It's possible to have a democracy in which every decision is made by majority rule, but the majority is dissatisfied with the majority of the decisions. You just have to have a small percentage that wins all the time.
"I will probably never be able to describe just how horrible it has been to be me for the last three or four years, and I certainly will not insult you now by attempting to do so; suffice it to say that anything must be better than this dubious existence. [...] I will be shutting persephone down for an indeterminite period while I try to work out whether I have a future."
That sounds to me like the guy is borderline suicidal. It's sad.
Seriously, who here didn't see this sort of thing coming more than ten years ago? You've had plenty of time to switch over to an OS that has acceptable licensing. Not only that, but it keeps getting easier to switch over to free software.
Don't you remember the Corel Linux informercials? A half-hour informercial extolling the virtues of Corel Linux and explaining how Corel was setting up the perfect alternative to Windows.
I'm not making this up. If I recall correctly it ran many times on ZDTV back in the day. That and the Cue Cat one were my two favorite dotcom bubble infomercials.
I've been using only Debian for about 5 years. It's the best. I totally support the community, and the philosophy behind Debian. Debian Stable is great for some purposes, and Debain unstable is great for others.
I've been reading Martin's book (it cost me $30), and unless the second half has a lot more in it than the first half does, there's not much there that an experienced user of Debian doesn't already know. So if you're already an experienced Debian user, the news is good: you already probably understand a lot more than you think you do! If you're not already experienced with Debian, what are you waiting for?
When Newton posited gravity, some people claimed that he wasn't doing science because he invoked medieval-sounding "occult powers", and hence wasn't giving properly naturalistic explanations. People who make up definitions of science and then try to rule out rival theories because they are not "scientific" are usually up to no good. Part of what is at stake in scientific controversy is what the proper definition of science is. I'm no fan of what the Kansas Board is doing, but your concern about the sanctity of the "definition of science" is misplaced.
Is there any advantage over a web service?
on
RSSOwl 1.2 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I've been using Bloglines (http://www.bloglines.com/ for about a year, and find it does a great job of aggregating rss, xml, atom and other kinds of feeds. I can move from machine to machine without a problem.
Would there be any advantage in switching to something like rssowl or liferea?
Or, as in the infamous McDonalds hot coffee case to which you are perhaps alluding, the company may have known about the problem for years and refused to do anything about it. The details of this case are documented all over the web, and they are quite striking.
I don't see why a porn producer in LA should be prosecuted for offering a masturbation video on his website because some evangelical group in Alabama is offended by it.
I agree. That's why the only material that's going to get prosecuted is the stuff that will fail the Miller test in just about any jurisdiction, not just in Alabama. That's what I meant when I said that the new standards will be much more lenient than many local communities would prefer. We're talking now about material that would be ruled obscene in any community.
I also agree that it's not clear how much of a dent the FBI can make in the supply of the very worst stuff. But they seem to do a pretty good job of keeping child porn on the outer fringes of the Internet. We can at least hope there will be a similar effect for the worst of the obscene material.
If the framers had intended to protect only non-obscene speech they would have written the First Amendment to reflect that intent.
Give me a break! The framers lived in a society in which there were strict anti-obscenity laws. They intended the First Amendment to function within such a society. I don't mind if you argue that the founders were wrong and that they should have intended to include First Amendment privileges for obscenity (most of the people who read Slashdot will agree with you), but it's just absurd to claim that the founders intended obscenity to be unregulated. You are seriously trying to say that the founders intended the First Amendment to apply to obscene speech? As I said, give me a break.
There have been obscenity prosecutions for decades. In the South, local police have always played a cat and mouse game with local porn video stores, taking them to court when they sell material that violates local community standards. Most Americans believe this is a legitimate function of local government. The Internet has made it increasingly difficult, probably impossible, for local law enforcement to keep pornography in their local communities under control. The FBI seems like the appropriate law enforcement agency for dealing with this new problem. They will easily find material that will fail the Miller test, and they'll easily get convictions.
The move away from local community standards and toward national standards is not a good thing. Most social conservatives would prefer that local standards had continued to be enforceable at the local level, so that we could protect our local communities even if all the other communities went crazy. But so long as we have moved into an age in which local standards are unenforceable, it is inevitable that the worst of the worst stuff out there is going to be prosecuted. This sounds like a reasonable way to do it. The new standards will be much more lenient than many local communities would prefer, but they will be better than nothing.
I mean it's not like men ever get hit by a car and have to take a few months out (or lose their jobs!), is it?
