Back in the 18th century, property lines and deeds were a bit looser than they are now. Someone who had been tilling a plot of land his whole life - land his father had tilled before him - would suddenly find himself declared a squatter because a shifty banker type had filed the documents needed to receive a deed for "previously unoccupied land."
I think comparing modern day p2p to 18th century "undocumented landowners" that were screwed by rich bankers is perfectly valid.
Trivia of the day. The English used this trick on the Irish back in the 17th century (and earlier). They'd demand to see the deeds for a piece of land that had headstones of ten generations of "O'Somethings" and kick the poor bastards off when they couldn't produce the paper. Hell, nobody in Ireland had deeds, and the English damn well knew this.
I was referring to domestic wiretaps. International phone calls are an entirely different matter if it does not include an American citizen.
If a "terrorist" is an American citizen, then yes, the Constitution does protect them as much as it protects you and me. We can not start picking and choosing who gets the benefits of our laws, especially the Constitution. Today we exclude suspected terrorists. Tomorrow we exclude suspected pedophiles. Next week we exclude suspected drug dealers, then the casual pot smoker, the litter bug, and the kid who was speeding in mom's Saturn. Allowing exceptions because they are "evil dudes" gives the government a loophole that is just too damn big to be comfortable.
Well, yes, if the feds passed a law forbidding wiretaps under any circumstance, then even a situation that passed the "reasonable" test would be illegal even though it was Constitutional. I don't see that happening any time soon, though.
What I would like to see is for all wiretaps to have to go through that reasonableness test. The Feds are getting to fast and loose with privacy for my taste. They seem to think they can spy on anyone at any time by invoking the magic words "terror suspect". I'm all for catching terrorists, but not if it means we toss out the Constitution.
If the government can violate the Constitution, then the terrorists have already won (I love twisting the words of politicians).
The difference between our Constitution and the constitutions of other countries is we BELIEVE in it (at least we used to). In every other country, their constitution is just a bunch of laws that can be tossed out at any time. Here the Constitution is the very foundation of the country. The two are inseparable.
You just don't get it, The Constitution IS a sacred document.
The 10 commandments didn't touch on the concept of personal rights, while our Constitution made it very clear that the government wasn't allowed to mess with our Rights. A few thousand years ago, personal rights weren't exactly a hot topic.
A horrible wrong that was corrected over 100 years ago. The issue of slavery was a hot topic from before we became a nation and the subject almost prevented the country from being formed at all. The Civil War wasn't something that "just happened". Civil War over the issue of slavery had been narrowly averted at least two other times. And for those southern folks who say the Civil War wasn't about slavery: bullshit. I'm a student of history. Your argument about "State's Rights" holds no water when you are arguing for a State to keep a human as property.
The lack of universal suffrage.
This has also been corrected. Back when this country was formed, exactly how many nations had universal suffrage?
The electoral college and variegated citizenship.
There are good arguments both for and against the electoral college. Personally, I believe it was necessary before modern communication, but it's usefulness is long gone.
As for "veriegated citizenship", WTF are you talking about? You want to become a citizen, you meet the requirements. There are no rules about your race or religion. Yes, for immigration we do have quotas to that we don't get overwhelmed by any single country, but that is only loosely related to citizenship. My (ex)wife was not born here, but she did get her citizenship and the Constitution as something to be stepped around or violated outright.
The concept of equality and fairness.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
I said the Constitution was possibly the greatest piece of law ever written. I did not say it was perfect. The basic ideas set down in the Constitution are as relevant today as they were over two hundred years ago. That is, very limited national government with powers in only very specific areas, all other powers are FORBIDDEN! The power of the government is derived through the People. It's these two key concepts that are asshole politicians have forgotten about. They see The People as a heard of sheep to be driven in the direction they desire and to be controlled by the "benevolent leaders".
The fact that you dismiss someone as a "bot" for stating what should be the mainstream view explains how the politicians are able to violate are most sacred laws with impunity. You have been convinced by your political masters that a strong belief in our Constitution is only for the "fringe".
