A-haha, haha... [tear] I would like some of that stuff you are smoking.
These countries are treading on a slippery slope. At what point is it OK now to
not pay for the hard work of other people, or to begin to directly steal from them?
Mentioning stealing is just a troll. And it is perfectly OK not to pay
people when they do not work for you. I live in US, and even here
I believe that these people do not work for me. I'll pay them for the
research results when I can tell them what to do. Why should Brazil or anyone
else suffer if they think that medical patents are stupid? If medical
patents are as awesome as you think, shouldn't we just wait a few years
and see the Brazilian economy shatter? Oh, wait, you say, patents do not
work this way. Americans will actually be in a crippling disadvantage if they
have patents and no one else does. Well, duh. That is because sharing
knowledge is more productive than creating scarcity where there is none.
The issue here is that the key is just a number. The software
probably uses it as an integer argument for the descrambler function.
It does not code any information besides its own integer value.
So what? Why should someone's anonymous statement on some website
mean anything to these teachers? Can't they just ignore it?
They should, I believe, but they do not want to. The school these
days is a boot camp for ideas. Students are expected to absorb
the curriculum without questioning either the content, the teaching
method, or the teacher. Consequently, most teachers hate it when
students form and communicate their own opinions, whether in school
or outside of it.
Eh, fact check. A door with an electronic lock + DRM is illegal
to circumvent even if you manage to install it in your own body
cavity. Hey, that gives me an idea...
Even if we forget about the fact that modern schools tend to teach
without students learning (which is the main reason to get rid of them),
the compulsory education in US is not that cost-effective. The numbers are just a quick
Google search away:
1999-2000 year has seen 382B dollars spent on grade and secondary schools.
That money came out of taxes. In 2003, there were roughly 50 M students
around. That is over 7K per child, per year. Sure, my estimate is
very rough, and the funds would not be distributed evenly if there was
no taxation, but bear with me. How much would you expect to pay for the
services of an uncertified teacher in a very competitive marketplace?
If five people start a "learning center", get 50 clients, and charge
5k per year, they are set. Now factor in an informal learning environment
and at most 10 people in a study group, and it starts looking really good.
And the number of clients could easily be more than 50 too. It is a myth
5 hours a day, 5 days a week, 40 weeks a year of mind-numbing,
non-interactive instruction facilitates learning. A kid needs, may be,
an hour or two of that a day, tops, because that's the length of the attention
span for this kind of thing. Anything else is just water down the drain.
There is something very circular about the DMCA anti-circumvention reasoning.
It can be argued that DRM does not effectively protect the data from copying.
Once it is cracked, there is nothing to "circumvent" anymore. An anti-DRM
tool does not merely allow you to circumvent it, but rather makes the lock
disappear altogether. The law, then, makes it illegal to go through the
empty doorway in your own house on the account that there used to be a
door and a lock there.
Too much drama. Anyone who's been observing a band with a female vocalist knows
that. The only solution is to send at least a few dozen of people,
preferably in several different ships, and then let them fuck each other
stupid.
Claiming (as they would) that an integer is a "circumvention device" is retarded.
They shouldn't be allowed to design a lock that can be opened
with any pointed object and then ban all sticks and branches.
I would not be so sure about that. If this decision withstands
the test of time, many lawyers will be willing to take on at least
some of the cases, since the salary will now come out of **AA's
pockets. The obvious outcome will be that more people
will engage in illegal filesharing (seeing that it is possible to
go to court and win), while **IA will have to pay
considerably more for its "war on piracy".
Oh, come one. Just yesterday I tuned on to Fox just to
catch a report about two cutest little kittens abandoned
behind a dumpster and then rescued by some good people.
I am not joking.
I agree with you in regard to pro-Roman Jesus: this viewpoint
lacks evidence. But I think that Jesus did many more unsettling
things besides converting people. He was openly hostile to the
Temple and the organized Jewish religion (not Judaism, which
he mostly took for granted, but the power structure consisting
of Pharisees, Sadducees, and the Temple priests). He humiliated
them in front of the crowds, overturned their money tables inside
the temple, and generally was a thorn in their backside.
