No, you're just a zealot. Which is fine. If you really like your language, and you can use it well, by all means use it. However, don't come around acting like the biggest pain in the ass in the world is actually some miraculous godsend just because you happen to like it and somebody else doesn't. I personally think Java is a complete and total waste of resources, but, unlike you, I realize those are just my opinions, so I'm not going to sit here and try and tell you you're clueless about programming.
What really irks me about your post, however, is that the grandparent was modded to Flamebait for posting a fairly evenhanded opinion, but no fact. You've been modded to Interesting for posting what is, essentially, a flame against the grandparent, and still no fact.
Yay for moderation. I'm so glad it helps me get to the popularized, uninformed opinions quickly while allowing me to hide the potentially intelligent - but critical to the popular position - postings below the threshold.
Now I'm asking how it's related to the original post since the original poster suggested a connection between ident theft and fraud and victimless crime.
Ahhh Slashdot. Nothing like coming into a psuedo newsite full of ranting loons going off against the bias of Fox News or anything else then seeing half-truth, inflammatory headlines like that just to grab people's attention.
What you MEANT to say, of course, is:
Italy Approves Jail for P2P Users Who Transfer Copywritten Materials Without Permission to Do So
Which is, of course, already illegal in most places. Moral arguments about the punishment not fitting the crime etc. aside, it would be nice if Slashdot would at least pretend to be a news site every now and then instead of just trying to sell us ads by playing off of reactionary attitudes on this site.
This is the fourth goddamn attempt to post this around that stupid 20 second rule. Thank you CmdrTaco. I almost had it last time, but I had only waited a MERE 19 seconds! THE HORROR!
Normally, I wouldn't quote the CS Monitor because, well, my flatulence is more informative than their overly biased bullshit. However, the irony is just too sweet to pass up the opportunity.
Assuming that the seperator plate functioned properly, which could be why it was a dud in the first place. It's well known that Saddam fired live chemical munitions in the desert, and it's well known that some of them did not function properly (failure rates are, what, about 1 in 10 for that type of weaponry?). Of course, this assumes the shell came from Hussein in the first place...
True- but it is indicative that no matter what Saddam said, he had not fully disarmed.
Only in the most stubbornly technical sense. While Bush could declare technical vindication, few people would accept it if only a half dozen weapons (or, worse, only one) are ever found. After all, only an idiot would try to claim Saddam never had them - we GAVE HIM the materials to make the damn things. Of COURSE we know he had them. The question is whether or not he posed a significant threat to us or our forces stationed in the area. One crappy munition says no so far. We've lost nearly a thousand of our men and women so far, and the number's rising. I don't think that one bomb with sarin in it is enough to justify that loss.
I'm not arguing what you think I'm arguing. I'm just saying to stop jumping to idiotic conclusions until the shell has been examined and a determination is made as to its age, status, and origin. I'm sick of these dipshits running around yelling "HAHA! BUSHORZ WUZ RIGHT! YOO R TEH L00x0RZ!Q!!!1" just because one rigged weapon was found planted by the road. This is NOT evidence right now. Maybe it WILL be in the future, but it's not right NOW.
Just wait until we start letting Joe Six-pack refuel his hydrogen powered fuel cell pickup truck while smoking and yakking on his cell phone. BOOM!!
Mmm... no.
H explodes when it mixes with O2. If it gets to Joe's cigarette, it's already going to have exploded having leaked into the surrounding atmosphere, so Joe's cigarette and cell will not be a catalyst for the reaction.
Besides, if it's leaking that fast, it's already going to be burning and Joe's going to get a new orifice courtesy of one badass hot hydrogen fire.
Okay... let me clarify this for all you simpletons. Pay attention now. I realize that not being a total dumbass is something that you people have to concentrate on really hard, but do me a favor and try for a minute:
There are numerous possible sources for the single weapon that was found. You do not know where that weapon came from. You are probably not a forensic expert qualified to determine its source. Even if you are, you probably aren't one of the experts assigned to that bomb. In addition, the presence of a single armed shell is not indicative of the presence of an entire stockpile. On top of that, it's well known that there numerous unexploded munitions, many of which are likely to contain gas or germs, due to duds from live fire ranges.
