"This is something IBM never got with OS/2, and why it died a stagnant death, because while it could run Windows 3.1 apps better than Windows itself, to do anything in native you pretty much had to do it in C++."
Ever hear of REXX, ObjectREXX, VisualREXX, NetREXX. These are a very solid and powerful and relatively easy to use scripting languages & tools for OS/2. IBM maimed OS/2 first with inept marketing. Then due to basic business direction strategy they finished the job via the lack of any real continued marketing and pretty much killing off allocation of resources and support to the independent developer base. Finally they starved the customers for technology updates (drivers mainly) and make what little support they did deliver expensive. They did this simply because they decided that the desktop was not where their expertise and thus focus was. IBM made then and still makes most of its money via med to big iron hardware and the services to support this hardware. Another large plate for them was and still is back office integration with software only houses like Microsoft, SAP and Oracle.
OS/2 was a fine system in many ways. I used it since v2.0 all through Warp v4.5. The various programmers responsible for OS/2 were pretty damn good. Many of them were either MS employees or left IBM for MS. BTW OS/2 was a joint venture of IBM and MS, when they split Microsoft evolved, or actually merged with I believe a fair part of a DEC Unix fork, a lot of the code base into WinNT. Many of the best kernel and WPS Desktop programmers I have heard are dead or long since retired now.
OS/2 had a few technical problems like the being a single user OS and a single input queue issue but was mostly a solid OS. I still miss a lot of features of the WPS and a few well written native apps. It still runs on a lot of the ATM's and banking back end stuff, medical staff support systems, and longer lived big industrial hardware and services. There are still a quite a few OS/2 users in the US, with a lot more in Europe and Australia.
There is a clone/fork or whatever called eCS ( http://www.ecomstation.com/ ) for about $260.00 or $160.00 upgrade from Warp4+. I believe. eCS has been kept pretty current with hardware and services technology's. I have however decided that Linux is a better fit for my meager budget in the future, with a vast amount more development going on and then there is the freedom of the source code as a killer plus. Though note there is X support in OS/2 and via ports like perl and emx quite a bit of support for Linux/Unix apps in OS/2 and eCS. Anyway I hope to soon be using OS/2 and some OS/2 apps like ProNews again under Parallels virtualization and Suse. Just gotta find the time.
"This is the appropriate place to mention two wolves and five sheep trying to determine what should be for dinner. Yes the wolves are outnumbered, but they hold the power, and will end up with mutton for dinner 90% of the time."
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin
I would agree with the vast majority of what you have said. I do not have any expectation that such a well reasoned society as you also wish will exist in my lifetime. I do believe that several of the founders, Jefferson and Franklin especially come to mind, came very close to such in their contributions and moderations of others in our nations charter. In fact the base attributes of human nature being as they are I see such as unlikely for hundreds if not thousands of years if ever. However I continue to try and use calm logic wherever I can to reason with the unreasonable. My base ideal on this is that through the steady and sustained efforts of those like ourselves we will make a contribution toward this end, and that such is an honorable and rewarding task.
I was raised as a Baptist though the best description for my faith of lack thereof now would be Agnostic. I have made several admittedly shallow investigations of organized religious faiths and always come away disillusioned with both the doctrine, the practice and most of the the practitioners, though the base messages were often of great value. What I find objectionable at a very base level in all religious faiths I have examined is the exclusivity. The insistence that one sheepishly or dogmatically accept that the particular faiths "truth" as the only possibility, the only path. I do not believe this is inherently true or necessary and believe such practices are simply tools of control. I have found a few common threads of belief and expectations of proper ideals and practices in various faiths and other philosophical musings that I accept as my personal set of ideals. They resolve down to these ten most basic sets of ideals:
I. Be grateful for life, for having the experience of consciousness and physical form to enjoy the fascinating universe about me. Be especially thankful for my comparative good fortune, good health and easy life. I try and remember the many less fortune than myself, not the few with more. The fact that I or my children have not had to fight or actually have rats for our breakfast this morning means we are better off than millions are today. The fact that I am able to write this means I have lived to greater than six years old, which means I have already outlived untold billions of others less fortunate.
II. To do my best to be a positive force on all around me both other persons and the universe in general. To never intentionally harm anyone for any reason except in defense of myself or others from someone who doesn't care to uphold the same ideal. The term harm I define here as mental and spiritual as well as physical anguish. To remember that while words are important, very often my actions are the true measure of who I am in the eyes of others and myself. While not a vegetarian I try to honor and avoid cruelty to less fortunate forms of animal life where ever reasonable.
III. To actively develop my compassion for others and prevent the hardening of my heart. This includes trying to forgive, not forget, but forgive trespasses against myself and those closest to me. To be sensitive to the pain of others. This is possibly the most important of all quests and the one most often avoided. It is all too tempting and easy to harden ones heart against the harshness of life. There is no higher a calling or more rewarding a task than to heal a malignant hate, to provide comfort for an unrequited loss or to sweeten the bitterness of injustice searing another's soul.
IV. To seek within myself and in the works of others to define my life and ideals. Life without ideals has no center or focus. I strive to develop these ideals that define
Yea this almost happened to me a few years back. My wife was setup as an intermediate in a nickel assed pot purchase (less than $50 if I remember right) for a disabled vet and supposed "friend" and in law of her brother. Apparently he had gotten in some serious trouble and bought his way out setting up everyone he could to the regional DEA task force. After the search came up empty of any drugs they pretty much trashed my home and repeatedly crashed my computer equipment trying to get past the login prompt.
I am sure it would have been worse if not for local law enforcement folks that knew us well enough to know I or my wife were not involved in the level of charges that this "friend" had made. To start with the local ATF agent limited the scope of the items described in the warrant to those directly pertaining to the charges. In addition I believe an decent and honest local police chief mostly limited the actual search actions to the parameters of the warrant. Once again the local ATF agent was to be commended when he refused to issued a second warrant to confiscate my computer equipment because it "looked too expensive for me to have bought" and as you state because I might have evidence of the locations of my obviously well hidden drug stash on the computer. I was told that the DEA agent had mentioned to the ATF agent at the time that I had "some kind of encrypted industrial software" (Linux and BSD) on my computer that he could not get past on the site and that he would have to take it to the lab to get at it. These computers he wanted, along with my guns to run ballistics on, and a small safe he managed to damage with a crowbar without opening, though I gave him the combination. The good ole ATF agent told him he missed his chance he should have took the safe in the first place and the rest were not his to take.
Not to be deterred the DEA agent went next to my employer and told the VP of my division that he suspected I had stolen company computer equipment in my home, asking the VP to assist him in the acquisition of a warrant. Again yet another person did the right thing and called my department manager and I suspect company legal reps. My department manager insisted the charge was nuts and said he would get back with them after checking with me. In the end I allowed my manager and a IS dept staff member to check my computer equipment against a list of stolen equipment without a warrant or the presence of the DEA agent or other law enforcement being present. Of course I did not have any and that was the end most of the issue as I had by this time contacted my lawyer and he kinda put the brakes on the DEA agents continued adventure on my ticket.
