Yes, but when have you ever known a Federal bureaucracy (or Congress itself, for that matter) to make such fine distinctions. It's a much safer approach (politically speaking) to simply ban/over-regulate everything in a given category and worry about the economic fallout later. It's the same hysteria-driven non-thinking that puts Estes model rockets in the same class as military weapons.
that the cable companies don't consider (or don't want to have to consider) the consumer of their broadband offerings as their customer. They'd much rather have us be parasites on their network, parasites who happen to be targets of profitable marketing campaigns. The ad injection nonsense that a number of ISPs have launched is indicative of this attitude: we're just eyeballs attached to brains that view commercials.
It's pretty much the same reason by which people fight Scientology as well.
Actually... I don't think so. The Church of Scientology (and I use the term loosely) does a lot of unsavory things that draw attention to it. The fact that they're keeping their sci-fi^h^h^h^h^hsecret writings under wrap has little to do with it. Most people don't care what "secrets" a church has, as long as said church behaves decently otherwise.
Read some of Hubbard's writings on the subject of his pet "church" if you want to get a better handle on what those sociopaths are all about. Nasty stuff all around. Honestly, I don't know much about the Church of the Latter Day Saints and it's unlikely I'd ever be much interested in that. However, if the worst aspect of the LDS is that it's weird, it's not even in the same class as Scientology. Scientology has a deservedly bad reputation because the people who run that particular cult are dangerous (Tom Cruise, are you listening?) Maybe that's also true about LDS, I don't know. But in either case, keeping a few secrets isn't what pisses people off.
It does not address what I think are the many enormously unethical positions the Church holds, from its persecution of gays to the many ways it subjugates women to its relentless torment of people who leave the religion.
You really didn't deserve the Troll mod. But in common parlance "virus" is used as a catchall term for malware (which is odd, since malware is the actual catchall) in much the same way the word "hacker" has been abused. The popular media is usually responsible for that since they're not very good at making distinctions.
That's unfortunate though. I know a lot of people that tell me "I installed Spybot and Ad-Aware to look for viruses." Really, it does help to know the difference between a virus, a trojan, a worm, a rootkit and an exploit. Granted the line is blurring nowadays, and many bits of malware have attributes of some or all of the above. Still, this is a situation where ignorance is not helpful.
ISPs generally are not common carriers, so there's nothing whatsoever to revoke. They probably should be, but they managed to finagle an exemption for "data services". That's quite irrational, really, given how much phone traffic is carried by the same packet-switched networks that carry regular Internet traffic. I don't know why this myth persists that ISPs want or have ever wanted to be considered common carriers. Even the Telcos who are legally common carriers for their telephone offerings are not common carriers when it comes to data.
One should be free to hate anyone or anything. In fact, we all are free to do so... since no government yet has the ability to put a brain implant in our heads to limit or direct our thoughts. What's at issue is how we behave, and whether we allow extreme emotion to control our actions.
I've known people that "hate" certain other people, or certain other groups, but who keep that emotion under strict control in order to do their jobs better. Part of life in any modern society is the ability to deal effectively with those who think or believe differently. Granted, it's not always pleasant, but it's a necessary level of maturity that some people lack. However, if you don't have that capacity, if you allow your hatred to overwhelm you to the point where you start to damage other people, well, that's the point at which all societies reserve the right to remove you. Unless, of course, you're a member hate-driven society... if that's the case, God help you if you're not part of the majority.
Hate speech laws and similar misguided attempts to protect the public are morally bankrupt from the get-go as legislative attempts to control the public's thought processes. They're also shortcuts: they know that the only real way to keep hate from causing social disturbances is educate people, get them to know each other. If that fails, just make sure the people know that they can still hate, but the moment they cross the line into hate-driven action they'll be put away. But education is comparatively difficult, takes more time and money... it's just easier to pass a law. That said law will be ineffective, and that the consequences may be worse than the feared hate speech itself, are facts often lost on lawmakers.
