For those still in the lower 1% of operating systems (for once not Apple!) please hold. Your call^H^H^H^H service is very important to us a Verizon^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Opera representative will be with you shortly..
'christian doublethink'? don't reach too far because you might fall over. you assumptions are that I hate "groups" of people because of a definition of bigotry?... not so. your presumption is that I get upset when they do something I don't like and that's not so, yet again. I never claimed nor do I in the best way I know how to "judge" others for your assumption (yet again), that someone will 'burn in hell' for their actions... yet AGAIN... no.
Your entire argument is based on the suppositions you've conjured in your own mind about who I am, yet nothing you said could be further from the truth.
people are more than what they do. if it were that simple to define an individual we would be crawling on all fours without any complex speech patterns or the ability to read as we do now.
since when has it or hasn't it been a right? you imply that legislation is the deciding factor between a right and not a right but that's hardly the case.
Someone who opposes homosexual relationships in any form based on his beliefs and morals is not a bigot. Bigotry is an intolerance towards those holding different opinions from oneself. You can be opposed to homosexual relationships and tolerant of the individual.
People often in a fury of over-emotional reactions blur the line behind accepting of the individual and condemning of their actions. Just like I can accept my friend for who he is as a person I don't have to accept what he does or condone his own beliefs. You can care and love for someone without accepting some of their choices as correct or right despite what people think.
As someone else said regarding construction of Dyson Spheres, "If you can build it, you don't need it."
Here's what I think. Obi Wan Kanobi said that a light saber was a more elegant weapon and reinforced a true jedi's skill. Regardless of that statement of "if you can build it, you don't need it", it was more for the focus of a jedi in his transcendence within the force and also a part of his training.
1) Correct. Copying child porn is not the same as creating new child porn. But the child is still victimized. True, even if physically done only once to the child their victimization is celebrated, condoned, accepted in the minds of individuals repeatedly. Fantasizing over a child in a sexual (explicit or other) way does its damage the first time, and every time after that is reinforcing such acts into the mind, each as damage reinforcing as the next.
2) Your questioning why people call him a scumbag, and I will avoid discussing that for now. But you're wrong about what people choose what they are attracted to, and whom and here is why. Choice. Based on the preponderance of education one receives by a vast majority of people in any given region, child molestation and exploitation is known to be wrong. This man had a choice, even at an earlier age, to not do something that was wrong but instead chose to do it. A small attraction, if allowed to be entertained in the mind, will grow into something much larger than anticipated or even expected. But that's the crux of the matter. He did have a choice and did not choose correctly with either the laws of the land or what was accepted universally by a vast majority of people in this world that you DO NOT sexually exploit a child for any reason.
If you doubt that thoughts lead to actions or in any way dispute this please read books by, "Lazarus, Lazarus & Fay, 1993", Shengold (1995), Sutherland (1995) and vos Savant (1996) and acquaint yourself with how choices that are left uncorrected or unguided can be damaging to an individual or many others around them. "The Manifold of Sense" - by Dr. Sam Vaknin is also a good read that deals with Narcissism. Believe me when I say that it is quite related to this issue.
3) For example, it is illegal to create computer-generated child pornography. Why!?... no children are harmed. Yes you are right. However, the basic premise of child pornography, no matter in regards to it's fictitious or actual nature in being, is so repugnant, combined with common knowledge of the basic premise that thoughts do lead to actions is why any "art" depicting sexual exploitation is deemed illegal.
I'm shocked, though it's not completely surprising, the amount of people who come out and give speeches where they claim "sex-related laws are based on some twisted idea of morality, and nothing more." That so called "twisted" idea of morality is based on the moral reasoning from a deontological point of view. That such acts deviate from the stability of society and must be quashed, even when some of them are veiled from the public and aren't allowed audience or to promulgate to prevent the perpetuation of acceptance of such acts.
While I could go on about the ramifications of the ill-informed and undereducated status of the people in this country regarding the stability of society from a moral point of view, it wouldn't do this thread any justice, failing to hold the attention to the points you raised.