The final outcome my wife got to spend about 36 hours in jail plus five years probated sentence for conspiracy to traffic and I got to spend about 6 hours in jail, define Agnostic for the booking deputy and got a deferred prosecution, of what I am still not sure. Oh and we were out about $3k total for lawyer, fine and court cost, about $500 in cash that disappeared the day of the search, a couple hundred more in damaged items, about two days cleanup, several days work, and plenty of embarrassment. All for my wife trying to simply make the connections to help a disabled vet and supposed "family friend" get a nickel bag of pot he said he needed for his pain and nausea.
This adventure shows me both how broken this system is in some respects, but also how it can sometimes work when people decide to do the right thing. I started to post this as an AC, but heck the damaging part to me is public record anyway and the details well this way at least my side of the story gets told. My lawyers advice of course was to shut up and let him make the deal. I still don't know if I got took or got lucky. Yea I like ole TJ, I would love to be able to travel in time just to have a pint and one on one discourse with folks the likes of him.
Association fallacy's such as the logical argument tool "reductio ad absurdum" (reduction to the absurd) or "reductio ad Hitlerum" (reduction to Hitler), which are what Godwin's Law attempts to thwart, are tools of debate usually employed to expose a contradiction, fallacy or weak argument. They really should not be used to set the framework for such discussion. I do agree that Godwin's Law does indeed express valid concerns when applied to a lot of Internet discussions. Such hyperbole has been way to common and often has been an indication of a weak argument, and such does tend to degrade the whole environment. In its essence the law would tend to promote discussion of more depth. However it also has the inherent tendency to apply a "political correctness" to such discussion. At some point Godwin's Law becomes untenable as valid limiter for the frame of discussion. Fascist states rarely happen overnight. Such a state is often the devolution of a Democracy or Republic and as such the decline is deceptively gradual. The signs of such trends toward fascist like states are apparent today in many lands including the USA and UK. To ban these observations in discussions because of the wish to elevate the content at some point defeats the validity of the discussion.
If you haven't already, you should read some Hermann Hesse. The novels Krieg und Frieden, Steppenwolf and Demian are insightful as to the stealthy insipid effects of such "politically correct" rules on discussion in social environments leading to a fascist state. Or maybe some George Orwell, the novels "1984", "Animal Farm", "Coming Up For Air" were also somewhat interesting in this regard. I do agree that those that rant incessantly and illogically in such a manner are in no way helpful indeed they often actually defeat their own agendas. Since my point of view is often tainted by these types I wish many would just shut-tf-up.
"I know you will all hate me for saying this, but with a warrent the officials should be able to get into anywhere they want, including your electronic systems."
Amendment IV - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Careful now, be sure you understand your rights. I do agree that the law allows warranted searches for pre-described specific locations and persons and/or items. This should not be allowed to degrade into "with a warrant they can search or seize whomever, whatever, whenever, wherever they wish". Plus what about encryption, to require that one surrender the key is paramount to being a witness on oneself. The encryption key surrender requirement is in the works, failure to surrender the key would be either an outright admission of guilt or a separate crimminal charge such as contempt of court. I believe I read that something like this has already passed as law in the UK, any UK citizens care to support or correct this?
"Why not have the goverment exoloit security holes in windows which are already documented but MS refuses to fix? Cheaper! Later they can just rely on more holes in Vista to get in, or have MS leave them a hole in their little wga program."
One little problem with this, it is unlikely that terrorist's would use Windows. I suspect most likely they would use a Linux distro with the inherent security improvements and low hardware requirements and costs. I mean they are obviously deranged social malcontents already, plus they have something to hide.
Does this description not fit most Linux users as well. I mean that is pretty close to the common reaction I get when I tell someone that I use Linux and WHY I don't use Windows. The old "your just pathologically envious of America's entrepreneurial hero Bill Gate's wealth". From there the conversation has a tendency to dive into the social corpro-political mess in the world today. Maybe it is the bluntness of my arguments, maybe it is because I tend to call others on the lame ass FOX news talking points they dish up as indisputable facts. But the next thing you know I get the "cynical and possibly deranged, for sure socially malcontented Libertarian at the table" label.
You know I started this post as a joke. But it seems most of the Linux users I have face to face discussions with tend to have similar views. Now I am beginning to wonder... are we all on a State Department list just because we use Linux? I am pretty sure I am due simply to my frequent public digressions like this. But everyone, just because they use Linux...
"all they have to do is repeat three words over and over again. Terrorism, child porn. Terrorism, child porn. Terrorism, child porn."
You forgot drugs and drug traffickers. The "war on drugs" has been at the forefront on our loss of civil liberties in the last fifty years or so. Before that there were the McCarthy years with the communist purges. There were also a lot of terrible abuses of peoples civil liberties by the states and feds during Prohibition as well, until that is we found the good sense to repeal the insane amendment.
There is a long history of abuses in this country. Usually the abuses have been restricted to a minority of the population and no one else seemed to care. The beast that has been allowed to feed on the hapless minority is larger, hungrier and more insecure and aggressive. Now the people of the majority have begin to smell its foul breath and feel the chill of its shadow. This is a natural progression of this type of abuse of power and should have been expected by all. IMHO those who have created, supported, simply ignored or indeed often applauded this beasts self righteous feeding frenzy on others will deserve the attention they get when its fear driven hunger is directed toward them.
"It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own." Thomas Jefferson
Your problem will be solved in a few years. Your personal viewing, surfing, purchasing habits will be complied and analyzed. The ability to FF through commercials if lost will be restored and used in the analysis process. Most marketing content will be targeted to your apparent interests, with occasional plugs from outside as a chum test, or chump test as it applies.:)
"How are these ABC executives going to prevent me from switching to another channel while the commercials are on?"
It seems to me that most of the channels on my DirectTV service have the commercial programming times synchronized. Or maybe it is just that the commercial time/program time balance is so screwed up that the odds just favor hitting a commercial on any channel change at any time. The majority of what I watch is non-typical, PBS, IFC, CSPAN, the History or Science channels all which have fewer or no program interrupting commercial content. However whenever I watch SciFi, FX, MSNBC, CNN, etc the commercial/programming balance is ridiculous. And to me the slots do seem synced.
This is like the DRM/DCMA mess, all it has done here is that I spend less time and money on this type of time wasting activity and more time in the real world. If you sit down a figure a bit you will find that they produce 25% or less of decent programming/music/fantasy anyway. So for a large part I'll keep my time and money and they can keep their crappy content. I'll bet they will miss even little ole me more than I do the news/music/fantasy they produce. More time working at making money, more time reading, more time outside in the garden or at the grill, more time visiting and talking with friends, even more time rattling on here at/.:). Most if not all of this, it seems to me is a good thing.:)
"And what's with commercials being twice as loud as the show you're watching!"
So you can't help but to hear the pitch from the bathroom or 'fridge. Also it is a psychological attribute of many if not most people that the relative importance or correctness they place upon something is in direct relation to: the volume of the pronouncement, the size of the text, or boldness of the image or argument.
Should ever having read a Steven King or Clive Barker novel make you a any more a suspect for the dismembered body they found last night? What about that college chemistry class you took in 1998, should that indicate you as a possible suspect for the meth lab they found a block from your house? Should this along with other similar circumstantial evidence be enough for you to be convicted? If law enforcement has creditable physical evidence this type of circumstantial support is unnecessary and a dangerous methodology.