Do you morons have all that, or would you like to come back and make some other meaningless, completely irrelevant statements or make shit up about what I said?
Jesus christ... this is not complicated shit people... stop jumping to fucking conclusions, and stop making shit up about what I believe one way or another and then trying to apply to me... it's not that fucking hard.
I'm just going to wait until they figure out where it actually came from.
Of course, the fact that you seem to think that this bomb is somehow evidence of a "stockpile" or "an imminent threat" when nobody even knows where it came from suggests you have the critical thinking skills of a moldy carrot anyway, so I'm not surprised in the least that you pulled that entire last statement right out of your ass.
The material would almost certainly not catch fire. Even if a hydrogren flame were somehow started at a lower altitude (where there's enough oxygen to actually burn it), all you'd have to do is ensure that the cargo is stored under it at a reasonable distance. Hyrdogren flames burn very hot, but there is almost no radiation from them, so things have to be directly in the flames to catch fire or get burned. They also don't burn very long.
Of course... you'd still have non-burning cargo crashing to earth.... but that's a risk with ANY type of spacecraft.
The risk I'm presenting is that hydgrogen is explosive, helium is not. If something set the hydrogen off, which is more likely than with helium, it would explode and send your material flying about the general area - bye bye cargo.
First of all, unless you assume one "truth" or another about the situation, points 1 and 3 conflict. If you're assuming truths (for any complex issue), well, you're just full of shit. Perhaps you should have qualified point 1 with "destroyed it without documenting the process"?
Second of all, Iraq was using sarin against Iran back in the 80s which is fairly common knowledge. Amusingly, although you indicate that we were well aware of its presence, you fail to indicate that we may well have been the provider as it's well known that we provided multitudes of "dual use" material to them.
You also fail to note that numerous leftover duds of the Iran-Iraq war have been littering the desert's live fire ranges for two decades, and G.I.s have known that since at least GW1. Since this appears to have been a crudely rigged bomb, one could just as easily speculate that it was one of these duds dragged off by a lucky insurgent as it was a piece of a stockpile.
Given all that, it's not significant. Unlike you folks clamoring for some sign that the president isn't utterly full of shit, I'm just going to wait until they figure out where it actually came from. Regardless, however, one discarded shell is hardly a stockpile or an immenent threat, so they better damn well find more or some other evidence or I'm only going to admit being wrong on the stupid technicality that, yes, technically *A* weapon of mass destruction was found.
um no offence but its a proven fact the hindenburg didnt explode from hydrogen... its a myth.
Umm... no offense, but I didn't mention the Hindeburg disaster.
It explodes yes, but there is no flame.
I'm aware of that. Which is why I said it's "explosive", but there's little risk to people (assuming they're not standing right next to it), just cargo and the cost of transporting it.
First link: why is the WA Timesv (2nd link) the only place to have ever corroborated this "story", and why hasn't the administration been parading it around if it's damning evidence?
Third link: "Iraq's coalition government claims that it has uncovered documentary proof that Mohammed Atta..." Why has this never been validated?
Fourth link: I've seen this one. It deals with Clinton's views of Al Quaeda. So? Are you saying Clinton knew something Bush didn't? The only "evidence" that link presents (amusingly, part of it is presented as "damning proof" or something similar regarding a soil sample) is a bunch of second-rate inferences from tests that they claim happened. No corroboration, no discussion, no documentation, no nothing. Just claims.
Fifth link: I've already seen that one as well. It deals largely with terrorist organizations that target other Middle Eastern nations. Shouldn't the U.S. be a little more interested in dealing with groups that target us? Such as, say, Al Quadea? A group that your 5th link expressly states is unlikely to have had any interest in Saddam?
