There is no central point. SPACE ITSELF is inflating.
And you cannot "wind the clock back", because as you go back time gravity increases exponentially until time itself is contracted beyond recognition and passes so slowly, possibly without ever getting to a zero point, instead "reversing" its course (string theory says that a universe with radius R and radius 1/R is the same), though reversing is probably not the best word to use, it's not like a scale from 1 to -1, it's mathematically more complex.
If you can accept that a revolution from tyranny is a tail event (which I think it is), then its proability is either zero or one by Kolmogorov's Zero-One Law. We know tyrants have been thrown off before, then its probability must be one... It only doesn't guarantee that it will happen within a specific amount of time.
It's composed of essentially psychopathic entities (people) who cannot, by their very definition, take the interests of the market in consideration...
Which is where you are being fallacious: People can and will take the interests of the gorup (society, market) of which they are a part of beyond their own. Call it enlightened self-interest or altruism, those behaviors make all the difference. Corporations, by definition, care only about bringing profit for their investors. Those investors, when they are few and mostly in control of the corporation, project their own interests and altruisms into that corporation. But faceless investors and shareholders as well as corporative officers who have little knowledge or care of what really happens inside the company's walls won't do that.
Are you joking, is this like the first time you've ever heard about the benefits of freedom? Read Milton Friedman's "Capitalism and Freedom" if you need a refresher course.
You mean economic freedom, I guess? I don't much care about what has been written so much as what is currently happening. The reality shows consequences which economists and policy makers didn't anticipate, and must be corrected.
And even supposing that there is too much government control, the solution is not to stop all influence and control! If someone eats too much, is stopping eating going to help him? You are only advocating a radical solution which would be no better than the actual problem. What I think we need is some lateral thinking: a different kind of interventionism for a different kind of society.
The issue is that this separation removes essentially ALL responsibility from the shareholders and leaders of the corporation.
What if instead the only protection was financial? It would certainly be better, because some consequences of the actions of the corporation would fall on those who made those decisions and brought them into being, but certain people have this quais-religious attitude to profit and might not even see that as a deterrent.
Markets aren't perfect, but they easily beat central planning, as demonstrated by the entire 20th century.
They are? What I see the market doing so far is create organisations whose sole purpose is the domination of that market, in ways that are detrimental to the evolution of society and to the well-being of its constituents who are not members of the new oligarchy.
Don't take me for a communist: I believe that the capitalistic ideal works well in a sane economic environment. But you can't apply an economic principle to social problems and expect sound results. What's more, I am not convinced that a capitalistic system can be self-balancing and naturally gravitate towards a balance of the factors that result in the best consequences for society. As we can now see, even with significant input from regulators, the system is leaning towards more control by a certain class, not an equilibrium. It's quite possible (and I believe) that the system is chaotic, and thus may have different attractors, and that we are now seeing one of those that results from the tinkering to the system.
The problem with libertarians is that they (you?) believe that the system is necessariy self-balancing, like some kind of bell curve, and that it will automatically gravtiate towards a balanced solution if left to itself. That's where the wishful thinking rests. I believe, as many others do, that the economic system is chaotic and that balance may be one of many attractors towards which it would gravitate. Constant tugging may be required to send it towards a less powerful attractor state. I do not advocate complete control or centralized planning either, but I am definitely in favor of carefully planned, numerous but minimalistic in themselves, interference in the system. Even better, I believe there are certain specific changes which could be made to the system that could help make it be more stable.
The market is composed of individuals such as yourself, who can choose to not do business with entities whose practices you disapprove of.
Can I? As another poster pointed out, the issue is that corporations are ready to do ANYTHING to get more power and money, which may entail breaking the law and being completely amoral. A corporation will break the law to get a monopoly or keep it as long as the consequences of its illegal behavior end up costing it less than the profits gained from the actions. Such behavior will, over time, lessen my choices and favor the corporations over the individuals, and allow them to have more control over what I buy (simply by controlling what I CAN buy) than I do myself.
And yet it's perfectly rational to believe that government acts in the best interests of the people, and not in ways that benefit current officeholder
At least, the government and individuals have a CHOICE in the matter. It might not always act in the best interest of people, but it often does, or at least tries to. You must always safeguard against individuals within the government (elected or otherwise) acting against the common good. Such safeguards appear to be inefficient or insufficient in the US at the moment, and that's a big cause of the problem.