Yes that would be nice, too bad it is no longer necessary. While things like this are recently getting much worse at a national level, they have always been bad at local level. Freedom of speech like the blind justice it depends upon are far too often available directly in relation to the $$$$ you can spend lubricating the wheels of justice. The Internet has helped this situation some, but even this minor gain has been lost with recent legislation like the Patriot Acts.
"Our favorite villian, simply out protecting the rights of recording artists."
Do you really believe that? The share the recording studios pay to artist's is minuscule. Nearly all artists find the most lucrative part of their business are the live performances which would benefit from great circulation of their work.
"I guess the RIAA fills the role that the 'Narcs' and DEA agents played in the 1970's, they're fun beat up on, mischaracterize, draw cartoon conclusions about, etc."
In the 70's? Heck they are still at it with bigger budgets than ever. It is interesting that you choose to relate one horribly failed quagmire with another doomed to the same fate. The drug war and the laws and methodology used to enforce them are a total failure in their efficacy, and a damn train wreck in regard to our civil rights. What adults do to themselves is no business of anyone else's. If their actions in doing so place others in harms way, like say operating a vehicle under the influence or running meth labs, there are plenty other laws to charge them for violating. I have to agree with ole Abe here.
"Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." Abraham Lincoln
"So lets get the posts going expressing outrage and rightous indignation over the RIAA just because you like to steal music."
I don't steal music nor do I wish to, I have as to yet download a single track I have not paid for on some type of media. Yet I have several problems with the RIAA. One is about their attempts to circumvent the "fair use" rights via DRM technology which was merely used as a stalking horse for the creation of the DCMA. On the same subject line I have a problem with them negating the spirit of Democracy and the Republic with their bribes, oops sorry contributions to the politicians that voted the DCMA into law. They failed to update a business model in the face of new technology. Instead of moving to correct this they have choose instead to buy the legislation to legitimize and support the flawed business model of what is basically an organized criminal consortium.
Even if I supported the idea of violating someones privacy by allowing a commercial enterprise to hire legal whores to go fishing their ISP's logfiles, the punishment is way out of line with this petty crime. In my view the $1000 per song violates Amendment VIII (1791) which states: Prohibits excessive bail or fines and cruel and unusual punishment. This is a fine, a punitive measure because the price of the music itself is what, 1.00 per title, ok maybe 2.00 on over priced CD's at max.
The foundation for none of this is new, most of it has been around since people started sharing caves. Most of it has roots in our territorial animal natures. Survival of ones genes meant as it still does providing for and protecting ones self and ones offspring from nature and other people. The same instincts that allowed us to survive to this point are still in effect. The threats are still here, the details have become more complex and in some cases of a slightly different nature or requiring different types of reactions. So much is, as I said initially, the same as always. In the end a lot of it is about the ability to control of ones life.
I do suspect that the amplitude and frequency of many of these issues is trending dramatically upwards in the last 50 years or so. I think a lot of it is driven by the massive increase in information available today, both in volume and speed of update. In addition the world is in a period where the growth of specialized knowledge and thus new information is growing faster than ever before. There is also the same type of increase in the rate of technological, social and economic change in the world today. These are areas where one can make the statement that today is different the past and it not be anthropic. The rates of change in the general information available, technological, social and economic evolution in the world viewed on a graph with the history of mankind have went from a nearly straight gradually rising line to almost perpendicular in the last century, even more so in the last half. Yet in many ways we are the same instinctive creatures we have been for tens of thousands of years or more. The environment we live in however is changing in ways that make if more and more difficult to control some aspects of our lives and thus our instinctive fears arise. I believe this is the primary cause of the issues you are concerned about.
I also think a lot if it recently, at least in the USA is getting worse because the politicians and pundits are using the issues at hand in dramatic and divisive ways. This seems to be so whether we are talking about global warming or gay rights. I think that the original intent of many politicians and pundits were to use these issues divisively in an objective methodology for their own gain. However these politicians and pundits are subject to many of the same instinctive pressures as everyone else and I suspect the drum beats from opposing views are tending to drive each other faster and harder in a vicious cycle.
From what I an see from my own situation and attitude, watching those I know well and my observations of the general population via the news and such I make the following very general observations. Keep in mind that I realized there are many shades of gray in these very general observations.
Those on the right tend to get upset by things of a sexual nature, this seems to me to be about loss of control of others primarily the opposite sex and children, thus loss of control of their own lives through proxy. Many seem to get upset about what they see as their rightful resources(money) being wasted on what they consider the undeserving(the idle poor). Many of those on the right seem to be especially fearful of things and people alien to the specific cultural background in which they were raised(example:foreigners).
Those on the left tend to get upset by things of a privacy nature, this seems to me to be about loss of autonomy, of having to conform to others expectations of what is proper, thus loss of control of their own lives directly. Many seem to get upset about what they see as their rightful resources(money) being hoarded by those they see as undeserving(the idle rich). Many of those on the left seem to to be especially fearfully over any type of potential violence(example:guns).
I could go on but I won't tonight. Like I said before I realized that individuals cannot be classified this cleanly. For instance I consider myself very much a Liberal and I consider the right to bear arms as very
"Trying to adapt to run Windows programs is what killed OS/2"
Not to say there isn't some validity to your statement, but I believe that inept marketing, poor hardware vendor ie: driver development support and finally a reassignment of basic business objectives by IBM are the primary forces that killed OS/2. I used it for years, it ran most Windows 16bit applications with more far greater stability and flexibility, vastly easier configuration and usually with very little extra overhead. Even if there were no OS/2 apps available it was well worth the money ($80.00-$120.00US)for that one purpose for most serious users that tried it. The lack of drivers for cheap hardware was a problem for marketing it to the masses just as it is still an issue for Linux today.
I still miss the flexibility of the Workplace Shell and a few really awesome native OS/2 apps like Object Desktop, Deskman/2, PMView, Impos/2 and ProNews/2. I wish these developers would consider porting some of those apps to Linux. The end for me was when IBM simply decided to kill it off by making updates horrendously expensive via a subscription service. Simple USB support was going to cost me several hundred dollars for the subscription services or a move to eCS for about $250.00. With no reassurance of future development, in fact just the opposite. The fact that they never provided serious WIN32 support did not help. My move to Linux has been interesting though, the variety of distro,s is for me a healthly sign of continued future life, the rapid constant development with new technology support is a refreshing change and the price is great!
"There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly" Henry David Thoreau
"It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own." Thomas Jefferson
No argument from me there. I support the ACLU fiducially as best I can and in discussion quite often. I even agree with that logic of their argument and the logic of case it is based upon is not unreasonable. I can also understand why it is necessary to limit the arms that may be brought to bear. Personal rocket launchers and tanks would not make for a safe or stable society. I personally believe basic sporting arms in the forms they exist in today would be far more effective than many think if push came to shove with a totally out of control government. For personal safety they are more than adequate, if the user is proficient. As examples a 30-06, 9mm sidearm or 12 ga. shotgun are potent and respectable weapons as they are. Also insane firing rates are subject to creating way much unintended damage, especially with an less than proficient user.
