Ummm just to let you in on a little secret - Child Pornography IS evil. Which ever way you look at it, it is the realm of sick fuck, way beyond anything except maybe snuff and rape porn.
I don't agree with shutting down the net to capture the Child pornographers, niether do I advocate strict filtering to prevent all porn from being accessed, however I do believe that the more we restrict the access to material such as child porn the more we can attack those who produce it.
Censorship in any form is unacceptable.
Very dangerous statement my friend, taken literally it can lead to very dangerous precedents. I have no problem with consenting adults watching, reading or hearing porn, it is only when the material goes beyond sex and into the how should we put this, realm of the sick fuck that I start thinking about censoring stuff.
Now before you go off accusing me of being a close minded wowser, I have no problem with people either watching or participating in their own fetishes, god knows I have enough of my own, however when it involves children that is where I draw the line. Somethings are just not worth defending and Child Pornography is one of those things.
I know I've taken some cheap shots at the Kiwis but from what I've read of the articles they are looking for a sensible way to balance the rights of their citizens to look at porn with the oh so real fact that shit like child porn, beastiality and snuff movies do exist on the web.
If they can come up with a way that manages to both protect their citizens rights and make inroads into the production of the sick shit then all the better for them. God knows we need some one to re-think the Internet cencorship laws here, thankyou Chief Luddite Alston.
They want to steal our internet filtering laws? Don't they realise that they just don't work. Our system is complaints based and is restricted to Australia only, so what did the Aussie porn sites do? They went over seas.
Not only that but in the couple of years it has been running, the system has recieved less than a hundred complaints in total. ISPs are required by law not to host naughty material, and provide filtering software if and when the user requests it. And we all know how well shit like Net Nanny works don't we.
Umm, I did actually say any other medium as well, that includes, letters, telephone, and any other sort of communication short of smoke signals.
TV, radio and print are all forms of information distribution, and so is the internet, except the Internet allows anyone with a computer to distribute what information they like, and it also allows instant reaction to said information, as opposed to writing letters to the editor or ringing up the station and complaining that Dan Rather is a complete twonk.
Sure the Internet, or at least the WWW component is more like print, given that most of the information is presented in a text format, and when designing pages we talk about above the fold and other newspapery/magaziny design terminology.
Nope Internet is not TV, Internet is like TV, print, radio and any other medium roled into one. It has the potential to replace TV, this is not a bad thing, instead of being restricted to just three of four channels (free to air) you could access the whole range from your normal vanilla media outlets to the extreme areas.
I think Huang's been watching too many Austin Powers films.
Or maybe he's talking about the Shrubs plans for Son of Starwars. You know that little idea that its really okay to send up killer sats and all that jazz.
NASA maybe least deserving of the bashing but it is also a sympton of what is wrong. NASA's budget has been slashed time and time again because no one can see the benefits both in terms of science and in terms of "Man we went to the MOON" type feelings.
That sort of thing is becoming deeply embedded in the American spirit, the attitude of "Well we've done it a couple of times why would we want to do it again." Its a shame you can't apply that thinking to Iraq.
America, once you had the pioneering spirit, the need to go out and actually stand on new places, see sights with your own eyes never before seen. Now you couldn't be bothered getting off your arse to change the channel.
Yes the Americans have already been to the moon, so what? They dropped the ball. Instead of moving forwards and instigating semi-permanent to permanent settlements and benefiting from the exploration and discovery that would entail, they decided the ratings weren't good enough and limited themselves to earth orbit.
You can't afford to sit on your laurels for too long, because some one else is going to come along and knock you off the perch.
Just a question, but with AOL, Yahoo and MSN all making plays for the Corperate IM market, where is Jabber?
I know it could really help out in the organisation that I work at as we have offices right across the country and its bloody expensive to get all the execs together for a meeting. If Jabber had Video/Audio support it would be just what the doctor ordered.
If I wasn't already building something else, I might even take it on myself.
Seriously, anybody who has been following OpenGL could have seen this coming a mile off. MS has bought out several patents relating to OpenGL2, they are desperate to move the focus back onto their own substandard offerings and if they can fuck over the OSS movement while they do so all the better.
one advantage microsoft will always have, over OSS as it currently stands, is its oneness....
And that is why whenever you see an MS story here you will see the Billy Borg icon. MS is oneness because it is one company, one organisation. OSS is completely different, its a range of different groups that want to write software that for whatever reason they want to be free. People always seem to have troubles with this concept. They keep expecting people from the OSS movement to speak with one voice because any normal company would. OSS is not a company, it is basically an outlook on life. Its an outlook that says, I am sick and tired of being dependant on the big boys for my toys, I'll build it myself.
