I agree. The DoD would not act towards Manning as they do if Obama had seriously told them not to do so. Hell, IIRC Obama even could have given Manning pardon for everything he might have done, if he wanted to. Except for if he'd be proven to have caused serious direct threats to the life of one ore more persons, he should be granted pardon alone for leaking that video of the heli crew who thought shooting innocents is a funny video game.
I heard that guy talking often enough to see that he's not one of the brightest. And please don't try to tell me that he just lacks a little rhetoric capability.
Don't have a link handy, but search for what Larry Hagman (JR Ewing) said about Bush. A little harsh, but I liked it.:)
I know, I know. A cigar-case sized box with 3* Gbit LAN and 1* 54 Mbit (or better) WLAN capable of running IPCop or similar would cost me a little over 200 Euros. Have some more urgent problems right now, but it's on my list.
But, then I have to fear the Dutch hackers, whom I'd rather not mess with. Fortunately I could sue them here in Germany, thanks to being in the EU.:)
Although I'd not say that someone using such a hacked WiFi should not be punished, I find their reasoning more than questionable. I run a dual core 400 MHz P-II as a router (WLAN AP with 63 chars WEP2 key), so hacking mine would be criminal. I don't see why hacking a - properly secured - usual WLAN router box should be treated differently. I'd decide that based on the intention - if it was just for regular internet usage - OK then just give the offender a slap on his ass, but if it was to commit serious crimes, then kick his balls.
As long as there are people with a monthly income greater than what I will probably earn in my whole lifetime, while paying less taxes each month than I am, without having to do any real work for it, there is something completely wrong.
I don't work at McD, and they'd have to pay me a greater amount of compensation for suffering in addition to the salary than they ever would before I'd consider to do that.
Look, a great bunch of the people with a salary of six figures and above only have that because of others doing the real work while they just "manage" them. Useless assheads they mostly are! I surely did not want to attack hard working (as in work = doing something that actually results in a piece of work) people like you seem to be.
Then stand up and defend it! IIRC, your constitution allows you to do that, even using firearms for this purpose. I often have the same "toilet-paper-feeling" here in Germany, but I have to admit that I don't feel our constitution being trampled on so much as I would if I was a US citizen.
Being member #150 of the Pirate Party of Germany, I hope that we can change some things to the better in the future. But I am aware that this is more a dream than a realistic outlook.
In terms of effect on what happened, unfortunately there's no big difference. But that's not related to their IQ, it's a consequence of the absurd ways of your presidential elections. The one who received the biggest bribes becomes president, and the bribers will want returns for their investments. Not really better than the way it works here in Germany, just a little more obvious.
In general, you are right. But, just compare some recordings of Bush and Obama, and then tell me that Bush isn't IQ-wise closer to a chimpanzee than to the average human, while Obama surpasses a great part of the population he's president of. And I'm not sure that this won't be an insult to all those chimpanzees out there.
Re:And of course ISPs will start filtering .xxx
on
ICANN Approves .XXX
·
· Score: 1
Even back in the early 90ies, I saw my ISP in the role of providing me access to the Internet, and nothing else. That most of them provided Usenet, email, and other services, was a nice add-on, but not part of the deal.
I see some more differences here, mostly in the IQ.:) While dubya clearly only was a puppet of people like Cheney, Obama seemed less dependent in his decisions. But maybe that's only my view from far away (being a German who's never been to the US, and surely will not unless I can do that without giving my fingerprints)
It's not about "raising" taxes for them, it's about making them pay their part of the share. People with a monthly income greater than other people's income in their whole life should pay at least the same percentage in taxes of that income that normal people do!
While I understand most of the points you want to make:
1. Puts pressure on all sorts of sites to operate only under a.xxx domain whenever a loud enough moral group insist that it should be categorised as dirty.
There should be no pressure in any way, but I'd really like a TLD where I can expect that every subdomain really hosts porn.
