Knew that. The problem is that there is a corollary - or a replacement - theorem to the Peter Principle at work here: people in social hierarchies rise to the level of their sociopathy. Wouldn't it be priceless if the Peter Principle was coined by a sociopath as a deliberate misdirection?
Why did people mod you funny? Do they all know something about you that I don't? I could have written that myself, and I would've been sociopathically dead serious. All human social hierarchies suck, and the reason they suck, the sole reason, is because sociopaths always wind up in charge of them. If we had a prenatal test for sociopathy or a gene therapy cure, I'd be advocating eugenics like there was no tomorrow!
That only works if he doesn't know that he's sitting in a Faraday cage. Otherwise the kid would simply subconsciously - or consciously - fake symptoms just to fulfill the prophesy declared by his parents. He can't know the Faraday cage is there, else you'd never be able to rule out WiFi RF and narrow it to "something [else] environmental".
So... give him an astronaut suit to wear for a day and tell him it's a reward for good grades or something.
When I was in elementary and high school, I learned the incompleteness of science well enough; it was not omitted, at least not for those who were actually interested enough to PAY ATTENTION. No, it wasn't described explicitly in big neon flashing letters, but honestly should it be? As I said, someone paying attention would have extrapolated this message. Don't we want scientists who are actually interested enough in the subject to pay attention to the messages not presented in neon?
I stand vindicated! I've been reading seditious material my whole life and really did need that tinfoil hat to keep the FBI from reading my seditious thoughts. No wonder my high school English teacher declared that science fiction wasn't literature and refused to allow book reports about it, she was protecting us from the FBI!
I can add that the closest historical parallel to what is not being called piracy might be land squatting. It's not a perfect analog, but the best that comes to mind.
That's quite a non sequitur. Laptops are physical, tangible, personal property. Digital "content", whatever its form, is immaterial, intangible, and the "crime" we're talking about here is not theft: the alleged owner(s) of the content are never at any time deprived of their use of it, nor are any of the other people "licensed" to use it deprived of that usage. That "denial of usage" is an essential characteristic of any action that might be described as theft. There is no theft taking place in these instances, only REPLICATION. There is no denial of anything except PREDICTED SPECULATIVE profit.
Sorry, bub. That is a civil matter, not a criminal one. Either you've been had by greedy manipulative people or you're one of the manipulators yourself.
TEN years imprisonment for personal copyright infringement, what is actually a civil tort, when other actual crimes so often result in sentences less than that? What a surprise that corporations want to criminalize anything that might reduce their already insane profits, and bribe lawmakers to do their bidding for them and leave their hands unbloodied. In a more honest transparent world they'd just hire mercenary squads to go murder or maim people who dare question their perpetual copyrights. Is this a civilized world, with all its layers upon layers of scheming and misdirection and manipulation?
No self-respecting cyclist drunk will ever voluntarily purchase one of these, and they can't serve a purpose sitting on a store shelf, so what's the point? Will the manufacturer now secretly draft boilerplate for new state legislation that will require the use of breathalyzer locks by all cyclists and make it a criminal offense to refuse, thus guaranteeing themselves a captive market?
(Don't laugh; how do you think California wound up with laws mandating bicycle helmets, car insurance, and smog checks, among other things? Assemblymen had little faeries with deep pocketses whispering in their ears. Captive markets created by and for corporate interests.)
It isn't even mentioned in the summary until the end, but "over-criminalization" has been worrying me, too. Another example, and an even better one, is the increasing criminalization of predicate behaviors, like alcoholism, that MIGHT lead to criminal behavior but are not of themselves criminal. There are many such predicate behaviors that are now criminalized, and the number increases. Making these predicate behaviors illegal allows gung-ho police and prosecutors and lawyers to indict and convict many more people than they could otherwise. It once again trades liberty for "safety".
I don't know if this is supposed to be shocking because it's new behavior, but it's not (new behavior). I saw the very same selfish gimme-my-cut-of-the-bigger-pie behavior from nonprofit community groups in particular when the California Public Utilities Commission held public hearings to gather input about the proposed merger of AT&T and SBC (formerly Pacific Telesis Group, formerly Pacific Bell, formerly AT&T, ad nauseum).
There were representatives from quite a few local community nonprofit groups from all over California in attendance. They were there almost universally for one reason: to promote the merger and thus guarantee their cut of what they deemed to be a bigger pie if the merger were approved. California state law requires that utilities set aside a percentage of their profits to return to the local communities they rape errrr support. This is done in part via the aforementioned nonprofits, who receive a significant share.
They had all analyzed the effect of the merger and concluded that it would result in a more profitable company, which would thus set aside a larger pool of CPUC mandated funds, and thus they'd receive more money than before. They didn't give a damn whether the merger was actually beneficial for the people they supposedly served (it wasn't); they only cared about grabbing more money.
The real problem is that one dedicated man has no built-in redundancy, no backup, open source or not. If he's enslaved by aliens, there will be "major consequences", all for lack of redundancy.
At 59 years old, statistically Mr. Stenn isn't going to live long enough to maintain NTP for another 30 years. Perhaps something so crucial should be a voluntary communal effort?
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.projecthoneypot.org...
Knew that. The problem is that there is a corollary - or a replacement - theorem to the Peter Principle at work here: people in social hierarchies rise to the level of their sociopathy. Wouldn't it be priceless if the Peter Principle was coined by a sociopath as a deliberate misdirection?
Sure, but it's so much more fun to blame others and then sue them FTW.
