Well it really depends how you look at things. In one country one does one thing and another one does another.
For example, drugs are illegal, death penalty is legal, carrying a machine gun is legal in the USA. In Holland drugs are legal, most other "western" countries death penalty is illegal, machine guns in most places are illegal
Right on, I just saw a TV program about Indian call centres, I was complaining about my taxes being high, and then I saw this Indian kid working 12 hours a day, 7 days a week to make 20 dollars per month, he needs $1600 to pay for his Mother's operation otherwise she's dead. National free healthcare and Medicare are brilliant, and after seeing that I'm happy to pay my taxes to fund them.
It's easy to say in ignorance that companies should sell software to companies and give it free for people to learn, but they assume you'll pirate it anyway. Like Adobe said it wanted Skylarov jailed, but they didn't EXPECT it to actually happen. "Put all the software pirates in jail" is something the sales department would say (and they talk VERY loudly and forcefully). The CEO on the other hand would definitely recognise the learning effect of pirated software, but the massive cost of consulting lawyers to actually release two tiers of the product and splitting/forking the codebase to give a different free version are prohibitive. It took me 10 days to make a minor alteration to a shareware contract just to allow distribution. This is because at the end of the day every lawyer knows that a Judge can spend 8 hours debating the meaning of one word, and that your entire case will depend on the outcome.
This is why the BSA targets corporations only, they know that if they went after the public that the ACLU, FSF would bring a whole pile of trouble on their heads, and BSA's customers won't want to be associated with this so the BSA would lose its funding.
I was expecting great things after your MacBoy Flash 6 player download, I was disappointed. Just having some guy in a funny voice say some stuff and that Dell rhymes with smell so you should switch to Mac, is just politically correct Texan humour to the extreme e.g. "My Mom puts extra Hershey into my brownies ha ha ha ha haaaaaa!". Whoever made the website is a truly uninspired man, and if he meets Steven Spielberg or Phil Dick, he will bore them to death. Sorry.
er... hasn't the "cacl" thing been around since Win NT?
Yeah, but I'm still sure this is a problem with *nix, a user playing about can still chgrp, chown and chmod his files out of accessibility, e.g. to an account that has a long password that somebody has forgotten, and the root password has been forgotten also.
Any tool can be used incorrectly if the superuser and all users are baboons, even a good admin should be able to admin his machine with a hangover and be forgiven for his mistakes (by the OS).
True. Even the big companies screw up big time on simple stuff. My new Dell Inspiron just lost its hard drive contents (thanks to an ACL accident using cacl command). I reinstall Win XP and it says, "Found New Hardware. Please connect to Internet to download drivers for Device: PCI Modem and for Device: Ethernet card". I never thought computers could say stupid things until today. AND with all this mess they're firing geniuses from their companies and only keeping the managers that can talk the most horsesh**t. It's like a Dilbert cartoon except it's real. Where did the entire free market system go so wrong?
blind suicide bombers worrys me about as much as shark mounted lasers
They could use GPS mobile phones (maybe 3G) with a braille on the mobile's (?) USB port (?)
Alternatively, now that you've got me thinking about it, maybe they can just teach their kids to do it, same as the Palestinian suicide bombers in Jenin. I remember seeing his Mother on BBC, "One of my sons is a martyr, he will set an example to my other sons to follow until we are freed from Israeli oppression" yada yada. They could say, "I was blinded and my face was burnt to a crisp by these terrible Americans, but no my children, it's cool don't worry about it, peace out." I don't think so
But seriously do we want these laser weapons in the hands of people that have committed these crimes? People like this?
This is not as flame, but your logic is flawed. As we can see these injured people become suicide bombers (one step beyond a guerilla war) in other words terrosrists that will plague the country that attacked for centuries.
1) injuring one person removes at least two people from the battlefield, because one other has to care for him. This is why it's considered more desirable to maim than kill. 2) the effects of the weapon last for decades. If you blind 10,000 enemy troops, they will then be an economic burden on their country for the rest of their lives
Many movies show that eyesight is more valuable to people than their lives. This will simply create a city full of suicide bombers. Imagine it - if you could never see anything again, would you kill the person that did it to you, even if it meant your own life?
Flash is a very common kind of memory chip used in embedded devices.
He's also a superhero who hates Ming the Merciless.
There's no embedded computer in the example - it's a Windows box.
