It's really very simple. The Government decides that I owe them money. They tell me how much money I owe them. If I refuse to pay this money, they will take it by force, one way or another. They will seize bank accounts, garnish wages, or come with guns and take my property directly from my posession. They are the only institution that can do that. If I sent you a letter saying I owed you x amount of money, you would laugh. If I attempted to collect that from you, by any means, you would vigorously defend it. The only difference is that the government decided it was legal for them to do it.
Oh my God. Whatever would you have done if you had been born a little earlier and had to have gone to high school before the invention of cel phones. I guess you would have gotten a blanket and just stayed at the school.
Except there's a real problem with that. I recently read an article where a Honda GoldWing went to 3 different dealerships, had multiple sensors replaced, had the main computer replaced twice, and was about to be sent to Honda's headquarters because the mechanics assumed some sophisticated electronic part had gone out and started swapping parts rather than actually diagnosing the problem. The author went in, put in a freshly charged battery, and went to work with a multimeter. He couldn't find anything else wrong, so he started it up. It turns out the entire problem was a faulty battery!
John Tuttle was an officer (doctor) invented by hawkeye and (either BJ or Trapper, not sure) who was eventually decorated as war hero but never existed.
Motorcycle deaths have increased at a lower rate than motorcycle registrations since 1998 in the US. There are more riders, so it's logical more would get hurt. Statistics can say whatever you want them to. If you look at the number of accidents per registered motorcycle as opposed to accidents per registered (car/truck/monster SUV with built in DVD and cel phone) you will see that motorcyclists are actually SAFER than most drivers.
It amazes me that a community such as/. can hold such widely disparate opinions and somehow most of these people can internally justify it.
On the one hand, bring up any subject such as crypto, the MPAA, RIAA, government surveillance, or most any other individual rights issue, and the fur will fly. You will get countless opinions of how people should be left alone, complaints about how the US government is slowly (quickly?) taking away our individual rights, and how sad it is that the majority of the American populace just laps up the drivel fed to them by the mainstream media and the government.
Ask a gun control question, however, and many of those same people will suddenly be spouting the same mantra as the mainstream media and the government about how guns are the root of all evil. Don't you people realize that the second ammendment is there in case the government forgets the other nine? What good is a guarantee against "unreasonable search and seizure" against an unarmed populace?
Ever been to America? I've been to London. Also, I'm 37 years old, and except for my military service I have lived in Texas my entire life. The US (including Texas) is not a bunch of gun-toting cowboys from old westerns, or even a bunch of gun-toting gangsters and criminals from modern crime dramas. I have never been threatened with a gun; I have never seen a gun drawn with intent, either in the commission of prevention of a crime. I don't go around ducking and covering for fear of being hit with a stray bullet. I can give you a few facts:
Texas is a right to carry state, which means an average citizen can get a license to carry a concealed weapon. Since the passage of that law, no legally owned and carried weapon has been used in the commission of a crime, and the overall violent crime rate has gone down.
As another poster pointed out, Canada has a higher per capita gun ownership than the US, and a lower violent crime rate.
Washington D.C., where it is completely illegal to possess a handgun, has the highest per capita number of shootings in the US.
Yes guns don't kill people, people do, and yes a gun is just a tool.
But it's a tool designed to make it easier to kill people.
Is it? Depending on the gun, it could be designed to do a great many things. Personally, I see it as tool to prevent killing.
Hypothetical situation, let's say your (sister/mother/grandmother/daughter) is walking along a city street and a pair of criminals threaten her with violence. Would you prefer her to able to pull out a firearm to defend herself or a cel phone so that the police can arrive in 10 minutes to take her statement, or perhaps recover her body?
Next time, if you're going to state a strong opinion, log in instead of hiding behind the AC label.
So what's to stop me from starting one corporation now and donating 250 million through that corporation (aside from the problem of where would I get 250 million)? So, the individual limits are already pointless if I really want to bypass them.
no, it doesn't have physical, feelable buttons. Did you even look at the pictures? The whole point is that the thing is a touchscreen over a display.
Re:What's to see at a PC trade show these days?
on
The Last Comdex?
·
· Score: 1
Apple has a captive audience of vendors that support their products. COMDEX doesn't have such luxury.
What do you mean COMDEX doesn't have that luxury? Isn't the main complaint on/. that the PC industry IS a "captive audience of vendors that support Windows?"
