You are correct. I was responding to your original post, where you wrote,
I find it highly amusing that the left is now trying to circumvent the right by citing the 10th Amendment "States Rights" provisions which they derided for so many years
I'm not intentionally referring to the 10th Amendment in my posts, although I never explicitly stated otherwise. My point was that many people misidentify nuance as waffling, and that it is important to maintain the distinction between them.
I was also trying to say that it is possible to be honest about one's motives, instead of bandying about such lofty notions as States' Rights.
Or, to put it more succinctly, you believe in the protections of the 10th amendment when it's convenient to your beliefs.
Essentially. I think it would take a bit of time to fully articulate my views. I'll make a brief attempt now, though.
I feel that protecting minority rights is very important in the face of the tyranny of the majority. I do not believe in the 'separate but equal' doctrine. If the overwhelming power of the Federal government was required to enforce integration of the public schools, then I would have supported it.
However, I do not support the efforts of the Federal government to reduce the amount of freedoms that the people in the individual states have chosen for themselves.
I think it really boils down to the definition of the word 'freedom'. I do not think of the word 'freedom' when I think of young black students being denied entry to public schools. I do think of the word 'freedom' when I think of someone consuming marijuana for medicinal purposes.
In general, I favor local rule with protections for the minorities against the masses.
The funny thing is that both the left and the right in this country pick and choose from the Bill of Rights depending on the issue.
While it might be amusing, it is also very predictable. I would argue that the Federal government had the duty to intervene to force integration in the schools. I also believe, however, that the Federal government ought to keep its nose out of assisted suicide or drug de-criminalization efforts.
Hypocrisy? I think not. I'm for the Federal government intervening to enforce those laws with which I am in agreement. I don't, however, try to convince people that I am a categorical states-rightist.
Which ideology calls for a "dictatorship of the Proletariat"? Communism? I believe that you are referring to Russia after the October Revolution. This is not a general tenet of Communism.
It would be a tragedy to dismiss any ideology based on an inaccurate understanding of it.
Anyone who removes the DRM and ignores the licensing of the song they accepted can no longer complain about anyone violating the GPL as you are just as bad.
I believe you are making a much stronger statement here than you probably intended. If I remove the DRM from an album that I purchased from iTunes, I have indeed broken the agreement that I have made with Apple regarding the purchase. Similarly, if I take a GLPed program, modify it, AND re-distribute it without distributing the source code, I have indeed broken the agreement that I have made with the developer regarding the program.
However, these two acts are not morally equivalent!! If I decided to sell the DRM free song, the comparison might be valid. As it stands, though, the comparison is flawed. You might as well throw a jaywalker in jail for life as he broke the same agreement he implicitly made with the State as did a murderer (the agreement not to commit crimes.)
Ah, great comment. Unfortunately, it seems the moderators are unfamiliar with 'The Producers'. I wonder if a comment like, "Don't be stupid, be a smarty, come and join the Nazi party!" would get modded funny or flamebait.
How true! Still, it's the best government money can buy. I think the Ironic Times explained it well in their latest issue:
Last week we mistakenly reported that lobbyists, representing minimum wage workers who contributed heavily to lawmakers' reelection campaigns, used their clout to force a robust increase in the minimum wage. In fact these workers have no lobbyists, no money to contribute and no clout to use, and the bill favors business interests. We apologize for any confusion resulting from the error.
I'd definitely rather try to solve things through the Windows interface than trying to solve whatever is on the XF86Config-4 file
I'm not saying that I prefer a CLI to a GUI. It'd even be nice if I thought I could modify the XF86Config-4 file from a Control Panel-like window. What I'm really saying is that, for me, it is easier to solve Linux problems than Windows problems, even though I have more Windows experience.
When something doesn't work correctly on my Linux box, it may take me some time to discover the cause and develop a solution. In the end, however, I WILL know why it didn't work before and why it does work now. I might say, "Oh, that makes sense. I needed to make sure that the usbdevfs module had been inserted into the kernel before I could mount the drive from the/etc/fstab file." And it will work! And if it stops working, I'll know how to fix it.
