Republicans like Ron Paul are strongly against such behavior. The fully corporatized Democrats and Republicans alike are Just as guilty of the things you assert are Republican.
The Mike Gravels and Dennis Kuciniches of your favored party are few and far between, but respectably hostile to such things.
The Ideological basis of Classical Liberalism, which is what the "good" Republicans subscribe to, is quite opposed to a large spying intervening government.
Most modern Neo-Liberals/Democrats I have the pleasure to listen to have a very ad-hoc/inconsistent feeling about government wiretapping and other sorts of police-state tactics used by government. If some "good"(protect the children/minority/[fill in your blank]) comes of it then they seem to be fine with all sorts of interventionist and police-state action. "Good" in this case seems to be when a Democrat is running or providing "Oversight" to the abusive action, "Evil" when a Republican does the same.
Branches of government are full of rent-seeking opportunists with both R's and D's before their names, it is disingenuous of you to assert that it is wholly worthy to blame Republicans alone for this disgusting and wholly unconservative President and Administration.
Nixon was not a true conservative either. Kissinger was a proto-neocon. And Hillary Clinton worked on one of Nixons election campaigns, before she became a Democrat, there you go.
For me, it explains a few things, the with me or against me worldview, the incessant blinking, the spastic twitching of his arms, his habit of blowing up at those that disagree with him. He is additionally NOT A CONSERVATIVE (bailout drama anyone?), and represents how beaten down the Republican brand has been by the Right Wing Statists in charge.
Electing McCain during the primaries was just the shot in the foot the Republican Party was trucking towards with their willingness to go Big Government Big Spending and Big War against their bases wish. Now they meld Palin to the ticket to try to bring it back to some effect, but too little too late. Maybe the Republican party can have a purge after this long series of continued complete failure to adhere to principles and we can have a Coburn/Paul/Stoessel big tent that might actually do what it says again.
Just like the were falling over each other to vote for the bailout that the public was overwhelmingly against? Or do you mean to tell me that they didn't know that the public was against it?
I think they were just trying to establish that they were "bold leaders" determined not to let the uneducated masses sway them from necessary and decisive action (for their primary campaign donors).
If Nancy Pelosi and John McCain firmly agree on anything, it's on being bold leaders. It is after all what pays their (primary campaign donors) bills.
I suppose you believe that intense regulation and vast government intervention makes everything better? Who will ensure that a powerful regulatory agency isn't just as corrupt as the oligarchies (state aided ones) that control the country of Mexico? The power of the state of Mexico is used to oppress the citizens of Mexico, through the Mexican Army and Police, and keep the economy running to benefit the oligarchs, how is that libertarian in principle?
Marx created something that imploded awhile back, perhaps you could note the wonderful degree of autonomy the population enjoyed under these socio-economic conditions before you start trashing ideologies you obviously do not understand.
You can have third party applications (GASP Enterprise ones even) that are based on Perl, or are capable of using Perl to access their API. If following this, you install a non OS Vendor version of Perl, and have other problems requiring support your support headache could forseeably increase. In this kind of scenario (though you are likely someone who trashes Perls performance and think it beneath your favored language(s)) 100x slowdown affects you greatly, and will negatively impact business.
Got me on that reference, I read an article that had a survey (a smaller sample size than the one you mention definitely and more recent) but in this case I probably should have said Many, a significant number, not most. Additionally belief doesn't have to be blind, it is faith that does (as the saying goes) which throws out whether someone is stupid/smart no matter their particular specializations of knowledge. Then it comes down to which group of scientists you sample, heavy hitters at the razors edge of scientific accomplishment or the entire mass of scientifically degreed folks. *shrug*
There is dogma in belief, Athiests believe in the absence of a thing, and are convinced of it I argue just as dogmatically and pigheadedly at times as the most ardent fundamentalist billy boy.
It has been my experience that Athiests are often overbearingly abrasive and HIGHLY dogmatic in their adherence to whatever Science of the Day (peer reviewed by the proper licensed authorities of course) as a sort of substitute for the belief in say a Old guy Hurling Thunderbolts or Jewish guy on a Stick.
I approach religion as a 'to each their own' sort of thing, Athiests grate on me because of their knee-jerk (dogmatic?) consignment to absurdity of the very possibility of the soul, at times claiming it is merely because there is no evidence, but immediately discounting as rubbish and assassinating the character of those who would differ in a manner unbecoming of someone who respected another human being.
To your last comment, yes, it's a consistent (and valuable) reaction to christian fundamentalists in the US, but when it gets out of hand, religion becomes a thought-crime, and I don't like that at all. See Dawkins and his Neocon tendencies for an example of a (very dogmatic) athiest making you all look like Evil Bastards. But I respect ones right to whatever belief they believe.