At one desk, users can move a wireless mouse's pointer from the screen of one computer to the screen of a laptop, with no wire or wireless connection between the computers themselves.
Now that's amazing. There is no wired OR WIRELESS connection between the computers? By definition, ANY connection would either have wires or it wouldn't, so this means there IS NO connection between the computers. Did M$ suddenly hire David Copperfield as a development engineer?
You're kidding, right? Most of the/. community won't even read the articles in this story, and you're asking them to read the Constitution of the United States? This is extremely optimistic.
One more thing most people will want it to run that a lot of people are forgetting... AOL. That and Yahoo messenger, MSN Messenger (I doubt we'll be seeing MSN Messenger for Linux anytime soon) or some other widely used chat client. Until those apps run under Linux, Windows will rule the consumer market.
The movie studios are growing because people like pablum. There are maybe 3 or 4 really good movies a year out of hollywood, the rest are formula films designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
So if I can buy the sheet music I should just play the songs myself and then I wouldn't have to buy the cd? The only way that analogy works is if I could download and steak and a baked potato from some p2p network.
First of all, likening this to narcotics is simply asinine, so I'll ignore that comment.
I just want to address the statement about "legal development" for the GBA. Nintendo cannot legitimately dictate the method used for development. They cannot specify that ANY software for use with the GBA be licensed by them. They can specify that any software SOLD for use the GBA be licensed, but that is different. If I want to write a game to play on my GBA, there's not much they can do about that.
I have not read the specified book, but I have read the constitution of the United States, which I believe does apply in this case. The fourth amendment, for those who have never taken the time to actually READ it, says:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Now I don't know what the author meant by "Originally, a cop could walk into your house and search at will", but this has certainly not been the case in the US since the ratification of the bill of rights.
I would say there is a clear difference between e-mail and IM. If we continue the somewhat tenuous analogies used popularly, e-mail can be likened to snail-mail. If I send you a letter, I expect that you will keep the letter and have a permanent record of it, and that you could share that letter with others if you so desired. With an IM conversation, it is a real time exchange. I know that you have the ability to record it, but don't necessarily expect that you are doing so. This is more like a phone conversation. The argument could be made that in any state that requires consent to record a phone conversation, it would be illegal to log, or "record", and IM conversation without consent of both parties. The courts decision could cause producers of messaging clients to include notices in their logging options that inform the user that logging of the conversation MAY be considered illegal in some states without consent of all parties involves. IANAL, but this could prove very interesting in the long run. The defendant in this case MAY have a case against the 15 year old girl for illegally "recording" an electronic conversation.
Is that in the second page, the author suggests that one way to get the applet to send the data back is to disguise it as a form, even a form with all hidden data, and only a button to click... what if the button just said "next page"? to read the page where the author suggests that, you have to click a button that says "next page". Have we all just been unwitting participants in an experiment to see if the theory works? Or was it just the 3 or 4/. readers who actually go out and read the articles?
Slashdot Mirror
It's really very simple. The Government decides that I owe them money. They tell me how much money I owe them. If I refuse to pay this money, they will take it by force, one way or another. They will seize bank accounts, garnish wages, or come with guns and take my property directly from my posession. They are the only institution that can do that. If I sent you a letter saying I owed you x amount of money, you would laugh. If I attempted to collect that from you, by any means, you would vigorously defend it. The only difference is that the government decided it was legal for them to do it.
Oh my God. Whatever would you have done if you had been born a little earlier and had to have gone to high school before the invention of cel phones. I guess you would have gotten a blanket and just stayed at the school.
From looking at the link to their website, I'd say they aren't taking a position.
Except there's a real problem with that. I recently read an article where a Honda GoldWing went to 3 different dealerships, had multiple sensors replaced, had the main computer replaced twice, and was about to be sent to Honda's headquarters because the mechanics assumed some sophisticated electronic part had gone out and started swapping parts rather than actually diagnosing the problem. The author went in, put in a freshly charged battery, and went to work with a multimeter. He couldn't find anything else wrong, so he started it up. It turns out the entire problem was a faulty battery!
John Tuttle was an officer (doctor) invented by hawkeye and (either BJ or Trapper, not sure) who was eventually decorated as war hero but never existed.
Motorcycle deaths have increased at a lower rate than motorcycle registrations since 1998 in the US. There are more riders, so it's logical more would get hurt. Statistics can say whatever you want them to. If you look at the number of accidents per registered motorcycle as opposed to accidents per registered (car/truck/monster SUV with built in DVD and cel phone) you will see that motorcyclists are actually SAFER than most drivers.
