Libertarians are people who have never ceased being teenagers and seeing beyond their own personal needs and desires, they have no expectations at all about other people's behaviour as they do not think of it at all. They are permanently stuck in the 'me now generation' like a broken record and they quite simply cannot conceive of a society based upon that principle because it is beyond their understanding, hence their desire for it.
You've obviously never actually known many. Instead of making a sweeping stereotype, maybe you could act unlike those you accusations you've made above, and learn something.
This has been the most amusing story I've seen on/. in a long time.
So many getting wrapped around the axle with what is or isn't math, if ANYthing should be patentable or not, and wearing their emotions here.
Whatever, any of us believe here, our opinions mean Jack, and the courts will decide (likely in the middle somewhere) that some things are math and others are not, despite the functions of printing Hello World, and 0s and 1s.
Just my $.02. Let's have a sane discussion on the value, or lack thereof, of any patents. For myself, I've got mixed feelings. While I despise patent trolling, I do see value in allowing patents for a fixed period of time in order to allow the creator to benefit from their invention. What that period should be?...I'm not sure what's reasonable. I think there should be some discussion about the transfer of patents when one company purchases another, and maybe even eliminating that, but confess I haven't really thought it through.
At some point, I'll be contacting my Congressmen and expressing my opinion on this. I'm sure some of you would tell me that's a useless naive exercise, and I'll counter with a couple of examples where it's worked for me.
Computers are viewed as tools. If I bought a hammer, and it's been working fine for several years, and you come to me with a fancy new hammer, you need to convince me why I need to spend money to "upgrade". Will I be able to pound nails faster?
I work at a Fortune 500 company. We have several old x386 machines that are used to log equipment, and have done that job just fine for years. They're not supported by any OEM, but who gives a damn, they don't need to be.
All that said, we're requiring anyone with an XP machine to get a waiver in order to keep it. Not that they won't be able to, but they need to justify not upgrading. Not everything is black and white.
Just adding some of my own anecdotal experience...
Certainly, DWB is an issue, but you can be profiled while white as well. In '78, I was 20 yrs old, and drove a gold Trans Am. In the one year I owned that car, I was pulled over at least eight times for such things as being over the line at a stop light, and having a tail light out. Young guy, hot car...must be guilty of something. I'm now 54 yrs old, and have a Charger SRT8...it looks fast standing still, and I've been pulled over three times since purchasing it last summer...no tickets. One cop walked up, and said, "sure must be fast", and walked away. Would I have gotten tickets if I was black?...possibly, but they would have all been minor (unless trumped up). We all make assumptions based upon appearances, in spite of being told not to judge a book by it's cover. Does that make it right?...no. But if you don't want the attention, don't dress like a gangster or hooker, and don't drive a hot car,
Link a single credible source that indicates dumping by the U.S. Navy in recent years? I googled, and couldn't find one that didn't rely only on speculation or "someone told me". You'd think that with around 300 ships, someone somewhere would have snapped a photo.
Unless it was thirty plus years ago, I'm gonna call B.S. No Navy captain is going to risk his career on getting busted for throwing stuff overboard unless it's necessary to save the ship or someone's life.
There is no precedent for imposing this "responsibility" upon the consumer. The producer has complete control and the ultimate responsibility for how the product was created. Your argument lacks any logic and is baseless.
I did, and I appreciate that, but fail to see how it's relevant to what I stated. When a consumer makes a purchase, they don't know where the producers power came from. Even if there is a list, is it incumbent upon consumers to search that before any major purchase? That's going to be a non-starter for 99+% of all consumers.
The consumer has little in resources to tell them if their products were produced with clean power, or from a coal plant. You have to go to the source for that.
So, are you saying that it's the consumer's fault? Most consumers don't give a rats ass how/where their products were produced, only that they come at the lowest price. That's not to say consumers shouldn't get educated on the topic. However, China is solely responsible for their own pollution, they have a government, and laws, and have chosen to prioritize money above the environment.
So, you're blaming China's emissions on the U.S.? I missed the part where outsourcing work also outsource pollution rules/laws. But, it all makes sense to me now.
WTF gives you the right to complain about where anyone lives, and their position on the topic? Their place of residence doesn't make them personally responsible for their country. Now you have heard it all.