Final link: So... WHAT? How many terrorists are in the U.S. right now? Maybe we should pre-emptively attack ourselves? This is just a combination of the crap espoused in the first two links subjected to a torturous stretch of possible scenarios. The mere presence of these groups does not imply a connection. Did Bush ever ask for them to be turned over? He asked those nice Taliban folks that weren't even recognized as a governing body to hand over bin Laden before he shot them up, and they were just as cruel, if not worse, than Saddam. Why didn't he ask for these terrorists to be turned over?
Shamble off with your conjecture now. I'm not interested. Show me a REAL document that has been validated or some recordings, or go find me some real bombs. Stop presenting me with a bunch of hearsay and postulation from a group of overtly biased sources claiming that other people have found documents that are claimed to be evidence. This "I heard it from a friend of a friend" crap is getting old.
Yea, like that. Here, let me summarize: it had Sarin in it and nobody knows where it came from or who's it was.
Gee, now if they can find about 100 more of these, we'll have only wasted 8 young men and women's lives to find these big, dangerous WMD! Of course, this assumes that what was found last week was Saddam's and not something insurgents or terrorists planted....
Yea, no big deal. Why don't you make it your personal crusade to find all the widows out there from this war, all the children who lost a parent, maybe both. Everyone who lost a friend or family member. Why don't you go find them and explain to them how it was no big motherfucking deal? Huh?
You are one fucked up individual to make such a ridiculously infuriating statement on a site where the odds of you being a 350 pound loser with Cheetoh-stained hands and sweat stains under your armpits is through the fucking roof.
There is no such thing as a war that's "not a big deal", dumbass. You'd do well to remember that in the future rather than showing yourself as the mindless dipshit you are.
I feel that you are missing the ultimate ends where this is going.
Slip slidin' down-a-slope-am-I.
IF that even has a chance to happen we have to fail here first. Therefore, rather than worrying too much about the "what if" of years down the road, why not focus on the problem at hand?
And, the problem at hand is introduction of inferior products to consumers, which is not a free speech issue.
Therefore, while this could conceivably become a free speech issue in the FUTURE, it's not one NOW, and we don't know what will ever become of it down the road anyway.
You don't have to convince me that this is a Bad Thing, I already oppose it. You just have to convince me that this is a free speech issue as you originally stated.
Heh.. on a side note, convenient of you to reply while I was responding to the last guy... Slashdot must be working around my schedule now..
1) There are a lot of things you can't legally remove from your car (presuming we're talking street vehicles) that are of questionable usefulness. Various emissions equipment come to mind. You may not become a felon, but if you get caught without them on the street, you will get a fine, and you might get a record. If you replaced them with something else that's not street legal, you could go to jail or lose your license altogether.
2) You're talking about a different law entirely when you bring up circumvention, which, while related, is not a core peice of this discussion. That's a different problem that also needs to be dealt with.
3) It STILL doesn't become a freedom of speech issue, unless you can manage to convince the court that you express yourself through the redistribution of other people's music.
Yea, good and explosive. While it may not be particularly dangerous to people, losing payloads to accidents involving hydrogen explosions in the atmosphere would jack the potential cost up.
When the FCC enforces an audio broadcast flag, and all software has to respect it there will be free speech issues.
No, there won't be.
Fair use is a free speech issue...
No, it's not. Not in this context.
This is technical legislation that affects the product itself. This is no different than putting a chip in a car that doesn't let you resell or give away the vehicle. It's stupid, but then, you'd have to be a stupid person to buy it. Maybe it's a consumer rights issue and it might also be an abuse of a monopolistic position (assuming that no non-monopoly would ever get away with such crap), but there are no free speech issues involved in damaging your own product. As long as people are clearly made aware it's there before they buy it (right to know what you're buying), it's up to the consumer to determine whether or not they want to purchase it. As a buyer, I would look at such media as an inferior product, and I would not purchase it.
