I don't know about Berkeley, but I know some universities are willing to provide a signer, or someone who will hang out with the student and translate them into sign language for the student so they can understand.
Yeah. And actually it wouldn't be a problem if the large studios didn't also own the distribution networks and theaters. The big studios only want to fund billion dollar movies, and those are the ones that they show.
There are plenty of movies that would be great (I'm thinking movies like Amadeus, or Man for All Seasons or Dead Poets Society or BladeRunner) and would make $100-$300 million, but they won't get any screen time since the theaters have no choice in what they display. If BladeRunner 2049 turns out to be good then we'll be lucky.
That is also why a lot of movies are full of explosions, and don't have much confusing plot (woohoo transformers!), because that is easy to translate into any language and culture. Seriously, check out these numbers.
It seems clear that a Hillary win would have meant a much higher likelihood of the US starting more wars. I mean just look at her awful war record when she was just Secretary of State.
That is the #1 thing that worried me about Hillary.
Yeah you are right, and the 'occupiers' have no intention of controlling with German government (Ha! I'll bet France wishes they could sometimes). That said, if the German government for some reason decided to invade Czech provinces, then it is certain the occupiers would this time take action. But that is only theoretical because Germany doesn't want to do that.
I have to say, Obama handled the Turkey coup really well, and he deserves a ton of credit for it, because I'm sure there was a lot of pressure internally to take different actions. What did he do?
He didn't get involved
He didn't send in bombers. He didn't send in the military. He didn't send in snipers. Or anything. He let the situation take its natural course, in a place where the US has no business getting involved. That might not seem like much of an accomplishment but Well done Obama. That turns out to be something really hard for US presidents to do, and he did it.
That's a totally different law. Under that law, you can still talk or write about how much you hate another class (and people did). Under current law, you can't even do a historical analysis of the number of people killed in the holocaust. Games like Castle Wolfenstein can't be released in Germany because of the Nazi symbolism. Neither of these examples will disturb the public peace unless there is a different meaning to the word *disturb.*
Incidentally, Germany in the Bismark days definitely used censorship as a tool of oppression. Even before then, certainly under Frederick William II (although I believe that was only in Prussia) censorship was used as a tool of oppression, trying to suppress alternate ideas.
Yes, anyone should be allowed to shout fire in a crowded theatre. No harm there.
Just an FYI: this standard for freedom of speech is extremely outdated, has been discounted by the supreme court, and has become a cliche and a shibboleth revealing those who have no fucking clue what they are talking about.
You have no idea what is going on in Germany, it is not a theater on fire which for some reason you think it is.
The graph of historical temperatures in the arctic is really helpful. Traditionally there are massive temperature swings in the arctic, during the arctic night (which of course lasts all winter). In the summer, it begins to stabilize. The temperature swings are caused by wind, as massive fronts move across the region (or out of the region, as with the polar vortex).
Incidentally, winter temperatures in the arctic are not directly from the greenhouse effect, because there is no sun and you need sun for the CO2 to make a difference. At best the warming from anthropogenic sources is a secondary effect (which can still be large).
Is that literally just clicking a cookie over and over? Did you set up a script to click it? What number are you on and what is the most epic achievement or whatever you've reached?
I used to wish browsers would do this. But now I know that there are good uses for background processes, even though limiting them to 1% seems fine to me.
For example, slack changes the tab title and icon when an event happens, like a new message. Gmail updates the title to show how many messages you have. These are reasonable use cases.
There are 37 US military bases in Germany. There are more foreign soldiers in Germany than German soldiers (including French and British soldiers). Germany is surrounded by countries that have nuclear weapons. There is no way you can say Germany is a free country. If they piss off their occupiers, they will get smacked down.
Of course, Germany isn't likely to piss of their occupiers these days, because all parties have basically the same worldview. You might make an argument that there is no use for keeping foreign soldiers in Germany, and to a large degree the occupiers agree with you. They have been reducing their number of soldiers in Germany, and have plans in place to continue the reduction.
Your arguments remind me of the arguments that were used to censor pornography. "I know it when I see it."
Face it, once you start banning speech, the kind of speech that will be banned is the kind that is disliked by the ruling class. Thus it has always been.
You seem to be complaining that these ant-free-speech laws are a form of oppression, and you are right: Germany is still an occupied country. They were given quite a bit of freedom because of the bigger Soviet threat, but none of the victors in WW2 wanted the Nazis to rise again, and no one wanted another holocaust. To prevent it from happening again, several measures were taken, among them was to censor speech. No more Nazi propaganda, no more people winning elections by demonizing Jews.
So yes, these laws are tools of an oppressor. Eventually maybe they will disappear, but when they were created, it was with a good purpose.
Slashdot Mirror
"Do not look through telescope with remaining good eye"
Doesn't this mean that any video (public) anywhere now needs to have subtitles?
That's true, it's not about students at Berkeley, anyone in the US could have brought this lawsuit.
I don't know about Berkeley, but I know some universities are willing to provide a signer, or someone who will hang out with the student and translate them into sign language for the student so they can understand.
Fortunately, since Frodo Lives, he can explain about the three hares.
Indeed, but you tried to compare that to modern German democracy
OK ok, one part of what I said is bullshit. The rest is true.