Microsoft's idea of an embedded device is having a full-size tower case strapped to your head running.NET with an IDE cable impaled in your tongue (hence embedded)
I hope Macromedia will put out a player that can be set by default to not play flash
If you're using IE6, click on Tools -- Internet Options -- Security -- Custom. Then under ActiveX and Plug-ins section set everything that is ENABLED to PROMPT. e.g. Download signed ActiveX controls - prompt; Run ActiveX controls and plugins - prompt
flash programs themselves are small and neat -- but the actual client (that reads, processes, and displays the animations and all that) always have seemed quite processor intensive to me, though
I think that a read-only hard drive is a great idea. I wish I could store my OS files on it and my user files on my main hard drive. This way no matter what I do I won't get the dreaded "Operating System partition corrupt, you're screwed". Dell should say, "You would like to order a PC?" Customer: "Uh huh." Dell: "What type?" Customer: "Uhhhh, a cheap one." Dell: "Would you like to use AoL as your ISP? It's nice and easy" Customer: "I like easy, sounds great" Dell: --quietly selects "read-only hard drive" on the checklist
As far as webservers go, a lot of sysadmins will appreciate just having to call and say "Dude, someone's defaced your website, better reboot" instead of having to find a rootkit and then reimage
The point is that no crime was committed. The legal framework allowed people to own slaves (legally, slaves were property) and they allowed companies to insure property. Attempting to sue a company for legally insuring property (this is what the current reparations cases revolve around, after all, providing services to slaveowners which "allowed them" to continue owning slaves), because you find that the property in question should not have been owned for moral reasons, is nonsensical.
Agree
Further, the idea of paying "reparations" to people who were not intrinsically harmed, with the money taken from people who did not commit harm themselves, is morally repugnant
The current Government and States (e.g. Texas) that kept it legal for economic/political reasons (failed in their base duty in maintaining basic human rights for all residents) should pay reparations until the former slaves and infinite descenants' average autonomous wealth are brought up to the same level of the general population (I speak morally, I've given up on the Courts deciding this in actuality). If you state this is unfair, then I ask you why the KKK base is in Texas. The State of Texas, Mississipi, etc. should pay these reparations. In simpler terms the descendants are justified in getting compensation from State/Government if all they can get is meager apartments in the Bronx, if the majority of them are still stuck in the cycle of poverty. You need money to make money, the American dream is a rare exception.
I agree that "bombing everything in sight" is not a moral foreign policy. However, the US has not done that. We are in the singular position of being the sole international warfighting agency.
And so it should, the number of aircraft carriers the US has gives them far more mobile punch than anybody else, and as for ground conflict B-52, Spectre and YF-22 is a power nobody else has. The US has other commitments (e.g. Japan, Saudi, Iraq, Taiwan what was he thinking) and basically needs to increase the size of the military although hellfire-equipped UVAs can mitigate this.
NATO is such only in the sense that other NATO nations will join us in places like Kosovo or Afghanistan because it was morally right to enter those wars (if not making any policy sense in the case of the Balkans). When peacekeeping and negotiation fail, the international community invariably turns to the US to restore the status quo ante. Examples: the Balkans, Korea, Iraq.
This is wise, after the antics of April Aglissen where the US told Saddam to invade Kuwait, even the closest allies of the US wait to see where the Bull runs before following, guessing the Bull's intentions incorrectly can leave even staunch allies beaten and impaled.
In addition to that, there are a number of conflicts that America gets in due to our international presence, but that aren't related to mutlinational affairs per se. For example, we are in Panama because we have to be able to quickly move our Navy around to meet our security and international commitments. When Panama was taken over by a dictator (Noriega) who not only threatened our use of the Canal, but also was running drugs into the US, we took action. This is no less moral than the Spanish/Moroccan conflict over shipping illegals through the Straits of Gibraltar, which resulted in the Spanish occupying an island off the coast of Morocco recently (and whose claim to the island is, to say the least, contested).
Both are immoral, default=bomb everything in sight. Arguing over a barren rock is the height of stupidity and a symptom of Patriotism and Nationalism gone mad.
The US really doesn't act differently in its interests than Britain in the Falklands campaign, France when it sunk the Rainbow Warrior, or any of a number of other governments around the world. The difference is only that our interests are wider and deeper than most countries due to our size, economy, and international warfighting role.