Please attempt to come to terms with that instead of submitting to your creepy state indoctrination.
Not sure what you mean by "creepy state indoctrination" but you did notice that the GP said quite clearly that he was not a citizen of the U.S.? I know you were trying to America-bash, but you make yourself sound kinda stupid when you try to slam someone who isn't even an American citizen.
Oh, sure, it's the drivers who are responsible and I agree, the whole idea of the Sport Useless Vehicle is stupid. But if you look at it from the proper perspective, the car companies identified a market segment (borderline sociopaths) and deliberately targeted them with a massive multi-year ongoing ad campaign. I mean, just look at some of the SUV ads that have come out in the past few years, showing SUVs being piloted by rude, obnoxious, despicable people who absolutely must have their own way. So in that sense, it is the SUV: those people picked it because it's what they've been sold on as a good thing. Personally, I hold the car makers to some degree responsible for all the death and destruction their brain child has caused.
I agree about the mini-van: I drive a Caravan myself. Pragmatic, fuel-efficient and since I don't care about intimidating other drivers or what they think of my choice in vehicles it works great for me. I have noticed one thing, at least in my area. More women are driving giant SUVs, with more men driving mini-vans. That's exactly backwards from the way it was a few years back: I know my observations are hardly statistically valid but still it's interesting.
No, the problem is people who are unable to think for themselves sufficiently to ignore obvious bullshit. Heck, if you're so weakminded that you can be induced to commit a crime because you read a book, well, you probably need psychiatric care. Furthermore, the author of that book is not responsible for your actions: you are. I perceive any attempt by government to deem any particular creative work as inappropriate to be insincere, paternalistic and insulting.
This attempt to suppress certain forms of speech because they "incite" people is just as wrongheaded as rationalizing video cameras on every street corner in order to stop terrorism. Neither "solution" gets to the root of either problem, and have been about as effective as trying to cure diarrhea by tinkering with the plumbing in your house. Put it this way: hate usually spreads among the ignorant, among those with no sense or knowledge of history or other peoples. If you want to prevent hate crimes, eliminating one of the basic causes for hatred (ignorance) is a better solution than legislating civil liberties away. It just takes education.
The other big problem in the world today is that people have become spineless weaklings, unable to stand up to those who say, "I find your speech offensive and I will try to intimidate you until you stop." So far as I'm concerned, the Muslims (at least, the vocal ones) are living in a glass house: if they don't want to hear anything offensive to their religion and/or way-of-life then stop saying bad things about everyone else's. Odds are I'll keep my trap shut if you keep yours under control. Otherwise... just deal with it.
Face it some people are just bad drivers, without any distractions or other cars around, and they will be forever.
I agree a hundred percent. Fortunately, most of the really bad ones eventually remove themselves from the gene pool. Unfortunately, for each one of them who does so, a new one is just finishing the license exam and getting behind the wheel of a new Tahoe or Yukon. Seriously, the number of mentally-challenged cell-phone-wielding SUV-driving all-wheel-drive-death-machine drivers on the road in my area is increasing exponentially. I wouldn't feel safe on the way to work each day if I was driving a Hummer: these people are dangerous.
And I don't care if I'm offending any of you death-machine owners: I got hit by one of you lunatics a couple months ago, and had to listen to the little bastard call me every name in the book ("Fuck you you motherfucking asshole!") then roaring off before the police arrived. My insurance agent had never even heard of his insurance company: she said it was probably some fly-by-night outfit and that it was likely all he could get. I'm not surprised, given his behavior and poor driving. I could tell he wanted to take a poke at me, but I'm about twice his size and I guess he figured that would be a bad idea. I will admit that after I took his insurance info and was walking back to my car, I said, "You're a dick." Yeah, he pissed me off.
