Yeah, except that the.xxx proposal has been wholly unworkable, and the only reason the FCC gets to egulate TV is because it's broadcast - a shared resource. Once we go to IP distro, they won't have a leg to stand on.
I don't begrudge the violence in 24, or the right of the producers to create programming with that level of violence. But does it have to be on at 8:00?
Because 8pm is primetime. Why should Fox change their broadcast time because of your son?
3. Bend the car analogy into an angry, frothing rant against SUVs... or rather, against the people who drive them... or rather, against the people who can afford them.
The only reason for his refusal (that I can see) is that it may show some illegal or unethical behavour on his part - In which case, he deserves all he gets.
Then I guess you're a fool. He's willing to hand the tape over to the judge, just not the prosecution's office.
BTW, you wouldn't happen to enjoy the benefits of a passport would you?...if so I call hypocrite.
Nah, Passports last 10 years, don't give your address (because why does france care what town I live in?), and are voluntary. National IDs would likely be mandatory for driving (which means mandatory unless you live in NYC or a similar place), are mandatory for entering a federal building and, if implemented, will likely be demanded by all and sundry; good luck if it ever gets stolen. Get your SSN stolen now and it can be a nightmare - this will be worse because people will assume that a national ID will be hard to counterfeit and will therefore be positive ID. Anyone using one that ties back to you will make life suck for you.
No they won't - if hollywood continues to demand BDSM rights restrictions, then the Linux (and probably Mac) platform won't be able to support something hollywood likes, so nobody in their right mind would support them - if you can't download 'Cars', who's gonna use your service?
Now, think about those political cartoons that Islam was so terribly intolerant of. They showed a religious figure as a terrorist, using his "towel" to hold a bomb.
And it took several months for the drooling masses to notice (basically until the imams need to whip them into a frenzy).
This wasn't just against the religion, this was against a whole group of people, painting a whole religion with one brush.
No, it was pretty much the religion.
Would a Christian be happy to see a cartoon of Jesus dressed as a klansman?
When they 'censor,' they are censoring what they are willing to sell, not what the artist can produce. Wal-Mart's refusal to push somebody else's idea of art does not constitute censorship, despite what your article says.
Yes it is. Since they command such a large portion of the market, they can say 'we demand sanitized versions of your music' and get their way more often than not. Since the publisher is already producing one version, there's a good chance they'll abandon the more faithful recording with all the objectionable crap left in, so only the walmart version is produced. Basically, Walmart's position allows it to distort the market, so it's different.
If a criminal cannot prove identity the police can detain them in many states. Making a nationally recognized ID system would keep the average Joe from being detained, and if the ID system were set at secure enough standards we could reduce the number of counterfit IDs in use.
Criminal? Try suspect - your words betray your bias. Now, what if the average joe doesn't have an ID? What if they aren't carrying it? There's no reason the police need to, or even should detain someone because they don't present a national ID and happen to be near a crime scene. Also, once there is a trusted ID in place, what happens if you get your card stolen? Have a look in various EU countries that have a national ID and see what happens there.
To protect you, are you really this stupid?
They demand my ID to protect me? In case you forgot, this is illegal, and I can do without the protection, thank you.
One way or another you will need to be identified if you want to be part of a governmental system.
I'm fine with a government system. I just don't want a national one, as that's far too easy to abuse.
The fact of the matter is, everyone is identified in one way or another, better an agreed upon standard than this messsy piece of crap we have now. When we are standardized we can then work on who gets control of that data.
Now who's the moron? The people who will be in control are the ones pushing for the national ID. I prefer the mess, mainly because efficiency in working of people who can exercise force on youis hazardous to my health. Right now, the government appears to have lost the necessary fear of the governed.
It doesn't follow that they would all be incompetent, so the reasonable conclusion is that removing the artificial restriction would increase the supply of competent doctors.
Unfortunately, terrorists aren't playing by the same set of rules. Their goal is to destabilize through fear.
They aren't terrorists by your definition - their goal is to get us out of the middle east, and their tactics reflect their inferior military potential. What did you expect them to do? Attack the 7th army?
hey launched a single attack almost 6 years ago, and the American response is "Oh my gosh, it's another attack!" We are terrified.
That wasn't the terrorists/attackers. Sure, they blew up wtc 1 and 2, but it's your government that likes to keep you scared shitless. Al Queda hasn't done much lately, and why would we? We're wearing ourselves out and building their support - they love this stuff!
Slashdot Mirror
I guess you didn't know about La Blue Girl live, then :)
It doesn't protect yelling fire, but yelling 'Boobies!" is just fine.
Yeah, except that the .xxx proposal has been wholly unworkable, and the only reason the FCC gets to egulate TV is because it's broadcast - a shared resource. Once we go to IP distro, they won't have a leg to stand on.
Japan allows extreme sex - Since when? They won't show a cooter without pixelating it.
I don't begrudge the violence in 24, or the right of the producers to create programming with that level of violence. But does it have to be on at 8:00?
Because 8pm is primetime. Why should Fox change their broadcast time because of your son?
They can't do that until Congress passes a law authorizing them to regulate this stuff.