Yeah. And actually it wouldn't be a problem if the large studios didn't also own the distribution networks and theaters. The big studios only want to fund billion dollar movies, and those are the ones that they show.
There are plenty of movies that would be great (I'm thinking movies like Amadeus, or Man for All Seasons or Dead Poets Society or BladeRunner) and would make $100-$300 million, but they won't get any screen time since the theaters have no choice in what they display. If BladeRunner 2049 turns out to be good then we'll be lucky.
Hollywood has made more money from abroad than in the US for a while now. It's now to the point that they are making movies primarily for foreign consumption and merely showing them here.
That is also why a lot of movies are full of explosions, and don't have much confusing plot (woohoo transformers!), because that is easy to translate into any language and culture. Seriously, check out these numbers.
It seems clear that a Hillary win would have meant a much higher likelihood of the US starting more wars. I mean just look at her awful war record when she was just Secretary of State.
That is the #1 thing that worried me about Hillary.
Yeah you are right, and the 'occupiers' have no intention of controlling with German government (Ha! I'll bet France wishes they could sometimes). That said, if the German government for some reason decided to invade Czech provinces, then it is certain the occupiers would this time take action. But that is only theoretical because Germany doesn't want to do that.
I have to say, Obama handled the Turkey coup really well, and he deserves a ton of credit for it, because I'm sure there was a lot of pressure internally to take different actions. What did he do?
He didn't get involved
He didn't send in bombers. He didn't send in the military. He didn't send in snipers. Or anything. He let the situation take its natural course, in a place where the US has no business getting involved. That might not seem like much of an accomplishment but Well done Obama. That turns out to be something really hard for US presidents to do, and he did it.
That's a totally different law. Under that law, you can still talk or write about how much you hate another class (and people did). Under current law, you can't even do a historical analysis of the number of people killed in the holocaust. Games like Castle Wolfenstein can't be released in Germany because of the Nazi symbolism. Neither of these examples will disturb the public peace unless there is a different meaning to the word *disturb.*
Incidentally, Germany in the Bismark days definitely used censorship as a tool of oppression. Even before then, certainly under Frederick William II (although I believe that was only in Prussia) censorship was used as a tool of oppression, trying to suppress alternate ideas.
That's a good point.
Yes, anyone should be allowed to shout fire in a crowded theatre. No harm there.
Just an FYI: this standard for freedom of speech is extremely outdated, has been discounted by the supreme court, and has become a cliche and a shibboleth revealing those who have no fucking clue what they are talking about.
You have no idea what is going on in Germany, it is not a theater on fire which for some reason you think it is.
Here is the actual study, in case anyone wants to read it. TFA is not so informative. I am interested in reading it and figuring out how exactly they came to the 50% measurement.
The graph of historical temperatures in the arctic is really helpful. Traditionally there are massive temperature swings in the arctic, during the arctic night (which of course lasts all winter). In the summer, it begins to stabilize. The temperature swings are caused by wind, as massive fronts move across the region (or out of the region, as with the polar vortex).
Incidentally, winter temperatures in the arctic are not directly from the greenhouse effect, because there is no sun and you need sun for the CO2 to make a difference. At best the warming from anthropogenic sources is a secondary effect (which can still be large).
You're an idiot for stating that Germany is still an occupied country.
Really? What exactly would you call a country that has more external military than local military? A hotel? A brothel?
Is that literally just clicking a cookie over and over? Did you set up a script to click it? What number are you on and what is the most epic achievement or whatever you've reached?
I used to wish browsers would do this. But now I know that there are good uses for background processes, even though limiting them to 1% seems fine to me.
For example, slack changes the tab title and icon when an event happens, like a new message. Gmail updates the title to show how many messages you have. These are reasonable use cases.
There are 37 US military bases in Germany. There are more foreign soldiers in Germany than German soldiers (including French and British soldiers). Germany is surrounded by countries that have nuclear weapons. There is no way you can say Germany is a free country. If they piss off their occupiers, they will get smacked down.
Of course, Germany isn't likely to piss of their occupiers these days, because all parties have basically the same worldview. You might make an argument that there is no use for keeping foreign soldiers in Germany, and to a large degree the occupiers agree with you. They have been reducing their number of soldiers in Germany, and have plans in place to continue the reduction.
Your arguments remind me of the arguments that were used to censor pornography. "I know it when I see it."
Face it, once you start banning speech, the kind of speech that will be banned is the kind that is disliked by the ruling class. Thus it has always been.
You seem to be complaining that these ant-free-speech laws are a form of oppression, and you are right: Germany is still an occupied country. They were given quite a bit of freedom because of the bigger Soviet threat, but none of the victors in WW2 wanted the Nazis to rise again, and no one wanted another holocaust. To prevent it from happening again, several measures were taken, among them was to censor speech. No more Nazi propaganda, no more people winning elections by demonizing Jews.
So yes, these laws are tools of an oppressor. Eventually maybe they will disappear, but when they were created, it was with a good purpose.
Commercials are often entertaining......until you've seen them and they just keep repeating, repeating, repeating.
Domain Driven Design does a good job of that, imho. Long read, though.