While I don't condone this pedophile's actions in the spread, making or distribution of such material I believe the courts were wrong in how they defined "making porn". It's a digital copy. It's not as if who ever burns a CD/DVD "creates" the piece of work; eg. If I were to copy a disc, I certainly didn't write the code, write the UI etc. and this is what it looks like they jury and court tried to make him guilty of.
I'm all for riding the demand and material of such child pornography in every possibly way (obviously not conflicting with law or human rights (ie: torture)) but from what it looks like, the jury went too far by taking the definition of "making" out of context / too close to the line to be of any good. There's an understanding for wanting this person to be put away for his disgusting actions, but maybe I'm wrong in my understanding of this judgement.
but that's a really great way to download files via.torrent when you have a server at home and don't want your main system (my laptop) be used for a torrent that'll be running for a few days. It needs to move around with me and.torrents prevent that.
I totally agree. However the article blurb stating "it will heal itself" [sic] implies some sort of artificial intelligence, or intelligence at all when that isn't the fact. Then again, I never could understand the personification, or assigning a gender to inanimate objects. It just never made sense to me, the fond attachment to a mechanical or "workhorse" type of object that came from human emotion.
I'm sure it's not just me in this respect- but it still doesn't make sense. If anyone would care to explain, please do. I'm eager to learn / figure this out.
So if there is revealing information about yourself on a particularly popular website and you want it removed you're SOL all because of a license? I don't know about you but information about me is my property and if I want it removed I'll go through heaven and hell to have it removed.
Maybe this is just me, but here's what I've done. I've set up a linux server with afp:// (apple file protocol, so I can log in with my iBook) and SAMBA so I can log on through Windows. iTunes runs on both machines and can run the purchased music. When I purchase it, I immediately move it to the server in it's own directory/usr/local/ftp/media/paid/iTunes/. (It is complicated, but I keep things extremely organized through my complexity sometimes) it loads easily as afp://server and smb://server.
This doesn't work for you since you're not using iTunes, and choice is what many people seek after. This is merely my solution.
Some of us use cash for all transactions, even purchasing airline tickets. Some of us never/rarely use credit cards. Some of us have bank accounts after lawfully terminating your social security number as US born citizens aren't required by law to have them. See 20 CFR 3 A7 404.1905 Some of us have "acquaintances" buy us our slashdot membership for fixing their computers. Some of us aren't paranoid; only prefer to live this way because most of the time, it's simpler. Some of us, even after all of the above, still can get mortgages, loans, etc. without a hassle (albeit it may take a little while for approval) Some of us don't even use mail in rebates of any kind and look for better deals elsewhere. (When did lazy become synonymous with normal shopping behaviors or life in general?)
With "localhost" style proxies and other external proxies (ssh -D 8080 user@host works well from freeshells) to filter out headers containing browser type, screen resolution, operating system, originating ISP etc, there are ways you can remain anonymous.
I have even recently been approved for a mortgage on a home under the current conditions.
Yes, this is what I personally have done. There are stores that normally do not have a card and the prices are even lower than the "big guys" and the quality is still higher! But here's one final statement I would urge you to realize. It is all *who* you know, not *what* you know, necessarily.
That's what I meant by my original post too. Too bad some people really just don't get it. The level of education and learning about things like sentence structure, spelling and general literature is astoundingly frightening! Mercutio was fond of them, but the OP certainly doesn't have a grasp on it, that's for sure.
This is awesome. This idea... is awesome. Too bad it will probably only run on a Windows PDA OS, therefor has no proper file attributes to prevent nasties etc. (For me it's just a bad aftertaste to run a Microsoft OS or product...) I like this idea completely. Allowing only specific files such as.doc,.pdf,.txt etc?! This would be awesome if everyone had a pda / device with this kind of software.
Slashdot Mirror
For those still in the lower 1% of operating systems (for once not Apple!) please hold. Your call^H^H^H^H service is very important to us a Verizon^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Opera representative will be with you shortly..
*cue elevator music*
since when do people not have options like this? there is always a chance to change.
that analogy is pure bullshit. you can change the fact that you're homosexual if you wanted but the pigment of your skin is something you cannot.
How about not committing the crime? What happened to that as an option?