I used to think there was hope for this country. I now realize this country was lost a long time ago. Thanks for giving it the interest groups, asshole.
This problem, like many others, can be fixed by one simple thing. FORCING OUR DAMN GOVERNMENT TO ABIDE BY THE CONSTITUTION.
Our Constitution is quite possibly the greatest piece of law ever written in the history of mankind. Unfortunately, the politicians (both democrats and republicans) have decided it can be ignored at will. We need to change this. We need to force every aspect of the government to operate under the full strength of our Constitution.
No more seizing property without due process. No more stifling free speech just because it might offend somebody. No more wiretaps of citizens and legal residents to fight terrorists without a court order signed by a REAL judge. No more government agencies that aren't sanctioned by the Constitution (list to long to put here).
I am sicked by any politician who doesn't consider the Constitution the most sacred document in existence. Which means I'm sicked by ALL politicians.
Video footage is an old and well understood technology. With modern advances like digital storage, the evidence could be challenged on the grounds that it was tampered with, but if you can't prove the video was tweaked, the images of you buggering that puppy are going to be admitted as evidence.
What is going on in the music industry is completely different. They state they have technology that can track down file traders. This is not old technology that has been previously tested in court. This is something brand new, yet they want us to take their word for it that it works perfectly. We just have to trust them. Considering how they do business, especially the accounting side of it, I choose not to trust them. In fact, considering their past history (like being convicted of price fixing multiple times) I think it's a safe bet to say the music industry is a bunch of dishonest, lying sacks of shit who would sell out their own mothers for a buck.
The difference here is the oil companies can't make a profit if you fill your tank with your garden hose. Thus, they'll need to come up with a plan. Since you need to add this chemical to the mix, they will be the only source of said chemical, so you can only get the "chemically altered water" from the fuel pumps. This will result in a black market for this magic chemical and the oil companies will need the feds to put a stop to it. The first step, outlaw garden hoses!
The islamofascists will want to do nasty things, but without their usual source of funding they will be severely limited in their actions. It comes down to two choices. 1. Well funded pissed off assholes, or 2. Poorly funded really pissed off assholes.
Everybody giggling about this would mean the end of "Big Oil" forgets that gasoline is only one of many petroleum based products. Plastics are still going to be a huge market, for example. The oil companies still won't like it, as their profits will no doubt go down. On the plus side, the profits for terrorist funders (Saudi Arabia) would go down, too.
I had to look up ASBO since I had no clue about it. Good concept in theory, but so ripe for abuse that it frightens me. Threatening to ASBO kids for playing football (soccer as we call it) because they are too noisy? Ummm, clue to city council, THAT'S WHAT KIDS DO YOU FUCKTARDS!
1. Thirteen year old girls are usually emotional basket cases. 2. Social standing is EVERYTHING and teenage girls can be the most evil little bitches around because of how they treat each other. An adult playing this game is inexcusable (even if it doesn't result in a suicide). 3. Teenagers rarely ask their parents for help with "real" problems (as opposed to non-problems like needing a ride to the mall). 4. Teenagers are in the process of learning how to deal with problems. Normally you (as a parent) let them make mistakes so they'll learn. Occasionally you must intervene if the problem gets too big. That assumes you even know about the problem. Teenagers are pretty damn good at hiding things from their parents. The bigger the problem, the more effort they'll put into hiding it.
Since there is no crime that the bitch of a woman can be charged with, the logical response is social shunning. The entire community refuses to have anything to do with her - including businesses! Imagine her going to the grocery store and the manager telling her they don't want her business. Imagine her going to some school function and every parent and every teacher turns their back on her. It won't bring back the dead girl, but it would get rid of the woman since she'd have to move. It would also send a strong message to everyone else in their community that some things are just not acceptable.