Why did people mod you funny? Do they all know something about you that I don't? I could have written that myself, and I would've been sociopathically dead serious. All human social hierarchies suck, and the reason they suck, the sole reason, is because sociopaths always wind up in charge of them. If we had a prenatal test for sociopathy or a gene therapy cure, I'd be advocating eugenics like there was no tomorrow!
Although... then they just wind up claiming the symptoms have delayed onset or something else ridiculous.
Works for me! I was kidding about the spacesuit, though.
I look forward to the Lucas-style remake of Interstellar next year.
That only works if he doesn't know that he's sitting in a Faraday cage. Otherwise the kid would simply subconsciously - or consciously - fake symptoms just to fulfill the prophesy declared by his parents. He can't know the Faraday cage is there, else you'd never be able to rule out WiFi RF and narrow it to "something [else] environmental".
So... give him an astronaut suit to wear for a day and tell him it's a reward for good grades or something.
When I was in elementary and high school, I learned the incompleteness of science well enough; it was not omitted, at least not for those who were actually interested enough to PAY ATTENTION. No, it wasn't described explicitly in big neon flashing letters, but honestly should it be? As I said, someone paying attention would have extrapolated this message. Don't we want scientists who are actually interested enough in the subject to pay attention to the messages not presented in neon?
I stand vindicated! I've been reading seditious material my whole life and really did need that tinfoil hat to keep the FBI from reading my seditious thoughts. No wonder my high school English teacher declared that science fiction wasn't literature and refused to allow book reports about it, she was protecting us from the FBI!
You didn't read it either, did you?
I can add that the closest historical parallel to what is not being called piracy might be land squatting. It's not a perfect analog, but the best that comes to mind.
That's quite a non sequitur. Laptops are physical, tangible, personal property. Digital "content", whatever its form, is immaterial, intangible, and the "crime" we're talking about here is not theft: the alleged owner(s) of the content are never at any time deprived of their use of it, nor are any of the other people "licensed" to use it deprived of that usage. That "denial of usage" is an essential characteristic of any action that might be described as theft. There is no theft taking place in these instances, only REPLICATION. There is no denial of anything except PREDICTED SPECULATIVE profit.
Sorry, bub. That is a civil matter, not a criminal one. Either you've been had by greedy manipulative people or you're one of the manipulators yourself.
What if they are privately run prisons? Those are very profitable and all the rage now.
TEN years imprisonment for personal copyright infringement, what is actually a civil tort, when other actual crimes so often result in sentences less than that? What a surprise that corporations want to criminalize anything that might reduce their already insane profits, and bribe lawmakers to do their bidding for them and leave their hands unbloodied. In a more honest transparent world they'd just hire mercenary squads to go murder or maim people who dare question their perpetual copyrights. Is this a civilized world, with all its layers upon layers of scheming and misdirection and manipulation?
The problem with your logic is that by the time the drunken person's behavior does damage someone else it is too late.
Thanks a lot. You just legitimized prosecution of thoughtcrime and the chipping and monitoring of every living human.
When did that get repealed?
No self-respecting cyclist drunk will ever voluntarily purchase one of these, and they can't serve a purpose sitting on a store shelf, so what's the point? Will the manufacturer now secretly draft boilerplate for new state legislation that will require the use of breathalyzer locks by all cyclists and make it a criminal offense to refuse, thus guaranteeing themselves a captive market?
(Don't laugh; how do you think California wound up with laws mandating bicycle helmets, car insurance, and smog checks, among other things? Assemblymen had little faeries with deep pocketses whispering in their ears. Captive markets created by and for corporate interests.)
It isn't even mentioned in the summary until the end, but "over-criminalization" has been worrying me, too. Another example, and an even better one, is the increasing criminalization of predicate behaviors, like alcoholism, that MIGHT lead to criminal behavior but are not of themselves criminal. There are many such predicate behaviors that are now criminalized, and the number increases. Making these predicate behaviors illegal allows gung-ho police and prosecutors and lawyers to indict and convict many more people than they could otherwise. It once again trades liberty for "safety".
Honestly, using SlashDot right now is kind of like using Facebook.com. Sure, you might not get something nasty, but why take the chance?
FTFY.
Okay, so they tried turning it off and back on, but did they check to make sure it's plugged in?
It's called tribalism. Tribalism is very alive and well, thank you for asking.
I don't know if this is supposed to be shocking because it's new behavior, but it's not (new behavior). I saw the very same selfish gimme-my-cut-of-the-bigger-pie behavior from nonprofit community groups in particular when the California Public Utilities Commission held public hearings to gather input about the proposed merger of AT&T and SBC (formerly Pacific Telesis Group, formerly Pacific Bell, formerly AT&T, ad nauseum).
There were representatives from quite a few local community nonprofit groups from all over California in attendance. They were there almost universally for one reason: to promote the merger and thus guarantee their cut of what they deemed to be a bigger pie if the merger were approved. California state law requires that utilities set aside a percentage of their profits to return to the local communities they rape errrr support. This is done in part via the aforementioned nonprofits, who receive a significant share.
They had all analyzed the effect of the merger and concluded that it would result in a more profitable company, which would thus set aside a larger pool of CPUC mandated funds, and thus they'd receive more money than before. They didn't give a damn whether the merger was actually beneficial for the people they supposedly served (it wasn't); they only cared about grabbing more money.
The real problem is that one dedicated man has no built-in redundancy, no backup, open source or not. If he's enslaved by aliens, there will be "major consequences", all for lack of redundancy.
At 59 years old, statistically Mr. Stenn isn't going to live long enough to maintain NTP for another 30 years. Perhaps something so crucial should be a voluntary communal effort?