Back to the "fair use" tripe: no, it's not a fair use issues. If Cary Sherman came over and kicked you in the nuts for making a parody of a song, it's a fair use problem (and aggravated assault, but that's a different issue). If Cary Sherman doesn't let you redistribute exact copies of the original song + parody via technology breakage on the data, well, too bad. Why are you buying faulty products? Also, nothing is stopping you from recreating it yourself in parody. Nothing says that the content provider is OBLIGATED to provide you with an exact copy for the purposes of reuse or parody or anything else.
It's a broken product, plain and simple. There is not freedom of speech issue, and reactionay statements to that effect just make dissenters of this policy look like babbling fools. I'd really appreciate it if people on Slashdot would pull their heads out of their asses now and then and try to repsond to this sort of thing in a rational, sane manner, because nobdoy is going to listen to this den of lunatics as long as the hive mind moderation continues to reward this sort of nonsensical response and behavior with facetime at +5, Whatever (I'm aware the original poster didn't get modded up).
I hope that they will still teach the basics in the future..... If not, we will be sitting ducks.
Oh no. America would never abandon teaching the basics in favor of letting high tech gadgetry handle it all. No, never. You, uh, do know how to do long division in your head, right?
Actually, despite the fact that our public schools are miserable failures of education these days, I do seem to recall seeing a story about an equipment drop or a jump or artillery targetting or something gone awry in Afghanistan or Iraq where the soldiers wound up having to do a bunch of trajectory calculations on paper. Turns out they were trained to use the equipment, but they were also trained not to have to rely on it, so all went well in the end.
Slashdot Mirror
You are truly clueless about Java.
No, you're just a zealot. Which is fine. If you really like your language, and you can use it well, by all means use it. However, don't come around acting like the biggest pain in the ass in the world is actually some miraculous godsend just because you happen to like it and somebody else doesn't. I personally think Java is a complete and total waste of resources, but, unlike you, I realize those are just my opinions, so I'm not going to sit here and try and tell you you're clueless about programming.
What really irks me about your post, however, is that the grandparent was modded to Flamebait for posting a fairly evenhanded opinion, but no fact. You've been modded to Interesting for posting what is, essentially, a flame against the grandparent, and still no fact.
Yay for moderation. I'm so glad it helps me get to the popularized, uninformed opinions quickly while allowing me to hide the potentially intelligent - but critical to the popular position - postings below the threshold.
Gotcha - I was just confused by your post. Thank you for clarifying.
Now I'm asking how it's related to the original post since the original poster suggested a connection between ident theft and fraud and victimless crime.
Okay, but how does that relate to identity theft and fraud? There are most certainly victims.
Victimless crime.. explain to me how something can be a victimless crime, or, if some action really is victimless, why it's a crime.
So.... your theory is that everything of this nature should be excusable as long as it's not the bottom of the barrel?
Italy Approves Jail for P2P Users
Ahhh Slashdot. Nothing like coming into a psuedo newsite full of ranting loons going off against the bias of Fox News or anything else then seeing half-truth, inflammatory headlines like that just to grab people's attention.
What you MEANT to say, of course, is:
Italy Approves Jail for P2P Users Who Transfer Copywritten Materials Without Permission to Do So
Which is, of course, already illegal in most places. Moral arguments about the punishment not fitting the crime etc. aside, it would be nice if Slashdot would at least pretend to be a news site every now and then instead of just trying to sell us ads by playing off of reactionary attitudes on this site.
What state is it in?
This is the fourth goddamn attempt to post this around that stupid 20 second rule. Thank you CmdrTaco. I almost had it last time, but I had only waited a MERE 19 seconds! THE HORROR!
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0521/p09s01-coop.htm l
Normally, I wouldn't quote the CS Monitor because, well, my flatulence is more informative than their overly biased bullshit. However, the irony is just too sweet to pass up the opportunity.