With Windows, I was never quite sure what was going on. "Hmmm, this thing doesn't seem to be working. I'll try rebooting. Oh look, it's fixed. Oh, there it goes again. Maybe it's a problem with the registry? I'll try reinstalling."
For me, it's not that Linux is easier or more intuitive. Rather, Linux is understandable. Granted, like many Slashdotters, I have a degree in Computer Science, so understandable is a very relative term.
I don't see how one black grandma represents all fundamentalist Christians.
Good, because she doesn't. You should notice I wrote, "She believed that fiction was the work of the Devil", and not, "Fundamentalist Christians believed that fiction was the work of the Devil." My point is that you don't hear too many people making this claim nowadays.
There is no prohibition against writing fiction in the Bible, whatsoever.
Granted. But where did I make that claim? Or were you responding to someone else's post?
In fact, Jesus often used parables, and others wrote them down. So is Jesus or the Gospel writer the sinner?
I'm afraid that Richard Wright's grandmother is long dead, so we won't be able to ask her this question. (Well, at least not in this life, anyway.)
What does this have to do with the IDF anyway, which is mostly composed of Jews, both ethnic and religious?
Absolutely nothing. You're pretty sharp today. My reply was a response to the grandparent's post. If you'd like, he and I could take the conversation offline. I should note, however, that my reply is currently at '+5, Interesting', so at least some people found this more interesting than they found it offtopic.
I'm tired of corporations and government thinking society exists for the sole purpose of ensure their profit.
If the government doesn't exist to protect the interests of the wealthy power elite, then why does it exist? From the founding of the United States, through the Dred Scott decision, up until today, the wealthy and landed have used the legislature, the police, and the courts to preserve their way of life. The government just needs to toss in a little reform when the masses are ready to revolt, and push just enough people into the middle class to quell the rising anger.
It seems I've got to put down Zinn's 'A People's History of the United States' until I calm down. (Nurse, I'm ready for my meds.)
Simple, because you thought for yourself, instead of relying on the state's definition of right and wrong. Next thing you know, you'll decide that you don't need the government telling you what substances you can put into your body or what constitutes obscenity. What happens when everybody starts thinking for himself or herself, substituting their own judgment for that of career politicians?
I've had a very Fundie Christian relative who started blabbing off about how roleplaying was letting Satan into your heart with all that magic and fantastical creatures.
In his autobiography 'Black Boy', Richard Wright recalls his grandmother's attitude towards his writing. She believed that fiction was the work of the Devil. Paraphrasing: 'You writin' down things that ain' true. Tha's the Devil's work, boy.' (My apologies to Richard Wright for my crude approximation of his characteristic style.)
Things are getting a little better as time goes on, I hope.
Thanks for the advice. I've looked into using ipconfig to solve this problem. Hmmm, perhaps I should start at the beginning.
Occasionally, the browser has trouble resolving a host. Once it has this problem, it can't seem to look up any other hosts either. Pinging the IP address of the host works, but name resolution fails. I know that XP can experience problems with a tainted DNS cache, but flushing the cache does not solve the problem. The only solution to the problem appears to be to switch over to another DNS server (something that XP does not do automatically, it seems.) I'd love to be able to script a solution to this problem, but I don't want to have to put hours into solving a problem with a good, well-defined workaround, even if the workaround is a PITA.
As far as the monitor is concerned, Remote Desktop can be helpful in these situations. However, it's the only Windows box in the house. Is there a Linux client available? (If X fails to load, it'll drop me to a shell where I can solve the problem.)
I agree that command line hacking is a bit much for most people. I also think that configuring alternate DNS servers is a bit much for most people.
What the grandparent and I were both getting at is that a fundamental difference exists between administrators and users. And Windows has not made ordinary users into administrators. They still need us to help them set up their computers, fix their monitors, and repair their Internet connections. If a user with XP experience is just going to be checking his email or visiting his favorite portal, he or she won't experience much of a problem using Gnome or KDE.