We'd all be dead from rat poison in our food, no doubt.
No, but we would most likely live in some corporate version of 1984.
All you Libertarians are seriously deluding yourselves if you think leaving it in the hands of "the market" will solve anything.
There is no "invisible hand", and "the market" is a non-entity. It's composed of essentially psychopathic entities (corporations) who cannot, by their very definition, take the interest of society in consideration. To believe that some magic forces can somehow act in the favor of society and correct things by themselves is beyond wishful thinking, it's downright irresponsible and infantile.
What do you think will happen if government stops taking part in regulating industries? Their behavior will worsen, and they will get more grabbing and take more control of our everyday lives in other ways. Leaving them free will not help at all!
There's nothing new here. The warez scene has been doing -1 and 0-day releases forever. I've seen -7 releases before. They're getting a bit better, and I suspect some of the biggest networks are probably paying people to do the leaks, which helps things.
This is news only because the game has been widely publicized. This happens all the time.
I don't think trying to "reconcile" the text of the Bible with the modern observations and results of science makes sense.
You and so many others completely mistake the original purpose of the Bible's early stories. They are mystical stories, intended as allegories and stories to illustrate a point, or create specific religious responses in the people. They were not considered real in an historical real sense even back then. This factual interpretation of those texts is mostly a Western, recent (in terms of world history) aberration.
And that's not even hinting at the problem that our empirical, skeptical and scientific way of looking at the world did NOT exist back then. The worldview was significantly different, and it is definitely invalid to project our way of looking at the world back to those people. They didn't see "history" as a fixed past reality the way our science does, where facts are verified and data is collected through painstaking, careful analysis. Many of the stories predate the written word, and they were just that, stories, which would change according to the needs of the people telling them, changing in the retelling. They were not intended in describing the physical world, but to try to make sense of it by way of a mystical background shown through those stories.
What about you check the content of the speech as well. And realize it's a tissue of lies, exagerrations, and pure invention? Reconstruction is going well? Elections in 4 months in a country that might as well be said to be in the middle of a civil war? (Funny most people suspected a civil war would occur when the US left, it didn't even wait for that!)
Compare that to the memos which were but ONE piece of evidence that turned out to be invalid. The issue of whether or not Bush did his military service still exists, and other pieces of evidence point toward the hypothesis that he did not.
Just to clarify, I find it nice to do a LotR party and watch all three movies. It's the hobbit disguise which I find a bit much. And doing it on September 22nd (or close to).
I went to Trilogy Tuesday BTW, so I know what it's like watching all three in the same day, in a row.
From now on, when some people say I'm obsessed with LotR because I wear a One Ring replica and own a few sword replicas from the movies, I'll just have to link to your post and appear perfectly normal.
No, because a correct default configuration of ssh won't allow root access, and Linux distributions don't normally allow passwordless root.
And mostly because most users who use ssh (if not all!) will have some pretty good idea of how to configure it correctly and securely. And they will have themselves selected settings that are insecure.
File and Print sharing on Windows is easily configurable, and many default configurations are insecure, according to this article, all the while when it SAYS it's secure.
Should PETA be allowed to use music, speeches, and photographs to promote their causes? What if I as an artist disagree with PETA?
Well, writers and artists have had their works used to promot ideologies and opinions they didn't agree with before. I'm thinking about Nietzsche's work was used in Germany.
It wouldn't be unreasonable to provide rules restricting such permitted use even within not-for-profit organisations, for example for political insitutions and lobbies.
As for personal use, should I be allowed to distribute music via P2P or give it out to friends?
Yes. That's currently legal in Canada and I hope the CRIA (Canadian equivalent to the RIAA) doesn't manage to buy laws that would change this.
neither of which is good for the art community and for the public at large.
I agree that artists must keep the right to profit from their creations, unless we find some other way of allowing them to earn a living (government subsidies? Probably not a good solution). But the currently proposed restrictions on technology are not doing that, they're simply trying to keep the profit in the hands of the oligopolists.
Slashdot Mirror
You forgot the most important group of all, as stated by Casaubon's Law:
As a conspiracy theory grows, the probability the Templars will fit in it approaches 1.
There is no central point. SPACE ITSELF is inflating.
And you cannot "wind the clock back", because as you go back time gravity increases exponentially until time itself is contracted beyond recognition and passes so slowly, possibly without ever getting to a zero point, instead "reversing" its course (string theory says that a universe with radius R and radius 1/R is the same), though reversing is probably not the best word to use, it's not like a scale from 1 to -1, it's mathematically more complex.