You live in a fantasy world. There will always be evil assholes who will want to kill us simply because we are successful, or we don't follow the right religion or our government is different, or any number of a hundred reasons.
Re:The Borland "It's like a book" license c. 1980s
on
UK Report Slams EULAs
·
· Score: 1
Because Borland was so reasonable about their license, I bought two copies of Borland Pascal (5 or 6?). The license allowed me to run the same copy on both my home and work computer, as long as only one copy was being used at any one time, but I didn't want to drag the manuals back and forth. They were reasonably priced and they didn't try to stick me in the backside with lawyers, so I supported them by buying an extra copy.
If what LucasFilm says of GenCon, then they need to be crushed. Stealing money from dying children? It would be very difficult to do something more scummy.
ell, the parent post made an argument that the military does not kill civilians. The person you are replying to basically called B.S., and they made the argument that killing results in more killing.
That's not what I said. I said they do not TARGET civilians. I never said the military does not kill civilians. When you fight a war in cities and towns, it's impossible to avoid civilian casualties. The difference between the US military and the terrorist scum is our military tries to avoid civilian casualties. The terrorist scumbag (that so many here wish to defend) strategy is to target the civilians.
And as for the argument that killing causes more killing. I say this. The terrorists will not stop killing until everyone has been killed or converted to Islam. And even then I doubt they will stop since they disagree with each other about what is the "true word of allah". So not killing will result in the terrorists not having opposition.
Which do you pick? Slavery or death? Those are your only two choices if you reject the third choice of "fight back".
So 99.9% of those captured are Iraqi. That tells us --- well, that 99.9% of those captured are Iraqis. That's it. It doesn't tell us one bit about the nationality of everyone fighting. It doesn't tell us a thing about the nationality of suicide bombers (the fact that the terrorists started using mentally challenged Iraqis for suicide bombings suggests they ran out of mentally competent volunteers in Iraq).
Why are you arguing for these pieces of scum? What do people have to do for you to denounce them? Considering the evil shit you refuse to notice, my guess is the ONLY thing needed for a denouncement is "American". Maybe also "Jew".
I bet I'm right. I bet you automatically assume the worse about Americans and American policy, and would tolerate mass murder from anyone else.
You actually believe Obama will do something about your privacy and freedom? ROFLMAO! You are so naive. Look at who voted this crap in? The Republicans don't have a majority in Congress, so you can't blame them this time, now can you?
The Republicans are bad enough, but the Democrats, though, are the worst type of nanny-statist, socialistic fascist assholes.
A civil war is when the people inside the country are fighting each other. The majority of the attacks in Iraq are from assholes from other countries. Thus, this is not a civil war, as much as the main stream press wants you to believe it.
Why do you think the Iraqi government has been trying to seal their borders? They're trying to stop these assholes from sneaking in from other countries, mostly Iran and Syria. I'm sure a lot from Saudi Arabia, too (they may say they are our friends, but the Saudis, by their actions, have proven they are our worse enemy).
What's not mentioned is that DRM will be built right into your house. It will prevent you from doing anything that Disney considers a violation of intellectual property (as Disney defines it). That means your VCR won't record. Your DVR will self-destruct. Your computer won't download music or videos. You CDs will be locked to the first player you use the disc in. Your original and priceless manuscript of Grimm's Fairy Tales will smolder and burn (Disney now owns all that). iPods and other MP3 players will have permanent memory corruption. You'll be sent a bill for royalties if it detects you singing copyrighted songs in the shower (and the "Happy Birthday" song you sing for your kid on his third birthday).
The vast majority of civilian deaths are the result of the terrorists blowing up civilians going about their daily lives, not our US military exercises.
Yes, civilians will be killed. That is unfortunate but often unavoidable (especially when the bad guys use civilians as shields). The difference is we try to avoid civilian casualties, the bad guys are targeting civilians.
And terrorists with bombs and guns are NOT civilians.