People get upset because they're skilled with Windows and can correct problems there, but don't want to learn the same skills under Linux.
I've got the opposite problem now. I grew up with DOS and MS-Windows, and I learned how to administer and use these Operating Systems. However, since I switched to Linux three years ago, I've forgotten how to fix a Windows box.
For instance, if I'm having problem with my network card in Linux, I'll try '$/sbin/dhclient-2.2.x -q eth0', or maybe '$/sbin/ifconfig eth0 up'. With Windows, I'll spend hours trying to fix a flaky network connection or DNS problem. My wife's laptop runs Windows XP (she needs it for school, unfortunately.) When the network connection dies out, I've taught her to switch the primary DNS server with the secondary DNS server, and then switch back again. (Click here, then here, then here, then here, then here, then here, and then here.) I have no idea why this works, but it does.
Similarly, if I'm having an issue with my monitor in Linux, the solution is likely as simple as editing the '/etc/X11/XF86Config-4' file. With Windows, I'd likely have to download new drivers from the manufacturer. That *MIGHT* solve the problem. (Good luck, since the monitor's not working and the CLI isn't sophisticated enough for a simple lynx session.) If that doesn't work, it's likely time for a reinstall.
I agree with your point. I've never met a single person who had trouble getting work done in Linux who didn't also have trouble with Windows. You just say, 'Ok, remember how, in Windows, you'd click that little button in the bottom left hand corner to find the program you want to run. In Linux, you do the same thing. Oh, and to close a window, you click that little 'x' in the upper right hand corner, just like you remember from Windows.'
C'mon, mods. The parent is obviously joking. 'Insightful'?
A certain moral fiber? These are curious students who heard of a simple way to learn something that Harvard would be telling them in the near future anyway! The notion that their simple curiousity would necessarily compel them to commit serious crimes in the future is ludicrous! Laugh!
Hmmm, it could be that agustindondo is a Spanish speaker. 'Funciones' is Spanish for, you guessed it, 'functions.' Oh, and 'fecha' is 'date' en español.
I did not mean to give the impression that I felt that the rapist should be locked up for over 20 years. I thought that it was interesting that the woman did not feel that he deserved to go to jail for over 20 years. She did not value herself enough to think that someone should be punished for hurting her.
So, her position did not stem from an informed belief about the value of 'turning the other cheek.' (Granted, your only knowledge about the woman's position is garnered from what I have written about her here, so you could not have known her motivations.)
I happen to agree with your position on the nature of prison. Twenty years in prison is clearly punishment and not rehabilitation.
If you don't mind my asking, are you vegetarian? I'm vegan primarily out of my rejection of "real" violence.
I love violent games as much as the next gamer, but I also feel sick to my stomach when I watch other people cheer at violence or watch footage from the inside of a slaughterhouse.
I know at least one vegetarian that refuses to play violent games or watch violent movies. Although, I should note, his behavior is really based on the Buddhist notion of not putting attention towards unwholesome seeds in our store conciousness. (I'm obviously not Buddhist.)
I read a related article a couple of months ago. A woman was describing the time she was raped. The man came into her apartment when she opened the door for him (Mistake #1).
She felt that it would have been impolite to not answer her door. The article had a title like, 'When Violence Knocks and Kindness Answers.'
The police caught the rapist, and a judge sentenced him to over 20 years in prison. The victim knew that she should want to see the man suffer behind bars, but couldn't bring herself to feel that the crime warranted it. The article gave a very good insight into the woman's mindset.
So, at least in this woman's case, she could have used some assertiveness training.
Slashdot Mirror
Piracy is still wrong (just as making bathtub gin was).
Why was making bathtub gin wrong? Perhaps you meant that it was illegal (unless you're at Stage 4 in Kohlberg's Moral Development scheme.)
You are correct. I was responding to your original post, where you wrote,
I find it highly amusing that the left is now trying to circumvent the right by citing the 10th Amendment "States Rights" provisions which they derided for so many years
I'm not intentionally referring to the 10th Amendment in my posts, although I never explicitly stated otherwise. My point was that many people misidentify nuance as waffling, and that it is important to maintain the distinction between them.