No, quite wrong.
If you yourself wrote product A and B, you can relicence your code for product C any way you want.
OTOH, if *I* take code from your product A to make product D, then yes product D has to be GPL.
The single thing that I am really, truly afraid of is to be immortal.
The dullness, the boredom, the horror of it, being stuck in this single life instead of going back...
Makes me shiver down to my bones. Immortality is not a boon, it's a curse, the worse one that could be visited onto a living being.
Don't know who marked you offtopic, but you're perfectly right, this is VERY old.
You should learn some history. The October Revolution took place in November, on the 7th to be more precise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_Revolution
If you can accept that a revolution from tyranny is a tail event (which I think it is), then its proability is either zero or one by Kolmogorov's Zero-One Law. We know tyrants have been thrown off before, then its probability must be one... It only doesn't guarantee that it will happen within a specific amount of time.
Considering most of the games I have played seriously in the past or intend to play in the near future are from Blizzard, I'm not too concerned.
Which is where you are being fallacious: People can and will take the interests of the gorup (society, market) of which they are a part of beyond their own. Call it enlightened self-interest or altruism, those behaviors make all the difference. Corporations, by definition, care only about bringing profit for their investors. Those investors, when they are few and mostly in control of the corporation, project their own interests and altruisms into that corporation. But faceless investors and shareholders as well as corporative officers who have little knowledge or care of what really happens inside the company's walls won't do that.
You mean economic freedom, I guess? I don't much care about what has been written so much as what is currently happening. The reality shows consequences which economists and policy makers didn't anticipate, and must be corrected.
And even supposing that there is too much government control, the solution is not to stop all influence and control! If someone eats too much, is stopping eating going to help him? You are only advocating a radical solution which would be no better than the actual problem. What I think we need is some lateral thinking: a different kind of interventionism for a different kind of society.
The issue is that this separation removes essentially ALL responsibility from the shareholders and leaders of the corporation.
What if instead the only protection was financial? It would certainly be better, because some consequences of the actions of the corporation would fall on those who made those decisions and brought them into being, but certain people have this quais-religious attitude to profit and might not even see that as a deterrent.
They are? What I see the market doing so far is create organisations whose sole purpose is the domination of that market, in ways that are detrimental to the evolution of society and to the well-being of its constituents who are not members of the new oligarchy.
Don't take me for a communist: I believe that the capitalistic ideal works well in a sane economic environment. But you can't apply an economic principle to social problems and expect sound results. What's more, I am not convinced that a capitalistic system can be self-balancing and naturally gravitate towards a balance of the factors that result in the best consequences for society. As we can now see, even with significant input from regulators, the system is leaning towards more control by a certain class, not an equilibrium. It's quite possible (and I believe) that the system is chaotic, and thus may have different attractors, and that we are now seeing one of those that results from the tinkering to the system.
The problem with libertarians is that they (you?) believe that the system is necessariy self-balancing, like some kind of bell curve, and that it will automatically gravtiate towards a balanced solution if left to itself. That's where the wishful thinking rests. I believe, as many others do, that the economic system is chaotic and that balance may be one of many attractors towards which it would gravitate. Constant tugging may be required to send it towards a less powerful attractor state. I do not advocate complete control or centralized planning either, but I am definitely in favor of carefully planned, numerous but minimalistic in themselves, interference in the system. Even better, I believe there are certain specific changes which could be made to the system that could help make it be more stable.
Can I? As another poster pointed out, the issue is that corporations are ready to do ANYTHING to get more power and money, which may entail breaking the law and being completely amoral. A corporation will break the law to get a monopoly or keep it as long as the consequences of its illegal behavior end up costing it less than the profits gained from the actions. Such behavior will, over time, lessen my choices and favor the corporations over the individuals, and allow them to have more control over what I buy (simply by controlling what I CAN buy) than I do myself.
At least, the government and individuals have a CHOICE in the matter. It might not always act in the best interest of people, but it often does, or at least tries to. You must always safeguard against individuals within the government (elected or otherwise) acting against the common good. Such safeguards appear to be inefficient or insufficient in the US at the moment, and that's a big cause of the problem.
No, but we would most likely live in some corporate version of 1984.