But they were initially apprehended by an MIT campus security officer and while he may well have known who to look for it was his training and bravery that made the most significant impact in this case
*Boggle* Did you make this shit up? If not, you need to disqualify the source as a reference for valid information.
So you your reasoning, we in the U.S. are being exploited, though I can't think of a single example of a business that had to categorize their service as free to meet an obligation. It simply isn't necessary. It's also interesting to note that I could walk on your property and injure myself and sue you, but you have no requirement to respond to any mail from me, no matter what the purpose is. You call this consumer protection, but from what?...I call it Nanny State. Now if we're talking about privacy laws, I'll admit, EU is way ahead of the U.S., but to me this requirement makes no sense.
Maybe it's none of my business, being an American, though I have close ties, having lived there for six yrs., and distant family.
Congratulations on your entitlement. As a German decedent, I'll say that it's a stupid law, which is what I'm attempting to debate. This is a long way from being a human rights issue.
Your strawman, while interesting, doesn't provide a logical reason to be "entitled" to get service from a business that really owes you nothing. What you described is a monopoly situation, and that's a different case entirely. You have the option to take your "business" elsewhere. Ads are on virtually every website, do they all have to respond to anyone's questions? To claim that I'm making a "payment" is silly. You don't pay a dime (Euro, or whatever), and there's plenty of ways to block those if you don't like it. I don't personally block ads, but I guarantee you that I look at well under 1% of those on my screen.
Unfortunately, you didn't answer the question that was asked. Yes, the advertisers paid, and I could understand if they expected something in return. But, how can you claim an entitlement that you gave nothing to get?
I've read the argument that you're giving up privacy. Well, nobody is twisting anyone's are to force them to use this free service.
I'm not trying to argue that they, or anyone else should be exempt from local laws, only the logic, or lack there of behind it.
Slashdot Mirror
Libertarians are people who have never ceased being teenagers and seeing beyond their own personal needs and desires, they have no expectations at all about other people's behaviour as they do not think of it at all. They are permanently stuck in the 'me now generation' like a broken record and they quite simply cannot conceive of a society based upon that principle because it is beyond their understanding, hence their desire for it.
You've obviously never actually known many. Instead of making a sweeping stereotype, maybe you could act unlike those you accusations you've made above, and learn something.
They don't get to switch flags at will.
This has been the most amusing story I've seen on /. in a long time.
So many getting wrapped around the axle with what is or isn't math, if ANYthing should be patentable or not, and wearing their emotions here.
Whatever, any of us believe here, our opinions mean Jack, and the courts will decide (likely in the middle somewhere) that some things are math and others are not, despite the functions of printing Hello World, and 0s and 1s.
Just my $.02. Let's have a sane discussion on the value, or lack thereof, of any patents. For myself, I've got mixed feelings. While I despise patent trolling, I do see value in allowing patents for a fixed period of time in order to allow the creator to benefit from their invention. What that period should be?...I'm not sure what's reasonable. I think there should be some discussion about the transfer of patents when one company purchases another, and maybe even eliminating that, but confess I haven't really thought it through.
At some point, I'll be contacting my Congressmen and expressing my opinion on this. I'm sure some of you would tell me that's a useless naive exercise, and I'll counter with a couple of examples where it's worked for me.
Cheers!
And can either of you counter what those history books state with evidence to the contrary?
Computers are viewed as tools. If I bought a hammer, and it's been working fine for several years, and you come to me with a fancy new hammer, you need to convince me why I need to spend money to "upgrade". Will I be able to pound nails faster?
I work at a Fortune 500 company. We have several old x386 machines that are used to log equipment, and have done that job just fine for years. They're not supported by any OEM, but who gives a damn, they don't need to be.
All that said, we're requiring anyone with an XP machine to get a waiver in order to keep it. Not that they won't be able to, but they need to justify not upgrading. Not everything is black and white.
judging by you spelling
Pot...kettle.
Just adding some of my own anecdotal experience...