I was also trying to say that it is possible to be honest about one's motives, instead of bandying about such lofty notions as States' Rights.
Or, to put it more succinctly, you believe in the protections of the 10th amendment when it's convenient to your beliefs.
Essentially. I think it would take a bit of time to fully articulate my views. I'll make a brief attempt now, though.
I feel that protecting minority rights is very important in the face of the tyranny of the majority. I do not believe in the 'separate but equal' doctrine. If the overwhelming power of the Federal government was required to enforce integration of the public schools, then I would have supported it.
However, I do not support the efforts of the Federal government to reduce the amount of freedoms that the people in the individual states have chosen for themselves.
I think it really boils down to the definition of the word 'freedom'. I do not think of the word 'freedom' when I think of young black students being denied entry to public schools. I do think of the word 'freedom' when I think of someone consuming marijuana for medicinal purposes.
In general, I favor local rule with protections for the minorities against the masses.
The funny thing is that both the left and the right in this country pick and choose from the Bill of Rights depending on the issue.
While it might be amusing, it is also very predictable. I would argue that the Federal government had the duty to intervene to force integration in the schools. I also believe, however, that the Federal government ought to keep its nose out of assisted suicide or drug de-criminalization efforts.
Hypocrisy? I think not. I'm for the Federal government intervening to enforce those laws with which I am in agreement. I don't, however, try to convince people that I am a categorical states-rightist.
Which ideology calls for a "dictatorship of the Proletariat"? Communism? I believe that you are referring to Russia after the October Revolution. This is not a general tenet of Communism.
It would be a tragedy to dismiss any ideology based on an inaccurate understanding of it.
Anyone who removes the DRM and ignores the licensing of the song they accepted can no longer complain about anyone violating the GPL as you are just as bad.
I believe you are making a much stronger statement here than you probably intended. If I remove the DRM from an album that I purchased from iTunes, I have indeed broken the agreement that I have made with Apple regarding the purchase. Similarly, if I take a GLPed program, modify it, AND re-distribute it without distributing the source code, I have indeed broken the agreement that I have made with the developer regarding the program.
However, these two acts are not morally equivalent!! If I decided to sell the DRM free song, the comparison might be valid. As it stands, though, the comparison is flawed. You might as well throw a jaywalker in jail for life as he broke the same agreement he implicitly made with the State as did a murderer (the agreement not to commit crimes.)
MCSE is the most highly regarded certification? Isn't that the one that people often expand to "Minesweeper Certified Solitaire Expert"?
Ah, great comment. Unfortunately, it seems the moderators are unfamiliar with 'The Producers'. I wonder if a comment like, "Don't be stupid, be a smarty, come and join the Nazi party!" would get modded funny or flamebait.
How true! Still, it's the best government money can buy. I think the Ironic Times explained it well in their latest issue:
Last week we mistakenly reported that lobbyists, representing minimum wage workers who contributed heavily to lawmakers' reelection campaigns, used their clout to force a robust increase in the minimum wage. In fact these workers have no lobbyists, no money to contribute and no clout to use, and the bill favors business interests. We apologize for any confusion resulting from the error.
I seem to remember hearing that the Catholic Church banned the use of the fork as an eating utensil after its invention.
From http://www.bartcop.com/0159.htm:
"[Sam Waterston] said the fork wasn't invented until the 1400's, and it was immediately banned by the Catholic Church as, 'a tool of the devil.'"
(I'm sorry that I couldn't find a more reputable source.)
I'd definitely rather try to solve things through the Windows interface than trying to solve whatever is on the XF86Config-4 file
/etc/fstab file." And it will work! And if it stops working, I'll know how to fix it.
I'm not saying that I prefer a CLI to a GUI. It'd even be nice if I thought I could modify the XF86Config-4 file from a Control Panel-like window. What I'm really saying is that, for me, it is easier to solve Linux problems than Windows problems, even though I have more Windows experience.