All you Libertarians are seriously deluding yourselves if you think leaving it in the hands of "the market" will solve anything.
There is no "invisible hand", and "the market" is a non-entity. It's composed of essentially psychopathic entities (corporations) who cannot, by their very definition, take the interest of society in consideration. To believe that some magic forces can somehow act in the favor of society and correct things by themselves is beyond wishful thinking, it's downright irresponsible and infantile.
What do you think will happen if government stops taking part in regulating industries? Their behavior will worsen, and they will get more grabbing and take more control of our everyday lives in other ways. Leaving them free will not help at all!
Check their forums, in ZC General discussion, a guy is looking for beta testers.
Indeed you are correct.
"Nothing to see here, move along", as they say...
There's nothing new here. The warez scene has been doing -1 and 0-day releases forever. I've seen -7 releases before. They're getting a bit better, and I suspect some of the biggest networks are probably paying people to do the leaks, which helps things.
This is news only because the game has been widely publicized. This happens all the time.
I don't think trying to "reconcile" the text of the Bible with the modern observations and results of science makes sense.
You and so many others completely mistake the original purpose of the Bible's early stories. They are mystical stories, intended as allegories and stories to illustrate a point, or create specific religious responses in the people. They were not considered real in an historical real sense even back then. This factual interpretation of those texts is mostly a Western, recent (in terms of world history) aberration.
And that's not even hinting at the problem that our empirical, skeptical and scientific way of looking at the world did NOT exist back then. The worldview was significantly different, and it is definitely invalid to project our way of looking at the world back to those people. They didn't see "history" as a fixed past reality the way our science does, where facts are verified and data is collected through painstaking, careful analysis. Many of the stories predate the written word, and they were just that, stories, which would change according to the needs of the people telling them, changing in the retelling. They were not intended in describing the physical world, but to try to make sense of it by way of a mystical background shown through those stories.
What about you check the content of the speech as well. And realize it's a tissue of lies, exagerrations, and pure invention? Reconstruction is going well? Elections in 4 months in a country that might as well be said to be in the middle of a civil war? (Funny most people suspected a civil war would occur when the US left, it didn't even wait for that!)
Compare that to the memos which were but ONE piece of evidence that turned out to be invalid. The issue of whether or not Bush did his military service still exists, and other pieces of evidence point toward the hypothesis that he did not.
You need to put pictures on that web site.
Just to clarify, I find it nice to do a LotR party and watch all three movies. It's the hobbit disguise which I find a bit much. And doing it on September 22nd (or close to).
I went to Trilogy Tuesday BTW, so I know what it's like watching all three in the same day, in a row.
From now on, when some people say I'm obsessed with LotR because I wear a One Ring replica and own a few sword replicas from the movies, I'll just have to link to your post and appear perfectly normal.
Thank you.
No, because a correct default configuration of ssh won't allow root access, and Linux distributions don't normally allow passwordless root.
And mostly because most users who use ssh (if not all!) will have some pretty good idea of how to configure it correctly and securely. And they will have themselves selected settings that are insecure.
File and Print sharing on Windows is easily configurable, and many default configurations are insecure, according to this article, all the while when it SAYS it's secure.
like many others, I use Windows.
And MacOS X, and Linux.
Each system has its uses. I mostly browse the net and work with OS X or Linux, and I play games with Windows.
Someone please mod up parent: It's not only iChat that uses this framework, other system apps and applications can use it.
I've seen that bug in Netscape 7 - on Mac OS 9!
The Netscape codebase was on Mozilla 1.3 or something? Hard to believe this is still in firefox and that it affects other platforms.
The only solution I found back then was to delete the user.js pref file.
I couldn't find anything so far about the swap file password reveal being fixed or not.
That's a serious issue that I expected to be fixed soon.
Well, writers and artists have had their works used to promot ideologies and opinions they didn't agree with before. I'm thinking about Nietzsche's work was used in Germany.
It wouldn't be unreasonable to provide rules restricting such permitted use even within not-for-profit organisations, for example for political insitutions and lobbies.
Yes. That's currently legal in Canada and I hope the CRIA (Canadian equivalent to the RIAA) doesn't manage to buy laws that would change this.
I agree that artists must keep the right to profit from their creations, unless we find some other way of allowing them to earn a living (government subsidies? Probably not a good solution). But the currently proposed restrictions on technology are not doing that, they're simply trying to keep the profit in the hands of the oligopolists.