Buy It Now, when it was introduced years ago, marked the beginning of the slow and painful death of ebay as THE auction site on the internet. Now it's all a bunch of buy-it-now crap from fronting retailers, the real people are all gone.
Fuck Buy It Now. It's not worth the patent it's written on.
But it also raises fears that those challenges will be met by researchers outside of the US.
Is this in and of itself really something to be afraid of? That scientific advances might happen without the U.S.'s participation does not seem so threatening to me. If anything that fact is just an obvious corollary to the fact that the U.S. has lost interest in mainstream science, and is currently spending much more heavily on all the military / "defense" related technologies and advancements they can.
There was a time, I've been told, when the US actually worked with other countries rather than simply trying to dominate and control them all. If we don't go back to that before our government loses too much power throwing fits internationally, and spreading terror and submission nationally through it's ironically named "war on terror", the US will continue to drift more and more toward being what it used to accuse the USSR of being.
We should be HAPPY if other countries do with scientific research, we should form joint projects - Working together is not just a good idea on a personal level. This whole national attitude that we have to do everything better, first, and completely alone - that is a kind of psychosis that should not be supported. It's pretty fucked up that even 1% of Americans are willing enablers for being abusive toward the rest of the world, let alone 29% or whatever it is today.
People with those kind of fears pushed us into war with Iraq, and the same group will push us into the blue light special war of the month for as long as we let them run our country. It's a _business_ for them, and it has nothing to do with (our) security.
ok, we haven't been talking about this on slashdot for decade_S_. but a long time.
but the guy deserves honest consideration. if you don't think he's 'electable', how would it hurt to vote for him? you can't live your life based in fear of what everyone else will do. think for yourself and do something right regardless.
Read about what he believes in on his web site. It's pretty fucking obvious if you are a fan of informed consent in who you let run your government. No one else has ever come close to the level of detail he's not only put together but has freely shared online.
I've met him. He is a good guy and could handle the __job__ of being president better than anyone else who has run in my lifetime. Say whatever you want about his appearance, he is the one person who has been consistent and right about the importance of peace, all this time.
If you still think that looking good is more important than doing good in our leader, you're a fool, and you might as well re-elect bush. It's SO offensive that he's not on the poll. FIX THAT!
He's the obvious slashdot candidate, and the only one who understands the issues we have been talking about online for decades (check my user number, I've been around a while.)
Here are just a few examples of for incredibly forward thinking this man is:
Bullshit. If you vote for a party that has no expectation of actually winning in an election where your bloc may be able to sway the vote between someone like Bush and Kerry, you are just as responsible as you would be if you didn't vote at all. Bullshit. If you refuse to ever vote for someone you don't think will do a good job, and instead vote for someone who is more pandering to the poll averages, you'll help to elect someone in the primary for your "lesser evil" party who doesn't know what the hell s/he stands for, won't take a stand on anything important, and will lose anyway. And along the way they cost the integrity of all those who vote for the more "electable" one despite it not necessarily being the person they would choose if it were up to them.
You have more hope of making a career of playing slot machines than you do of intelligently influencing election results by "strategically" voting for the lesser man. You've been gamed, man. Wake up. That is not how democracy works.
As a fellow shamed American, I have to point out by refusing to take ownership of your opportunity to affect the government of the US, unless you've already been working to change things, you are part of the problem. A lot of people would rather sit back and call real change impossible (or "un-electable") instead of thinking for themselves and doing something about it. You may not be able to directly affect more than 100 or so people if you work hard, but if you kick ass at it, those you manage to inspire just may start to add up, once they start trying too.
Our behavior as a country has been very, very shitty toward the rest of the world. Agreed. But when you take that and go straight to "welcome to the new world order", as if it's done and finished and nothing that *you* could affect, you're just cheating the country of a thinking citizen to assuage your own guilt for not doing that affecting in your own community.
If you have already been trying your ass off, then.. you deserve full credit for that, and maybe an apology, but I'm sensing an armchair critic mentality here.
Personally I don't think the solution to US national arrogance is for the people of _Austrailia_ to grow some balls and start voting for someone who might tell US off. The solution is for people in this country to see through this idiotic premise I see everywhere that you are voting for who you think will win, instead of who you think SHOULD win.
Um, this is worth gutting all in a huff about. The government is supposed to defend freedom, not take it away. He might have been stupid to say those things, but NONE WERE THREATS of any kind. nor was the comic. No one accused him of mental problems or being likely to hurt anyone.
The lack of intelligence in law enforcement is no excuse to trample on civil rights. The worst he should have gotten was probation.
Actually, if it came standard in cellphones, you couldn't trust it to really be encrypted. To prevent easy institutionalized monitoring, you have to have an encryption layer under the COMPLETE control of the people talking. That way you know there are no secret extra keys etc.. that others could remove.