And furthermore athiesm is not an ideology? I suppose you have a point there it's not one per-se, but it's a good umbrella for positivism, humanism, naturalism and secularism which are.
An interesting furthering to this 80% popular belief in the "oh so horrible" supernatural.
Many scientists apparently (really good scientists who are peer-reviewed and everything, not necessarily the creation science/ID folks) tend to more often than not believe in a creator of some sort.
Essentially I believe the polling went somewhere close to 50% Believing in Something and the other 50% Believing in Nothing, with probable gradation in which exact belief or degree of absolute dogmatic conviction in a belief a plurality of beliefs or non-belief they espoused individually.
Here's an Aside: Why is it dogmatic reactionary A-Theists get so shrill when someone might be open to the possibility of, or find comfort in the practice of a belief [which incidentally is between them and the belief, not them and the critic(Any Given Dogmatic Reactionary Athiest)].)
Do they just not want to get along? I suppose lacking faith in anything else, the redeeming biochemical cocktail provided by having irrational grudges are a great substitute for the wellspring of endorphins likely present during religious experiences.
Wow, what a puff job review. It's almost as though someone was trying to push an agenda or something. It is good however that even the rat-bags that cooperatively decided to pull the wool over the American publics eyes with regard to Iraq are now admitting their error in print. And I suppose they don't think they are rat-bags either. Let's just call 'em security industry spooks with a weighty conflict of interest, with their collective hands caught in the cookie jar.
But then you'd become a haxx0r3d node in a botnet with your games machine, probably not a good idea:) and not good for you gaming performance either. Since you're probably administering your firewall well though maybe not a problem.
Exactly, if the consensus opinion of congress was towards a declaration of war Ron would be a president who would be sure of doing it (per the constitutions definition), I think the view of the grandparent poster represents the immediately dismissive view of Paul as isolationist. This view is rather tired, as Paul's overall position would be one of encouraging relationships other than military relationships with other nations. I'd characterize the immediate withdrawal of troops as essential, and I believe that Iraq would likely (since it has reasonable financial capability) purchase and implement it's own security forces. Why not send Carly, Bill Oreilly, Haliburton and let Blackwater handle the contract they can charge their reasonable rates to Iraq. The great thing about this is that the funds come from a different source than tax revenue. If Iraq wants the bases, we can sell them too, cha-ching.
Then, we start making ethanol out of sugar, and make irrelevant our foreign energy dependence, and be less hated everywhere eventually.
Not that it isn't accurate (that ebay did in fact see an upward trend in linux based phishing I mean), but I suspect the Redmond Machine is emitting carefully crafted puppet FUD again. Glad you made me reRTFA and catch that wee bit of disclosure.
Exactly my point, this is exactly the kind of post I enjoy reading, I can go use a translator or check the opinion of those who can read it on this forum. This story IMO was vastly more interesting to read for me than the repeated PS3/Wii/XBox360 console controversies for instance.
Copyright requires this kind of enforcement maintenance, not patents. I believe their issuance grants exclusive use, and the right to reassign rights and engage in licensing and cross licensing, but it is not required for them to sue against percieved infringement to maintain the patent.
WAD is my most favored TLA for such responses, with a parenthetical 4 letter variant WA(P)D. Respectively Working As Designed and Working As (Poorly) Designed.
Odds are with this particular component, they were on the way to reducing functionality in their core component to force you into buying a third party developed component that was actually well designed and or useful.
They do probably make a fair amount of federal grant money available to VFD's however they do get donations from corporations and individuals as well. I suspect if the Feds created a vacuum any locality in their right mind would step up to the plate and contribute as well.
Complete consumption based taxation without taxing income directly is a good recent solution, though Neal Boortz has forsaken what credibility he used to have by staking his opinion on the side of justifying the war in Iraq. Pity, that.
I go back and forth about these issues with an Anarcho-Syndicalist friend of mine fairly often, we seem to agree more often than not on things of this nature. Top down resource control systems tend to get hijacked by inefficiencies in the forms of waste and/or fraud. Neither Anarcho-Capitalism Libertarianism or Anarcho-Syndicalism value the sort of pyramidally constructed resource allocation mechanism we have currently.