Assuming that the seperator plate functioned properly, which could be why it was a dud in the first place. It's well known that Saddam fired live chemical munitions in the desert, and it's well known that some of them did not function properly (failure rates are, what, about 1 in 10 for that type of weaponry?). Of course, this assumes the shell came from Hussein in the first place...
True- but it is indicative that no matter what Saddam said, he had not fully disarmed.
Only in the most stubbornly technical sense. While Bush could declare technical vindication, few people would accept it if only a half dozen weapons (or, worse, only one) are ever found. After all, only an idiot would try to claim Saddam never had them - we GAVE HIM the materials to make the damn things. Of COURSE we know he had them. The question is whether or not he posed a significant threat to us or our forces stationed in the area. One crappy munition says no so far. We've lost nearly a thousand of our men and women so far, and the number's rising. I don't think that one bomb with sarin in it is enough to justify that loss.
I'm not arguing what you think I'm arguing. I'm just saying to stop jumping to idiotic conclusions until the shell has been examined and a determination is made as to its age, status, and origin. I'm sick of these dipshits running around yelling "HAHA! BUSHORZ WUZ RIGHT! YOO R TEH L00x0RZ!Q!!!1" just because one rigged weapon was found planted by the road. This is NOT evidence right now. Maybe it WILL be in the future, but it's not right NOW.
Just wait until we start letting Joe Six-pack refuel his hydrogen powered fuel cell pickup truck while smoking and yakking on his cell phone. BOOM!!
Mmm... no.
H explodes when it mixes with O2. If it gets to Joe's cigarette, it's already going to have exploded having leaked into the surrounding atmosphere, so Joe's cigarette and cell will not be a catalyst for the reaction.
Besides, if it's leaking that fast, it's already going to be burning and Joe's going to get a new orifice courtesy of one badass hot hydrogen fire.
Okay... let me clarify this for all you simpletons. Pay attention now. I realize that not being a total dumbass is something that you people have to concentrate on really hard, but do me a favor and try for a minute:
There are numerous possible sources for the single weapon that was found. You do not know where that weapon came from. You are probably not a forensic expert qualified to determine its source. Even if you are, you probably aren't one of the experts assigned to that bomb. In addition, the presence of a single armed shell is not indicative of the presence of an entire stockpile. On top of that, it's well known that there numerous unexploded munitions, many of which are likely to contain gas or germs, due to duds from live fire ranges.
Do you morons have all that, or would you like to come back and make some other meaningless, completely irrelevant statements or make shit up about what I said?
Jesus christ... this is not complicated shit people... stop jumping to fucking conclusions, and stop making shit up about what I believe one way or another and then trying to apply to me... it's not that fucking hard.
Yea, sure, dipshit. That's why I said:
I'm just going to wait until they figure out where it actually came from.
Of course, the fact that you seem to think that this bomb is somehow evidence of a "stockpile" or "an imminent threat" when nobody even knows where it came from suggests you have the critical thinking skills of a moldy carrot anyway, so I'm not surprised in the least that you pulled that entire last statement right out of your ass.
The material would almost certainly not catch fire. Even if a hydrogren flame were somehow started at a lower altitude (where there's enough oxygen to actually burn it), all you'd have to do is ensure that the cargo is stored under it at a reasonable distance. Hyrdogren flames burn very hot, but there is almost no radiation from them, so things have to be directly in the flames to catch fire or get burned. They also don't burn very long.
Of course... you'd still have non-burning cargo crashing to earth.... but that's a risk with ANY type of spacecraft.
The risk I'm presenting is that hydgrogen is explosive, helium is not. If something set the hydrogen off, which is more likely than with helium, it would explode and send your material flying about the general area - bye bye cargo.
First of all, unless you assume one "truth" or another about the situation, points 1 and 3 conflict. If you're assuming truths (for any complex issue), well, you're just full of shit. Perhaps you should have qualified point 1 with "destroyed it without documenting the process"?