'christian doublethink'? don't reach too far because you might fall over. you assumptions are that I hate "groups" of people because of a definition of bigotry?... not so. your presumption is that I get upset when they do something I don't like and that's not so, yet again. I never claimed nor do I in the best way I know how to "judge" others for your assumption (yet again), that someone will 'burn in hell' for their actions... yet AGAIN... no.
Your entire argument is based on the suppositions you've conjured in your own mind about who I am, yet nothing you said could be further from the truth.
people are more than what they do. if it were that simple to define an individual we would be crawling on all fours without any complex speech patterns or the ability to read as we do now.
since when has it or hasn't it been a right? you imply that legislation is the deciding factor between a right and not a right but that's hardly the case.
Someone who opposes homosexual relationships in any form based on his beliefs and morals is not a bigot. Bigotry is an intolerance towards those holding different opinions from oneself. You can be opposed to homosexual relationships and tolerant of the individual.
People often in a fury of over-emotional reactions blur the line behind accepting of the individual and condemning of their actions. Just like I can accept my friend for who he is as a person I don't have to accept what he does or condone his own beliefs. You can care and love for someone without accepting some of their choices as correct or right despite what people think.
if you're staring at his ass and worry about being considered a homo or homophobic you have other problems to worry about.
As someone else said regarding construction of Dyson Spheres, "If you can build it, you don't need it."
Here's what I think. Obi Wan Kanobi said that a light saber was a more elegant weapon and reinforced a true jedi's skill. Regardless of that statement of "if you can build it, you don't need it", it was more for the focus of a jedi in his transcendence within the force and also a part of his training.
good god i am a geek
Karma can go to hell for now, so I'll bite.
... no children are harmed. Yes you are right. However, the basic premise of child pornography, no matter in regards to it's fictitious or actual nature in being, is so repugnant, combined with common knowledge of the basic premise that thoughts do lead to actions is why any "art" depicting sexual exploitation is deemed illegal.
1) Correct. Copying child porn is not the same as creating new child porn. But the child is still victimized. True, even if physically done only once to the child their victimization is celebrated, condoned, accepted in the minds of individuals repeatedly. Fantasizing over a child in a sexual (explicit or other) way does its damage the first time, and every time after that is reinforcing such acts into the mind, each as damage reinforcing as the next.
2) Your questioning why people call him a scumbag, and I will avoid discussing that for now. But you're wrong about what people choose what they are attracted to, and whom and here is why. Choice. Based on the preponderance of education one receives by a vast majority of people in any given region, child molestation and exploitation is known to be wrong. This man had a choice, even at an earlier age, to not do something that was wrong but instead chose to do it. A small attraction, if allowed to be entertained in the mind, will grow into something much larger than anticipated or even expected. But that's the crux of the matter. He did have a choice and did not choose correctly with either the laws of the land or what was accepted universally by a vast majority of people in this world that you DO NOT sexually exploit a child for any reason.
If you doubt that thoughts lead to actions or in any way dispute this please read books by, "Lazarus, Lazarus & Fay, 1993", Shengold (1995), Sutherland (1995) and vos Savant (1996) and acquaint yourself with how choices that are left uncorrected or unguided can be damaging to an individual or many others around them. "The Manifold of Sense" - by Dr. Sam Vaknin is also a good read that deals with Narcissism. Believe me when I say that it is quite related to this issue.
3) For example, it is illegal to create computer-generated child pornography. Why!?
I'm shocked, though it's not completely surprising, the amount of people who come out and give speeches where they claim "sex-related laws are based on some twisted idea of morality, and nothing more." That so called "twisted" idea of morality is based on the moral reasoning from a deontological point of view. That such acts deviate from the stability of society and must be quashed, even when some of them are veiled from the public and aren't allowed audience or to promulgate to prevent the perpetuation of acceptance of such acts.
While I could go on about the ramifications of the ill-informed and undereducated status of the people in this country regarding the stability of society from a moral point of view, it wouldn't do this thread any justice, failing to hold the attention to the points you raised.
While I don't condone this pedophile's actions in the spread, making or distribution of such material I believe the courts were wrong in how they defined "making porn". It's a digital copy. It's not as if who ever burns a CD/DVD "creates" the piece of work; eg. If I were to copy a disc, I certainly didn't write the code, write the UI etc. and this is what it looks like they jury and court tried to make him guilty of.