Slashdot Mirror
Back in the 18th century, property lines and deeds were a bit looser than they are now. Someone who had been tilling a plot of land his whole life - land his father had tilled before him - would suddenly find himself declared a squatter because a shifty banker type had filed the documents needed to receive a deed for "previously unoccupied land."
I think comparing modern day p2p to 18th century "undocumented landowners" that were screwed by rich bankers is perfectly valid.
Trivia of the day. The English used this trick on the Irish back in the 17th century (and earlier). They'd demand to see the deeds for a piece of land that had headstones of ten generations of "O'Somethings" and kick the poor bastards off when they couldn't produce the paper. Hell, nobody in Ireland had deeds, and the English damn well knew this.
I was referring to domestic wiretaps. International phone calls are an entirely different matter if it does not include an American citizen.
If a "terrorist" is an American citizen, then yes, the Constitution does protect them as much as it protects you and me. We can not start picking and choosing who gets the benefits of our laws, especially the Constitution. Today we exclude suspected terrorists. Tomorrow we exclude suspected pedophiles. Next week we exclude suspected drug dealers, then the casual pot smoker, the litter bug, and the kid who was speeding in mom's Saturn. Allowing exceptions because they are "evil dudes" gives the government a loophole that is just too damn big to be comfortable.
Well, yes, if the feds passed a law forbidding wiretaps under any circumstance, then even a situation that passed the "reasonable" test would be illegal even though it was Constitutional. I don't see that happening any time soon, though.
What I would like to see is for all wiretaps to have to go through that reasonableness test. The Feds are getting to fast and loose with privacy for my taste. They seem to think they can spy on anyone at any time by invoking the magic words "terror suspect". I'm all for catching terrorists, but not if it means we toss out the Constitution.
If the government can violate the Constitution, then the terrorists have already won (I love twisting the words of politicians).
The difference between our Constitution and the constitutions of other countries is we BELIEVE in it (at least we used to). In every other country, their constitution is just a bunch of laws that can be tossed out at any time. Here the Constitution is the very foundation of the country. The two are inseparable.
You just don't get it, The Constitution IS a sacred document.
The 10 commandments didn't touch on the concept of personal rights, while our Constitution made it very clear that the government wasn't allowed to mess with our Rights. A few thousand years ago, personal rights weren't exactly a hot topic.
A horrible wrong that was corrected over 100 years ago. The issue of slavery was a hot topic from before we became a nation and the subject almost prevented the country from being formed at all. The Civil War wasn't something that "just happened". Civil War over the issue of slavery had been narrowly averted at least two other times. And for those southern folks who say the Civil War wasn't about slavery: bullshit. I'm a student of history. Your argument about "State's Rights" holds no water when you are arguing for a State to keep a human as property.
This has also been corrected. Back when this country was formed, exactly how many nations had universal suffrage?
There are good arguments both for and against the electoral college. Personally, I believe it was necessary before modern communication, but it's usefulness is long gone.
As for "veriegated citizenship", WTF are you talking about? You want to become a citizen, you meet the requirements. There are no rules about your race or religion. Yes, for immigration we do have quotas to that we don't get overwhelmed by any single country, but that is only loosely related to citizenship. My (ex)wife was not born here, but she did get her citizenship and the Constitution as something to be stepped around or violated outright.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
I said the Constitution was possibly the greatest piece of law ever written. I did not say it was perfect. The basic ideas set down in the Constitution are as relevant today as they were over two hundred years ago. That is, very limited national government with powers in only very specific areas, all other powers are FORBIDDEN! The power of the government is derived through the People. It's these two key concepts that are asshole politicians have forgotten about. They see The People as a heard of sheep to be driven in the direction they desire and to be controlled by the "benevolent leaders".
The fact that you dismiss someone as a "bot" for stating what should be the mainstream view explains how the politicians are able to violate are most sacred laws with impunity. You have been convinced by your political masters that a strong belief in our Constitution is only for the "fringe".