It's called thinking ahead. He doesn't assert that the technology exists today. If you believe everything you watch on the Discovery channel you'll think it's just a few years anyway.
How does that in any way diminish from the important other work done by this proposal? Do you want to live in a world where there are weapons systems in space everywhere (openly)? What if "the terrorists" get control of them? What if the supreme court appoints another idiot to run the country?
Why are you so obsessed with the context? How could you even get into that before talking about whether or not it's deserved?
I think it's SO OBVIOUS that he needs to be removed that it's going to be self serving for ANYONE at ANY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT to do it. It's like picking up a $500 bill you dropped six years ago -- it's stupid not to do it. Easy pickings.
Hell, even Bush could score some points by ditching Cheney.
None of that is important - the issue is: Do you or don't you think Cheney deserves to be removed from office?
If yes, you are only hurting yourself by doing anything but help.
It doesn't matter whether Pelosi or Clinton or Reid or anyone else has already spoken out in support of impeachment. It's a process, and they just don't have the balls to do what needs to be done. They'll come around when people start contacting their senators and representatives and demand that they sponsor this bill.
This is absolutely the right thing to do, and a great time to do it. The Bush administration has more than earned a public trial to determine if they are indeed criminals, as so many American citizens feel more and more these days.
Cheney is the obvious logical first step.
If you disagree on whether Cheney has earned himself an impeachment, that's one thing - but keep in mind the country's most recent impeachment proceedings, and how serious of an accusation it took to trigger those - a cover-up over a consensual sexual relationship.
How does that compare to the loss of the hundreds of thousands of lives in Iraq, the permanent loss of civil rights, and our new status as a country that disappears people, tortures them, with the wholehearted consent and endorsement of our president and vice president?
This kind of sick aggression, in the name of a country supposedly supportive of peace, cannot go unanswered for. What kind of example would be set for future presidents?
Congress is getting the background laid with the investigation into Gonzales, and Rove, and now Rice.. Reid is testing the waters by escalating his verbal attacks on Cheney every day - The circle is closing. You may think I'm dreaming, but I'd take bets that we'll see at least part of this administration taken down before their term is out.
Reid and the rest of the dems will need escalating tactics anyway, once bush and friends piss them off sufficiently, which they are well on their way to doing. Getting impeachment articles off the ground would be a good next step before the next negotiating round over the Iraq funding bill, once the first is veto'ed.
As to whether the rest of congress _currently_ and _publicly_ supports impeachment -- how is that AT ALL relevant to whether a citizen like you or me should contact their representative, and tell them how their constituents feel about it?
It's our duty to tell them, and it's their duty to do it. But in that order.
I can't believe how little support there is for such a good man, loudly supporting things (such as world peace), that everyone pretends they support while dismissing him without a second thought. And then they vote for some asshole who starts war after war after war while deeply invested in defense companies.
Going on and on about how others don't support Kucinich as a "reason" not to support him yourself, is just an excuse not to think for yourself, and THAT is the biggest problem in politics. Go on and on about how YOU feel if you want to be a helpful part of democracy.
Sometimes in the depths of a sickening tragedy, joking about it is all you can do to stay sane when you've done everything else you can. I really like your document. I have been wanting to write something similar for a long time.
Dennis Kucinich has more credibility than the whole white house put together. What the hell are you talking about? He's the only one who didn't have to completely switch loyalties on Iraq, he voted against the patriot act before putting it down was cool -- that's just the slightest beginning, I will leave it at that to avoid a flame war here..
But bottom line, check your facts, and his voting record. You owe an apology.
Where is the punishment already? Stop whining and get an injunction to ban all microsoft product imports and sales until they comply with the rulings of the court.
b) why not, um, actually use scary quotes from Hillary? YES, thank you. There is so much more that could have been done - this (job) loser just did the absolute minimum of work to get the concept across, congratulated himself, and posted it. The sad thing is that this ad could have been effective and it's not because it's made from a well-worn template.
People are so starved for creativity they'll praise anything.. sorry but it's not there in this video.
Sorry no. It wasn't well designed, well done, or even original. The general shittiness of political ads does not make this one any cooler in comparison.
Copying Apple's 1984 ad has been done some many times it's past cliché now.
What might have been useful would have been if, in the ad, they said even one thing which gave a REASON that Obama might be better than Hillary. All they did was dress her up as a totalitarian leader in the commercial and copy all the old footage. Seriously, this is a two day project for a decent editor. It's sad that someone with real creative thought didn't get involved, because it really could have been cool if they would have made a rational argument. There was no evidence, just a cartoon of what this guy saw Hillary as. He needed to explain WHY.
Slashdot Mirror
Buy It Now, when it was introduced years ago, marked the beginning of the slow and painful death of ebay as THE auction site on the internet. Now it's all a bunch of buy-it-now crap from fronting retailers, the real people are all gone.