In any event, here's a piece of advice to anyone that doesn't realize that a car can become a deadly weapon in instant. If you don't want to be considered part of the nation's burgeoning supply of sociopaths, get rid of the damned cell phone, drive a smaller car, or better yet learn how to drive. At the very least, accept that the cell phone you have continuously jammed into your ear is just making matters worse for everyone including yourself. If you can't do that, then for God's sake pop a Xanax before you hit the road.
You can be neutral as well. Not evil, not good, just neutral.
Not really. I'd say you've been playing too many adventure games. The reality is that you have to make choices: the choice to do nothing is still a choice, still has effects, still has influence, can still be the wrong thing to do. We tried very very hard to remain "neutral" during World War II when the Axis powers went on their rampage. "Not our war" and so forth. Yet, the world paid a price for our attempted neutrality: Hitler, Devil & Co. used the time we spent trying to avoid the inevitable to good advantage. Perhaps if we'd weighed in sooner rather than waiting for Pearl Harbor... hard to say. But you can't be neutral when there are so many sides and they all want something from you.
Ultimately, what it comes down to is that if you are "moral", if you wish to hurt the least number of people, neutrality is a non-sequitur. Whichever way Google jumps, somebody will pay for their decision. Whether it's their stockholders, the citizens of China, or Google itself, their actions (or inactions) will have a negative outcome to somebody. If Google truly wishes to be non-evil, they have to at least try and find the path of least damage. That's not always easy, and it's rarely obvious, and somebody always gets hurt.
At some point, if companies like Apple want to have a market for their products here in the U.S., they're going to have to go to Washington and spread some money around. Something has to offset the crap coming from the media companies.
Of course, then there's the schizoid Sony, which can't seem to decide exactly what kind of a company it is anymore.
What they don't tell you is that copyright infringement cures cancer. And the common cold. And male pattern baldness. Also, it can be used to make any car run on water. Clearly, it's a cover-up.
Yes indeed! And better yet, I've noticed that with every Britney Spears song that I illegally download, my penis gets bigger. It's amazing really... I've been able to stop buying enlargement pills at a substantial cost savings. If this keeps up, I'll be able to start buying music again!
And yes, I think voters are morons. disclaimer - I've lived in Germany for a few years and have developed the same opinion of the average German voter. It seems that people are just stupid.
"The majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed for all time. The terror of their tyranny, however, is alleviated by their lack of consistency." -- A. Einstein
Now how can I monitor my actual consumption bearin in mind that I have 5 PCs in my home network - can my router tell me how much internet bandwidth I am consuming?
Yes. Now, for example, I have a Linksys WRT54G V4 running the Tomato alternate firmware. It has a convenient page where it keeps track of how much you've transferred. You can view it by day, by week or by month. Also has a lot of other features that put it miles ahead of the stock firmware in most inexpensive SOHO routers.
Besides, there hasn't been a single case yet in which something like that has happened.
I'm not sure what country you live in, but it must be someplace whose legal system hasn't been pwned by a bloodsucking media conglomerate. That would not be the United States, by the way. The Recording Industry Association of America has been suing/threatening thousands of Internet users on just the kind of "evidence" I was talking about. And so far as governmental organizations are concerned, the FBI has taken the position that merely clicking on a hyperlink constitutes access to verboten materials, even if said link is non-descriptive. Furthermore, Congress is currently in the process of criminalizing copyright infringement and establishing a Federal copyright enforcement wing of the Justice Department.
Consequently, I maintain that one opens one's WAP at one's own risk.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but when have you ever known a Federal bureaucracy (or Congress itself, for that matter) to make such fine distinctions. It's a much safer approach (politically speaking) to simply ban/over-regulate everything in a given category and worry about the economic fallout later. It's the same hysteria-driven non-thinking that puts Estes model rockets in the same class as military weapons.
I don't think anybody other than the biggest partisan can argue that the confederacy wasn't engaged in an act of rebellion.
... they were seceding!