But not everyone quickly recovers from being hit by a car. And many, many more women bear children than men ever get "hit by a car". So if bearing a child or being hit by a car has even a very slight negative effect on employment, the sheer number of women suffering from this effect will create a huge disparity between the two groups.
One side doesn't care because the fraud worked in their favor, and the other side doesn't care because they don't know enough math to understand what happened
Do you continue to oppose discussion on the actions and possibilities of fraud?
Hardly. If you read my post, you should have noticed that I encouraged the original poster and his brethren to continue down this road. Please, by all means, continue talking about this issue as long as you can. A party of cranks is much easier to defeat than a party of reasonable people.
It's amusing how you separate the term "Left" with your (presumed) support of the Republican party. You do realize that Bush is perhaps the most Leftist Republican ever?
Of course I realize it. I separated the wacky Left from the Republican party, but there has always been a Leftist part of the party, they're just not wacky. I don't have a problem with Bush's liberalism on economic issues so long as he retains the conservative social views that put him into office. Which he has.
Perhaps we're living in interesting times and it was a one-in-a-billion discrepancy between votes and exit polls... but since we CAN'T VERIFY THE MACHINES my opinion is that vote tampering is much more likely than not and CNN covered the trail.
The wacky Left's descent into madness is bittersweet for me. On the one hand, it's sad to see otherwise-reasonable people throwing their minds away like this. On the other hand, it helps insure that the party I support will retain control of all three branches of government for the foreseeable future. So, as saddened as I am by the pathology on display, please do rant on!
Slashdot Mirror
It's possible to have a democracy in which every decision is made by majority rule, but the majority is dissatisfied with the majority of the decisions. You just have to have a small percentage that wins all the time.
From http://www.vandenbogaerde.net/pegasusmail/dh_upd1. html:
"I will probably never be able to describe just how horrible it has been to be me for the last three or four years, and I certainly will not insult you now by attempting to do so; suffice it to say that anything must be better than this dubious existence. [...] I will be shutting persephone down for an indeterminite period while I try to work out whether I have a future."
That sounds to me like the guy is borderline suicidal. It's sad.
I want to see an article which tracks down the people who respond to spam
And then hurt them, bad.
Seriously, who here didn't see this sort of thing coming more than ten years ago? You've had plenty of time to switch over to an OS that has acceptable licensing. Not only that, but it keeps getting easier to switch over to free software.
Don't you remember the Corel Linux informercials? A half-hour informercial extolling the virtues of Corel Linux and explaining how Corel was setting up the perfect alternative to Windows.
I'm not making this up. If I recall correctly it ran many times on ZDTV back in the day. That and the Cue Cat one were my two favorite dotcom bubble infomercials.
I've been using only Debian for about 5 years. It's the best. I totally support the community, and the philosophy behind Debian. Debian Stable is great for some purposes, and Debain unstable is great for others.
I've been reading Martin's book (it cost me $30), and unless the second half has a lot more in it than the first half does, there's not much there that an experienced user of Debian doesn't already know. So if you're already an experienced Debian user, the news is good: you already probably understand a lot more than you think you do! If you're not already experienced with Debian, what are you waiting for?
The issue here is that they redefine science.
When Newton posited gravity, some people claimed that he wasn't doing science because he invoked medieval-sounding "occult powers", and hence wasn't giving properly naturalistic explanations. People who make up definitions of science and then try to rule out rival theories because they are not "scientific" are usually up to no good. Part of what is at stake in scientific controversy is what the proper definition of science is. I'm no fan of what the Kansas Board is doing, but your concern about the sanctity of the "definition of science" is misplaced.
I've been using Bloglines (http://www.bloglines.com/ for about a year, and find it does a great job of aggregating rss, xml, atom and other kinds of feeds. I can move from machine to machine without a problem.
Would there be any advantage in switching to something like rssowl or liferea?
Three days is more than I can usually handle without my brain going into a fit of chaos.
If you're telling the truth about this, then your brain is already in a continual fit of chaos.
Or, as in the infamous McDonalds hot coffee case to which you are perhaps alluding, the company may have known about the problem for years and refused to do anything about it. The details of this case are documented all over the web, and they are quite striking.
r ants139.htmlh
See, for example,
http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/vivienne/438/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stella_Liebeck
http://friends.macjournals.com/mattd/hotcoffeemyt
Beyond the Valley of the Dolls is not a bad movie. It doesn't belong on your list of bad movies.