Fuck Buy It Now. It's not worth the patent it's written on.
if this works perfectly, they will have created a way for machines to use humans as food.
sure, on a tiny scale, the tiny fractions of a watt seem insignificant - but the energy is not free, it slows your bloodstream a tiny amount.
when a nanoscale does it's typical ramping up to larger swarms to do a collective job, it can and will eventually add up.
just add self-replication and we have a potentially awesome sci-fi horror flick without the fi.
Way to half-ass yet another product, Bill.
Is this in and of itself really something to be afraid of? That scientific advances might happen without the U.S.'s participation does not seem so threatening to me. If anything that fact is just an obvious corollary to the fact that the U.S. has lost interest in mainstream science, and is currently spending much more heavily on all the military / "defense" related technologies and advancements they can.
There was a time, I've been told, when the US actually worked with other countries rather than simply trying to dominate and control them all. If we don't go back to that before our government loses too much power throwing fits internationally, and spreading terror and submission nationally through it's ironically named "war on terror", the US will continue to drift more and more toward being what it used to accuse the USSR of being.
We should be HAPPY if other countries do with scientific research, we should form joint projects - Working together is not just a good idea on a personal level. This whole national attitude that we have to do everything better, first, and completely alone - that is a kind of psychosis that should not be supported. It's pretty fucked up that even 1% of Americans are willing enablers for being abusive toward the rest of the world, let alone 29% or whatever it is today.
People with those kind of fears pushed us into war with Iraq, and the same group will push us into the blue light special war of the month for as long as we let them run our country. It's a _business_ for them, and it has nothing to do with (our) security.
ok, we haven't been talking about this on slashdot for decade_S_. but a long time.
but the guy deserves honest consideration. if you don't think he's 'electable', how would it hurt to vote for him? you can't live your life based in fear of what everyone else will do. think for yourself and do something right regardless.
I've met him. He is a good guy and could handle the __job__ of being president better than anyone else who has run in my lifetime. Say whatever you want about his appearance, he is the one person who has been consistent and right about the importance of peace, all this time.
If you still think that looking good is more important than doing good in our leader, you're a fool, and you might as well re-elect bush. It's SO offensive that he's not on the poll. FIX THAT!
He's the obvious slashdot candidate, and the only one who understands the issues we have been talking about online for decades (check my user number, I've been around a while.)
Here are just a few examples of for incredibly forward thinking this man is:
He at least deserves a spot before Cthulhu. The future of the country matters. C'mon, I know the poll software can handle another spot or two.
You have more hope of making a career of playing slot machines than you do of intelligently influencing election results by "strategically" voting for the lesser man. You've been gamed, man. Wake up. That is not how democracy works.
As a fellow shamed American, I have to point out by refusing to take ownership of your opportunity to affect the government of the US, unless you've already been working to change things, you are part of the problem. A lot of people would rather sit back and call real change impossible (or "un-electable") instead of thinking for themselves and doing something about it. You may not be able to directly affect more than 100 or so people if you work hard, but if you kick ass at it, those you manage to inspire just may start to add up, once they start trying too.
Our behavior as a country has been very, very shitty toward the rest of the world. Agreed. But when you take that and go straight to "welcome to the new world order", as if it's done and finished and nothing that *you* could affect, you're just cheating the country of a thinking citizen to assuage your own guilt for not doing that affecting in your own community.
If you have already been trying your ass off, then.. you deserve full credit for that, and maybe an apology, but I'm sensing an armchair critic mentality here.
Personally I don't think the solution to US national arrogance is for the people of _Austrailia_ to grow some balls and start voting for someone who might tell US off.
The solution is for people in this country to see through this idiotic premise I see everywhere that you are voting for who you think will win, instead of who you think SHOULD win.
It ain't Australia's problem, it's ours.
Um, this is worth gutting all in a huff about. The government is supposed to defend freedom, not take it away. He might have been stupid to say those things, but NONE WERE THREATS of any kind. nor was the comic. No one accused him of mental problems or being likely to hurt anyone.
The lack of intelligence in law enforcement is no excuse to trample on civil rights. The worst he should have gotten was probation.
Thank you. Someone mod that up so I can find it if I ever need it later.
Actually, if it came standard in cellphones, you couldn't trust it to really be encrypted. To prevent easy institutionalized monitoring, you have to have an encryption layer under the COMPLETE control of the people talking. That way you know there are no secret extra keys etc.. that others could remove.
Thank you for the example. I called, but writing is a good idea too.
-
Kucinich -- ENOUGH with the fucking lies
When Clinton was impeached, it was THE BIG STORY for weeks, it was the major headline on drudge for days and days... this is VERY different.
damn straight!
I've called mine.
It's called thinking ahead. He doesn't assert that the technology exists today. If you believe everything you watch on the Discovery channel you'll think it's just a few years anyway.