When something doesn't work correctly on my Linux box, it may take me some time to discover the cause and develop a solution. In the end, however, I WILL know why it didn't work before and why it does work now. I might say, "Oh, that makes sense. I needed to make sure that the usbdevfs module had been inserted into the kernel before I could mount the drive from the
With Windows, I was never quite sure what was going on. "Hmmm, this thing doesn't seem to be working. I'll try rebooting. Oh look, it's fixed. Oh, there it goes again. Maybe it's a problem with the registry? I'll try reinstalling."
For me, it's not that Linux is easier or more intuitive. Rather, Linux is understandable. Granted, like many Slashdotters, I have a degree in Computer Science, so understandable is a very relative term.
Thanks! I'll set up the script tonight. I'll ask my wife to try it next time the error pops up.
I don't see how one black grandma represents all fundamentalist Christians.
Good, because she doesn't. You should notice I wrote, "She believed that fiction was the work of the Devil", and not, "Fundamentalist Christians believed that fiction was the work of the Devil." My point is that you don't hear too many people making this claim nowadays.
There is no prohibition against writing fiction in the Bible, whatsoever.
Granted. But where did I make that claim? Or were you responding to someone else's post?
In fact, Jesus often used parables, and others wrote them down. So is Jesus or the Gospel writer the sinner?
I'm afraid that Richard Wright's grandmother is long dead, so we won't be able to ask her this question. (Well, at least not in this life, anyway.)
What does this have to do with the IDF anyway, which is mostly composed of Jews, both ethnic and religious?
Absolutely nothing. You're pretty sharp today. My reply was a response to the grandparent's post. If you'd like, he and I could take the conversation offline. I should note, however, that my reply is currently at '+5, Interesting', so at least some people found this more interesting than they found it offtopic.
Thanks, I'll check it out.
I'm tired of corporations and government thinking society exists for the sole purpose of ensure their profit.
If the government doesn't exist to protect the interests of the wealthy power elite, then why does it exist? From the founding of the United States, through the Dred Scott decision, up until today, the wealthy and landed have used the legislature, the police, and the courts to preserve their way of life. The government just needs to toss in a little reform when the masses are ready to revolt, and push just enough people into the middle class to quell the rising anger.
It seems I've got to put down Zinn's 'A People's History of the United States' until I calm down. (Nurse, I'm ready for my meds.)
Please explain to me why that was wrong.
Simple, because you thought for yourself, instead of relying on the state's definition of right and wrong. Next thing you know, you'll decide that you don't need the government telling you what substances you can put into your body or what constitutes obscenity. What happens when everybody starts thinking for himself or herself, substituting their own judgment for that of career politicians?
I've had a very Fundie Christian relative who started blabbing off about how roleplaying was letting Satan into your heart with all that magic and fantastical creatures.
In his autobiography 'Black Boy', Richard Wright recalls his grandmother's attitude towards his writing. She believed that fiction was the work of the Devil. Paraphrasing: 'You writin' down things that ain' true. Tha's the Devil's work, boy.' (My apologies to Richard Wright for my crude approximation of his characteristic style.)
Things are getting a little better as time goes on, I hope.
Thanks for the advice. I've looked into using ipconfig to solve this problem. Hmmm, perhaps I should start at the beginning.
Occasionally, the browser has trouble resolving a host. Once it has this problem, it can't seem to look up any other hosts either. Pinging the IP address of the host works, but name resolution fails. I know that XP can experience problems with a tainted DNS cache, but flushing the cache does not solve the problem. The only solution to the problem appears to be to switch over to another DNS server (something that XP does not do automatically, it seems.) I'd love to be able to script a solution to this problem, but I don't want to have to put hours into solving a problem with a good, well-defined workaround, even if the workaround is a PITA.
As far as the monitor is concerned, Remote Desktop can be helpful in these situations. However, it's the only Windows box in the house. Is there a Linux client available? (If X fails to load, it'll drop me to a shell where I can solve the problem.)
I agree that command line hacking is a bit much for most people. I also think that configuring alternate DNS servers is a bit much for most people.