They weren't rebelling
Fine point for arguing, I know.
that the cable companies don't consider (or don't want to have to consider) the consumer of their broadband offerings as their customer. They'd much rather have us be parasites on their network, parasites who happen to be targets of profitable marketing campaigns. The ad injection nonsense that a number of ISPs have launched is indicative of this attitude: we're just eyeballs attached to brains that view commercials.
It's pretty much the same reason by which people fight Scientology as well.
... I don't think so. The Church of Scientology (and I use the term loosely) does a lot of unsavory things that draw attention to it. The fact that they're keeping their sci-fi^h^h^h^h^hsecret writings under wrap has little to do with it. Most people don't care what "secrets" a church has, as long as said church behaves decently otherwise.
Actually
Read some of Hubbard's writings on the subject of his pet "church" if you want to get a better handle on what those sociopaths are all about. Nasty stuff all around. Honestly, I don't know much about the Church of the Latter Day Saints and it's unlikely I'd ever be much interested in that. However, if the worst aspect of the LDS is that it's weird, it's not even in the same class as Scientology. Scientology has a deservedly bad reputation because the people who run that particular cult are dangerous (Tom Cruise, are you listening?) Maybe that's also true about LDS, I don't know. But in either case, keeping a few secrets isn't what pisses people off.
It does not address what I think are the many enormously unethical positions the Church holds, from its persecution of gays to the many ways it subjugates women to its relentless torment of people who leave the religion.
Are you talking about Mormons or Scientologists?
Well, they say that any landing you can walk away from is a good one. If you can re-use the aircraft, it's a great one.
You really didn't deserve the Troll mod. But in common parlance "virus" is used as a catchall term for malware (which is odd, since malware is the actual catchall) in much the same way the word "hacker" has been abused. The popular media is usually responsible for that since they're not very good at making distinctions.
That's unfortunate though. I know a lot of people that tell me "I installed Spybot and Ad-Aware to look for viruses." Really, it does help to know the difference between a virus, a trojan, a worm, a rootkit and an exploit. Granted the line is blurring nowadays, and many bits of malware have attributes of some or all of the above. Still, this is a situation where ignorance is not helpful.
That's him. I don't think he believes in the Holocaust either.
ISPs generally are not common carriers, so there's nothing whatsoever to revoke. They probably should be, but they managed to finagle an exemption for "data services". That's quite irrational, really, given how much phone traffic is carried by the same packet-switched networks that carry regular Internet traffic. I don't know why this myth persists that ISPs want or have ever wanted to be considered common carriers. Even the Telcos who are legally common carriers for their telephone offerings are not common carriers when it comes to data.
That's why they've busted their nuts trying to convince everyone that the size of your SUV must indicate that size of your dick.....
Yes, but they conveniently forget to mention in their ads that it's an inverse relationship.
One should be free to hate anyone or anything. In fact, we all are free to do so ... since no government yet has the ability to put a brain implant in our heads to limit or direct our thoughts. What's at issue is how we behave, and whether we allow extreme emotion to control our actions.
... if that's the case, God help you if you're not part of the majority.
... it's just easier to pass a law. That said law will be ineffective, and that the consequences may be worse than the feared hate speech itself, are facts often lost on lawmakers.
I've known people that "hate" certain other people, or certain other groups, but who keep that emotion under strict control in order to do their jobs better. Part of life in any modern society is the ability to deal effectively with those who think or believe differently. Granted, it's not always pleasant, but it's a necessary level of maturity that some people lack. However, if you don't have that capacity, if you allow your hatred to overwhelm you to the point where you start to damage other people, well, that's the point at which all societies reserve the right to remove you. Unless, of course, you're a member hate-driven society
Hate speech laws and similar misguided attempts to protect the public are morally bankrupt from the get-go as legislative attempts to control the public's thought processes. They're also shortcuts: they know that the only real way to keep hate from causing social disturbances is educate people, get them to know each other. If that fails, just make sure the people know that they can still hate, but the moment they cross the line into hate-driven action they'll be put away. But education is comparatively difficult, takes more time and money
Please attempt to come to terms with that instead of submitting to your creepy state indoctrination.