Second of all, Iraq was using sarin against Iran back in the 80s which is fairly common knowledge. Amusingly, although you indicate that we were well aware of its presence, you fail to indicate that we may well have been the provider as it's well known that we provided multitudes of "dual use" material to them.
You also fail to note that numerous leftover duds of the Iran-Iraq war have been littering the desert's live fire ranges for two decades, and G.I.s have known that since at least GW1. Since this appears to have been a crudely rigged bomb, one could just as easily speculate that it was one of these duds dragged off by a lucky insurgent as it was a piece of a stockpile.
Given all that, it's not significant. Unlike you folks clamoring for some sign that the president isn't utterly full of shit, I'm just going to wait until they figure out where it actually came from. Regardless, however, one discarded shell is hardly a stockpile or an immenent threat, so they better damn well find more or some other evidence or I'm only going to admit being wrong on the stupid technicality that, yes, technically *A* weapon of mass destruction was found.
um no offence but its a proven fact the hindenburg didnt explode from hydrogen... its a myth.
Umm... no offense, but I didn't mention the Hindeburg disaster.
It explodes yes, but there is no flame.
I'm aware of that. Which is why I said it's "explosive", but there's little risk to people (assuming they're not standing right next to it), just cargo and the cost of transporting it.
First link: why is the WA Timesv (2nd link) the only place to have ever corroborated this "story", and why hasn't the administration been parading it around if it's damning evidence?
Third link: "Iraq's coalition government claims that it has uncovered documentary proof that Mohammed Atta..." Why has this never been validated?
Fourth link: I've seen this one. It deals with Clinton's views of Al Quaeda. So? Are you saying Clinton knew something Bush didn't? The only "evidence" that link presents (amusingly, part of it is presented as "damning proof" or something similar regarding a soil sample) is a bunch of second-rate inferences from tests that they claim happened. No corroboration, no discussion, no documentation, no nothing. Just claims.
Fifth link: I've already seen that one as well. It deals largely with terrorist organizations that target other Middle Eastern nations. Shouldn't the U.S. be a little more interested in dealing with groups that target us? Such as, say, Al Quadea? A group that your 5th link expressly states is unlikely to have had any interest in Saddam?
Final link: So... WHAT? How many terrorists are in the U.S. right now? Maybe we should pre-emptively attack ourselves? This is just a combination of the crap espoused in the first two links subjected to a torturous stretch of possible scenarios. The mere presence of these groups does not imply a connection. Did Bush ever ask for them to be turned over? He asked those nice Taliban folks that weren't even recognized as a governing body to hand over bin Laden before he shot them up, and they were just as cruel, if not worse, than Saddam. Why didn't he ask for these terrorists to be turned over?
Shamble off with your conjecture now. I'm not interested. Show me a REAL document that has been validated or some recordings, or go find me some real bombs. Stop presenting me with a bunch of hearsay and postulation from a group of overtly biased sources claiming that other people have found documents that are claimed to be evidence. This "I heard it from a friend of a friend" crap is getting old.
Yea, like that. Here, let me summarize: it had Sarin in it and nobody knows where it came from or who's it was.
Gee, now if they can find about 100 more of these, we'll have only wasted 8 young men and women's lives to find these big, dangerous WMD! Of course, this assumes that what was found last week was Saddam's and not something insurgents or terrorists planted....
Yea, no big deal. Why don't you make it your personal crusade to find all the widows out there from this war, all the children who lost a parent, maybe both. Everyone who lost a friend or family member. Why don't you go find them and explain to them how it was no big motherfucking deal? Huh?
You are one fucked up individual to make such a ridiculously infuriating statement on a site where the odds of you being a 350 pound loser with Cheetoh-stained hands and sweat stains under your armpits is through the fucking roof.
There is no such thing as a war that's "not a big deal", dumbass. You'd do well to remember that in the future rather than showing yourself as the mindless dipshit you are.
I feel that you are missing the ultimate ends where this is going.
Slip slidin' down-a-slope-am-I.