Instead of "antisocial" I should have probably said "outside
of the prescribed norm", because that is the point of comparison.
(Note that I am not arguing that Cho is like Jesus as much as
trying to explain what Cho might have meant when he did so.)
This is where Jesus really shines. With as much ado as possible,
he broke every contemporary Jewish taboo he did not like.
He talked to women he was
not related to, including unmarried ones and prostitutes;
hung out with Samarians;
played with children and touched them; taught in synagogues
and the temple without being a rabbi; posed as a rabbi by
wearing a fancy robe and long hair; broke kosher laws--this
is a big one--and taught others to do the same;
was self-employed as a traveling performer (for the last few years of his life). All of these
are big, scandalous no-nos for a Jewish man.
To change the angle a bit, I am not surprised that my Jesus
post was modded down into the oblivion. I do not regret what I said,
but it might have been more effective if I compared Harris with
someone who does not cause an immediate hard-on of one's inflated
moral sense. I should have
went with Pavel Florensky
or any other well-acknowledged martyr of the Stalinist regime.
So they do have not-so-easy access? Criminals, at least, have guns, I presume?
They are planning it for months, dude. If the only way to get a gun is to
mug a cop, they'll mug a cop and get away with it too. These are not "crimes
of passion", but carefully planned and tactically sound operations. If
Netherlands has no history of school violence yet, that's good. But it is
not because of gun control, it's because their schools are not yet seen
as robot factories.
from an purely economic standpoint you are correct, it is rational. From a standpoint of living in a socienty in which people have to interact in order to survive, it isn't rational. So making a single statement that has some logic or demonstrates some rational thought doesn't mean that if you look at the bigger picture that it is rational.
Stop right here. What you are talking about is called "a wise decision". I fully agree that actions
can be seen as wise from an economic point of view, yet foolish (unwise) from the political one.
Because of that, it is often hard to reach a consensus about a decision being wise.
That has nothing to do with rationality. As it is most commonly used, the word applies to any
decision that is based on reason. And sometimes its scope is narrowed to the reasoning which
strictly follows the classical laws of logic. At any rate, a chain of reasoning like "(1) this
man has money (2) I must have that money (3) the only way to get the money is for me to murder this
man (4) therefore, I must murder this man" is perfectly rational. It's almost a classical syllogism,
for god's sake.
The society is different. 2000 years ago, an antisocial element was
eliminated physically. These days, it is being excluded just as effectively
by more subtle means, which nevertheless result in the expulsion from the political life.
This is achieved by regarding abnormal behavior as sickness and completely
discrediting one's actions and words on the account of them being seen as senseless.
Since no one is out to kill them, martyrs find other ways to die.
Jesus was a psycho in his day too. He did what he thought was right,
even though he knew all too well that his actions will definitely
result in torture and death. He could not have predicted the massive
following, he just honestly acted on his beliefs for the sake of
being true to himself (and the Father).[*] If you are, by the way,
one of those people who think that Christianity effected more evil
than good, if you are attributing countless murders to the people
of Christian faith, you absolutely must see that Jesus and Paul were the
biggest psychos in the human history. Kill me, but I do not
see how their madness is at all different from that of Eric Harris,
except, so far, in the scale of the consequences.
Thank you very much, everyone. I am now officially insane...
[*] All of you non-heretics
with your all-knowing Jesus, please do not flame me. You've missed the
part of the book where it says that he was fully human, with all all
of the limitations that involves.
My beard is actually gay. That is why it's so gay-looking. It has
butt-sex with men and then I get shit smeared all over my face.
So I have to lick it off with my tongue. Because of that I became
addicted to gay shit and I can't get enough. Also, I always keep
a stapler in the glove compartment.
I'm sorry but I can't see the thought of premeditated mass murder as being rational. Sure, they may have had some reasoning in their mind that follows some logical process but just the simple fact that these people were thinking about and then commiting mass murder makes them 100% irrational.
I cannot agree with that. Killing someone and taking their posessions seems perfectly
rational to me, especially if you throw in a suitcase with a few million dollars.