I used to think there was hope for this country. I now realize this country was lost a long time ago. Thanks for giving it the interest groups, asshole.
FYI, I can't stand Ron Paul.
This problem, like many others, can be fixed by one simple thing. FORCING OUR DAMN GOVERNMENT TO ABIDE BY THE CONSTITUTION.
Our Constitution is quite possibly the greatest piece of law ever written in the history of mankind. Unfortunately, the politicians (both democrats and republicans) have decided it can be ignored at will. We need to change this. We need to force every aspect of the government to operate under the full strength of our Constitution.
No more seizing property without due process.
No more stifling free speech just because it might offend somebody.
No more wiretaps of citizens and legal residents to fight terrorists without a court order signed by a REAL judge.
No more government agencies that aren't sanctioned by the Constitution (list to long to put here).
I am sicked by any politician who doesn't consider the Constitution the most sacred document in existence. Which means I'm sicked by ALL politicians.
Video footage is an old and well understood technology. With modern advances like digital storage, the evidence could be challenged on the grounds that it was tampered with, but if you can't prove the video was tweaked, the images of you buggering that puppy are going to be admitted as evidence.
What is going on in the music industry is completely different. They state they have technology that can track down file traders. This is not old technology that has been previously tested in court. This is something brand new, yet they want us to take their word for it that it works perfectly. We just have to trust them. Considering how they do business, especially the accounting side of it, I choose not to trust them. In fact, considering their past history (like being convicted of price fixing multiple times) I think it's a safe bet to say the music industry is a bunch of dishonest, lying sacks of shit who would sell out their own mothers for a buck.
"We're too stupid to deal with this interweb thingy, so we need the entire world to change how things are done to accommodate our incompetence."
Yeah, that's going to happen.
The difference here is the oil companies can't make a profit if you fill your tank with your garden hose. Thus, they'll need to come up with a plan. Since you need to add this chemical to the mix, they will be the only source of said chemical, so you can only get the "chemically altered water" from the fuel pumps. This will result in a black market for this magic chemical and the oil companies will need the feds to put a stop to it. The first step, outlaw garden hoses!
The islamofascists will want to do nasty things, but without their usual source of funding they will be severely limited in their actions. It comes down to two choices. 1. Well funded pissed off assholes, or 2. Poorly funded really pissed off assholes.
Everybody giggling about this would mean the end of "Big Oil" forgets that gasoline is only one of many petroleum based products. Plastics are still going to be a huge market, for example. The oil companies still won't like it, as their profits will no doubt go down. On the plus side, the profits for terrorist funders (Saudi Arabia) would go down, too.
I had to look up ASBO since I had no clue about it. Good concept in theory, but so ripe for abuse that it frightens me. Threatening to ASBO kids for playing football (soccer as we call it) because they are too noisy? Ummm, clue to city council, THAT'S WHAT KIDS DO YOU FUCKTARDS!
Except the problem is:
1. Thirteen year old girls are usually emotional basket cases.
2. Social standing is EVERYTHING and teenage girls can be the most evil little bitches around because of how they treat each other. An adult playing this game is inexcusable (even if it doesn't result in a suicide).
3. Teenagers rarely ask their parents for help with "real" problems (as opposed to non-problems like needing a ride to the mall).
4. Teenagers are in the process of learning how to deal with problems. Normally you (as a parent) let them make mistakes so they'll learn. Occasionally you must intervene if the problem gets too big. That assumes you even know about the problem. Teenagers are pretty damn good at hiding things from their parents. The bigger the problem, the more effort they'll put into hiding it.
Since there is no crime that the bitch of a woman can be charged with, the logical response is social shunning. The entire community refuses to have anything to do with her - including businesses! Imagine her going to the grocery store and the manager telling her they don't want her business. Imagine her going to some school function and every parent and every teacher turns their back on her. It won't bring back the dead girl, but it would get rid of the woman since she'd have to move. It would also send a strong message to everyone else in their community that some things are just not acceptable.