Good for you for introducing your business to OSS, just don't make the mistake that OSS is some monolithic whole, instead it is a wide range of parts that when brought together are more than their sum.
Well enough evanglising, I have to go and sacrifice some dumbass ASP coder, because he thought he could build a real database.
I think you are missing something here, the main reason why the US feels safe in being the stand over man with Iraq is the fact that Iraq doesn't have any major friends in the region, whereas if the US tried to do to North Korea what they are doing to Iraq, North Koreas 600 pound Gorilla is going to come and play.
Just remember, North Korea has been playing the brinkmanship game for a lot longer than Iraq, something like fifty years now, constantly threatening its neighbours as well as forcing its own people to live in desperate poverty, and now they have Nuclear weapons.
Umm just to point out that the TV Station where I work has been replacing Word with Open Office for several months now. Sure some people have complained about it, but for the most part they're just bitching because its something new.
For clerical use, it is fine, its only when you move into the Macro dev area that you have a problem.
Ok thatsa it I have finally reached boil over point. I am sick and tired of listening to uninformed right wing idiots who seem to have forgotten the lessons they should have learnt in Vietnam.
I don't care what your reasons are for invading, unless Iraq invades US territory or can be proved (in the International Court) to have sponsored an attack on US territory, the US has no excuse for an invasion. Go after Bin Laden sure, he is the one who masterminded 11/9, Al Queda is your enemy, Iraq is a nation run by a tin pot dictator no better or worse than any of the other Tin Pot dicatators.
Funnily enough I don't see a quarter of a million troops threatening to invade North Korea, a nation we KNOW to have nuclear weapons as well as Missiles that could quite possibly reach the US mainland, not to mention my own country (Australia). See the problem here?
I know this will probably get modded down as a troll by I've got Karma to burn, and I've just had enough.
Does your country ship products to the US?
Yup but the US insists on imposing tariffs to protect its own interests while demanding that we drop ours. That is the price of doing business with the US. Australia is just about to enter into negotiations with the US on a free trade agreement and one of the points is the US demand that we drop our local content rules for television so as to allow more American television onto our screens.
As to the Philipines they weren't declared free until 1946. Tell me something, does America still hold onto Samoa, Guam, Wake, Puerto Rico, the American Virgin Islands, and Guantanamo Bay? Formerly independant nations or parts of independant nations that are now part of the US.
A nation does not have to have an Emporer to have imperial designs or notions.
Do you know that your local McDonalds is owned by someone in your country? It's called a Franchise.
Ooh look sarcasm, on slashdot, who'ld have thunk it, listen mate I am fully aware of how McDonalds nd other purveyors of edible shit operate. America lecturing others about opening up their markets to foriegn investment is laughable considering the massive tariffs they inflict on others.
Name one country that has ever been threatened by imperialism from the United States?
Ummm how about the Philipines, various pacific islands and South American nations. Not to mention cultural imperialism which has a far greater reach than the military might. I hate to burst your bubble, but the US has a history of extending its sphere of influence, often to the detriment of those who come under it.
I would just like to point out that Mod-Chips are legal here in Australia. Sony took a bloke to court for selling pirated games and mod-chips, on the games he got busted but on the chips it was declared that they are perfectly legal.
Umm Bush by no means is trying to keep the prestige of the UN, if anything he would probably prefer to see the UN relegated to the history books. Much easier to be the dominant player without those pesky hinderances like international law.
As for America going in without UN approval, you do realise that such an action will open up the US to charges of war crimes don't you, surprise surprise, it is actually illegal to invade another country, not that the US actually worries about that.
I am not anti-American, America has come up with some wonderful concepts and ideas, freedom of expresion comes to mind, I am anti-Bush, which is completely different. I think Bush is either a not to bright puppet put up by the right and conservative christians or he knows exactly what he is doing and really doesn't care what it does to global stability. Either way he is dangerous and I trust him about as much I trust our Prime Minister, better known as Deputy John. (Im Australian by the way).
Ummm just a question, what makes Saddam and Iraq any different from the multitude of tin-pot dictators around the world. And what gives the US the right to decide who is bad and who isn't?
Frankly I would be more supportive of an effort to remove Saddam if it was led by the UN without any US involvement at all.
Tell me something, what if the rest of the World decided that the US presented a threat. After all it is run by a fundementalist christian with access to WMD, and it has a notoriously trigger happy military.
Slashdot Mirror
Ummm just to let you in on a little secret - Child Pornography IS evil. Which ever way you look at it, it is the realm of sick fuck, way beyond anything except maybe snuff and rape porn.