IF that even has a chance to happen we have to fail here first. Therefore, rather than worrying too much about the "what if" of years down the road, why not focus on the problem at hand?
And, the problem at hand is introduction of inferior products to consumers, which is not a free speech issue.
Therefore, while this could conceivably become a free speech issue in the FUTURE, it's not one NOW, and we don't know what will ever become of it down the road anyway.
You don't have to convince me that this is a Bad Thing, I already oppose it. You just have to convince me that this is a free speech issue as you originally stated.
Heh.. on a side note, convenient of you to reply while I was responding to the last guy... Slashdot must be working around my schedule now..
1) There are a lot of things you can't legally remove from your car (presuming we're talking street vehicles) that are of questionable usefulness. Various emissions equipment come to mind. You may not become a felon, but if you get caught without them on the street, you will get a fine, and you might get a record. If you replaced them with something else that's not street legal, you could go to jail or lose your license altogether.
2) You're talking about a different law entirely when you bring up circumvention, which, while related, is not a core peice of this discussion. That's a different problem that also needs to be dealt with.
3) It STILL doesn't become a freedom of speech issue, unless you can manage to convince the court that you express yourself through the redistribution of other people's music.
Yea, good and explosive. While it may not be particularly dangerous to people, losing payloads to accidents involving hydrogen explosions in the atmosphere would jack the potential cost up.
When the FCC enforces an audio broadcast flag, and all software has to respect it there will be free speech issues.
No, there won't be.
Fair use is a free speech issue...
No, it's not. Not in this context.
This is technical legislation that affects the product itself. This is no different than putting a chip in a car that doesn't let you resell or give away the vehicle. It's stupid, but then, you'd have to be a stupid person to buy it. Maybe it's a consumer rights issue and it might also be an abuse of a monopolistic position (assuming that no non-monopoly would ever get away with such crap), but there are no free speech issues involved in damaging your own product. As long as people are clearly made aware it's there before they buy it (right to know what you're buying), it's up to the consumer to determine whether or not they want to purchase it. As a buyer, I would look at such media as an inferior product, and I would not purchase it.
Back to the "fair use" tripe: no, it's not a fair use issues. If Cary Sherman came over and kicked you in the nuts for making a parody of a song, it's a fair use problem (and aggravated assault, but that's a different issue). If Cary Sherman doesn't let you redistribute exact copies of the original song + parody via technology breakage on the data, well, too bad. Why are you buying faulty products? Also, nothing is stopping you from recreating it yourself in parody. Nothing says that the content provider is OBLIGATED to provide you with an exact copy for the purposes of reuse or parody or anything else.
It's a broken product, plain and simple. There is not freedom of speech issue, and reactionay statements to that effect just make dissenters of this policy look like babbling fools. I'd really appreciate it if people on Slashdot would pull their heads out of their asses now and then and try to repsond to this sort of thing in a rational, sane manner, because nobdoy is going to listen to this den of lunatics as long as the hive mind moderation continues to reward this sort of nonsensical response and behavior with facetime at +5, Whatever (I'm aware the original poster didn't get modded up).
People with that sort of rigid viewpoint don't have much of a moral compass when it comes to "the other guys".
People who don't understand why people have that rigid viewpoint don't have to fight "the other guys" though.
Or, to put it all together: war sucks no matter which side you're on and what part you play, and there just isn't any justification for that fact.
I hope that they will still teach the basics in the future..... If not, we will be sitting ducks.
Oh no. America would never abandon teaching the basics in favor of letting high tech gadgetry handle it all. No, never. You, uh, do know how to do long division in your head, right?
Actually, despite the fact that our public schools are miserable failures of education these days, I do seem to recall seeing a story about an equipment drop or a jump or artillery targetting or something gone awry in Afghanistan or Iraq where the soldiers wound up having to do a bunch of trajectory calculations on paper. Turns out they were trained to use the equipment, but they were also trained not to have to rely on it, so all went well in the end.