What the grandparent and I were both getting at is that a fundamental difference exists between administrators and users. And Windows has not made ordinary users into administrators. They still need us to help them set up their computers, fix their monitors, and repair their Internet connections. If a user with XP experience is just going to be checking his email or visiting his favorite portal, he or she won't experience much of a problem using Gnome or KDE.
People get upset because they're skilled with Windows and can correct problems there, but don't want to learn the same skills under Linux.
I've got the opposite problem now. I grew up with DOS and MS-Windows, and I learned how to administer and use these Operating Systems. However, since I switched to Linux three years ago, I've forgotten how to fix a Windows box.
For instance, if I'm having problem with my network card in Linux, I'll try '$/sbin/dhclient-2.2.x -q eth0', or maybe '$/sbin/ifconfig eth0 up'. With Windows, I'll spend hours trying to fix a flaky network connection or DNS problem. My wife's laptop runs Windows XP (she needs it for school, unfortunately.) When the network connection dies out, I've taught her to switch the primary DNS server with the secondary DNS server, and then switch back again. (Click here, then here, then here, then here, then here, then here, and then here.) I have no idea why this works, but it does.
Similarly, if I'm having an issue with my monitor in Linux, the solution is likely as simple as editing the '/etc/X11/XF86Config-4' file. With Windows, I'd likely have to download new drivers from the manufacturer. That *MIGHT* solve the problem. (Good luck, since the monitor's not working and the CLI isn't sophisticated enough for a simple lynx session.) If that doesn't work, it's likely time for a reinstall.
I agree with your point. I've never met a single person who had trouble getting work done in Linux who didn't also have trouble with Windows. You just say, 'Ok, remember how, in Windows, you'd click that little button in the bottom left hand corner to find the program you want to run. In Linux, you do the same thing. Oh, and to close a window, you click that little 'x' in the upper right hand corner, just like you remember from Windows.'
C'mon, mods. The parent is obviously joking. 'Insightful'?
A certain moral fiber? These are curious students who heard of a simple way to learn something that Harvard would be telling them in the near future anyway! The notion that their simple curiousity would necessarily compel them to commit serious crimes in the future is ludicrous! Laugh!
Hmmm, it could be that agustindondo is a Spanish speaker. 'Funciones' is Spanish for, you guessed it, 'functions.' Oh, and 'fecha' is 'date' en español.
I did not mean to give the impression that I felt that the rapist should be locked up for over 20 years. I thought that it was interesting that the woman did not feel that he deserved to go to jail for over 20 years. She did not value herself enough to think that someone should be punished for hurting her.
So, her position did not stem from an informed belief about the value of 'turning the other cheek.' (Granted, your only knowledge about the woman's position is garnered from what I have written about her here, so you could not have known her motivations.)
I happen to agree with your position on the nature of prison. Twenty years in prison is clearly punishment and not rehabilitation.
I absolutely detest "real" violence.
If you don't mind my asking, are you vegetarian? I'm vegan primarily out of my rejection of "real" violence.
I love violent games as much as the next gamer, but I also feel sick to my stomach when I watch other people cheer at violence or watch footage from the inside of a slaughterhouse.
I know at least one vegetarian that refuses to play violent games or watch violent movies. Although, I should note, his behavior is really based on the Buddhist notion of not putting attention towards unwholesome seeds in our store conciousness. (I'm obviously not Buddhist.)
Ah, nice try. Three-headed monkey. Fool me once, shame on--shame on you. Fool me--you can't get fooled again.
(three-headed monkey dances by)
I read a related article a couple of months ago. A woman was describing the time she was raped. The man came into her apartment when she opened the door for him (Mistake #1).
She felt that it would have been impolite to not answer her door. The article had a title like, 'When Violence Knocks and Kindness Answers.'
The police caught the rapist, and a judge sentenced him to over 20 years in prison. The victim knew that she should want to see the man suffer behind bars, but couldn't bring herself to feel that the crime warranted it. The article gave a very good insight into the woman's mindset.
So, at least in this woman's case, she could have used some assertiveness training.