The philosophy of the Enlightenment, the principles upon which this country was founded state, and are clearly restated in the Declaration of Independence, that people have rights. An entity can only protect or violate those rights, not take them away.
What rights have I surrendered when I walk into K-mart? My freedom of religion? Speech? Due Process? Wearing stupid trucker caps?
An argument can be made that if I run a site and allow public comment, that I can censor or remove any comments I find offensive or disagree with. After all, my site is my free and protected expression, and I can do with it what I want.
LiveJournal is however a Corporation, thus should not have the same rights as a Person, despite the egregious and insane ruling of the Supreme Court to the contrary. Thus, the parent is arguing that LiveJournal's First Amendement protected rights are violated when someone posts something they find offensive, despite the fact they charge that person for the priviledge. I happen to think that's a little nutty.
So context means nothing to you? There are no such things as cultural differences, differences between perspectives? You would feel comfortable saying "What's up my nigga?" instead of hello to a black person?
George Carlin also said he was WRONG about words not having power in an interview with Dick Cavet. Words DO have power, they come laden with cultural significance. They are chosen for that power. Poorly chosen words can result in harm. They don't always, but they can.
Snoop Dogg talking about prostitutes in his neighborhood by calling them "ho's" is different than Imus calling college basket ball players "ho's".
The Slashdot libertarian noise machine may claim otherwise, but words matter. Context matters. By not jumping all over Imus and getting rid of him, by giving him a pass on bigotry, we're saying that there's nothing wrong with expressing bigotry. This is a guy who hosts Senators and Presidential candidates- like it or not, he had/has mindshare. It's NOT okay for him to say these things on the air. If society gives him a pass, it gives everyone a pass on this, saying it's okay to be openly bigoted to people- it's okay to use the language of racial superiority, language used to distance the superior from the inferior.
A Liberal realizes that "all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights", that a healthy society relies on the striving for equality, fairness and justice for all. A Liberal realizes there is no place for language that only has the purpose to push down one racial group and elevate another, not on the airwaves we all own, not using the resources of the Commons. He can say whatever he wants on his own time- he can print up his own fliers, make his own blog, do what he wants with his bigotry- but he's on the public airwaves spreading his vitriol, on OUR airwaves. We have every right to complain. The complaints reached his employer who terminated his contract. Even the Libertarians should recognize the simple market economics involved here.
All of you Libertarians should not be whimpering about how powerless Imus was or how much of a victim of a public witch hunt he was, but rather that your precious corporations buckled so quickly under public pressure, how they wouldn't stand up and defend their champion, how they wouldn't stand up for "free speech" rights. But I don't hear a peep from them about that. No, they blame the Public for being oversensitive.
The long and short of it is that Imus was fired for being jerk in public. He was a branded media "ho" and his corporate masters dumped him like a rotten sausage the moment he became a liability.
That's all political hogwash said to sound good to their peers. If they really believed that, why didn't they arm the slaves?
After all, the blood of patriots and tyrants such as Jefferson would have helped our Republic, yes?
Fact of the matter is, this country was founded by a ruling elite, set up to protect the ruling elite.
The government has a monopoly on the use of force, and unless you're willing to band together with your brothers and sisters and start shooting cops and soldiers, there's no way the 2nd Amendment can be made relevant. The State has become so powerful as to make violent resistance impossible.
Though I suppose in theory a huge state like California could break from the nation, but I just can't see it happening...
Self replicating nanobots are available now?
Wow, I guess my head's been in the sand all this time.
I think the logical argument to a ban is that the only people who can fund such intracate and amazing techonology are people who are backed by the latest cutting edge science and the megabucks of a first world country's concentrated effort.
Iran won't be making any nanobots anytime soon.
If this happens, would it be the beginning of the end of the Linux kernel? Since the GNU suite would most likely want to be GPL3, and the Solaris kernel would as well, would the Linux kernel become less used?
People here justifying Google's decisions bascically are saying that by not providing Google's services, they would be comitting more evil. That's such twisted thinking. They're saying that Google has a moral obligation to provide search engine services to China.
That argument doesn't make sense.
What Google is doing that's "evil" is doing business with a totalitarian regime. They're being like every other business and selling to whomever buys, no questions asked.
A principled stand would be to refuse to do business with a country that engages in repression of freedoms that, according to the thinkers that forged our country, are granted to all people by our Creator, that governments rule from the consent of the goverend.
By selling their services like this, Google takes the stand that such values are meaningless to them, when faced with the lure of more money.
In the end, that's probably the most American sentiment of all.
You're right, we only need one board game as well, one card game, one arcade game, one way to play pool...
The point is that the more games that are out there, the more ideas get put out in the ether for people to share. MMORPG's ARE virtual reality. There are no clunky helmets to put on or funky gloves to wear, instead it's just interface though a monitor. But these games are virtual reality, and soon enough NPC's in the games will seem to have the same level of intelligence of the average gamer. (probably not terribly hard. LFMOMGPNWED!)