I think this is one of a few areas that the founders could have been stronger and more specific upon. I would prefer the second part of the statement about the "peoples right" be applied as the basic tenement without the "well regulated militia" qualifier and thus limiter preceding it being defined as the only purpose for the right. But since no other purpose was specified I can understand the logic. Shame the founders did not have specific language about personal safety or freedom from tyrants in the amendment. From the Declaration Of Independence on through the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights the intent of these documents was clear. That the people have the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the right to remove a unaccountable government that endangers these rights. Basically I still agree with Franklin's observation quoted before. I bet Franklin was riot, I love his quotes. Anyway a toothless and clawless lion is just a big goofy looking mostly defenseless cat regardless of the ferocity its roar. That is my point.
Wabi-Sabi Matthew
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin
"When the people fear their Government, there is tyranny. When the Government fears it's people, there is liberty.." Thomas Paine
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" Benjamin Franklin
"We must indeed all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately." Benjamin Franklin
"Works just as it used to over here... What distopia land are you posting from?"
It is interesting that you you use the label "Dystopian land" in your reply, at least I guess that is what you meant with "distopia land". This is exactly what the USA is devolving into and exactly what the ACLU is confronting on issues like this. I do not believe in the possibility of a Utopian society at this stage of mankinds evolution, if ever. However, this does not mean I intend to sit and quietly watch as our liberty is stolen by a bunch of neo-fascists. Try the following Google link for a few examples of where the separation of powers is an issue with the current government.
"I don't see a contradiction, frankly. Nor does ACLU, apparently, because they are not using this argument..."
One more time. "Amendment V (1791) of the constitution says otherwise in regard to the collection and presentation of evidence against a citizen. "No person may be compelled to testify against himself." I don't see how it could be stated with any greater clarity. Are you operating under the mistaken assumption that this only to be used on foreign terrorist suspects? Have you read the FOIA? http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/privacy/fmrifoia20060628. pdf Besides even if it is only used on non US citizens the use of this technology to obtain evidence used to detain citizens of another nation does not seem to be an ethically sound practice. What's next, Bolton removing the US as a signatory of the UN charter on human rights?
That's just ridiculous. 20 years is not enough for you? Cell-phones have existed for shorter time...
The 20 years is actually the rough useful history for MRI as a medical diagnostic device. fMRI has not been around as long and there is very little data in the public space on the use of it for the methods of thought detection, let alone critical evaluation. A good read on the brain/mind that has some information on fMRI is "Conversations with Neil's Brain(1994)". I don't like what is happening with the monitoring of cell networks either:).
"Reading comprehension problems (in addition to writing)?.. Or just choking on your tofu? I'll try one more time: How the government spends money -- whether you approve of it or not -- is not a civil liberties concern, hence not one, I gave ACLU money to address..."
This is simple, accountability of government officials is at the core of what protection of civil liberty's are about. Where were you in primary school civics or US history classes? When the government spends money on things that directly threaten my constitutional rights and freedoms it becomes an even more critical civil liberty's issue. I don't always like the position the ACLU takes on some issues either. For instance I wish they would take a different stand on the second amendment, they are dead wrong in the interpretation they currently stand by. This does not mean that I withhold my support, moral or fiducial as on the whole their efforts are worthwhile for our liberty. Ouch, I must have hit a nerve somewhere. You don't like reading my writing, don't. If you think that by making derogatory statements about my missing a word or imperfections of grammar at 2:00AM, my reading comprehension of your illogical and non nonsensical diversions and digressions or my personal dietary habits you are going to annoy me, go ahead. What this actually tells me is that I somehow managed to annoy you. Got any more labels you wish apply or imply, abilities or skills you wish to denigr
A well-regulated militia will be useless, and certainly not efficient if the citizens from which it is drawn have no experience with tools of the trade.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin
"Monthly Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of candidate or elected politicians to find out what part of what they spew is intended to be deceptive."
I suspect at this time about all they expect is to measure relative activity in reaction to a audio or visual cue. For instance the serial streaming of audio or visual data of an investigation related event, place, date, time, other suspects a serial sequence with random ones. Not really much different than a polygraph, possibly harder to defeat, possibly easier. Seems it would take the same type of methods. I understand that simple "background noise like the subtle wiggling of toes or flexing of the groin muscles can make a polygraph difficult to get useful results from. Maybe simple a sexual fantasy, recalled childhood memories, grocery lists or silent songs or phonetic verses recalled in the mind would defeat this. BTW from what I know about MRI they are pretty loud. It seems this might disturb the methodology in a similar way. I don't know how one would use non ferrous metal substitutes for speaker pole pieces in a earphone headset to blank out the MRI and still deliver an audio stream.
Basically what you're saying here seems to be that law enforcement should be allowed to use whatever hokey crackpot ideas it wants to, and it's up to the courts to say if it's no good or not?
"Yes, actually. That's what we have the separation of powers for."
That's entertaining, from my perspective the separation of powers don't seem to be working too well these days.
First off, if the government is subjecting people to any kind of scans, be it speed radars or palm-reading, that is a civil rights issue, and something we should be given the full and complete details of.
"It'd be interesting from a scientific point of view, but a civil liberties concern it is not. Unless, of course, the procedure is painful and/or damaging to the subject."
Amendment V (1791) of the constitution says otherwise in regard to the collection and presentation of evidence against a citizen. "No person may be compelled to testify against himself." As for the physical dangers of this type of procedure, this is pretty new science, 20 years or so of application. Extended periods of flipping the polar states of the nuclear structure of ones brain might very well be a health issue, and that would defiantly be a civil rights issue. All the ACLU have done so far is request a FOIA on the specifics of the technology and methodology to be used, thats very reasonable.
In particular when it's being used on non-US citizens which you apparently can incarcerate nowadays without bothering with a trial.
"Now that is something for ACLU to fight tooth and nail... Even if they are enemy combatants."
As for its use on non citizens, SUSPECTED terrorists or whomever, the ethical thing to do is to try and be reasonably certain of the consequences of these actions. If the methodology that is applied to this technology is flawed and serious physical harm is done to the brains of the ACCUSED subject it would be a violation of the UN charter on human rights. This administration has already done enough to soil the respect for our ethics around the world.
Third, as a taxpayer, why the heck shouldn't I be concerned about the validity of any law-enforcement method (or any method in general) the government is blowing my money on?
This is a government accountability concern, not a civil liberties one...
Your a riot! Government accountability? Accountable to whom? Since when? I haven't any serious examples of accountability or responsibility either in the last six years or so. "Your doing one heck of a job Brownie!"
See the bold text below for how it pertains to the use of such on US citizens. Of course since certain "leaders" consider the constitution just "a goddamned piece of paper" I would not expect it to be honored anymore that say the "violations of due process" or "just compensation" statements are these days. Heck of a mess we are getting into. Thankyou for supporting the ACLU though, and no your money has not been misused, it has been well spent on protecting YOUR LIBERTY.