Not sure what you mean by "creepy state indoctrination" but you did notice that the GP said quite clearly that he was not a citizen of the U.S.? I know you were trying to America-bash, but you make yourself sound kinda stupid when you try to slam someone who isn't even an American citizen.
Oh, sure, it's the drivers who are responsible and I agree, the whole idea of the Sport Useless Vehicle is stupid. But if you look at it from the proper perspective, the car companies identified a market segment (borderline sociopaths) and deliberately targeted them with a massive multi-year ongoing ad campaign. I mean, just look at some of the SUV ads that have come out in the past few years, showing SUVs being piloted by rude, obnoxious, despicable people who absolutely must have their own way. So in that sense, it is the SUV: those people picked it because it's what they've been sold on as a good thing. Personally, I hold the car makers to some degree responsible for all the death and destruction their brain child has caused.
I agree about the mini-van: I drive a Caravan myself. Pragmatic, fuel-efficient and since I don't care about intimidating other drivers or what they think of my choice in vehicles it works great for me. I have noticed one thing, at least in my area. More women are driving giant SUVs, with more men driving mini-vans. That's exactly backwards from the way it was a few years back: I know my observations are hardly statistically valid but still it's interesting.
No, the problem is people who are unable to think for themselves sufficiently to ignore obvious bullshit. Heck, if you're so weakminded that you can be induced to commit a crime because you read a book, well, you probably need psychiatric care. Furthermore, the author of that book is not responsible for your actions: you are. I perceive any attempt by government to deem any particular creative work as inappropriate to be insincere, paternalistic and insulting.
... just deal with it.
This attempt to suppress certain forms of speech because they "incite" people is just as wrongheaded as rationalizing video cameras on every street corner in order to stop terrorism. Neither "solution" gets to the root of either problem, and have been about as effective as trying to cure diarrhea by tinkering with the plumbing in your house. Put it this way: hate usually spreads among the ignorant, among those with no sense or knowledge of history or other peoples. If you want to prevent hate crimes, eliminating one of the basic causes for hatred (ignorance) is a better solution than legislating civil liberties away. It just takes education.
The other big problem in the world today is that people have become spineless weaklings, unable to stand up to those who say, "I find your speech offensive and I will try to intimidate you until you stop." So far as I'm concerned, the Muslims (at least, the vocal ones) are living in a glass house: if they don't want to hear anything offensive to their religion and/or way-of-life then stop saying bad things about everyone else's. Odds are I'll keep my trap shut if you keep yours under control. Otherwise
Face it some people are just bad drivers, without any distractions or other cars around, and they will be forever.
I agree a hundred percent. Fortunately, most of the really bad ones eventually remove themselves from the gene pool. Unfortunately, for each one of them who does so, a new one is just finishing the license exam and getting behind the wheel of a new Tahoe or Yukon. Seriously, the number of mentally-challenged cell-phone-wielding SUV-driving all-wheel-drive-death-machine drivers on the road in my area is increasing exponentially. I wouldn't feel safe on the way to work each day if I was driving a Hummer: these people are dangerous.
And I don't care if I'm offending any of you death-machine owners: I got hit by one of you lunatics a couple months ago, and had to listen to the little bastard call me every name in the book ("Fuck you you motherfucking asshole!") then roaring off before the police arrived. My insurance agent had never even heard of his insurance company: she said it was probably some fly-by-night outfit and that it was likely all he could get. I'm not surprised, given his behavior and poor driving. I could tell he wanted to take a poke at me, but I'm about twice his size and I guess he figured that would be a bad idea. I will admit that after I took his insurance info and was walking back to my car, I said, "You're a dick." Yeah, he pissed me off.