2. Falsely creates a sense of safety amongst idiots who think they can block.xxx and filter out "the bad stuff".
That's like filtering.com and expecting you wont' see anything commercial. Besides: "Safety" and "idiots" in one sentence, really?
3. Creates a sense of unjustified expectation amongst a different set of idiots who immediately decide that just because ICANN has created this TLD, that any site they deem improper that operates outside the hierarchy is engaged in some terrible underhandedness for daring to do so, trying to expose innocent people to their content.
Noone expects that sites with commercial interest are only.com, so why should they expect porn to be only under.xxx?
4. Instantly tars anyone who visits a site in.xxx domain in the eyes of moralisers and authority groups, regardless of whether the site is donkeyporn.xxx or just some site that was pushed to register under.xxx because it deals with mature topics.
That's not a problem of the existence of an.xxx TLD, it's a problem of governments controlled or influenced by idiots believing porn was a bad thing.
5. Creates artificial segregation along lines decided by minority moral bodies. I.e. sexual content has to be treated differently. We don't have a separate TLD for religion, or science - why must sex be so treated?
I would not object a.science or a.religion TLD (as long as we keep scientology and some others from registering a.religion domain)
6. Make pot loads of money for ICANN and registrars everywhere.
Just usual registration fees and a mechanism that wields out domain grabbers (which is needed for every TLD) would be sufficient.
Just read the link. That guy paid some millions for one animal with less than 100 kg edible flesh on it. Seems not to be the sanest person around.
Re:And of course ISPs will start filtering .xxx
on
ICANN Approves .XXX
·
· Score: 1
What ISP really filters Usenet (in terms of restricting access to certain newsgroups although they are offered by your Usenet provider)? It's not an ISP's duty to run a Usenet server.
That just leads to a page wanting me to leave a comment without any subject to comment on, while hindering me to do that with a stupid captcha. No naked people there. WTF?
Slashdot Mirror
How much did you get out of suing them?
I agree. The DoD would not act towards Manning as they do if Obama had seriously told them not to do so. Hell, IIRC Obama even could have given Manning pardon for everything he might have done, if he wanted to. Except for if he'd be proven to have caused serious direct threats to the life of one ore more persons, he should be granted pardon alone for leaking that video of the heli crew who thought shooting innocents is a funny video game.
Thanks.
I doubt that an order to treat Manning with some respect instead of Guantanamo-like would be unlawful.
I heard that guy talking often enough to see that he's not one of the brightest. And please don't try to tell me that he just lacks a little rhetoric capability.
Don't have a link handy, but search for what Larry Hagman (JR Ewing) said about Bush. A little harsh, but I liked it. :)
OK, I admit that I have made an insult to many many chimpanzees with that sentence. I apologize!
I know, I know. A cigar-case sized box with 3* Gbit LAN and 1* 54 Mbit (or better) WLAN capable of running IPCop or similar would cost me a little over 200 Euros. Have some more urgent problems right now, but it's on my list.
But, then I have to fear the Dutch hackers, whom I'd rather not mess with. Fortunately I could sue them here in Germany, thanks to being in the EU. :)
Although I'd not say that someone using such a hacked WiFi should not be punished, I find their reasoning more than questionable. I run a dual core 400 MHz P-II as a router (WLAN AP with 63 chars WEP2 key), so hacking mine would be criminal. I don't see why hacking a - properly secured - usual WLAN router box should be treated differently. I'd decide that based on the intention - if it was just for regular internet usage - OK then just give the offender a slap on his ass, but if it was to commit serious crimes, then kick his balls.
Wasn't it that so many of your republicans being so opposite to .xxx because that would make "smut" somehow legitimate?
As long as there are people with a monthly income greater than what I will probably earn in my whole lifetime, while paying less taxes each month than I am, without having to do any real work for it, there is something completely wrong.
I don't work at McD, and they'd have to pay me a greater amount of compensation for suffering in addition to the salary than they ever would before I'd consider to do that.
Look, a great bunch of the people with a salary of six figures and above only have that because of others doing the real work while they just "manage" them. Useless assheads they mostly are! I surely did not want to attack hard working (as in work = doing something that actually results in a piece of work) people like you seem to be.