Arguably a good criticism of the libertarian utopia, but assuming income tax is the only way to fund government provided service is implied in your statement. Trade tariffs were the way in which the federal government was supposed to obtain revenue. This provided a natural incentive for the government to encourage trade (making more revenue for more international trade) and provided a natural constraint on intruding in the state citizens lives. A state government could institute something like an income tax for its citizens to pay for roads and schools and nice fire departments that don't require repayment from fire sufferers. Most fire departments where I live survive with money generated by citizen donations as well as state and federal grants. Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volunteer_Fire_Depart ment (if it is to be believed) seems to verify my assertion indicating that 73 percent of all fire departments being volunteer fire departments, though I'm not an expert capable of verifying the accuracy of the statement.
How this all would relate to the RIAA legislation is not entirely clear. But the Feds have their interstate commerce clause to use with anything occurring over the wires, and the education department mandates the existence of a pool of money for educating students to be misused in this manner. Assuming the lack of an income tax would result in a completely dog-eat-dog society appears to be your position, I disagree. I say it is an oversimplification and is a sign of a lack of understanding of how a libertarian society would settle out.
I salute your Bush Apologism, that surely is what neocons mean when they say Patriotism nowadays. Did you see those pics of Rummy with puppy ranching S.H. back in the day?
Way to go on the Republican smaller government platform too by the way. If only the voters had given those fiscally responsible defenders of liberty more time.
I would say the same, gmails mail interface is actually somewhat off-putting, with no concept of a folder or really a different way of organization than I would prefer. Blame it on me being used to folders, I guess.
But the apps (Calendar, and word processing) won me over and actually work well, the homepage customization is actually useful in terms of organizing what you like and making it easy to find new things to stuff in and evaluate. Gmail despite this, is in the same neighborhood, and filters spam rather well, so it'll pay to actually figure out how to organize items their way.
Contrast this ease of use with outlook 2000->2007 filter writing dialog boxes and their insane rigid modality and you have a case study for what Google does right where Microsoft does wrong. 2007 is much improved from a general interface ease of use and prettiness standpoint, but they kept enough of the bad to put me off.
Slashdot Mirror
Republicans like Ron Paul are strongly against such behavior. The fully corporatized Democrats and Republicans alike are Just as guilty of the things you assert are Republican.
The Mike Gravels and Dennis Kuciniches of your favored party are few and far between, but respectably hostile to such things.
The Ideological basis of Classical Liberalism, which is what the "good" Republicans subscribe to, is quite opposed to a large spying intervening government.
Most modern Neo-Liberals/Democrats I have the pleasure to listen to have a very ad-hoc/inconsistent feeling about government wiretapping and other sorts of police-state tactics used by government. If some "good"(protect the children/minority/[fill in your blank]) comes of it then they seem to be fine with all sorts of interventionist and police-state action. "Good" in this case seems to be when a Democrat is running or providing "Oversight" to the abusive action, "Evil" when a Republican does the same.
Branches of government are full of rent-seeking opportunists with both R's and D's before their names, it is disingenuous of you to assert that it is wholly worthy to blame Republicans alone for this disgusting and wholly unconservative President and Administration.
Nixon was not a true conservative either. Kissinger was a proto-neocon. And Hillary Clinton worked on one of Nixons election campaigns, before she became a Democrat, there you go.
According to this article: http://www.amconmag.com/article/2008/oct/20/00014/ McCain likely suffers from traumatic brain injury.
For me, it explains a few things, the with me or against me worldview, the incessant blinking, the spastic twitching of his arms, his habit of blowing up at those that disagree with him. He is additionally NOT A CONSERVATIVE (bailout drama anyone?), and represents how beaten down the Republican brand has been by the Right Wing Statists in charge.
Electing McCain during the primaries was just the shot in the foot the Republican Party was trucking towards with their willingness to go Big Government Big Spending and Big War against their bases wish. Now they meld Palin to the ticket to try to bring it back to some effect, but too little too late. Maybe the Republican party can have a purge after this long series of continued complete failure to adhere to principles and we can have a Coburn/Paul/Stoessel big tent that might actually do what it says again.
Just like the were falling over each other to vote for the bailout that the public was overwhelmingly against? Or do you mean to tell me that they didn't know that the public was against it?
I think they were just trying to establish that they were "bold leaders" determined not to let the uneducated masses sway them from necessary and decisive action (for their primary campaign donors).
If Nancy Pelosi and John McCain firmly agree on anything, it's on being bold leaders. It is after all what pays their (primary campaign donors) bills.
I suppose you believe that intense regulation and vast government intervention makes everything better? Who will ensure that a powerful regulatory agency isn't just as corrupt as the oligarchies (state aided ones) that control the country of Mexico? The power of the state of Mexico is used to oppress the citizens of Mexico, through the Mexican Army and Police, and keep the economy running to benefit the oligarchs, how is that libertarian in principle?