If you do not understand the rational behind Cho's actions, read Eric Harris, whom
Cho calls a martyr. If you do not understand the latter, it might be because Harris
was too well read for you. Brush up on
Nietzsche, Hobbs, and Dostoyevsky (especially Crime And Punishment). If you
are still unsure, throw in some Gatto and Illich for a good measure, and you will
see why they did it in school, out of all places.
He was actually very able to play "sane". In his encounter with a
judge and a probation officer, he was commended as a very bright
man who fully recognized his mistake and was well on his way
to the bright future. He was a total sociopath, I'll give you that.
I know that I am waging a war against the words again. Most people
use "insane" to designate a behavior well outside of the norm. That
is bullshit, imo. Everyone decided to conveniently forget
about the real insanity and real schizos, who's behavior defies
any kind of explanation and is impossible for everyone else
to understand or put into a narrative context. The modern use of
"insanity" is laden with value and it reinforces our conviction
that "out of the norm" is evil. If I wanted to find the real cause
of the school massacres, this is where I would start digging.
Prompted by the recent events, I've read the diary of Eric Harris
a few days ago, and I was blown away by how coherent and rational
his reasoning was. He describes both why and what could happen
to avoid it. I think that the biggest mistake people make
in judging these guys is when they label them as "insane".
I completely agree with you, and I am pleasantly surprised by the
mods' reaction. Concerning the last point... People will listen, but, unfortunately, it doesn't seem
like that many of them will hear what he had to say. The
common opinion about these shooters is that they are total psychos.
That is despite the fact that they leave behind lengthy diaries
where they explain (for the most part, cogently) their motives and reasoning.
I wish I could mod you up. People are so intent on dragging in anything
they do not like and citing it as a possible cause, it makes my head hurt.
Even Eric Harris, who was a big fan of FPS games (designed maps, ran a website)
clearly stated that they had nothing to do with his motives. In this latest
case, drawing any kind of parallel with games is just evil. These
people will use anything that is sensational and bullshit as much as they can to
advance their private agenda.
I am sure that the gun control party will have their heyday with this
case. They won't care that shooters like Harris and Cho prepare for months
and have no scruples with breaking the law. I am not arguing pro or con
here (I am still unsure myself), but it is clear to me that
(1) even making all guns illegal will not stop a determined shooter
from acquiring them, and, otoh,
(2) making guns legal for everyone will not reduce casualties, because
shooters always get to choose time, place, and "audience".
Slashdot Mirror
I think that computers are in fact safer than cars.
I could live with copyright if GPL was its only statute.
A-haha, haha... [tear] I would like some of that stuff you are smoking.
Mentioning stealing is just a troll. And it is perfectly OK not to pay people when they do not work for you. I live in US, and even here I believe that these people do not work for me. I'll pay them for the research results when I can tell them what to do. Why should Brazil or anyone else suffer if they think that medical patents are stupid? If medical patents are as awesome as you think, shouldn't we just wait a few years and see the Brazilian economy shatter? Oh, wait, you say, patents do not work this way. Americans will actually be in a crippling disadvantage if they have patents and no one else does. Well, duh. That is because sharing knowledge is more productive than creating scarcity where there is none.
The issue here is that the key is just a number. The software probably uses it as an integer argument for the descrambler function. It does not code any information besides its own integer value.
They should, I believe, but they do not want to. The school these days is a boot camp for ideas. Students are expected to absorb the curriculum without questioning either the content, the teaching method, or the teacher. Consequently, most teachers hate it when students form and communicate their own opinions, whether in school or outside of it.
Eh, fact check. A door with an electronic lock + DRM is illegal to circumvent even if you manage to install it in your own body cavity. Hey, that gives me an idea...