You have to build some form of relationship, positive ones more often than not are better, regardless of your opinion of someone. Positive relations are more effective at bringing about change.
Unless the country doesn't have nuclear weapons, then you're of course free to invade.
The "helping the people not the government" argument is utter bullshit. It helps US Corporations to do business in China, period. THAT's why we still do business with them and not in places like North Korea. It has NOTHING to do with helping the average Chinese.
What everyone fails to understand is that the word "life" should be thought of in a biological and scientific way, and not a spiritual way.
Consiousness is what we need to be concerned with, not life. My cells are alive. They're constantly being shed. Cancer cells are alive. They should be destroyed. A chicken is alive, yet millions are slaughtered every day without a thought to their existences.
Why does a cow have less right to life than I do? It's because we made up this whole 'value' thing and we measure it by the presense of our consious being, our 'soul.' Someone without a brain has no consiousness. This is empirical fact. I can prove this with a slide rule and a potato.
The ONLY ethical question should be if destroying these embryos harms consiousness.
It does not.
Our common human empathy is what gives us value to each other, and to a lesser extent animals as well. We know dogs feel pain and can be happy, so can we, so we have that valued commonality. We have no commonality with an embryo.
I have never been an embryo. The body I am in may have grown from one at one time in the past, but who I am is more than a clump of cells. Who I am is a person who, over many years of living consiously in this world, has developed a mind and awareness of my self in this world. I think therefore I am.
Ask someone who says they were an embryo what it was like. What was their favorite memory from being an embryo?
I really don't think Clinton gives a damn about this issue. She's using that DLC triangulation strategy to garner support among fence sitters and Democratic leaning cultural conservatives so that she (and the party) can say that Democrats care about the Culture Wars too.
It's classic political opportunism, little else.
What, as opposed to unprotected MURDER?!
Have you ever PLAYED this game?! You can get a machine gun and mow people down!
Your post makes no sense! It's a GAME with an "M" for "Mature" rating. It's FANTASY...
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm often under a lot of stress at work, and am often isolated from human contact. If I don't get to check my personal e-mails or chat occasionally with some friends, I get... twitchy.
I work for a small non profit and happen to be the Sysadmin, so I get to WRITE the AUP if I wanted to.
I'm so glad I work in a less than formal environment!:)
Slashdot Mirror
The philosophy of the Enlightenment, the principles upon which this country was founded state, and are clearly restated in the Declaration of Independence, that people have rights. An entity can only protect or violate those rights, not take them away.
What rights have I surrendered when I walk into K-mart? My freedom of religion? Speech? Due Process? Wearing stupid trucker caps?
An argument can be made that if I run a site and allow public comment, that I can censor or remove any comments I find offensive or disagree with. After all, my site is my free and protected expression, and I can do with it what I want.
LiveJournal is however a Corporation, thus should not have the same rights as a Person, despite the egregious and insane ruling of the Supreme Court to the contrary. Thus, the parent is arguing that LiveJournal's First Amendement protected rights are violated when someone posts something they find offensive, despite the fact they charge that person for the priviledge. I happen to think that's a little nutty.
So context means nothing to you? There are no such things as cultural differences, differences between perspectives? You would feel comfortable saying "What's up my nigga?" instead of hello to a black person?
George Carlin also said he was WRONG about words not having power in an interview with Dick Cavet. Words DO have power, they come laden with cultural significance. They are chosen for that power. Poorly chosen words can result in harm. They don't always, but they can.
Snoop Dogg talking about prostitutes in his neighborhood by calling them "ho's" is different than Imus calling college basket ball players "ho's".
The Slashdot libertarian noise machine may claim otherwise, but words matter. Context matters. By not jumping all over Imus and getting rid of him, by giving him a pass on bigotry, we're saying that there's nothing wrong with expressing bigotry. This is a guy who hosts Senators and Presidential candidates- like it or not, he had/has mindshare. It's NOT okay for him to say these things on the air. If society gives him a pass, it gives everyone a pass on this, saying it's okay to be openly bigoted to people- it's okay to use the language of racial superiority, language used to distance the superior from the inferior.
A Liberal realizes that "all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights", that a healthy society relies on the striving for equality, fairness and justice for all. A Liberal realizes there is no place for language that only has the purpose to push down one racial group and elevate another, not on the airwaves we all own, not using the resources of the Commons. He can say whatever he wants on his own time- he can print up his own fliers, make his own blog, do what he wants with his bigotry- but he's on the public airwaves spreading his vitriol, on OUR airwaves. We have every right to complain. The complaints reached his employer who terminated his contract. Even the Libertarians should recognize the simple market economics involved here.
All of you Libertarians should not be whimpering about how powerless Imus was or how much of a victim of a public witch hunt he was, but rather that your precious corporations buckled so quickly under public pressure, how they wouldn't stand up and defend their champion, how they wouldn't stand up for "free speech" rights. But I don't hear a peep from them about that. No, they blame the Public for being oversensitive.