Amendment V (1791). Guarantees against violations of due process in criminal proceedings. No person may be compelled to testify against himself. Grand jury process is required for criminal indictment. Double jeopardy is prohibited. Public taking of private property without just compensation is prohibited.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Slashdot Mirror
"This is something IBM never got with OS/2, and why it died a stagnant death, because while it could run Windows 3.1 apps better than Windows itself, to do anything in native you pretty much had to do it in C++."
Ever hear of REXX, ObjectREXX, VisualREXX, NetREXX. These are a very solid and powerful and relatively easy to use scripting languages & tools for OS/2. IBM maimed OS/2 first with inept marketing. Then due to basic business direction strategy they finished the job via the lack of any real continued marketing and pretty much killing off allocation of resources and support to the independent developer base. Finally they starved the customers for technology updates (drivers mainly) and make what little support they did deliver expensive. They did this simply because they decided that the desktop was not where their expertise and thus focus was. IBM made then and still makes most of its money via med to big iron hardware and the services to support this hardware. Another large plate for them was and still is back office integration with software only houses like Microsoft, SAP and Oracle.
OS/2 was a fine system in many ways. I used it since v2.0 all through Warp v4.5. The various programmers responsible for OS/2 were pretty damn good. Many of them were either MS employees or left IBM for MS. BTW OS/2 was a joint venture of IBM and MS, when they split Microsoft evolved, or actually merged with I believe a fair part of a DEC Unix fork, a lot of the code base into WinNT. Many of the best kernel and WPS Desktop programmers I have heard are dead or long since retired now.
OS/2 had a few technical problems like the being a single user OS and a single input queue issue but was mostly a solid OS. I still miss a lot of features of the WPS and a few well written native apps. It still runs on a lot of the ATM's and banking back end stuff, medical staff support systems, and longer lived big industrial hardware and services. There are still a quite a few OS/2 users in the US, with a lot more in Europe and Australia.
There is a clone/fork or whatever called eCS ( http://www.ecomstation.com/ ) for about $260.00 or $160.00 upgrade from Warp4+. I believe. eCS has been kept pretty current with hardware and services technology's. I have however decided that Linux is a better fit for my meager budget in the future, with a vast amount more development going on and then there is the freedom of the source code as a killer plus. Though note there is X support in OS/2 and via ports like perl and emx quite a bit of support for Linux/Unix apps in OS/2 and eCS. Anyway I hope to soon be using OS/2 and some OS/2 apps like ProNews again under Parallels virtualization and Suse. Just gotta find the time.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
"This is the appropriate place to mention two wolves and five sheep trying to determine what should be for dinner. Yes the wolves are outnumbered, but they hold the power, and will end up with mutton for dinner 90% of the time."
:
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin
I would agree with the vast majority of what you have said. I do not have any expectation that such a well reasoned society as you also wish will exist in my lifetime. I do believe that several of the founders, Jefferson and Franklin especially come to mind, came very close to such in their contributions and moderations of others in our nations charter. In fact the base attributes of human nature being as they are I see such as unlikely for hundreds if not thousands of years if ever. However I continue to try and use calm logic wherever I can to reason with the unreasonable. My base ideal on this is that through the steady and sustained efforts of those like ourselves we will make a contribution toward this end, and that such is an honorable and rewarding task.
I was raised as a Baptist though the best description for my faith of lack thereof now would be Agnostic. I have made several admittedly shallow investigations of organized religious faiths and always come away disillusioned with both the doctrine, the practice and most of the the practitioners, though the base messages were often of great value. What I find objectionable at a very base level in all religious faiths I have examined is the exclusivity. The insistence that one sheepishly or dogmatically accept that the particular faiths "truth" as the only possibility, the only path. I do not believe this is inherently true or necessary and believe such practices are simply tools of control. I have found a few common threads of belief and expectations of proper ideals and practices in various faiths and other philosophical musings that I accept as my personal set of ideals. They resolve down to these ten most basic sets of ideals
I. Be grateful for life, for having the experience of consciousness and physical form to enjoy the fascinating universe about me. Be especially thankful for my comparative good fortune, good health and easy life. I try and remember the many less fortune than myself, not the few with more. The fact that I or my children have not had to fight or actually have rats for our breakfast this morning means we are better off than millions are today. The fact that I am able to write this means I have lived to greater than six years old, which means I have already outlived untold billions of others less fortunate.
II. To do my best to be a positive force on all around me both other persons and the universe in general. To never intentionally harm anyone for any reason except in defense of myself or others from someone who doesn't care to uphold the same ideal. The term harm I define here as mental and spiritual as well as physical anguish. To remember that while words are important, very often my actions are the true measure of who I am in the eyes of others and myself. While not a vegetarian I try to honor and avoid cruelty to less fortunate forms of animal life where ever reasonable.
III. To actively develop my compassion for others and prevent the hardening of my heart. This includes trying to forgive, not forget, but forgive trespasses against myself and those closest to me. To be sensitive to the pain of others. This is possibly the most important of all quests and the one most often avoided. It is all too tempting and easy to harden ones heart against the harshness of life. There is no higher a calling or more rewarding a task than to heal a malignant hate, to provide comfort for an unrequited loss or to sweeten the bitterness of injustice searing another's soul.
IV. To seek within myself and in the works of others to define my life and ideals. Life without ideals has no center or focus. I strive to develop these ideals that define
I suspect two simultaneous Jessica Albas would send my core temperature critical resulting in system failure. But what a way to crash....
Matthew
You know what? You're right. Or then again maybe not.:)
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Yea this almost happened to me a few years back. My wife was setup as an intermediate in a nickel assed pot purchase (less than $50 if I remember right) for a disabled vet and supposed "friend" and in law of her brother. Apparently he had gotten in some serious trouble and bought his way out setting up everyone he could to the regional DEA task force. After the search came up empty of any drugs they pretty much trashed my home and repeatedly crashed my computer equipment trying to get past the login prompt.
I am sure it would have been worse if not for local law enforcement folks that knew us well enough to know I or my wife were not involved in the level of charges that this "friend" had made. To start with the local ATF agent limited the scope of the items described in the warrant to those directly pertaining to the charges. In addition I believe an decent and honest local police chief mostly limited the actual search actions to the parameters of the warrant. Once again the local ATF agent was to be commended when he refused to issued a second warrant to confiscate my computer equipment because it "looked too expensive for me to have bought" and as you state because I might have evidence of the locations of my obviously well hidden drug stash on the computer. I was told that the DEA agent had mentioned to the ATF agent at the time that I had "some kind of encrypted industrial software" (Linux and BSD) on my computer that he could not get past on the site and that he would have to take it to the lab to get at it. These computers he wanted, along with my guns to run ballistics on, and a small safe he managed to damage with a crowbar without opening, though I gave him the combination. The good ole ATF agent told him he missed his chance he should have took the safe in the first place and the rest were not his to take.
Not to be deterred the DEA agent went next to my employer and told the VP of my division that he suspected I had stolen company computer equipment in my home, asking the VP to assist him in the acquisition of a warrant. Again yet another person did the right thing and called my department manager and I suspect company legal reps. My department manager insisted the charge was nuts and said he would get back with them after checking with me. In the end I allowed my manager and a IS dept staff member to check my computer equipment against a list of stolen equipment without a warrant or the presence of the DEA agent or other law enforcement being present. Of course I did not have any and that was the end most of the issue as I had by this time contacted my lawyer and he kinda put the brakes on the DEA agents continued adventure on my ticket.