Then stand up and defend it! IIRC, your constitution allows you to do that, even using firearms for this purpose. I often have the same "toilet-paper-feeling" here in Germany, but I have to admit that I don't feel our constitution being trampled on so much as I would if I was a US citizen.
Being member #150 of the Pirate Party of Germany, I hope that we can change some things to the better in the future. But I am aware that this is more a dream than a realistic outlook.
In terms of effect on what happened, unfortunately there's no big difference. But that's not related to their IQ, it's a consequence of the absurd ways of your presidential elections. The one who received the biggest bribes becomes president, and the bribers will want returns for their investments. Not really better than the way it works here in Germany, just a little more obvious.
GWB having an IQ of 129? LOL, on which scale, one that sets 150 as the average? On the scale I am taking about, 100 is defined as the average.
In general, you are right. But, just compare some recordings of Bush and Obama, and then tell me that Bush isn't IQ-wise closer to a chimpanzee than to the average human, while Obama surpasses a great part of the population he's president of. And I'm not sure that this won't be an insult to all those chimpanzees out there.
Even back in the early 90ies, I saw my ISP in the role of providing me access to the Internet, and nothing else. That most of them provided Usenet, email, and other services, was a nice add-on, but not part of the deal.
I see some more differences here, mostly in the IQ. :) While dubya clearly only was a puppet of people like Cheney, Obama seemed less dependent in his decisions. But maybe that's only my view from far away (being a German who's never been to the US, and surely will not unless I can do that without giving my fingerprints)
"On their own", LMAO! "On others' backs" is the right term here!
It's not about "raising" taxes for them, it's about making them pay their part of the share. People with a monthly income greater than other people's income in their whole life should pay at least the same percentage in taxes of that income that normal people do!
For the time, I'll reside with http://goatse.ru/
While I understand most of the points you want to make:
1. Puts pressure on all sorts of sites to operate only under a .xxx domain whenever a loud enough moral group insist that it should be categorised as dirty.
There should be no pressure in any way, but I'd really like a TLD where I can expect that every subdomain really hosts porn.
2. Falsely creates a sense of safety amongst idiots who think they can block .xxx and filter out "the bad stuff".
That's like filtering .com and expecting you wont' see anything commercial. Besides: "Safety" and "idiots" in one sentence, really?
3. Creates a sense of unjustified expectation amongst a different set of idiots who immediately decide that just because ICANN has created this TLD, that any site they deem improper that operates outside the hierarchy is engaged in some terrible underhandedness for daring to do so, trying to expose innocent people to their content.
Noone expects that sites with commercial interest are only .com, so why should they expect porn to be only under .xxx?
4. Instantly tars anyone who visits a site in .xxx domain in the eyes of moralisers and authority groups, regardless of whether the site is donkeyporn.xxx or just some site that was pushed to register under .xxx because it deals with mature topics.
That's not a problem of the existence of an .xxx TLD, it's a problem of governments controlled or influenced by idiots believing porn was a bad thing.
5. Creates artificial segregation along lines decided by minority moral bodies. I.e. sexual content has to be treated differently. We don't have a separate TLD for religion, or science - why must sex be so treated?
I would not object a .science or a .religion TLD (as long as we keep scientology and some others from registering a .religion domain)
6. Make pot loads of money for ICANN and registrars everywhere.
Just usual registration fees and a mechanism that wields out domain grabbers (which is needed for every TLD) would be sufficient.
Just read the link. That guy paid some millions for one animal with less than 100 kg edible flesh on it. Seems not to be the sanest person around.
What ISP really filters Usenet (in terms of restricting access to certain newsgroups although they are offered by your Usenet provider)? It's not an ISP's duty to run a Usenet server.
Then why are the conservatives so much against .xxx?
That just leads to a page wanting me to leave a comment without any subject to comment on, while hindering me to do that with a stupid captcha. No naked people there. WTF?