In any event, here's a piece of advice to anyone that doesn't realize that a car can become a deadly weapon in instant. If you don't want to be considered part of the nation's burgeoning supply of sociopaths, get rid of the damned cell phone, drive a smaller car, or better yet learn how to drive. At the very least, accept that the cell phone you have continuously jammed into your ear is just making matters worse for everyone including yourself. If you can't do that, then for God's sake pop a Xanax before you hit the road.
Please tell us yet another anecdote about that one asshole soccer mom driver who cut you off while yapping on her cell phone. We love that one.
Ha! Methinks the lady doth protest too much.
I, good sir, refuse to sell my liberty for a shit-free sidewalk.
... that would be worth something.
Couldn't agree more. A shit-free Congress or White House now
You can be neutral as well. Not evil, not good, just neutral.
... hard to say. But you can't be neutral when there are so many sides and they all want something from you.
Not really. I'd say you've been playing too many adventure games. The reality is that you have to make choices: the choice to do nothing is still a choice, still has effects, still has influence, can still be the wrong thing to do. We tried very very hard to remain "neutral" during World War II when the Axis powers went on their rampage. "Not our war" and so forth. Yet, the world paid a price for our attempted neutrality: Hitler, Devil & Co. used the time we spent trying to avoid the inevitable to good advantage. Perhaps if we'd weighed in sooner rather than waiting for Pearl Harbor
Ultimately, what it comes down to is that if you are "moral", if you wish to hurt the least number of people, neutrality is a non-sequitur. Whichever way Google jumps, somebody will pay for their decision. Whether it's their stockholders, the citizens of China, or Google itself, their actions (or inactions) will have a negative outcome to somebody. If Google truly wishes to be non-evil, they have to at least try and find the path of least damage. That's not always easy, and it's rarely obvious, and somebody always gets hurt.
That is not, in itself, wrong. It's just life.
Why, Mr. Gabriel. How nice to see you. Welcome aboard the Slashdot Express ... ticket, please.
At some point, if companies like Apple want to have a market for their products here in the U.S., they're going to have to go to Washington and spread some money around. Something has to offset the crap coming from the media companies.
Of course, then there's the schizoid Sony, which can't seem to decide exactly what kind of a company it is anymore.
What they don't tell you is that copyright infringement cures cancer. And the common cold. And male pattern baldness. Also, it can be used to make any car run on water. Clearly, it's a cover-up.
... I've been able to stop buying enlargement pills at a substantial cost savings. If this keeps up, I'll be able to start buying music again!
Yes indeed! And better yet, I've noticed that with every Britney Spears song that I illegally download, my penis gets bigger. It's amazing really
And yes, I think voters are morons. disclaimer - I've lived in Germany for a few years and have developed the same opinion of the average German voter. It seems that people are just stupid.
"The majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed for all time. The terror of their tyranny, however, is alleviated by their lack of consistency." -- A. Einstein
Now how can I monitor my actual consumption bearin in mind that I have 5 PCs in my home network - can my router tell me how much internet bandwidth I am consuming?
Yes. Now, for example, I have a Linksys WRT54G V4 running the Tomato alternate firmware. It has a convenient page where it keeps track of how much you've transferred. You can view it by day, by week or by month. Also has a lot of other features that put it miles ahead of the stock firmware in most inexpensive SOHO routers.
This time around Skype is apparently trying to argue that the GPL violates anti-trust regulations.
it's not like I really needed another reason not to use Skype.
Besides, there hasn't been a single case yet in which something like that has happened.
I'm not sure what country you live in, but it must be someplace whose legal system hasn't been pwned by a bloodsucking media conglomerate. That would not be the United States, by the way. The Recording Industry Association of America has been suing/threatening thousands of Internet users on just the kind of "evidence" I was talking about. And so far as governmental organizations are concerned, the FBI has taken the position that merely clicking on a hyperlink constitutes access to verboten materials, even if said link is non-descriptive. Furthermore, Congress is currently in the process of criminalizing copyright infringement and establishing a Federal copyright enforcement wing of the Justice Department.
Consequently, I maintain that one opens one's WAP at one's own risk.