But who defines that a domain is property? The government, or the regulator. It's not necessarily obvious. And there are other various restrictions in place which make the market operate much better for the customer, too. The point is that whilst the definition of "market" may not be disputed, the definition of "free" is. Some of those big companies would pretty much like it to mean "anarchy" (wonder why?)
For the next year (or so), this will be my counter-example when I debate politics with people who argue that a centrally regulated economy is better than the free market -- as in, "I will happily agree with you, if first you explain this one annoying fact please."
OK, I'll try: domain registrars do not operate in a free market. They are regulated by ICANN. If they were in a truly free market, GoDaddy could (and almost certainly would) simply refuse to transfer any domains away from themselves.
When you hear talk of a free market working and really look at it, you almost always find that the market isn't TRULY free; it needs regulation, and if that regulation weren't there it would be a disaster.
I agree that domain registration is a relatively free market and this is an example of where a relatively free market works well. However it's not truly free; there's your explanation. In fact I suspect you'd be hard pressed to find any market that needs literally no regulation, to protect people's safety, or prohibit companies from screwing customers over.
Just to add another testimonial: I use Namecheap for my 20-odd domains and they have been fine; easy administration, prompting me when I needed to renew them, decent prices, decent customer service.
I haven't tried to move any domains away from Namecheap, so I'm not sure whether they're a bit dodgy there; it'd be a shame if they are.
Their strong anti-SOPA stance also gives them brownie points in my view.
Unfortunately, they also decided to go ahead with an update to Firefox 8 which disabled the user's custom theme for the large majority of users upgrading, even if the custom theme was compatible with Firefox 8. Of course, most users thought that it had been disabled because it was incompatible. As far as I know there are no plans to undo this damage, and so now every major theme has experiences a massive drop in the number of users who have it enabled.
Try installing Firefox 3 theme for Firefox 4+ to solve all the nasty transparency effect issues of the default theme and returning the look (largely) to that of Firefox 3.
I read a while back that North Korea has so much artillery trained on Seoul that they might as well have a nuclear bomb trained on it. They're basically holding a gun to the South's head and telling them to wait while they build a nuke, punching them every now and then.
Yeah I still support military action against the North to get rid of this intolerable situation, but it will be messy and there will be a lot of South Korean casualties.
No one is forming cogent, well-thought out rebuttals to the "problem,"
Oh, yeah, I should've remembered to link to the various software products that would've existed if software patents hadn't been around to show how things would've been better if software patents hadn't been around.
In comparison, Theravada Buddhism is almost completely different. It promotes the idea of people thinking themselves and not just accepting what someone else tells them to. It doesn't believe in some imaginary persons or miracles - Buddha has actually lived, and isn't viewed as some kind of more than a human. It also teaches you to respect other people and in karmas law. The whole religion isn't so much an religion but good guidelines for life.
Right. So, not all religions are bad - the ones which aren't really religions can be good.
If it can reasonably be called a religion, it's bad. "Promoting the idea of people thinking themselves" is not religion in any meaningful sense of the term.
It is not a tax to see public channels it's a license fee to own and use a TV receiver.
If you're talking about the UK licence fee, it's actually a tax to be able to receive any broadcast content originating from the UK - including over the internet. That's why it's illegal to use iPlayer if you don't have a licence. I'm actually rather surprised the government haven't yet agreed to just let the BBC tax everyone's internet connection.
Humans just love earth. Even mild changes to our environment can have extreme consequences on our health.
That assumes that we stick with our weak, somewhat pathetic human bodies which are evolved to massively favour Earthlike conditions. What about transporting our brains (or maybe even just their data contents) to a cybernetic body which is designed to be far more hardy and tolerant of low gravity, lack of oxygen, high radiation, etc.? This seems like a more viable way to go into space.