I'm all for riding the demand and material of such child pornography in every possibly way (obviously not conflicting with law or human rights (ie: torture)) but from what it looks like, the jury went too far by taking the definition of "making" out of context / too close to the line to be of any good. There's an understanding for wanting this person to be put away for his disgusting actions, but maybe I'm wrong in my understanding of this judgement.
I keep wondering when the comments about the old micro-machines these fish use are. Come on guys, you remember the old micro-machines? right?
whoa, they still do that?
but that's a really great way to download files via .torrent when you have a server at home and don't want your main system (my laptop) be used for a torrent that'll be running for a few days. It needs to move around with me and .torrents prevent that.
I totally agree. However the article blurb stating "it will heal itself" [sic] implies some sort of artificial intelligence, or intelligence at all when that isn't the fact. Then again, I never could understand the personification, or assigning a gender to inanimate objects. It just never made sense to me, the fond attachment to a mechanical or "workhorse" type of object that came from human emotion.
I'm sure it's not just me in this respect- but it still doesn't make sense. If anyone would care to explain, please do. I'm eager to learn / figure this out.
So if there is revealing information about yourself on a particularly popular website and you want it removed you're SOL all because of a license? I don't know about you but information about me is my property and if I want it removed I'll go through heaven and hell to have it removed.
No that post wasn't a virus, LOL!
Maybe this is just me, but here's what I've done. /usr/local/ftp/media/paid/iTunes/. (It is complicated, but I keep things extremely organized through my complexity sometimes) it loads easily as afp://server and smb://server.
I've set up a linux server with afp:// (apple file protocol, so I can log in with my iBook) and SAMBA so I can log on through Windows. iTunes runs on both machines and can run the purchased music. When I purchase it, I immediately move it to the server in it's own directory
This doesn't work for you since you're not using iTunes, and choice is what many people seek after. This is merely my solution.
Holy shit that works in OS X.
I tried my user account password but nothing works.
Hot damn, that was a good little discovery on my new OS X iBook
*shakes head in disbelief*
Some of us use cash for all transactions, even purchasing airline tickets.
Some of us never/rarely use credit cards.
Some of us have bank accounts after lawfully terminating your social security number as US born citizens aren't required by law to have them. See 20 CFR 3 A7 404.1905
Some of us have "acquaintances" buy us our slashdot membership for fixing their computers.
Some of us aren't paranoid; only prefer to live this way because most of the time, it's simpler.
Some of us, even after all of the above, still can get mortgages, loans, etc. without a hassle (albeit it may take a little while for approval)
Some of us don't even use mail in rebates of any kind and look for better deals elsewhere. (When did lazy become synonymous with normal shopping behaviors or life in general?)
With "localhost" style proxies and other external proxies (ssh -D 8080 user@host works well from freeshells) to filter out headers containing browser type, screen resolution, operating system, originating ISP etc, there are ways you can remain anonymous.
I have even recently been approved for a mortgage on a home under the current conditions.
Yes, this is what I personally have done. There are stores that normally do not have a card and the prices are even lower than the "big guys" and the quality is still higher! But here's one final statement I would urge you to realize. It is all *who* you know, not *what* you know, necessarily.
Just my two bits
That's what I meant by my original post too. Too bad some people really just don't get it. The level of education and learning about things like sentence structure, spelling and general literature is astoundingly frightening! Mercutio was fond of them, but the OP certainly doesn't have a grasp on it, that's for sure.
Then I suppose you haven't much more than basic "least common denominator" understanding of english
You're way off-topic here. Not mobile phones, PDA's.
You must not have read the article, but that's not surprising here.
and cell phones suck.
This is awesome. This idea... is awesome. .doc, .pdf, .txt etc?! This would be awesome if everyone had a pda / device with this kind of software.
Too bad it will probably only run on a Windows PDA OS, therefor has no proper file attributes to prevent nasties etc. (For me it's just a bad aftertaste to run a Microsoft OS or product...) I like this idea completely. Allowing only specific files such as
I love it! What a vision!
I failed to mention that writing an apple script program to install / do all the dirty work is as simple as creating a .bat or .wsh for windows.