I don't agree with shutting down the net to capture the Child pornographers, niether do I advocate strict filtering to prevent all porn from being accessed, however I do believe that the more we restrict the access to material such as child porn the more we can attack those who produce it.
Censorship in any form is unacceptable.
Very dangerous statement my friend, taken literally it can lead to very dangerous precedents. I have no problem with consenting adults watching, reading or hearing porn, it is only when the material goes beyond sex and into the how should we put this, realm of the sick fuck that I start thinking about censoring stuff.
Now before you go off accusing me of being a close minded wowser, I have no problem with people either watching or participating in their own fetishes, god knows I have enough of my own, however when it involves children that is where I draw the line. Somethings are just not worth defending and Child Pornography is one of those things.
I know I've taken some cheap shots at the Kiwis but from what I've read of the articles they are looking for a sensible way to balance the rights of their citizens to look at porn with the oh so real fact that shit like child porn, beastiality and snuff movies do exist on the web.
If they can come up with a way that manages to both protect their citizens rights and make inroads into the production of the sick shit then all the better for them. God knows we need some one to re-think the Internet cencorship laws here, thankyou Chief Luddite Alston.
When I first saw that figure I thought it was the projected total population of NZ, geez I thought Bondi was going to get big.
How many of them are sheep?
They want to steal our internet filtering laws? Don't they realise that they just don't work. Our system is complaints based and is restricted to Australia only, so what did the Aussie porn sites do? They went over seas.
Not only that but in the couple of years it has been running, the system has recieved less than a hundred complaints in total. ISPs are required by law not to host naughty material, and provide filtering software if and when the user requests it. And we all know how well shit like Net Nanny works don't we.
Does anybody else get an article about some guy getting kicked out of a mall for wearing a peace shirt instead of the vblogging as promised?
Umm, I did actually say any other medium as well, that includes, letters, telephone, and any other sort of communication short of smoke signals.
TV, radio and print are all forms of information distribution, and so is the internet, except the Internet allows anyone with a computer to distribute what information they like, and it also allows instant reaction to said information, as opposed to writing letters to the editor or ringing up the station and complaining that Dan Rather is a complete twonk.
Sure the Internet, or at least the WWW component is more like print, given that most of the information is presented in a text format, and when designing pages we talk about above the fold and other newspapery/magaziny design terminology.
Nope Internet is not TV, Internet is like TV, print, radio and any other medium roled into one. It has the potential to replace TV, this is not a bad thing, instead of being restricted to just three of four channels (free to air) you could access the whole range from your normal vanilla media outlets to the extreme areas.
I think Huang's been watching too many Austin Powers films.
Or maybe he's talking about the Shrubs plans for Son of Starwars. You know that little idea that its really okay to send up killer sats and all that jazz.
NASA maybe least deserving of the bashing but it is also a sympton of what is wrong. NASA's budget has been slashed time and time again because no one can see the benefits both in terms of science and in terms of "Man we went to the MOON" type feelings.
That sort of thing is becoming deeply embedded in the American spirit, the attitude of "Well we've done it a couple of times why would we want to do it again." Its a shame you can't apply that thinking to Iraq.
America, once you had the pioneering spirit, the need to go out and actually stand on new places, see sights with your own eyes never before seen. Now you couldn't be bothered getting off your arse to change the channel.
Yes the Americans have already been to the moon, so what? They dropped the ball. Instead of moving forwards and instigating semi-permanent to permanent settlements and benefiting from the exploration and discovery that would entail, they decided the ratings weren't good enough and limited themselves to earth orbit.
You can't afford to sit on your laurels for too long, because some one else is going to come along and knock you off the perch.
Just a question, but with AOL, Yahoo and MSN all making plays for the Corperate IM market, where is Jabber?
I know it could really help out in the organisation that I work at as we have offices right across the country and its bloody expensive to get all the execs together for a meeting. If Jabber had Video/Audio support it would be just what the doctor ordered.
If I wasn't already building something else, I might even take it on myself.
Seriously, anybody who has been following OpenGL could have seen this coming a mile off. MS has bought out several patents relating to OpenGL2, they are desperate to move the focus back onto their own substandard offerings and if they can fuck over the OSS movement while they do so all the better.
Man I feel bitter today
one advantage microsoft will always have, over OSS as it currently stands, is its oneness....
And that is why whenever you see an MS story here you will see the Billy Borg icon. MS is oneness because it is one company, one organisation. OSS is completely different, its a range of different groups that want to write software that for whatever reason they want to be free. People always seem to have troubles with this concept. They keep expecting people from the OSS movement to speak with one voice because any normal company would. OSS is not a company, it is basically an outlook on life. Its an outlook that says, I am sick and tired of being dependant on the big boys for my toys, I'll build it myself.