Even if we forget about the fact that modern schools tend to teach without students learning (which is the main reason to get rid of them), the compulsory education in US is not that cost-effective. The numbers are just a quick Google search away:
1999-2000 year has seen 382B dollars spent on grade and secondary schools. That money came out of taxes. In 2003, there were roughly 50 M students around. That is over 7K per child, per year. Sure, my estimate is very rough, and the funds would not be distributed evenly if there was no taxation, but bear with me. How much would you expect to pay for the services of an uncertified teacher in a very competitive marketplace? If five people start a "learning center", get 50 clients, and charge 5k per year, they are set. Now factor in an informal learning environment and at most 10 people in a study group, and it starts looking really good. And the number of clients could easily be more than 50 too. It is a myth 5 hours a day, 5 days a week, 40 weeks a year of mind-numbing, non-interactive instruction facilitates learning. A kid needs, may be, an hour or two of that a day, tops, because that's the length of the attention span for this kind of thing. Anything else is just water down the drain.
There is something very circular about the DMCA anti-circumvention reasoning. It can be argued that DRM does not effectively protect the data from copying. Once it is cracked, there is nothing to "circumvent" anymore. An anti-DRM tool does not merely allow you to circumvent it, but rather makes the lock disappear altogether. The law, then, makes it illegal to go through the empty doorway in your own house on the account that there used to be a door and a lock there.
Too much drama. Anyone who's been observing a band with a female vocalist knows that. The only solution is to send at least a few dozen of people, preferably in several different ships, and then let them fuck each other stupid.
Claiming (as they would) that an integer is a "circumvention device" is retarded. They shouldn't be allowed to design a lock that can be opened with any pointed object and then ban all sticks and branches.
You see, people do not want choice because they have no choice in that matter.
I would not be so sure about that. If this decision withstands the test of time, many lawyers will be willing to take on at least some of the cases, since the salary will now come out of **AA's pockets. The obvious outcome will be that more people will engage in illegal filesharing (seeing that it is possible to go to court and win), while **IA will have to pay considerably more for its "war on piracy".
Oh, come one. Just yesterday I tuned on to Fox just to catch a report about two cutest little kittens abandoned behind a dumpster and then rescued by some good people. I am not joking.
I agree with you in regard to pro-Roman Jesus: this viewpoint lacks evidence. But I think that Jesus did many more unsettling things besides converting people. He was openly hostile to the Temple and the organized Jewish religion (not Judaism, which he mostly took for granted, but the power structure consisting of Pharisees, Sadducees, and the Temple priests). He humiliated them in front of the crowds, overturned their money tables inside the temple, and generally was a thorn in their backside.
Instead of "antisocial" I should have probably said "outside of the prescribed norm", because that is the point of comparison. (Note that I am not arguing that Cho is like Jesus as much as trying to explain what Cho might have meant when he did so.) This is where Jesus really shines. With as much ado as possible, he broke every contemporary Jewish taboo he did not like. He talked to women he was not related to, including unmarried ones and prostitutes; hung out with Samarians; played with children and touched them; taught in synagogues and the temple without being a rabbi; posed as a rabbi by wearing a fancy robe and long hair; broke kosher laws--this is a big one--and taught others to do the same; was self-employed as a traveling performer (for the last few years of his life). All of these are big, scandalous no-nos for a Jewish man.
To change the angle a bit, I am not surprised that my Jesus post was modded down into the oblivion. I do not regret what I said, but it might have been more effective if I compared Harris with someone who does not cause an immediate hard-on of one's inflated moral sense. I should have went with Pavel Florensky or any other well-acknowledged martyr of the Stalinist regime.
So they do have not-so-easy access? Criminals, at least, have guns, I presume? They are planning it for months, dude. If the only way to get a gun is to mug a cop, they'll mug a cop and get away with it too. These are not "crimes of passion", but carefully planned and tactically sound operations. If Netherlands has no history of school violence yet, that's good. But it is not because of gun control, it's because their schools are not yet seen as robot factories.
Stop right here. What you are talking about is called "a wise decision". I fully agree that actions can be seen as wise from an economic point of view, yet foolish (unwise) from the political one. Because of that, it is often hard to reach a consensus about a decision being wise. That has nothing to do with rationality. As it is most commonly used, the word applies to any decision that is based on reason. And sometimes its scope is narrowed to the reasoning which strictly follows the classical laws of logic. At any rate, a chain of reasoning like "(1) this man has money (2) I must have that money (3) the only way to get the money is for me to murder this man (4) therefore, I must murder this man" is perfectly rational. It's almost a classical syllogism, for god's sake.