But Britain didn't reinvade Hong Kong ten minutes after it left, which leaves me perplexed as this was against the wishes of the people. A vgote should have been taken and if the vote was for the British to stay, well that's a different story. Fight a war over Falklands and show "British Pride" and then lose Hong Kong, talk about selective victories, people here are still talking about the 1966 World Cup soccer win, for God's sake. Next we'll have people running in the streets shouting, "The Titanic is unsinkable, it DID arrive in New York, the history books are wrong". Oh boy.
You are wrong on every point you just made.
So is a foetus;-)
Enron is nothing more than an accounting scandal, where the officers of the company ripped off the shareholders of the company by dubious accounting methods. There is no act here of any comparability to bombing Hiroshima or enslaving people
Mandatory stock pensions, no choice for bond pensions. Nowadays getting a job is slavery, and since the institutions in the US are geared around the vast majority of people getting jobs, that means that as we speak many Americans are stuck in similar "slavery by restrictive aggressive capitalism" situations.
Americans don't listen even if things go wrong and they get burned, by the time an amendment is filed (if that's what it takes to strengthen SEC) the American public would have forgotten about Enron and its pensionless retirees. Suddenly cashing in your pension doesn't sound so stupid.
All in all, I'd say that the nuclear bombings to end WWII were morally right
I think Nobel would disagree. However in the big picture, you are correct it is justifiable and was a good call, but it did accelerate the nuclear arms race, and if the Cuban missile crisis went slightly differently, Defcon 2 bajesus.
The groups bringing the suits for reparations in the US generally want the money to go to organizations representing various primarily-black constituencies in the US, such as the Urban League and the NAACP
The poor never get justice, that's why they want to be rich. You can't join a Poker game if you can't afford teh ante. Takes money to make money.
None of the States, as far as I am aware, kept slaves. Several (about half, I think) allowed slaves to be kept as property. The States, though, did not own slaves and therefore committed no harm
Even if a host is unaware of underage drinking at a party on his property, he is still legally liable and responsible for any damages. IANAL but I watch Judge Judy.
What about people who were slaves in other places and times? Should the British government pay reparations because they introduced slavery to the US and other colonies? Should the Italians pay because the Romans enslaved the Carthaginians? How far back do you go before it's just absurd?
Yes. Don't break an ideal just because it's impractical. In the Law, there's a similar expression - "Ignorance is not an excuse". In real life it is an excuse, but the ideal is recognised and is wide knowledge. With slave descendants the exact opposite is true - many people wish Indian reservations to be seized due to the land use, and the ungenerous welfare system to be scaled back (despite the fact this would disproportionately affect the slave descendants due to ther incomplete economic assimilation)
How far back do you go before it's just absurd? My answer would be, if someone is alive who was directly harmed by slavery, that is actionable. For everything else, there is no basis for reparations
There's compromises, there's plea bargains, but this goes well beyond that, this is just a sell-out, burying your head in the sand
Should the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki be compensated? Well, who would compensate them? Should the US government pay because it dropped the bombs, or should the Japanese government pay because it started the war?
I think I'll put my hands on my ears and shout "La la la la la la....".
You can regard invading another country as an investment. You would only have to pay reparations to the people you invaded while they were alive. When they pass away their children will be born into your slavery PLUS you won't have to pay them reparations because they were born after you invaded. Sounds like a good deal to me, I think this is why colonialism was so succesful.
The US as a superpower should on principle (at least in abhorrence to colonialism) give the native American Indians whatever concessions they want. ... No one was talking about the Native Americans. They were talking about reparations to African slaves
It is the same thing, the US might as well go back to Africa, kidnap 1,000 Africans as slaves, and bring them to the US. The US uses these African slaves for 30 years then pays them reparations of $1million each.
Now that's value for money because these slaves' children are born into poor areas with no education system and thus they stay slaves and the lucky ones get to work in McDonalds - "everybody is born equal" - yeah whatever. Therefore these kids of slaves can't move into better areas because the only company that would give such uneducated people a job is McDonalds. Then the third generation of slaves is again born into these slave areas with McDonalds being the only job and no education system and high crime. Even the most intelligent people can't learn anything if they don't get an education so they also work in McDonalds, and their kids in turn don't get enough money to go to Harvard or whatever if they get admittance. And so the cycle continues, and this is why the African Americans and their descendants should get repearations until their employment and wealth demographic completely matches that of all other races.