Good for you for introducing your business to OSS, just don't make the mistake that OSS is some monolithic whole, instead it is a wide range of parts that when brought together are more than their sum.
Well enough evanglising, I have to go and sacrifice some dumbass ASP coder, because he thought he could build a real database.
I think you are missing something here, the main reason why the US feels safe in being the stand over man with Iraq is the fact that Iraq doesn't have any major friends in the region, whereas if the US tried to do to North Korea what they are doing to Iraq, North Koreas 600 pound Gorilla is going to come and play.
Just remember, North Korea has been playing the brinkmanship game for a lot longer than Iraq, something like fifty years now, constantly threatening its neighbours as well as forcing its own people to live in desperate poverty, and now they have Nuclear weapons.
Why would he buy it from Saddam when they can get the premium stuff from the US?
Umm just to point out that the TV Station where I work has been replacing Word with Open Office for several months now. Sure some people have complained about it, but for the most part they're just bitching because its something new.
For clerical use, it is fine, its only when you move into the Macro dev area that you have a problem.
Ok thatsa it I have finally reached boil over point. I am sick and tired of listening to uninformed right wing idiots who seem to have forgotten the lessons they should have learnt in Vietnam.
I don't care what your reasons are for invading, unless Iraq invades US territory or can be proved (in the International Court) to have sponsored an attack on US territory, the US has no excuse for an invasion. Go after Bin Laden sure, he is the one who masterminded 11/9, Al Queda is your enemy, Iraq is a nation run by a tin pot dictator no better or worse than any of the other Tin Pot dicatators.
Funnily enough I don't see a quarter of a million troops threatening to invade North Korea, a nation we KNOW to have nuclear weapons as well as Missiles that could quite possibly reach the US mainland, not to mention my own country (Australia). See the problem here?
I know this will probably get modded down as a troll by I've got Karma to burn, and I've just had enough.
Does your country ship products to the US? Yup but the US insists on imposing tariffs to protect its own interests while demanding that we drop ours. That is the price of doing business with the US. Australia is just about to enter into negotiations with the US on a free trade agreement and one of the points is the US demand that we drop our local content rules for television so as to allow more American television onto our screens.
As to the Philipines they weren't declared free until 1946. Tell me something, does America still hold onto Samoa, Guam, Wake, Puerto Rico, the American Virgin Islands, and Guantanamo Bay? Formerly independant nations or parts of independant nations that are now part of the US.
A nation does not have to have an Emporer to have imperial designs or notions.
Do you know that your local McDonalds is owned by someone in your country? It's called a Franchise.
Ooh look sarcasm, on slashdot, who'ld have thunk it, listen mate I am fully aware of how McDonalds nd other purveyors of edible shit operate. America lecturing others about opening up their markets to foriegn investment is laughable considering the massive tariffs they inflict on others.
Name one country that has ever been threatened by imperialism from the United States?
Ummm how about the Philipines, various pacific islands and South American nations. Not to mention cultural imperialism which has a far greater reach than the military might. I hate to burst your bubble, but the US has a history of extending its sphere of influence, often to the detriment of those who come under it.
I would just like to point out that Mod-Chips are legal here in Australia. Sony took a bloke to court for selling pirated games and mod-chips, on the games he got busted but on the chips it was declared that they are perfectly legal.
Umm Bush by no means is trying to keep the prestige of the UN, if anything he would probably prefer to see the UN relegated to the history books. Much easier to be the dominant player without those pesky hinderances like international law.
As for America going in without UN approval, you do realise that such an action will open up the US to charges of war crimes don't you, surprise surprise, it is actually illegal to invade another country, not that the US actually worries about that.
I am not anti-American, America has come up with some wonderful concepts and ideas, freedom of expresion comes to mind, I am anti-Bush, which is completely different. I think Bush is either a not to bright puppet put up by the right and conservative christians or he knows exactly what he is doing and really doesn't care what it does to global stability. Either way he is dangerous and I trust him about as much I trust our Prime Minister, better known as Deputy John. (Im Australian by the way).
Ummm just a question, what makes Saddam and Iraq any different from the multitude of tin-pot dictators around the world. And what gives the US the right to decide who is bad and who isn't?
Frankly I would be more supportive of an effort to remove Saddam if it was led by the UN without any US involvement at all.
Tell me something, what if the rest of the World decided that the US presented a threat. After all it is run by a fundementalist christian with access to WMD, and it has a notoriously trigger happy military.