Marx created something that imploded awhile back, perhaps you could note the wonderful degree of autonomy the population enjoyed under these socio-economic conditions before you start trashing ideologies you obviously do not understand.
You can have third party applications (GASP Enterprise ones even) that are based on Perl, or are capable of using Perl to access their API. If following this, you install a non OS Vendor version of Perl, and have other problems requiring support your support headache could forseeably increase.
In this kind of scenario (though you are likely someone who trashes Perls performance and think it beneath your favored language(s)) 100x slowdown affects you greatly, and will negatively impact business.
Got me on that reference, I read an article that had a survey (a smaller sample size than the one you mention definitely and more recent) but in this case I probably should have said Many, a significant number, not most. Additionally belief doesn't have to be blind, it is faith that does (as the saying goes) which throws out whether someone is stupid/smart no matter their particular specializations of knowledge. Then it comes down to which group of scientists you sample, heavy hitters at the razors edge of scientific accomplishment or the entire mass of scientifically degreed folks. *shrug*
There is dogma in belief, Athiests believe in the absence of a thing, and are convinced of it I argue just as dogmatically and pigheadedly at times as the most ardent fundamentalist billy boy.
It has been my experience that Athiests are often overbearingly abrasive and HIGHLY dogmatic in their adherence to whatever Science of the Day (peer reviewed by the proper licensed authorities of course) as a sort of substitute for the belief in say a Old guy Hurling Thunderbolts or Jewish guy on a Stick.
I approach religion as a 'to each their own' sort of thing, Athiests grate on me because of their knee-jerk (dogmatic?) consignment to absurdity of the very possibility of the soul, at times claiming it is merely because there is no evidence, but immediately discounting as rubbish and assassinating the character of those who would differ in a manner unbecoming of someone who respected another human being.
To your last comment, yes, it's a consistent (and valuable) reaction to christian fundamentalists in the US, but when it gets out of hand, religion becomes a thought-crime, and I don't like that at all. See Dawkins and his Neocon tendencies for an example of a (very dogmatic) athiest making you all look like Evil Bastards. But I respect ones right to whatever belief they believe.
And furthermore athiesm is not an ideology? I suppose you have a point there it's not one per-se, but it's a good umbrella for positivism, humanism, naturalism and secularism which are.
An interesting furthering to this 80% popular belief in the "oh so horrible" supernatural.
Many scientists apparently (really good scientists who are peer-reviewed and everything, not necessarily the creation science/ID folks) tend to more often than not believe in a creator of some sort.
Essentially I believe the polling went somewhere close to 50% Believing in Something and the other 50% Believing in Nothing, with probable gradation in which exact belief or degree of absolute dogmatic conviction in a belief a plurality of beliefs or non-belief they espoused individually.
Here's an Aside: Why is it dogmatic reactionary A-Theists get so shrill when someone might be open to the possibility of, or find comfort in the practice of a belief [which incidentally is between them and the belief, not them and the critic(Any Given Dogmatic Reactionary Athiest)].)
Do they just not want to get along? I suppose lacking faith in anything else, the redeeming biochemical cocktail provided by having irrational grudges are a great substitute for the wellspring of endorphins likely present during religious experiences.
Wow, what a puff job review. It's almost as though someone was trying to push an agenda or something. It is good however that even the rat-bags that cooperatively decided to pull the wool over the American publics eyes with regard to Iraq are now admitting their error in print. And I suppose they don't think they are rat-bags either. Let's just call 'em security industry spooks with a weighty conflict of interest, with their collective hands caught in the cookie jar.
But then you'd become a haxx0r3d node in a botnet with your games machine, probably not a good idea :) and not good for you gaming performance either. Since you're probably administering your firewall well though maybe not a problem.
Exactly, if the consensus opinion of congress was towards a declaration of war Ron would be a president who would be sure of doing it (per the constitutions definition), I think the view of the grandparent poster represents the immediately dismissive view of Paul as isolationist. This view is rather tired, as Paul's overall position would be one of encouraging relationships other than military relationships with other nations. I'd characterize the immediate withdrawal of troops as essential, and I believe that Iraq would likely (since it has reasonable financial capability) purchase and implement it's own security forces. Why not send Carly, Bill Oreilly, Haliburton and let Blackwater handle the contract they can charge their reasonable rates to Iraq. The great thing about this is that the funds come from a different source than tax revenue. If Iraq wants the bases, we can sell them too, cha-ching.
Then, we start making ethanol out of sugar, and make irrelevant our foreign energy dependence, and be less hated everywhere eventually.