Biology is nanotechnology that evolved in nature without having been designed... There is no such thing as wars with our "android children". We are the android children, our technology is an extension of ourselves -- not progeny, it is literally ourselves. We won't be "sending robots", we will be sending ourselves who have become merged with "robots". The term you're looking for is "post-biological".
We won't need to engineer robots to escape Earth in our stead, we will be reengineering our very selves.
I agree with this, but the trouble is that it tends to utterly violate most religious dogmas that we're designed by a higher being, and re-engineering ourselves is assraping that so-called "perfect design". To be able to get away with this, we'd need to be able to defeat or eradicate religion, or the religious objection would prevent it. Do you see this happening?
Fine, but I'd like to see voting percentages for these clowns down to sub-10%, as well. That's what really shows that the citizens are discontented with the system. Voters need to say, "these clowns suck, and we're abstaining/throwing our vote away for a third party, because it's better than voting for these clowns."
Chernobyl and Fukishama have now both shown that nuclear incidents are ALWAYS worse then estimated and even worse then admitted to afterwards by the nuclear lobby.
Mods, I think you missed the +1 Funny and clicked Insightful instead. Oops.
You've taken the two worst accidents in the history of nuclear power, ignored the 99.9% of other accidents, and concluded from those two that nuclear incidents are ALWAYS worse than estimated?
To use a car analogy; there was a 15 car pile-up on the motorway the other day. 50 people died. This clearly proves that all car accidents are ALWAYS worse than estimated and will kill lots of people.
Slashdot Mirror
But who defines that a domain is property? The government, or the regulator. It's not necessarily obvious. And there are other various restrictions in place which make the market operate much better for the customer, too. The point is that whilst the definition of "market" may not be disputed, the definition of "free" is. Some of those big companies would pretty much like it to mean "anarchy" (wonder why?)
For the next year (or so), this will be my counter-example when I debate politics with people who argue that a centrally regulated economy is better than the free market -- as in, "I will happily agree with you, if first you explain this one annoying fact please."
OK, I'll try: domain registrars do not operate in a free market. They are regulated by ICANN. If they were in a truly free market, GoDaddy could (and almost certainly would) simply refuse to transfer any domains away from themselves.
When you hear talk of a free market working and really look at it, you almost always find that the market isn't TRULY free; it needs regulation, and if that regulation weren't there it would be a disaster.
I agree that domain registration is a relatively free market and this is an example of where a relatively free market works well. However it's not truly free; there's your explanation. In fact I suspect you'd be hard pressed to find any market that needs literally no regulation, to protect people's safety, or prohibit companies from screwing customers over.
That's like saying you're glad you got malaria so you could feel what it was like to be cured after a while. :-)
So why don't I have it? Because my home like so many others is upside down
Am I the only one who doesn't know what the hell you mean by that?
Just to add another testimonial: I use Namecheap for my 20-odd domains and they have been fine; easy administration, prompting me when I needed to renew them, decent prices, decent customer service.
I haven't tried to move any domains away from Namecheap, so I'm not sure whether they're a bit dodgy there; it'd be a shame if they are.
Their strong anti-SOPA stance also gives them brownie points in my view.
Why not Python?
Because teaching that whitespace before keywords is significant is unnecessary and arguably counterproductive. I like to be able to SEE my code.
I had serious problems with Namecheap. They seemed to want to refuse to renew my domains.
I've had no such problem. Namecheap actually bug me to renew my domains, if anything. :-)
Also, it helps to realize that world does not owe you free shit.
The world doesn't owe you ANYTHING, even life. Try a concentration camp in North Korea, for example.
I don't give a shit what the world owes me, though; I give a shit what makes for a happy, productive society.
this security issue will likely push the P2P DNS efforts already in place.
How's Freenet doing these days? Could this kind of legislation help it?
Unfortunately, they also decided to go ahead with an update to Firefox 8 which disabled the user's custom theme for the large majority of users upgrading, even if the custom theme was compatible with Firefox 8. Of course, most users thought that it had been disabled because it was incompatible. As far as I know there are no plans to undo this damage, and so now every major theme has experiences a massive drop in the number of users who have it enabled.