It amazes me that a community such as /. can hold such widely disparate opinions and somehow most of these people can internally justify it.
On the one hand, bring up any subject such as crypto, the MPAA, RIAA, government surveillance, or most any other individual rights issue, and the fur will fly. You will get countless opinions of how people should be left alone, complaints about how the US government is slowly (quickly?) taking away our individual rights, and how sad it is that the majority of the American populace just laps up the drivel fed to them by the mainstream media and the government.
Ask a gun control question, however, and many of those same people will suddenly be spouting the same mantra as the mainstream media and the government about how guns are the root of all evil. Don't you people realize that the second ammendment is there in case the government forgets the other nine? What good is a guarantee against "unreasonable search and seizure" against an unarmed populace?
So what's to stop me from starting one corporation now and donating 250 million through that corporation (aside from the problem of where would I get 250 million)? So, the individual limits are already pointless if I really want to bypass them.
no, it doesn't have physical, feelable buttons. Did you even look at the pictures? The whole point is that the thing is a touchscreen over a display.
At one desk, users can move a wireless mouse's pointer from the screen of one computer to the screen of a laptop, with no wire or wireless connection between the computers themselves. Now that's amazing. There is no wired OR WIRELESS connection between the computers? By definition, ANY connection would either have wires or it wouldn't, so this means there IS NO connection between the computers. Did M$ suddenly hire David Copperfield as a development engineer?
I really like the way that some of the words are misspelled in slashdot headline generator, though... adds realism.
As did I. I had quite a chuckle at that one!
Spoken like a true free thinker, who will no doubt insist on US assistance when his country runs into a crisis.
I couldn't agree more. As a veteran and a citizen, this saddens me.
You're kidding, right? Most of the /. community won't even read the articles in this story, and you're asking them to read the Constitution of the United States? This is extremely optimistic.
One more thing most people will want it to run that a lot of people are forgetting... AOL. That and Yahoo messenger, MSN Messenger (I doubt we'll be seeing MSN Messenger for Linux anytime soon) or some other widely used chat client. Until those apps run under Linux, Windows will rule the consumer market.
The movie studios are growing because people like pablum. There are maybe 3 or 4 really good movies a year out of hollywood, the rest are formula films designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
So if I can buy the sheet music I should just play the songs myself and then I wouldn't have to buy the cd? The only way that analogy works is if I could download and steak and a baked potato from some p2p network.
First of all, likening this to narcotics is simply asinine, so I'll ignore that comment. I just want to address the statement about "legal development" for the GBA. Nintendo cannot legitimately dictate the method used for development. They cannot specify that ANY software for use with the GBA be licensed by them. They can specify that any software SOLD for use the GBA be licensed, but that is different. If I want to write a game to play on my GBA, there's not much they can do about that.
I have not read the specified book, but I have read the constitution of the United States, which I believe does apply in this case. The fourth amendment, for those who have never taken the time to actually READ it, says: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Now I don't know what the author meant by "Originally, a cop could walk into your house and search at will", but this has certainly not been the case in the US since the ratification of the bill of rights.
I would say there is a clear difference between e-mail and IM. If we continue the somewhat tenuous analogies used popularly, e-mail can be likened to snail-mail. If I send you a letter, I expect that you will keep the letter and have a permanent record of it, and that you could share that letter with others if you so desired. With an IM conversation, it is a real time exchange. I know that you have the ability to record it, but don't necessarily expect that you are doing so. This is more like a phone conversation. The argument could be made that in any state that requires consent to record a phone conversation, it would be illegal to log, or "record", and IM conversation without consent of both parties. The courts decision could cause producers of messaging clients to include notices in their logging options that inform the user that logging of the conversation MAY be considered illegal in some states without consent of all parties involves. IANAL, but this could prove very interesting in the long run. The defendant in this case MAY have a case against the 15 year old girl for illegally "recording" an electronic conversation.
Is that in the second page, the author suggests that one way to get the applet to send the data back is to disguise it as a form, even a form with all hidden data, and only a button to click... what if the button just said "next page"? to read the page where the author suggests that, you have to click a button that says "next page". Have we all just been unwitting participants in an experiment to see if the theory works? Or was it just the 3 or 4 /. readers who actually go out and read the articles?