weird may be a calculated strategy to see if those around them are hopelessly hidebound.
Or simply irritating to those who don't think literalism is a form of humor.
Slashdot Mirror
The real problem is the lack of an appropriate energy storage technology.
Yes, he said it would end up costing us more money in the long run.
I don't pretend to understand the right's raging hard-on for mexicans, but I can appreciate that border security and immigration control are necessary components of a functioning government. That being said, going after them in a health care bill is inappropriate. Denying someone access to health care is reprehensible. Denying it to them out of spite, knowing full well that it will cost you more money, is obscene.
Good day to you, sir.
Why wouldn't you want citizens status to be verified, prior to their receiving taxpayer dollars?
Did you bother to read his post?
You mean the revolution that has promised 100% open source, the coup on Microsoft, the end of the DMCA, copy right roll backs and unlimited cellular voice and data service for a flat fee?
It is notable that a future version of my post fell through a wormhole in time, and its quote for the GP is "a mindless tool who was the first against the wall when the revolution came."
aaaaand we're done.
The 1% that expect 24/7 full throughput should understand they never bought that guarantee of service.
And yet it is advertised thusly.
Oh, and you're a mindless tool who'll be one of the first against the wall when the revolution comes.
Well when you're offered a choice between manifestly irresponsible and "bat-shit crazy" it's not exactly easy to keep your hands clean. Couple this with wildly inaccurate propaganda and it's amazing anything gets done around here.
I'm sorry, I must have missed that. I re-read the Geist piece and I'm still not seeing it.
Well the simplest point is that, by making reverse-engineering, stripping of DRM, and other circumvention measures illegal without precise technical definitions of the terms, you allow the accuser to define it as anything they see fit. Those 'double ROT-13' jokes? A little less funny now.
Honestly, just because you choose to be ill-informed about the topic is no reason for a snotty post. I'm certainly not going to write out a FAQ every time I comment. This isn't Wikipedia, and there is no real onus on me for [citation needed] ((translation: did you at least google the keywords?))
But do not overlook the benefits and fail to weigh them against the costs as you consider this discussion.
You do realize that this essentially allows corporations to write law. This is some real scary shit, and I'm amazed that it finds cheerleaders among ordinary people.
But I digress: what I meant to say was that the readily-downloaded media are something of a trap. I think we are going to be left with a whole generation that has no idea what their music is actually supposed to sound like.
So what kind of wooden knobs would you recommend for their ipods?
He must be old here.
At best it's problematic, the officers(sic, and HILARIOUS) life is almost always on the line and you want to be treated fairly by someone who in the next minute might lose there life.
Yeah but being a construction worker is much more dangerous, and those guys generally aren't assholes.
Or, as I preach to older relatives just getting into computers:
You go to your bank, your bank doesn't come to you.
Where the hell did people get the notion that prison is meant to reform criminals?
You mean the Department of Corrections, incarcerating someone at a correctional facility?
Well to be fair you do need to have templates like 'balloon party' ready to go at a moments notice.
They've read them, of course. They just conveniently ignore them.
Well, why should that part of the bible be any different?
1) That Vista had a horrible word-of-mouth reputation that all of Microsoft's considerable marketing ability couldn't counter.
I'd have phrased that "considerable marketing spending".
Sounds like you're just making excuses to justify yourself.
Uh, that's exactly what he said he was doing. Nice detective work there, Sherlock.
I'm not the biggest warezing cheerleader, but there's something about people on high horses that really chaps my hide. Here's a tip: if you, or any of your choirboy pals, ever made or gave a mix tape in your life, you're just as guilty as this guy. If you ever checked out a book from a library, you're just as morally complicit. This guy's no hero, but at least he's not a self-righteous hypocrite.
Wait, are you saying that eradicating polio was a bad thing?
I think I see what you mean, but I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around the concept of a man claiming he's straight AND wants to marry another man AND that he's somehow being discriminated against. It seems like a great deal of mental gymnastics to try and justify hatred.
Almost makes you miss the honesty and openness of the old anti-civil rights crowd last century.
I'll go ahead and keep doing whatever the hell I want, thanks.
2) Gay people in CA already have all the legal rights of straight people. No civil rights were stripped, only special rights unavailable to everyone else. (IE: As a non-gay, I could not marry a man. Only members of the special group had that right. It was clearly unconstitutional, and prop 8 rectified that.)
That is a truly bizarre leap of logic.
You people make us all look bad. I wish you'd stop tying your personal biases to our religion. It's mean, it's ugly, and it's ruining people's perception of us.
If they don't have an audio representation for silent space battles, someone always ends up piping 'Blue Danube Waltz' over the ship's PA.
Actions or behavior without negative consequences may lead to new discovery, and therefore need not be avoided. Being a little weird may be a calculated strategy to see if those around them are hopelessly hidebound.
Or simply irritating to those who don't think literalism is a form of humor.