3. Bend the car analogy into an angry, frothing rant against SUVs... or rather, against the people who drive them... or rather, against the people who can afford them.
What makes you think they can all afford them?
It is to compensate those industries hurt by piracy, not to give you a license to pirate.
What industries are those? The effect of piracy is minimal at best and positive in many cases.
Rated M, what does that mean? Does it mean that you have to 18 yrs or older to buy the game?
I'll just point out that movies are handled the exact same way. It's voluntary, with the exception of X rated stuff.
He said necessary. Iraq was never necessary.
No he isn't - Mary Shelley had talent.
Your employer has nothing to do with it. If you want a Roth, go get one. Scottrade, for example, will open one up if you fill out a form.
What should the digital photographers do, if this law is passed, when their current stock of memory cards runs out?
Pay an extra $5, I guess.
I mean how would you feel about the cop beating down Rodney King getting his ass kicked, on the spot, for his crime?
What crime? Beating down a drug crazed lunatic is a public service.
The only reason for his refusal (that I can see) is that it may show some illegal or unethical behavour on his part - In which case, he deserves all he gets.
Then I guess you're a fool. He's willing to hand the tape over to the judge, just not the prosecution's office.
If you need superscience to interbreed, it's fair to say you aren't the same race.
I use a speed freak, but that's more of a lifestyle thing.
BTW, you wouldn't happen to enjoy the benefits of a passport would you?...if so I call hypocrite.
Nah, Passports last 10 years, don't give your address (because why does france care what town I live in?), and are voluntary. National IDs would likely be mandatory for driving (which means mandatory unless you live in NYC or a similar place), are mandatory for entering a federal building and, if implemented, will likely be demanded by all and sundry; good luck if it ever gets stolen. Get your SSN stolen now and it can be a nightmare - this will be worse because people will assume that a national ID will be hard to counterfeit and will therefore be positive ID. Anyone using one that ties back to you will make life suck for you.
No they won't - if hollywood continues to demand BDSM rights restrictions, then the Linux (and probably Mac) platform won't be able to support something hollywood likes, so nobody in their right mind would support them - if you can't download 'Cars', who's gonna use your service?
Now, think about those political cartoons that Islam was so terribly intolerant of. They showed a religious figure as a terrorist, using his "towel" to hold a bomb.
And it took several months for the drooling masses to notice (basically until the imams need to whip them into a frenzy).
This wasn't just against the religion, this was against a whole group of people, painting a whole religion with one brush.
No, it was pretty much the religion.
Would a Christian be happy to see a cartoon of Jesus dressed as a klansman?
Would they then go shoot the cartoonist?
When they 'censor,' they are censoring what they are willing to sell, not what the artist can produce. Wal-Mart's refusal to push somebody else's idea of art does not constitute censorship, despite what your article says.
Yes it is. Since they command such a large portion of the market, they can say 'we demand sanitized versions of your music' and get their way more often than not. Since the publisher is already producing one version, there's a good chance they'll abandon the more faithful recording with all the objectionable crap left in, so only the walmart version is produced. Basically, Walmart's position allows it to distort the market, so it's different.
If a criminal cannot prove identity the police can detain them in many states. Making a nationally recognized ID system would keep the average Joe from being detained, and if the ID system were set at secure enough standards we could reduce the number of counterfit IDs in use.
Criminal? Try suspect - your words betray your bias. Now, what if the average joe doesn't have an ID? What if they aren't carrying it? There's no reason the police need to, or even should detain someone because they don't present a national ID and happen to be near a crime scene. Also, once there is a trusted ID in place, what happens if you get your card stolen? Have a look in various EU countries that have a national ID and see what happens there.
To protect you, are you really this stupid?
They demand my ID to protect me? In case you forgot, this is illegal, and I can do without the protection, thank you.
One way or another you will need to be identified if you want to be part of a governmental system.
I'm fine with a government system. I just don't want a national one, as that's far too easy to abuse.
The fact of the matter is, everyone is identified in one way or another, better an agreed upon standard than this messsy piece of crap we have now. When we are standardized we can then work on who gets control of that data.
Now who's the moron? The people who will be in control are the ones pushing for the national ID. I prefer the mess, mainly because efficiency in working of people who can exercise force on youis hazardous to my health. Right now, the government appears to have lost the necessary fear of the governed.
It doesn't follow that they would all be incompetent, so the reasonable conclusion is that removing the artificial restriction would increase the supply of competent doctors.
So why are they not bombing Canada? Could it be that they don't have bases in Saudi Arabia.
Unfortunately, terrorists aren't playing by the same set of rules. Their goal is to destabilize through fear.
They aren't terrorists by your definition - their goal is to get us out of the middle east, and their tactics reflect their inferior military potential. What did you expect them to do? Attack the 7th army?
hey launched a single attack almost 6 years ago, and the American response is "Oh my gosh, it's another attack!" We are terrified.
That wasn't the terrorists/attackers. Sure, they blew up wtc 1 and 2, but it's your government that likes to keep you scared shitless. Al Queda hasn't done much lately, and why would we? We're wearing ourselves out and building their support - they love this stuff!