The society is different. 2000 years ago, an antisocial element was eliminated physically. These days, it is being excluded just as effectively by more subtle means, which nevertheless result in the expulsion from the political life. This is achieved by regarding abnormal behavior as sickness and completely discrediting one's actions and words on the account of them being seen as senseless. Since no one is out to kill them, martyrs find other ways to die.
Jesus was a psycho in his day too. He did what he thought was right, even though he knew all too well that his actions will definitely result in torture and death. He could not have predicted the massive following, he just honestly acted on his beliefs for the sake of being true to himself (and the Father).[*] If you are, by the way, one of those people who think that Christianity effected more evil than good, if you are attributing countless murders to the people of Christian faith, you absolutely must see that Jesus and Paul were the biggest psychos in the human history. Kill me, but I do not see how their madness is at all different from that of Eric Harris, except, so far, in the scale of the consequences.
Thank you very much, everyone. I am now officially insane...
[*] All of you non-heretics with your all-knowing Jesus, please do not flame me. You've missed the part of the book where it says that he was fully human, with all all of the limitations that involves.
My beard is actually gay. That is why it's so gay-looking. It has butt-sex with men and then I get shit smeared all over my face. So I have to lick it off with my tongue. Because of that I became addicted to gay shit and I can't get enough. Also, I always keep a stapler in the glove compartment.
I cannot agree with that. Killing someone and taking their posessions seems perfectly rational to me, especially if you throw in a suitcase with a few million dollars. If you do not understand the rational behind Cho's actions, read Eric Harris, whom Cho calls a martyr. If you do not understand the latter, it might be because Harris was too well read for you. Brush up on Nietzsche, Hobbs, and Dostoyevsky (especially Crime And Punishment). If you are still unsure, throw in some Gatto and Illich for a good measure, and you will see why they did it in school, out of all places.
He was actually very able to play "sane". In his encounter with a judge and a probation officer, he was commended as a very bright man who fully recognized his mistake and was well on his way to the bright future. He was a total sociopath, I'll give you that.
I know that I am waging a war against the words again. Most people use "insane" to designate a behavior well outside of the norm. That is bullshit, imo. Everyone decided to conveniently forget about the real insanity and real schizos, who's behavior defies any kind of explanation and is impossible for everyone else to understand or put into a narrative context. The modern use of "insanity" is laden with value and it reinforces our conviction that "out of the norm" is evil. If I wanted to find the real cause of the school massacres, this is where I would start digging.
Dude, do you publish on the Web? Send me a link if you do, please. Writing here because I tried email but got no reply.
This should be +interesting.
Prompted by the recent events, I've read the diary of Eric Harris a few days ago, and I was blown away by how coherent and rational his reasoning was. He describes both why and what could happen to avoid it. I think that the biggest mistake people make in judging these guys is when they label them as "insane".
I completely agree with you, and I am pleasantly surprised by the mods' reaction. Concerning the last point... People will listen, but, unfortunately, it doesn't seem like that many of them will hear what he had to say. The common opinion about these shooters is that they are total psychos. That is despite the fact that they leave behind lengthy diaries where they explain (for the most part, cogently) their motives and reasoning.
That's bad news for Dr. Phil, as it implies that his audience will become dumber.
I wish I could mod you up. People are so intent on dragging in anything they do not like and citing it as a possible cause, it makes my head hurt. Even Eric Harris, who was a big fan of FPS games (designed maps, ran a website) clearly stated that they had nothing to do with his motives. In this latest case, drawing any kind of parallel with games is just evil. These people will use anything that is sensational and bullshit as much as they can to advance their private agenda.
I am sure that the gun control party will have their heyday with this case. They won't care that shooters like Harris and Cho prepare for months and have no scruples with breaking the law. I am not arguing pro or con here (I am still unsure myself), but it is clear to me that
(1) even making all guns illegal will not stop a determined shooter from acquiring them, and, otoh,
(2) making guns legal for everyone will not reduce casualties, because shooters always get to choose time, place, and "audience".