You live in a fantasy world. There will always be evil assholes who will want to kill us simply because we are successful, or we don't follow the right religion or our government is different, or any number of a hundred reasons.
Because Borland was so reasonable about their license, I bought two copies of Borland Pascal (5 or 6?). The license allowed me to run the same copy on both my home and work computer, as long as only one copy was being used at any one time, but I didn't want to drag the manuals back and forth. They were reasonably priced and they didn't try to stick me in the backside with lawyers, so I supported them by buying an extra copy.
If what LucasFilm says of GenCon, then they need to be crushed. Stealing money from dying children? It would be very difficult to do something more scummy.
That's not what I said. I said they do not TARGET civilians. I never said the military does not kill civilians. When you fight a war in cities and towns, it's impossible to avoid civilian casualties. The difference between the US military and the terrorist scum is our military tries to avoid civilian casualties. The terrorist scumbag (that so many here wish to defend) strategy is to target the civilians.
And as for the argument that killing causes more killing. I say this. The terrorists will not stop killing until everyone has been killed or converted to Islam. And even then I doubt they will stop since they disagree with each other about what is the "true word of allah". So not killing will result in the terrorists not having opposition.
Which do you pick? Slavery or death? Those are your only two choices if you reject the third choice of "fight back".
So 99.9% of those captured are Iraqi. That tells us --- well, that 99.9% of those captured are Iraqis. That's it. It doesn't tell us one bit about the nationality of everyone fighting. It doesn't tell us a thing about the nationality of suicide bombers (the fact that the terrorists started using mentally challenged Iraqis for suicide bombings suggests they ran out of mentally competent volunteers in Iraq).
Why are you arguing for these pieces of scum? What do people have to do for you to denounce them? Considering the evil shit you refuse to notice, my guess is the ONLY thing needed for a denouncement is "American". Maybe also "Jew".
I bet I'm right. I bet you automatically assume the worse about Americans and American policy, and would tolerate mass murder from anyone else.
So what. In Iraq, the MAJORITY of the insurgents (terrorists) are foreigners. This makes it an invasion, not a civil war.
If a bunch of US citizens snuck into Quebec and started shooting things up in a bid for that providences independence, would you call it a civil war?
You actually believe Obama will do something about your privacy and freedom? ROFLMAO! You are so naive. Look at who voted this crap in? The Republicans don't have a majority in Congress, so you can't blame them this time, now can you?
The Republicans are bad enough, but the Democrats, though, are the worst type of nanny-statist, socialistic fascist assholes.
A civil war is when the people inside the country are fighting each other. The majority of the attacks in Iraq are from assholes from other countries. Thus, this is not a civil war, as much as the main stream press wants you to believe it.
Why do you think the Iraqi government has been trying to seal their borders? They're trying to stop these assholes from sneaking in from other countries, mostly Iran and Syria. I'm sure a lot from Saudi Arabia, too (they may say they are our friends, but the Saudis, by their actions, have proven they are our worse enemy).
What's not mentioned is that DRM will be built right into your house. It will prevent you from doing anything that Disney considers a violation of intellectual property (as Disney defines it). That means your VCR won't record. Your DVR will self-destruct. Your computer won't download music or videos. You CDs will be locked to the first player you use the disc in. Your original and priceless manuscript of Grimm's Fairy Tales will smolder and burn (Disney now owns all that). iPods and other MP3 players will have permanent memory corruption. You'll be sent a bill for royalties if it detects you singing copyrighted songs in the shower (and the "Happy Birthday" song you sing for your kid on his third birthday).
The vast majority of civilian deaths are the result of the terrorists blowing up civilians going about their daily lives, not our US military exercises.
Yes, civilians will be killed. That is unfortunate but often unavoidable (especially when the bad guys use civilians as shields). The difference is we try to avoid civilian casualties, the bad guys are targeting civilians.
And terrorists with bombs and guns are NOT civilians.