The final outcome my wife got to spend about 36 hours in jail plus five years probated sentence for conspiracy to traffic and I got to spend about 6 hours in jail, define Agnostic for the booking deputy and got a deferred prosecution, of what I am still not sure. Oh and we were out about $3k total for lawyer, fine and court cost, about $500 in cash that disappeared the day of the search, a couple hundred more in damaged items, about two days cleanup, several days work, and plenty of embarrassment. All for my wife trying to simply make the connections to help a disabled vet and supposed "family friend" get a nickel bag of pot he said he needed for his pain and nausea.
This adventure shows me both how broken this system is in some respects, but also how it can sometimes work when people decide to do the right thing. I started to post this as an AC, but heck the damaging part to me is public record anyway and the details well this way at least my side of the story gets told. My lawyers advice of course was to shut up and let him make the deal. I still don't know if I got took or got lucky. Yea I like ole TJ, I would love to be able to travel in time just to have a pint and one on one discourse with folks the likes of him.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Thanks Ray
Thanks Jack
Thanks Archie
Association fallacy's such as the logical argument tool "reductio ad absurdum" (reduction to the absurd) or "reductio ad Hitlerum" (reduction to Hitler), which are what Godwin's Law attempts to thwart, are tools of debate usually employed to expose a contradiction, fallacy or weak argument. They really should not be used to set the framework for such discussion. I do agree that Godwin's Law does indeed express valid concerns when applied to a lot of Internet discussions. Such hyperbole has been way to common and often has been an indication of a weak argument, and such does tend to degrade the whole environment. In its essence the law would tend to promote discussion of more depth. However it also has the inherent tendency to apply a "political correctness" to such discussion. At some point Godwin's Law becomes untenable as valid limiter for the frame of discussion. Fascist states rarely happen overnight. Such a state is often the devolution of a Democracy or Republic and as such the decline is deceptively gradual. The signs of such trends toward fascist like states are apparent today in many lands including the USA and UK. To ban these observations in discussions because of the wish to elevate the content at some point defeats the validity of the discussion.
If you haven't already, you should read some Hermann Hesse. The novels Krieg und Frieden, Steppenwolf and Demian are insightful as to the stealthy insipid effects of such "politically correct" rules on discussion in social environments leading to a fascist state. Or maybe some George Orwell, the novels "1984", "Animal Farm", "Coming Up For Air" were also somewhat interesting in this regard. I do agree that those that rant incessantly and illogically in such a manner are in no way helpful indeed they often actually defeat their own agendas. Since my point of view is often tainted by these types I wish many would just shut-tf-up.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Careful now, be sure you understand your rights. I do agree that the law allows warranted searches for pre-described specific locations and persons and/or items. This should not be allowed to degrade into "with a warrant they can search or seize whomever, whatever, whenever, wherever they wish". Plus what about encryption, to require that one surrender the key is paramount to being a witness on oneself. The encryption key surrender requirement is in the works, failure to surrender the key would be either an outright admission of guilt or a separate crimminal charge such as contempt of court. I believe I read that something like this has already passed as law in the UK, any UK citizens care to support or correct this?
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
"Why not have the goverment exoloit security holes in windows which are already documented but MS refuses to fix? Cheaper! Later they can just rely on more holes in Vista to get in, or have MS leave them a hole in their little wga program."
... are we all on a State Department list just because we use Linux? I am pretty sure I am due simply to my frequent public digressions like this. But everyone, just because they use Linux...
One little problem with this, it is unlikely that terrorist's would use Windows. I suspect most likely they would use a Linux distro with the inherent security improvements and low hardware requirements and costs. I mean they are obviously deranged social malcontents already, plus they have something to hide.
Does this description not fit most Linux users as well. I mean that is pretty close to the common reaction I get when I tell someone that I use Linux and WHY I don't use Windows. The old "your just pathologically envious of America's entrepreneurial hero Bill Gate's wealth". From there the conversation has a tendency to dive into the social corpro-political mess in the world today. Maybe it is the bluntness of my arguments, maybe it is because I tend to call others on the lame ass FOX news talking points they dish up as indisputable facts. But the next thing you know I get the "cynical and possibly deranged, for sure socially malcontented Libertarian at the table" label.
You know I started this post as a joke. But it seems most of the Linux users I have face to face discussions with tend to have similar views. Now I am beginning to wonder
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
"all they have to do is repeat three words over and over again. Terrorism, child porn. Terrorism, child porn. Terrorism, child porn."
You forgot drugs and drug traffickers. The "war on drugs" has been at the forefront on our loss of civil liberties in the last fifty years or so. Before that there were the McCarthy years with the communist purges. There were also a lot of terrible abuses of peoples civil liberties by the states and feds during Prohibition as well, until that is we found the good sense to repeal the insane amendment.
There is a long history of abuses in this country. Usually the abuses have been restricted to a minority of the population and no one else seemed to care. The beast that has been allowed to feed on the hapless minority is larger, hungrier and more insecure and aggressive. Now the people of the majority have begin to smell its foul breath and feel the chill of its shadow. This is a natural progression of this type of abuse of power and should have been expected by all. IMHO those who have created, supported, simply ignored or indeed often applauded this beasts self righteous feeding frenzy on others will deserve the attention they get when its fear driven hunger is directed toward them.
"It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own." Thomas Jefferson
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
Your problem will be solved in a few years. Your personal viewing, surfing, purchasing habits will be complied and analyzed. The ability to FF through commercials if lost will be restored and used in the analysis process. Most marketing content will be targeted to your apparent interests, with occasional plugs from outside as a chum test, or chump test as it applies. :)
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
"How are these ABC executives going to prevent me from switching to another channel while the commercials are on?"
/. :). Most if not all of this, it seems to me is a good thing. :)
It seems to me that most of the channels on my DirectTV service have the commercial programming times synchronized. Or maybe it is just that the commercial time/program time balance is so screwed up that the odds just favor hitting a commercial on any channel change at any time. The majority of what I watch is non-typical, PBS, IFC, CSPAN, the History or Science channels all which have fewer or no program interrupting commercial content. However whenever I watch SciFi, FX, MSNBC, CNN, etc the commercial/programming balance is ridiculous. And to me the slots do seem synced.
This is like the DRM/DCMA mess, all it has done here is that I spend less time and money on this type of time wasting activity and more time in the real world. If you sit down a figure a bit you will find that they produce 25% or less of decent programming/music/fantasy anyway. So for a large part I'll keep my time and money and they can keep their crappy content. I'll bet they will miss even little ole me more than I do the news/music/fantasy they produce. More time working at making money, more time reading, more time outside in the garden or at the grill, more time visiting and talking with friends, even more time rattling on here at
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
"And what's with commercials being twice as loud as the show you're watching!"
So you can't help but to hear the pitch from the bathroom or 'fridge. Also it is a psychological attribute of many if not most people that the relative importance or correctness they place upon something is in direct relation to: the volume of the pronouncement, the size of the text, or boldness of the image or argument.