The people that made their money made it and got out - that's the idea, get the sharks to take the risk while the sucker-fish ride on it, eat the bacteria on the shark's skin, then when the shark gets in trouble the sucker-fish leave. The sucker-fish are the ones that make the money.
Like the collapse of BCCI - where did all the money go? Not to the account-holders, but to the corrupt evil receivers who cut deals with BCCI management to get their money.
You can regard invading another country as an investment. You would only have to pay reparations to the people you invaded while they were alive. When they pass away their children will be born into your slavery PLUS you won't have to pay them reparations because they were born after you invaded. Sounds like a good deal to me, I think this is why colonialism was so succesful.
The US as a superpower should on principle (at least in abhorrence to colonialism) give the native American Indians whatever concessions they want.
You seem to have missed the point. If in 150 years Bin Laden's great grandchildren are found guilty of the WTC attacks, then you can start to compare them
If not then you might as well go and invade every country on Earth because you would only have to pay reparations for 30 years, not forever.
You _do_ realize you are babbling incoherently, right?
Sorry, usually I think about what I say, but after seeing Tennesee I figure I might as well say what's on my mind, those people are amazing at selling cars just by talking somehow.
... and so any crime that can be buried by corporate conspiracy (Enron-style what if it takes 50 years to stitch the shredded documents together), or buried by Government bureaucracy by red tape, coerscion or assassination for enough time becomes no crime. This explains why Americans are ignorant about history, and why they also can't get foreign policies straight (hint: bombing everything in sight is not a moral foreign policy which they should just admit, but even the media doesn't)
I put it to you that Enron and the bad historical treatment of blacks is a wide-scale crime like nuking Hiroshima, thus entitling the victims to reasonable compensation from somebody, probably by the Government as it was their policy that hurt those people. So what if it's changed now? Nixon could have argued that the Government has changed 10 years after Watergate, and that the media is no longer necessary and can thus be made illegal, but people know that things don't change that easily.
Anybody that can understand Beliskner's post, please raise your hand... nobody moves
Just like Enron did with their customers to get their money, but it worked didn't it, so a couple of people are going to jail so what?
OK, clarification is called for. Think that you're a native American Red Indian couple of centuries ago. These British guys land on the beach and say, "Can we stay for a little while please?". Native Americans being nice people say, "Yeah sure, just don't stay too long". British stay for a few years, bring hundreds of soldiers. The native Americans get pissed off and say, "Maybe you should go home." The British say, "No asshole," and invade the rest of the country and look for gold whilst killing your people". You swear to your children to take the country back and become an Apache Indian and fight the British/US army. The Boston tea party and the Bill of Rights are irrelevant to your people, it's just the people that invaded your country arguing with each other and trying to stabilise their invasion force by inventing a Bill of Rights and Constitution. What if the Red Indians disagree with a foreign invading power inventing some weird rules that sound good, does that suddenly mean that they've never been invaded?
Suppose Osama binLaden invaded the US and took over Florida. Bush is busy with Enron and so he says, "binLaden you can stay a while but not too long"... In a bearacracy things always get delayed/lost so 50 years later binLaden stands on some fire hydrant and proclaims, "God passes down the Sharia law, all men shall be free, all women shall wear bhurkas" yada yada. Should Bush say, "Yeah, when binLaden came we didn't mind if he stayed a while, but now that he's been here for 50 years, we respect the Bill of Rights and Constitution of the Sharia that he has laid down in that State, and the Federal Government will be governed by those laws." Well this is what we're expecting of the Red Indians if we impose western law upon them.
The US was born out of a violation of sovereignty. Consequently by using delaying tactics if Osama binLaden is found in 50 years, then surely he should also be found innocent because the WTC attacks occured so long ago that it's of no consequence. So would your advice to Osama binLaden be "Run like hell make sure the US troops don't catch you for 10 years or more?". The fact is that the Bill of Rights, etc. was imposed upon the native Americans of the time at gunpoint, including all legal precedents built up around the Constitution. Since "invaders of the native American's sovereignty" have decided on this Bill of Rights arbitrarily (from their perspective) without offering the native Americans unconditional, irrevocable, non-negotiable veto, they should have full rights over and above the Bill of Rights to set laws, etc.