The long and short of it is that Imus was fired for being jerk in public. He was a branded media "ho" and his corporate masters dumped him like a rotten sausage the moment he became a liability.
That's all political hogwash said to sound good to their peers. If they really believed that, why didn't they arm the slaves?
After all, the blood of patriots and tyrants such as Jefferson would have helped our Republic, yes?
Fact of the matter is, this country was founded by a ruling elite, set up to protect the ruling elite.
The government has a monopoly on the use of force, and unless you're willing to band together with your brothers and sisters and start shooting cops and soldiers, there's no way the 2nd Amendment can be made relevant. The State has become so powerful as to make violent resistance impossible.
Though I suppose in theory a huge state like California could break from the nation, but I just can't see it happening...
Self replicating nanobots are available now? Wow, I guess my head's been in the sand all this time. I think the logical argument to a ban is that the only people who can fund such intracate and amazing techonology are people who are backed by the latest cutting edge science and the megabucks of a first world country's concentrated effort. Iran won't be making any nanobots anytime soon.
Let me be the first to say...
BOOM! HEADSHOT!!
If this happens, would it be the beginning of the end of the Linux kernel? Since the GNU suite would most likely want to be GPL3, and the Solaris kernel would as well, would the Linux kernel become less used?
People here justifying Google's decisions bascically are saying that by not providing Google's services, they would be comitting more evil. That's such twisted thinking. They're saying that Google has a moral obligation to provide search engine services to China.
That argument doesn't make sense.
What Google is doing that's "evil" is doing business with a totalitarian regime. They're being like every other business and selling to whomever buys, no questions asked.
A principled stand would be to refuse to do business with a country that engages in repression of freedoms that, according to the thinkers that forged our country, are granted to all people by our Creator, that governments rule from the consent of the goverend.
By selling their services like this, Google takes the stand that such values are meaningless to them, when faced with the lure of more money.
In the end, that's probably the most American sentiment of all.
You're right, we only need one board game as well, one card game, one arcade game, one way to play pool... The point is that the more games that are out there, the more ideas get put out in the ether for people to share. MMORPG's ARE virtual reality. There are no clunky helmets to put on or funky gloves to wear, instead it's just interface though a monitor. But these games are virtual reality, and soon enough NPC's in the games will seem to have the same level of intelligence of the average gamer. (probably not terribly hard. LFMOMGPNWED!)
You have to build some form of relationship, positive ones more often than not are better, regardless of your opinion of someone. Positive relations are more effective at bringing about change.
Unless the country doesn't have nuclear weapons, then you're of course free to invade.
The "helping the people not the government" argument is utter bullshit. It helps US Corporations to do business in China, period. THAT's why we still do business with them and not in places like North Korea. It has NOTHING to do with helping the average Chinese.
What everyone fails to understand is that the word "life" should be thought of in a biological and scientific way, and not a spiritual way. Consiousness is what we need to be concerned with, not life. My cells are alive. They're constantly being shed. Cancer cells are alive. They should be destroyed. A chicken is alive, yet millions are slaughtered every day without a thought to their existences. Why does a cow have less right to life than I do? It's because we made up this whole 'value' thing and we measure it by the presense of our consious being, our 'soul.' Someone without a brain has no consiousness. This is empirical fact. I can prove this with a slide rule and a potato. The ONLY ethical question should be if destroying these embryos harms consiousness. It does not. Our common human empathy is what gives us value to each other, and to a lesser extent animals as well. We know dogs feel pain and can be happy, so can we, so we have that valued commonality. We have no commonality with an embryo. I have never been an embryo. The body I am in may have grown from one at one time in the past, but who I am is more than a clump of cells. Who I am is a person who, over many years of living consiously in this world, has developed a mind and awareness of my self in this world. I think therefore I am. Ask someone who says they were an embryo what it was like. What was their favorite memory from being an embryo?
I really don't think Clinton gives a damn about this issue. She's using that DLC triangulation strategy to garner support among fence sitters and Democratic leaning cultural conservatives so that she (and the party) can say that Democrats care about the Culture Wars too. It's classic political opportunism, little else.
What, as opposed to unprotected MURDER?! Have you ever PLAYED this game?! You can get a machine gun and mow people down! Your post makes no sense! It's a GAME with an "M" for "Mature" rating. It's FANTASY...
I always have to laugh whenever I hear "Worlds Largest Democracy" in reference to India. How's that caste system workin' out for ya?
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm often under a lot of stress at work, and am often isolated from human contact. If I don't get to check my personal e-mails or chat occasionally with some friends, I get... twitchy.
:)
I work for a small non profit and happen to be the Sysadmin, so I get to WRITE the AUP if I wanted to.
I'm so glad I work in a less than formal environment!
--
Why didn't you tell the world, eh?!
I'm still trying to get my girlfriend the One Ring.
It's the only thing that seems fitting, since I already call her.. my prescioussss.....