Certainly, DWB is an issue, but you can be profiled while white as well. In '78, I was 20 yrs old, and drove a gold Trans Am. In the one year I owned that car, I was pulled over at least eight times for such things as being over the line at a stop light, and having a tail light out. Young guy, hot car...must be guilty of something. I'm now 54 yrs old, and have a Charger SRT8...it looks fast standing still, and I've been pulled over three times since purchasing it last summer...no tickets. One cop walked up, and said, "sure must be fast", and walked away. Would I have gotten tickets if I was black?...possibly, but they would have all been minor (unless trumped up). We all make assumptions based upon appearances, in spite of being told not to judge a book by it's cover. Does that make it right?...no. But if you don't want the attention, don't dress like a gangster or hooker, and don't drive a hot car,
Link a single credible source that indicates dumping by the U.S. Navy in recent years? I googled, and couldn't find one that didn't rely only on speculation or "someone told me". You'd think that with around 300 ships, someone somewhere would have snapped a photo.
Unless it was thirty plus years ago, I'm gonna call B.S. No Navy captain is going to risk his career on getting busted for throwing stuff overboard unless it's necessary to save the ship or someone's life.
There is no precedent for imposing this "responsibility" upon the consumer. The producer has complete control and the ultimate responsibility for how the product was created. Your argument lacks any logic and is baseless.
I did, and I appreciate that, but fail to see how it's relevant to what I stated. When a consumer makes a purchase, they don't know where the producers power came from. Even if there is a list, is it incumbent upon consumers to search that before any major purchase? That's going to be a non-starter for 99+% of all consumers.
The consumer has little in resources to tell them if their products were produced with clean power, or from a coal plant. You have to go to the source for that.
http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/find-by-topic/
So, are you saying that it's the consumer's fault? Most consumers don't give a rats ass how/where their products were produced, only that they come at the lowest price. That's not to say consumers shouldn't get educated on the topic. However, China is solely responsible for their own pollution, they have a government, and laws, and have chosen to prioritize money above the environment.
So, you're blaming China's emissions on the U.S.? I missed the part where outsourcing work also outsource pollution rules/laws. But, it all makes sense to me now.
WTF gives you the right to complain about where anyone lives, and their position on the topic? Their place of residence doesn't make them personally responsible for their country. Now you have heard it all.
But they were initially apprehended by an MIT campus security officer and while he may well have known who to look for it was his training and bravery that made the most significant impact in this case
*Boggle* Did you make this shit up? If not, you need to disqualify the source as a reference for valid information.
Time for new reading glasses...my bad
A/G != AIG
So you your reasoning, we in the U.S. are being exploited, though I can't think of a single example of a business that had to categorize their service as free to meet an obligation. It simply isn't necessary. It's also interesting to note that I could walk on your property and injure myself and sue you, but you have no requirement to respond to any mail from me, no matter what the purpose is. You call this consumer protection, but from what?...I call it Nanny State. Now if we're talking about privacy laws, I'll admit, EU is way ahead of the U.S., but to me this requirement makes no sense.
Maybe it's none of my business, being an American, though I have close ties, having lived there for six yrs., and distant family.
Congratulations on your entitlement. As a German decedent, I'll say that it's a stupid law, which is what I'm attempting to debate. This is a long way from being a human rights issue.
Your strawman, while interesting, doesn't provide a logical reason to be "entitled" to get service from a business that really owes you nothing. What you described is a monopoly situation, and that's a different case entirely. You have the option to take your "business" elsewhere. Ads are on virtually every website, do they all have to respond to anyone's questions? To claim that I'm making a "payment" is silly. You don't pay a dime (Euro, or whatever), and there's plenty of ways to block those if you don't like it. I don't personally block ads, but I guarantee you that I look at well under 1% of those on my screen.
Unfortunately, you didn't answer the question that was asked. Yes, the advertisers paid, and I could understand if they expected something in return. But, how can you claim an entitlement that you gave nothing to get?
I've read the argument that you're giving up privacy. Well, nobody is twisting anyone's are to force them to use this free service.
I'm not trying to argue that they, or anyone else should be exempt from local laws, only the logic, or lack there of behind it.
"Entitled to", how? What did you do to deserve this free service, and expectation to get more free service in the way of a written response?
Yes, I understand it's your local law, and they're free to not do business there. But, how would you handle a company that doesn't have a presence?
Sure, let's fund a Prowler for every major city for incidents that occur how often? Shouldn't cost much.