Try installing Firefox 3 theme for Firefox 4+ to solve all the nasty transparency effect issues of the default theme and returning the look (largely) to that of Firefox 3.
Light and gravity travel equally in 3 dimensions.
I read a while back that North Korea has so much artillery trained on Seoul that they might as well have a nuclear bomb trained on it. They're basically holding a gun to the South's head and telling them to wait while they build a nuke, punching them every now and then.
Yeah I still support military action against the North to get rid of this intolerable situation, but it will be messy and there will be a lot of South Korean casualties.
That's a *South* Korean myth.
In North Korea, they don't know what electric fans are.
No one is forming cogent, well-thought out rebuttals to the "problem,"
Oh, yeah, I should've remembered to link to the various software products that would've existed if software patents hadn't been around to show how things would've been better if software patents hadn't been around.
Try Wolf PAC.
In comparison, Theravada Buddhism is almost completely different. It promotes the idea of people thinking themselves and not just accepting what someone else tells them to. It doesn't believe in some imaginary persons or miracles - Buddha has actually lived, and isn't viewed as some kind of more than a human. It also teaches you to respect other people and in karmas law. The whole religion isn't so much an religion but good guidelines for life.
Right. So, not all religions are bad - the ones which aren't really religions can be good.
If it can reasonably be called a religion, it's bad. "Promoting the idea of people thinking themselves" is not religion in any meaningful sense of the term.
Who are the OWN and the NOT?
There's something missing - a downmod of "you are factually incorrect". Not "I disagree"
What's wrong with -1 Overrated?
It is not a tax to see public channels it's a license fee to own and use a TV receiver.
If you're talking about the UK licence fee, it's actually a tax to be able to receive any broadcast content originating from the UK - including over the internet. That's why it's illegal to use iPlayer if you don't have a licence. I'm actually rather surprised the government haven't yet agreed to just let the BBC tax everyone's internet connection.
Humans just love earth. Even mild changes to our environment can have extreme consequences on our health.
That assumes that we stick with our weak, somewhat pathetic human bodies which are evolved to massively favour Earthlike conditions. What about transporting our brains (or maybe even just their data contents) to a cybernetic body which is designed to be far more hardy and tolerant of low gravity, lack of oxygen, high radiation, etc.? This seems like a more viable way to go into space.
Biology is nanotechnology that evolved in nature without having been designed... There is no such thing as wars with our "android children". We are the android children, our technology is an extension of ourselves -- not progeny, it is literally ourselves. We won't be "sending robots", we will be sending ourselves who have become merged with "robots". The term you're looking for is "post-biological".
We won't need to engineer robots to escape Earth in our stead, we will be reengineering our very selves.
I agree with this, but the trouble is that it tends to utterly violate most religious dogmas that we're designed by a higher being, and re-engineering ourselves is assraping that so-called "perfect design". To be able to get away with this, we'd need to be able to defeat or eradicate religion, or the religious objection would prevent it. Do you see this happening?
230 years? Jesus started the trend.
Fine, but I'd like to see voting percentages for these clowns down to sub-10%, as well. That's what really shows that the citizens are discontented with the system. Voters need to say, "these clowns suck, and we're abstaining/throwing our vote away for a third party, because it's better than voting for these clowns."
Chernobyl and Fukishama have now both shown that nuclear incidents are ALWAYS worse then estimated and even worse then admitted to afterwards by the nuclear lobby.
Mods, I think you missed the +1 Funny and clicked Insightful instead. Oops.
You've taken the two worst accidents in the history of nuclear power, ignored the 99.9% of other accidents, and concluded from those two that nuclear incidents are ALWAYS worse than estimated?
To use a car analogy; there was a 15 car pile-up on the motorway the other day. 50 people died. This clearly proves that all car accidents are ALWAYS worse than estimated and will kill lots of people.