I don't see why a porn producer in LA should be prosecuted for offering a masturbation video on his website because some evangelical group in Alabama is offended by it.
I agree. That's why the only material that's going to get prosecuted is the stuff that will fail the Miller test in just about any jurisdiction, not just in Alabama. That's what I meant when I said that the new standards will be much more lenient than many local communities would prefer. We're talking now about material that would be ruled obscene in any community.
I also agree that it's not clear how much of a dent the FBI can make in the supply of the very worst stuff. But they seem to do a pretty good job of keeping child porn on the outer fringes of the Internet. We can at least hope there will be a similar effect for the worst of the obscene material.
If the framers had intended to protect only non-obscene speech they would have written the First Amendment to reflect that intent.
Give me a break! The framers lived in a society in which there were strict anti-obscenity laws. They intended the First Amendment to function within such a society. I don't mind if you argue that the founders were wrong and that they should have intended to include First Amendment privileges for obscenity (most of the people who read Slashdot will agree with you), but it's just absurd to claim that the founders intended obscenity to be unregulated. You are seriously trying to say that the founders intended the First Amendment to apply to obscene speech? As I said, give me a break.
There have been obscenity prosecutions for decades. In the South, local police have always played a cat and mouse game with local porn video stores, taking them to court when they sell material that violates local community standards. Most Americans believe this is a legitimate function of local government. The Internet has made it increasingly difficult, probably impossible, for local law enforcement to keep pornography in their local communities under control. The FBI seems like the appropriate law enforcement agency for dealing with this new problem. They will easily find material that will fail the Miller test, and they'll easily get convictions.
The move away from local community standards and toward national standards is not a good thing. Most social conservatives would prefer that local standards had continued to be enforceable at the local level, so that we could protect our local communities even if all the other communities went crazy. But so long as we have moved into an age in which local standards are unenforceable, it is inevitable that the worst of the worst stuff out there is going to be prosecuted. This sounds like a reasonable way to do it. The new standards will be much more lenient than many local communities would prefer, but they will be better than nothing.
just "ad maiorem Dei gloriam", feel free to copy for the greater God's glory.
"ad maiorem Dei gloriam" means "for the greater glory of God". "maiorem" and "gloriam" are both in the accusative case.
I wish I had some moderation points! :)
I mean it's not like men ever get hit by a car and have to take a few months out (or lose their jobs!), is it?
But not everyone quickly recovers from being hit by a car. And many, many more women bear children than men ever get "hit by a car". So if bearing a child or being hit by a car has even a very slight negative effect on employment, the sheer number of women suffering from this effect will create a huge disparity between the two groups.
BSD stands for BKill SDamn DPenguin.
Thanks to you I just sprayed some milk out my nose.
(Disclaimer: I am working on some free software that is competitive with BitTorrent)
It's too bad people must be willing to use unfree software before they can use your free software.
ever hear of legal torrents? http://legaltorrents.com/ check it out. lots o good LEGAL stuff!
Fewer than 30 is "lots"? Supernova and the other sites had thousands of links.
The company got its start by offering a tool to identify pornographic images
:-)
Like you need a tool to do this?
Heh. He said "tool".
One side doesn't care because the fraud worked in their favor, and the other side doesn't care because they don't know enough math to understand what happened
Now you know why Republicans underfund schools!
Do you continue to oppose discussion on the actions and possibilities of fraud?
Hardly. If you read my post, you should have noticed that I encouraged the original poster and his brethren to continue down this road. Please, by all means, continue talking about this issue as long as you can. A party of cranks is much easier to defeat than a party of reasonable people.
It's amusing how you separate the term "Left" with your (presumed) support of the Republican party. You do realize that Bush is perhaps the most Leftist Republican ever?
Of course I realize it. I separated the wacky Left from the Republican party, but there has always been a Leftist part of the party, they're just not wacky. I don't have a problem with Bush's liberalism on economic issues so long as he retains the conservative social views that put him into office. Which he has.
Perhaps we're living in interesting times and it was a one-in-a-billion discrepancy between votes and exit polls... but since we CAN'T VERIFY THE MACHINES my opinion is that vote tampering is much more likely than not and CNN covered the trail.
The wacky Left's descent into madness is bittersweet for me. On the one hand, it's sad to see otherwise-reasonable people throwing their minds away like this. On the other hand, it helps insure that the party I support will retain control of all three branches of government for the foreseeable future. So, as saddened as I am by the pathology on display, please do rant on!