Matthew
Should ever having read a Steven King or Clive Barker novel make you a any more a suspect for the dismembered body they found last night? What about that college chemistry class you took in 1998, should that indicate you as a possible suspect for the meth lab they found a block from your house? Should this along with other similar circumstantial evidence be enough for you to be convicted? If law enforcement has creditable physical evidence this type of circumstantial support is unnecessary and a dangerous methodology.
Matthew
"hopefully with a court warrant"
Yes that would be nice, too bad it is no longer necessary. While things like this are recently getting much worse at a national level, they have always been bad at local level. Freedom of speech like the blind justice it depends upon are far too often available directly in relation to the $$$$ you can spend lubricating the wheels of justice. The Internet has helped this situation some, but even this minor gain has been lost with recent legislation like the Patriot Acts.
Matthew
"Our favorite villian, simply out protecting the rights of recording artists."
Do you really believe that? The share the recording studios pay to artist's is minuscule. Nearly all artists find the most lucrative part of their business are the live performances which would benefit from great circulation of their work.
"I guess the RIAA fills the role that the 'Narcs' and DEA agents played in the 1970's, they're fun beat up on, mischaracterize, draw cartoon conclusions about, etc."
In the 70's? Heck they are still at it with bigger budgets than ever. It is interesting that you choose to relate one horribly failed quagmire with another doomed to the same fate. The drug war and the laws and methodology used to enforce them are a total failure in their efficacy, and a damn train wreck in regard to our civil rights. What adults do to themselves is no business of anyone else's. If their actions in doing so place others in harms way, like say operating a vehicle under the influence or running meth labs, there are plenty other laws to charge them for violating. I have to agree with ole Abe here.
"Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." Abraham Lincoln
"So lets get the posts going expressing outrage and rightous indignation over the RIAA just because you like to steal music."
I don't steal music nor do I wish to, I have as to yet download a single track I have not paid for on some type of media. Yet I have several problems with the RIAA. One is about their attempts to circumvent the "fair use" rights via DRM technology which was merely used as a stalking horse for the creation of the DCMA. On the same subject line I have a problem with them negating the spirit of Democracy and the Republic with their bribes, oops sorry contributions to the politicians that voted the DCMA into law. They failed to update a business model in the face of new technology. Instead of moving to correct this they have choose instead to buy the legislation to legitimize and support the flawed business model of what is basically an organized criminal consortium.
Even if I supported the idea of violating someones privacy by allowing a commercial enterprise to hire legal whores to go fishing their ISP's logfiles, the punishment is way out of line with this petty crime. In my view the $1000 per song violates Amendment VIII (1791) which states: Prohibits excessive bail or fines and cruel and unusual punishment. This is a fine, a punitive measure because the price of the music itself is what, 1.00 per title, ok maybe 2.00 on over priced CD's at max.
Matthew
The foundation for none of this is new, most of it has been around since people started sharing caves. Most of it has roots in our territorial animal natures. Survival of ones genes meant as it still does providing for and protecting ones self and ones offspring from nature and other people. The same instincts that allowed us to survive to this point are still in effect. The threats are still here, the details have become more complex and in some cases of a slightly different nature or requiring different types of reactions. So much is, as I said initially, the same as always. In the end a lot of it is about the ability to control of ones life.
I do suspect that the amplitude and frequency of many of these issues is trending dramatically upwards in the last 50 years or so. I think a lot of it is driven by the massive increase in information available today, both in volume and speed of update. In addition the world is in a period where the growth of specialized knowledge and thus new information is growing faster than ever before. There is also the same type of increase in the rate of technological, social and economic change in the world today. These are areas where one can make the statement that today is different the past and it not be anthropic. The rates of change in the general information available, technological, social and economic evolution in the world viewed on a graph with the history of mankind have went from a nearly straight gradually rising line to almost perpendicular in the last century, even more so in the last half. Yet in many ways we are the same instinctive creatures we have been for tens of thousands of years or more. The environment we live in however is changing in ways that make if more and more difficult to control some aspects of our lives and thus our instinctive fears arise. I believe this is the primary cause of the issues you are concerned about.
I also think a lot if it recently, at least in the USA is getting worse because the politicians and pundits are using the issues at hand in dramatic and divisive ways. This seems to be so whether we are talking about global warming or gay rights. I think that the original intent of many politicians and pundits were to use these issues divisively in an objective methodology for their own gain. However these politicians and pundits are subject to many of the same instinctive pressures as everyone else and I suspect the drum beats from opposing views are tending to drive each other faster and harder in a vicious cycle.
From what I an see from my own situation and attitude, watching those I know well and my observations of the general population via the news and such I make the following very general observations. Keep in mind that I realized there are many shades of gray in these very general observations.
Those on the right tend to get upset by things of a sexual nature, this seems to me to be about loss of control of others primarily the opposite sex and children, thus loss of control of their own lives through proxy. Many seem to get upset about what they see as their rightful resources(money) being wasted on what they consider the undeserving(the idle poor). Many of those on the right seem to be especially fearful of things and people alien to the specific cultural background in which they were raised(example:foreigners).
Those on the left tend to get upset by things of a privacy nature, this seems to me to be about loss of autonomy, of having to conform to others expectations of what is proper, thus loss of control of their own lives directly. Many seem to get upset about what they see as their rightful resources(money) being hoarded by those they see as undeserving(the idle rich). Many of those on the left seem to to be especially fearfully over any type of potential violence(example:guns).
I could go on but I won't tonight. Like I said before I realized that individuals cannot be classified this cleanly. For instance I consider myself very much a Liberal and I consider the right to bear arms as very
"Trying to adapt to run Windows programs is what killed OS/2"
Not to say there isn't some validity to your statement, but I believe that inept marketing, poor hardware vendor ie: driver development support and finally a reassignment of basic business objectives by IBM are the primary forces that killed OS/2. I used it for years, it ran most Windows 16bit applications with more far greater stability and flexibility, vastly easier configuration and usually with very little extra overhead. Even if there were no OS/2 apps available it was well worth the money ($80.00-$120.00US)for that one purpose for most serious users that tried it. The lack of drivers for cheap hardware was a problem for marketing it to the masses just as it is still an issue for Linux today.
I still miss the flexibility of the Workplace Shell and a few really awesome native OS/2 apps like Object Desktop, Deskman/2, PMView, Impos/2 and ProNews/2. I wish these developers would consider porting some of those apps to Linux. The end for me was when IBM simply decided to kill it off by making updates horrendously expensive via a subscription service. Simple USB support was going to cost me several hundred dollars for the subscription services or a move to eCS for about $250.00. With no reassurance of future development, in fact just the opposite. The fact that they never provided serious WIN32 support did not help. My move to Linux has been interesting though, the variety of distro,s is for me a healthly sign of continued future life, the rapid constant development with new technology support is a refreshing change and the price is great!
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
A couple somewhat relevant quotes,
"There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly" Henry David Thoreau
"It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own." Thomas Jefferson
Matthew
No argument from me there. I support the ACLU fiducially as best I can and in discussion quite often. I even agree with that logic of their argument and the logic of case it is based upon is not unreasonable. I can also understand why it is necessary to limit the arms that may be brought to bear. Personal rocket launchers and tanks would not make for a safe or stable society. I personally believe basic sporting arms in the forms they exist in today would be far more effective than many think if push came to shove with a totally out of control government. For personal safety they are more than adequate, if the user is proficient. As examples a 30-06, 9mm sidearm or 12 ga. shotgun are potent and respectable weapons as they are. Also insane firing rates are subject to creating way much unintended damage, especially with an less than proficient user.