Not that it isn't accurate (that ebay did in fact see an upward trend in linux based phishing I mean), but I suspect the Redmond Machine is emitting carefully crafted puppet FUD again. Glad you made me reRTFA and catch that wee bit of disclosure.
Mod parent insightful and funny.
Exactly my point, this is exactly the kind of post I enjoy reading, I can go use a translator or check the opinion of those who can read it on this forum. This story IMO was vastly more interesting to read for me than the repeated PS3/Wii/XBox360 console controversies for instance.
Dumb As Rocks + Litigious.
To kick a man like this while he's down fills me with glee.
Samba is open, it is based on reverse engineering of the SMB NMB CIFS protocol accretum. See: http://us4.samba.org/samba/docs/SambaIntro.html gg nm.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bible
Noun
Singular
bible
Plural
bibles
bible (plural bibles)
1. A comprehensive manual that describes something. (e.g., handyman's bible).
2. (nautical) A holystone.
You know, I believe you are right about that being a feature of Trademark law, rather than copyright.
But after all IANAL.
I am incorrect: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=235665&cid =19220055
Contains the Laches information and some explanation.
Copyright requires this kind of enforcement maintenance, not patents. I believe their issuance grants exclusive use, and the right to reassign rights and engage in licensing and cross licensing, but it is not required for them to sue against percieved infringement to maintain the patent.
WAD is my most favored TLA for such responses, with a parenthetical 4 letter variant WA(P)D. Respectively Working As Designed and Working As (Poorly) Designed.
Odds are with this particular component, they were on the way to reducing functionality in their core component to force you into buying a third party developed component that was actually well designed and or useful.
They do probably make a fair amount of federal grant money available to VFD's however they do get donations from corporations and individuals as well. I suspect if the Feds created a vacuum any locality in their right mind would step up to the plate and contribute as well.
Complete consumption based taxation without taxing income directly is a good recent solution, though Neal Boortz has forsaken what credibility he used to have by staking his opinion on the side of justifying the war in Iraq. Pity, that.
I go back and forth about these issues with an Anarcho-Syndicalist friend of mine fairly often, we seem to agree more often than not on things of this nature. Top down resource control systems tend to get hijacked by inefficiencies in the forms of waste and/or fraud. Neither Anarcho-Capitalism Libertarianism or Anarcho-Syndicalism value the sort of pyramidally constructed resource allocation mechanism we have currently.
Arguably a good criticism of the libertarian utopia, but assuming income tax is the only way to fund government provided service is implied in your statement. Trade tariffs were the way in which the federal government was supposed to obtain revenue. This provided a natural incentive for the government to encourage trade (making more revenue for more international trade) and provided a natural constraint on intruding in the state citizens lives. A state government could institute something like an income tax for its citizens to pay for roads and schools and nice fire departments that don't require repayment from fire sufferers. Most fire departments where I live survive with money generated by citizen donations as well as state and federal grants. Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volunteer_Fire_Depart ment (if it is to be believed) seems to verify my assertion indicating that 73 percent of all fire departments being volunteer fire departments, though I'm not an expert capable of verifying the accuracy of the statement.
How this all would relate to the RIAA legislation is not entirely clear. But the Feds have their interstate commerce clause to use with anything occurring over the wires, and the education department mandates the existence of a pool of money for educating students to be misused in this manner. Assuming the lack of an income tax would result in a completely dog-eat-dog society appears to be your position, I disagree. I say it is an oversimplification and is a sign of a lack of understanding of how a libertarian society would settle out.
I salute your Bush Apologism, that surely is what neocons mean when they say Patriotism nowadays. Did you see those pics of Rummy with puppy ranching S.H. back in the day?
Way to go on the Republican smaller government platform too by the way. If only the voters had given those fiscally responsible defenders of liberty more time.
I would say the same, gmails mail interface is actually somewhat off-putting, with no concept of a folder or really a different way of organization than I would prefer. Blame it on me being used to folders, I guess.
But the apps (Calendar, and word processing) won me over and actually work well, the homepage customization is actually useful in terms of organizing what you like and making it easy to find new things to stuff in and evaluate. Gmail despite this, is in the same neighborhood, and filters spam rather well, so it'll pay to actually figure out how to organize items their way.
Contrast this ease of use with outlook 2000->2007 filter writing dialog boxes and their insane rigid modality and you have a case study for what Google does right where Microsoft does wrong. 2007 is much improved from a general interface ease of use and prettiness standpoint, but they kept enough of the bad to put me off.
SaveTheStream.org appears to have been slashdotted or is merely an advertisement aggregation.
There was no petition available at the time of this posting.