How does that in any way diminish from the important other work done by this proposal? Do you want to live in a world where there are weapons systems in space everywhere (openly)? What if "the terrorists" get control of them? What if the supreme court appoints another idiot to run the country?
Why are you so obsessed with the context? How could you even get into that before talking about whether or not it's deserved?
I think it's SO OBVIOUS that he needs to be removed that it's going to be self serving for ANYONE at ANY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT to do it. It's like picking up a $500 bill you dropped six years ago -- it's stupid not to do it. Easy pickings.
Hell, even Bush could score some points by ditching Cheney.
None of that is important - the issue is:
Do you or don't you think Cheney deserves to be removed from office?
If yes, you are only hurting yourself by doing anything but help.
FINALLY!!!!!
It doesn't matter whether Pelosi or Clinton or Reid or anyone else has already spoken out in support of impeachment. It's a process, and they just don't have the balls to do what needs to be done. They'll come around when people start contacting their senators and representatives and demand that they sponsor this bill.
This is absolutely the right thing to do, and a great time to do it. The Bush administration has more than earned a public trial to determine if they are indeed criminals, as so many American citizens feel more and more these days.
Cheney is the obvious logical first step.
If you disagree on whether Cheney has earned himself an impeachment, that's one thing - but keep in mind the country's most recent impeachment proceedings, and how serious of an accusation it took to trigger those - a cover-up over a consensual sexual relationship.
How does that compare to the loss of the hundreds of thousands of lives in Iraq, the permanent loss of civil rights, and our new status as a country that disappears people, tortures them, with the wholehearted consent and endorsement of our president and vice president?
This kind of sick aggression, in the name of a country supposedly supportive of peace, cannot go unanswered for. What kind of example would be set for future presidents?
Congress is getting the background laid with the investigation into Gonzales, and Rove, and now Rice.. Reid is testing the waters by escalating his verbal attacks on Cheney every day - The circle is closing. You may think I'm dreaming, but I'd take bets that we'll see at least part of this administration taken down before their term is out.
Reid and the rest of the dems will need escalating tactics anyway, once bush and friends piss them off sufficiently, which they are well on their way to doing. Getting impeachment articles off the ground would be a good next step before the next negotiating round over the Iraq funding bill, once the first is veto'ed.
As to whether the rest of congress _currently_ and _publicly_ supports impeachment -- how is that AT ALL relevant to whether a citizen like you or me should contact their representative, and tell them how their constituents feel about it?
It's our duty to tell them, and it's their duty to do it. But in that order.
I can't believe how little support there is for such a good man, loudly supporting things (such as world peace), that everyone pretends they support while dismissing him without a second thought. And then they vote for some asshole who starts war after war after war while deeply invested in defense companies.
Going on and on about how others don't support Kucinich as a "reason" not to support him yourself, is just an excuse not to think for yourself, and THAT is the biggest problem in politics. Go on and on about how YOU feel if you want to be a helpful part of democracy.
Sometimes in the depths of a sickening tragedy, joking about it is all you can do to stay sane when you've done everything else you can. I really like your document. I have been wanting to write something similar for a long time.
Calling for a ban on space-based weapons is not paranoid, it's brilliant.
Aren't there enough problems from the development of weapons systems already?
Dennis Kucinich has more credibility than the whole white house put together. What the hell are you talking about? He's the only one who didn't have to completely switch loyalties on Iraq, he voted against the patriot act before putting it down was cool -- that's just the slightest beginning, I will leave it at that to avoid a flame war here..
But bottom line, check your facts, and his voting record. You owe an apology.
This will make it possible for a change of mood to deny your access to your own accounts. ..which will probably not help with the mood thing.
Even in capitalist democracies, they are supposed to enforce court orders.
Ok, forget blockading windows, I admit that was a bit of a macboy fantasy..
Just get orders to seize their bank accounts, take the appropriate amount of money, and it's done.
Where is the punishment already? Stop whining and get an injunction to ban all microsoft product imports and sales until they comply with the rulings of the court.
People are so starved for creativity they'll praise anything.. sorry but it's not there in this video.
Sorry no. It wasn't well designed, well done, or even original.
The general shittiness of political ads does not make this one any cooler in comparison.
Copying Apple's 1984 ad has been done some many times it's past cliché now.
Two quick examples for ya:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNru2SGZSms
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2665948/
----
What might have been useful would have been if, in the ad, they said even one thing which gave a REASON that Obama might be better than Hillary. All they did was dress her up as a totalitarian leader in the commercial and copy all the old footage. Seriously, this is a two day project for a decent editor. It's sad that someone with real creative thought didn't get involved, because it really could have been cool if they would have made a rational argument. There was no evidence, just a cartoon of what this guy saw Hillary as. He needed to explain WHY.