I think this is one of a few areas that the founders could have been stronger and more specific upon. I would prefer the second part of the statement about the "peoples right" be applied as the basic tenement without the "well regulated militia" qualifier and thus limiter preceding it being defined as the only purpose for the right. But since no other purpose was specified I can understand the logic. Shame the founders did not have specific language about personal safety or freedom from tyrants in the amendment. From the Declaration Of Independence on through the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights the intent of these documents was clear. That the people have the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the right to remove a unaccountable government that endangers these rights. Basically I still agree with Franklin's observation quoted before. I bet Franklin was riot, I love his quotes. Anyway a toothless and clawless lion is just a big goofy looking mostly defenseless cat regardless of the ferocity its roar. That is my point.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin
"When the people fear their Government, there is tyranny. When the Government fears it's people, there is liberty.." Thomas Paine
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" Benjamin Franklin
"We must indeed all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately." Benjamin Franklin
"Works just as it used to over here... What distopia land are you posting from?"
It is interesting that you you use the label "Dystopian land" in your reply, at least I guess that is what you meant with "distopia land". This is exactly what the USA is devolving into and exactly what the ACLU is confronting on issues like this. I do not believe in the possibility of a Utopian society at this stage of mankinds evolution, if ever. However, this does not mean I intend to sit and quietly watch as our liberty is stolen by a bunch of neo-fascists. Try the following Google link for a few examples of where the separation of powers is an issue with the current government.
http://www.google.com/search?hs=0zW&hl=en&lr=&clie nt=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q= Bush+separation+of+powers&btnG=Search
"I don't see a contradiction, frankly. Nor does ACLU, apparently, because they are not using this argument..."
One more time. "Amendment V (1791) of the constitution says otherwise in regard to the collection and presentation of evidence against a citizen. "No person may be compelled to testify against himself." I don't see how it could be stated with any greater clarity. Are you operating under the mistaken assumption that this only to be used on foreign terrorist suspects? Have you read the FOIA? http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/privacy/fmrifoia20060628. pdf Besides even if it is only used on non US citizens the use of this technology to obtain evidence used to detain citizens of another nation does not seem to be an ethically sound practice. What's next, Bolton removing the US as a signatory of the UN charter on human rights?
That's just ridiculous. 20 years is not enough for you? Cell-phones have existed for shorter time...
The 20 years is actually the rough useful history for MRI as a medical diagnostic device. fMRI has not been around as long and there is very little data in the public space on the use of it for the methods of thought detection, let alone critical evaluation. A good read on the brain/mind that has some information on fMRI is "Conversations with Neil's Brain(1994)". I don't like what is happening with the monitoring of cell networks either :).
"Reading comprehension problems (in addition to writing)?.. Or just choking on your tofu? I'll try one more time: How the government spends money -- whether you approve of it or not -- is not a civil liberties concern, hence not one, I gave ACLU money to address..."
This is simple, accountability of government officials is at the core of what protection of civil liberty's are about. Where were you in primary school civics or US history classes? When the government spends money on things that directly threaten my constitutional rights and freedoms it becomes an even more critical civil liberty's issue. I don't always like the position the ACLU takes on some issues either. For instance I wish they would take a different stand on the second amendment, they are dead wrong in the interpretation they currently stand by. This does not mean that I withhold my support, moral or fiducial as on the whole their efforts are worthwhile for our liberty. Ouch, I must have hit a nerve somewhere. You don't like reading my writing, don't. If you think that by making derogatory statements about my missing a word or imperfections of grammar at 2:00AM, my reading comprehension of your illogical and non nonsensical diversions and digressions or my personal dietary habits you are going to annoy me, go ahead. What this actually tells me is that I somehow managed to annoy you. Got any more labels you wish apply or imply, abilities or skills you wish to denigr
A well-regulated militia will be useless, and certainly not efficient if the citizens from which it is drawn have no experience with tools of the trade.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin
Matthew
"Monthly Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of candidate or elected politicians to find out what part of what they spew is intended to be deceptive."
Wait I think I know that one, ALL OF IT.
Matthew
I suspect at this time about all they expect is to measure relative activity in reaction to a audio or visual cue. For instance the serial streaming of audio or visual data of an investigation related event, place, date, time, other suspects a serial sequence with random ones. Not really much different than a polygraph, possibly harder to defeat, possibly easier. Seems it would take the same type of methods. I understand that simple "background noise like the subtle wiggling of toes or flexing of the groin muscles can make a polygraph difficult to get useful results from. Maybe simple a sexual fantasy, recalled childhood memories, grocery lists or silent songs or phonetic verses recalled in the mind would defeat this. BTW from what I know about MRI they are pretty loud. It seems this might disturb the methodology in a similar way. I don't know how one would use non ferrous metal substitutes for speaker pole pieces in a earphone headset to blank out the MRI and still deliver an audio stream.
Matthew
That's entertaining, from my perspective the separation of powers don't seem to be working too well these days.
"It'd be interesting from a scientific point of view, but a civil liberties concern it is not. Unless, of course, the procedure is painful and/or damaging to the subject."
Amendment V (1791) of the constitution says otherwise in regard to the collection and presentation of evidence against a citizen. "No person may be compelled to testify against himself." As for the physical dangers of this type of procedure, this is pretty new science, 20 years or so of application. Extended periods of flipping the polar states of the nuclear structure of ones brain might very well be a health issue, and that would defiantly be a civil rights issue. All the ACLU have done so far is request a FOIA on the specifics of the technology and methodology to be used, thats very reasonable.
"Now that is something for ACLU to fight tooth and nail... Even if they are enemy combatants."
As for its use on non citizens, SUSPECTED terrorists or whomever, the ethical thing to do is to try and be reasonably certain of the consequences of these actions. If the methodology that is applied to this technology is flawed and serious physical harm is done to the brains of the ACCUSED subject it would be a violation of the UN charter on human rights. This administration has already done enough to soil the respect for our ethics around the world.
This is a government accountability concern, not a civil liberties one...
Your a riot! Government accountability? Accountable to whom? Since when? I haven't any serious examples of accountability or responsibility either in the last six years or so. "Your doing one heck of a job Brownie!"
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew
See the bold text below for how it pertains to the use of such on US citizens. Of course since certain "leaders" consider the constitution just "a goddamned piece of paper" I would not expect it to be honored anymore that say the "violations of due process" or "just compensation" statements are these days. Heck of a mess we are getting into. Thankyou for supporting the ACLU though, and no your money has not been misused, it has been well spent on protecting YOUR LIBERTY.
Amendment V (1791). Guarantees against violations of due process in criminal proceedings. No person may be compelled to testify against himself. Grand jury process is required for criminal indictment. Double jeopardy is prohibited. Public taking of private property without just compensation is prohibited.
Wabi-Sabi
Matthew