Consider this: Osama binLaden brings the whole of Saudi Arabia to the United States. In time 300 million children are born in the United States and are indoctrinated to believe that they aren't American. These kids grow up and take over the US Federal Government and repeal the Bill of Rights, imposing Sharia Law in its place. The States of America attempt to revolt, but nobody wants to leave their job because their kids will go hungry, and their boss will fire them. So Sharia law stands. 50 years later when their bosses let them, these people start revolting, but it's too late because the entire legal system of the US has changed without their consent, and without them noticing. This is my understanding of what happened to the native Americans - invaders set laws and they had to follow them. If the Prosecutor dies naturally, the Court case ends and a criminal may go free. So is rampant capitalism an impediment to representative democracy? Hmmmm.... This sounds like a good storyline for a movie.
I find it difficult to believe that this covers DFT that JPEG does. Fourier transforms is a sum of sines and cosines transform, not a mean square. The Patent states that these mean square signals are quantised, whereas in JPEG it's the DFT that's quantised.
This is America. Hot coffee, anyone? Reparations for the ancestors of the slaves?
IMO, those reparations are FULLY justified. If Enron was discovered 20 years down the line when their pensions suddenly stopped, imagine what would happen if some Judge said, "Yeah, ancient history, Enron employees should go feed on garbage scows, next please"
Slashdot is guilty of spreading FUD in this case. It has to be clocked somewhere, the processor's going to have to at least have D-latches on its inputs and outputs as the FSB is going to be synchronous (unless I missed a REALLY important memo). Processors are already asynchronous between the D-Latches. This completely asynchronous chip is a rebellion against Intel hyperpipelining. Any EE knows that you get the highest clock speed when the slowest component on your ASIC is the D-Latch, but this doesn't necessarily mean the highest performance, simple operations must go through too many D-Latches.
Decreasing the clock speed and the number of D-Latches is a sensible idea, as D-Latches take up space on the die and make heat. This is a simple protest vote against Intel, rightfully so. In increasing the CLK of their processors at every other expense so much so they even hack their own processor by translatin it into microcode subinstructions. Stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
It's easy to say in ignorance that companies should sell software to companies and give it free for people to learn, but they assume you'll pirate it anyway. Like Adobe said it wanted Skylarov jailed, but they didn't EXPECT it to actually happen. "Put all the software pirates in jail" is something the sales department would say (and they talk VERY loudly and forcefully). The CEO on the other hand would definitely recognise the learning effect of pirated software, but the massive cost of consulting lawyers to actually release two tiers of the product and splitting/forking the codebase to give a different free version are prohibitive. It took me 10 days to make a minor alteration to a shareware contract just to allow distribution. This is because at the end of the day every lawyer knows that a Judge can spend 8 hours debating the meaning of one word, and that your entire case will depend on the outcome.
This is why the BSA targets corporations only, they know that if they went after the public that the ACLU, FSF would bring a whole pile of trouble on their heads, and BSA's customers won't want to be associated with this so the BSA would lose its funding.
I was expecting great things after your MacBoy Flash 6 player download, I was disappointed. Just having some guy in a funny voice say some stuff and that Dell rhymes with smell so you should switch to Mac, is just politically correct Texan humour to the extreme e.g. "My Mom puts extra Hershey into my brownies ha ha ha ha haaaaaa!". Whoever made the website is a truly uninspired man, and if he meets Steven Spielberg or Phil Dick, he will bore them to death. Sorry.
Any tool can be used incorrectly if the superuser and all users are baboons, even a good admin should be able to admin his machine with a hangover and be forgiven for his mistakes (by the OS).
True. Even the big companies screw up big time on simple stuff. My new Dell Inspiron just lost its hard drive contents (thanks to an ACL accident using cacl command). I reinstall Win XP and it says, "Found New Hardware. Please connect to Internet to download drivers for Device: PCI Modem and for Device: Ethernet card". I never thought computers could say stupid things until today. AND with all this mess they're firing geniuses from their companies and only keeping the managers that can talk the most horsesh**t. It's like a Dilbert cartoon except it's real. Where did the entire free market system go so wrong?
Alternatively, now that you've got me thinking about it, maybe they can just teach their kids to do it, same as the Palestinian suicide bombers in Jenin. I remember seeing his Mother on BBC, "One of my sons is a martyr, he will set an example to my other sons to follow until we are freed from Israeli oppression" yada yada. They could say, "I was blinded and my face was burnt to a crisp by these terrible Americans, but no my children, it's cool don't worry about it, peace out." I don't think so
But seriously do we want these laser weapons in the hands of people that have committed these crimes? People like this?
Dell should say, "You would like to order a PC?"
Customer: "Uh huh."
Dell: "What type?"
Customer: "Uhhhh, a cheap one."
Dell: "Would you like to use AoL as your ISP? It's nice and easy"
Customer: "I like easy, sounds great"
Dell: --quietly selects "read-only hard drive" on the checklist
As far as webservers go, a lot of sysadmins will appreciate just having to call and say "Dude, someone's defaced your website, better reboot" instead of having to find a rootkit and then reimage
So this is why Politicians always lie to us, if they told us the tuth we won't understand it, or won't want to understand it *sigh*
Now that's value for money because these slaves' children are born into poor areas with no education system and thus they stay slaves and the lucky ones get to work in McDonalds - "everybody is born equal" - yeah whatever. Therefore these kids of slaves can't move into better areas because the only company that would give such uneducated people a job is McDonalds. Then the third generation of slaves is again born into these slave areas with McDonalds being the only job and no education system and high crime. Even the most intelligent people can't learn anything if they don't get an education so they also work in McDonalds, and their kids in turn don't get enough money to go to Harvard or whatever if they get admittance. And so the cycle continues, and this is why the African Americans and their descendants should get repearations until their employment and wealth demographic completely matches that of all other races.
Like the collapse of BCCI - where did all the money go? Not to the account-holders, but to the corrupt evil receivers who cut deals with BCCI management to get their money.
The US as a superpower should on principle (at least in abhorrence to colonialism) give the native American Indians whatever concessions they want.
I put it to you that Enron and the bad historical treatment of blacks is a wide-scale crime like nuking Hiroshima, thus entitling the victims to reasonable compensation from somebody, probably by the Government as it was their policy that hurt those people. So what if it's changed now? Nixon could have argued that the Government has changed 10 years after Watergate, and that the media is no longer necessary and can thus be made illegal, but people know that things don't change that easily.
OK, clarification is called for. Think that you're a native American Red Indian couple of centuries ago. These British guys land on the beach and say, "Can we stay for a little while please?".
Native Americans being nice people say, "Yeah sure, just don't stay too long".
British stay for a few years, bring hundreds of soldiers. The native Americans get pissed off and say, "Maybe you should go home." The British say, "No asshole," and invade the rest of the country and look for gold whilst killing your people". You swear to your children to take the country back and become an Apache Indian and fight the British/US army. The Boston tea party and the Bill of Rights are irrelevant to your people, it's just the people that invaded your country arguing with each other and trying to stabilise their invasion force by inventing a Bill of Rights and Constitution. What if the Red Indians disagree with a foreign invading power inventing some weird rules that sound good, does that suddenly mean that they've never been invaded?
Suppose Osama binLaden invaded the US and took over Florida. Bush is busy with Enron and so he says, "binLaden you can stay a while but not too long"... In a bearacracy things always get delayed/lost so 50 years later binLaden stands on some fire hydrant and proclaims, "God passes down the Sharia law, all men shall be free, all women shall wear bhurkas" yada yada. Should Bush say, "Yeah, when binLaden came we didn't mind if he stayed a while, but now that he's been here for 50 years, we respect the Bill of Rights and Constitution of the Sharia that he has laid down in that State, and the Federal Government will be governed by those laws." Well this is what we're expecting of the Red Indians if we impose western law upon them.
Consider this: Osama binLaden brings the whole of Saudi Arabia to the United States. In time 300 million children are born in the United States and are indoctrinated to believe that they aren't American. These kids grow up and take over the US Federal Government and repeal the Bill of Rights, imposing Sharia Law in its place. The States of America attempt to revolt, but nobody wants to leave their job because their kids will go hungry, and their boss will fire them. So Sharia law stands. 50 years later when their bosses let them, these people start revolting, but it's too late because the entire legal system of the US has changed without their consent, and without them noticing. This is my understanding of what happened to the native Americans - invaders set laws and they had to follow them. If the Prosecutor dies naturally, the Court case ends and a criminal may go free. So is rampant capitalism an impediment to representative democracy? Hmmmm.... This sounds like a good storyline for a movie.
Decreasing the clock speed and the number of D-Latches is a sensible idea, as D-Latches take up space on the die and make heat. This is a simple protest vote against Intel, rightfully so. In increasing the CLK of their processors at every other expense so much so they even hack their own processor by translatin it into microcode subinstructions. Stupid.