It is truly sad that people have exchanged sex for what it was designed (beautiful expression of love between a committed man and woman) to nothing more than animal instinct and debasement.
Hmm....I think that sex was designed by that "evolution" phenomenon. You know, that animal instinct and debasement part.
Aren't your part of the bourgeois you're rallying against?
Reminds me of that time when I was looking for a place to live in Berkeley. This guy had an xbox, new apple powerbooks, digital tv, ipods, tivo, etc. etc. And he was a socialist...I found that odd. Is there something I'm missing?
Well, think about the unrealistic expectations that reality tv sets for life in the real world. I have heard much anecdotal evidence about couples in their 20s where the woman has to basically act like a reality tv star in the bedroom in order to interest the guy at all because he's become so desensitized to a simple life by all the reality tv he's been seeing since he was 16.
Now, imagine now how much worse it'll be for kids who are growing up on the Internet with a world of reality tv at their fingertips. I teach at a high school where all the kids are given laptops and wireless net connectivity, and I know that all of them, male and female alike, have gone to at least one reality tv site on purpose, not to mention all of the goatse's, lemonparty's, etc. that they are tricked into viewing by their maliscious friends.
I support user fees in lieu of taxes precisely because of what the grandparent was talking about--we pay so much in taxes and have no fucking clue where much of it is going. You claim that government works efficiently; the people I know who have government jobs brag about how LITTLE they have to do.
I bet if the government would itemize how peoples' taxes are being used and send it back to them with their IRS forms, we'd see more support for replacing government programs with private solutions.
Just because our global friends pay more taxes isn't an excuse for us to pay more taxes. That's like telling someone "it's ok that you failed that test, because Billy failed it even worse!" I think that forcing folks to hand over money makes them more greedy with what they have already...
indeed...part b of your argument is actually used by a harvard business school prof to argue against the RIAA's claim that free music piracy hurts sales. as is said in the article, many online sites appeal to groups that are "money-poor but time-rich." indeed slashdot fits the bill.
unfortunate, because I think roads should be toll based. and I think that if I was a guy whose only passion is drawing comics, I'd rather get paid a little less by everyone than have to take the time to do some marketing.
They have a word in Washington for the corporate-sponsored outcry, the grassroots movement that isn't: AstroTurf. By far the most comical example of this is to be found at the Freedom to Innovate Network (Fin), a "non-partisan, grassroots network of citizens and businesses who have a stake in the success of Microsoft and the high-tech industry". Fin doesn't try particularly hard to appear independent--its website, after all, is housed on Microsoft's own--but it has as its online centrepiece a lengthy collection of testimonials from activist groups with vaguely alarming names: the Centre for the Moral Defence of Capitalism, Frontiers of Freedom, Defenders of Property Rights. Their comments appear unsolicited and independent: it certainly looks like there is a groundswell of support for the beleaguered computer giant.
In the spirit of fair use, visit the website for the full story. It's interesting but don't take it as a rallying cry. Just remember to wonder why you see a think tank write a paper next time. In fact remember to wonder why the next person you see says something, in general.
The Harvard Business Review ran an article recently claiming that illegal downloads aren't hurting the music industry's bottom line. In fact is supposes that it may help, from an economic sense. I submitted as an article but alas rejection:)
Professor Felix Oberholzer-Gee and co-author Koleman Strumpf floored the disbelieving music industry with their findings that illegal music downloads don't hurt CD sales. Oberholzer discusses what the industry should do next.
There are several arguments made by individuals as to why they consider anonymous P2P applications desirable and in some cases necessary to freedom of speech and the free flow of information.
One argument is that true freedom of speech, especially on controversial subjects, is difficult or impossible unless individuals can speak anonymously. If anonymity was not offered, then they could be subject to threat or reprisal for voicing an unpopular view. This is one reason why voting is done by secret ballot in many democracies, to prevent this kind of intimidation.anonymous p2p
Actually I've seen some of the most insightful comments come from Anonymous Cowards. Yes there are AC's that troll, flame, and do other shitty things. But you've seen good comments from AC's and so that's why they're here. Similarly important historical documents were sometimes posted anonymously, great literature has been written anonymously or under psuedonyms, and great web surfing has been done anonymously too:)
Indeed, it is extremely hard to see why Mr Thurmond has picked on Mr Bursey out of all the people in the Secret Service zone. None of the other protesters with him was arrested. Neither were any of the several hundred supporters of the president who were holding equally dangerous (but pro-Bush) signs as they stood near the hangar where the president was to speak.
The prosecutors say that Mr Bursey was not in a special "free-speech zone" that was set up for protesters half a mile from the hangar. The pro-Bush people did not need to be there because they were not protesting. Mr Bursey told the cops, defiantly, that he was under the impression that the whole of America was a free-speech zone.
Is the Economist article biased? Yes. Is there still valuable truth there? Yes. Is there truth behind your arguments? Yes. But I see a lot of rhetoric and misdirection in what you say.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude. I file my own Schedule A. I know how to ITEMIZE HOW MUCH TAXES I AM REQUIRED TO PAY.
WHAT I WANT IS THE GOVERNMENT TO ITEMIZE EVERY PENNY OF WHERE MY TAXES GO. ALL I KNOW NOW IS THAT IT GOES TO THE IRS.
I know the CBO puts out a report saying that x% goes to defense, etc. But is that mostly debt financed, tax financed, or does it matter?
TORRENT IS HERE according to suprnova.
right now connecting to 8 seeds...
The reason is probably because slashdot needs something in the headline to make it seem technology-related.
otherwise, your submission will probably get rejected quickly (fahrenheit 9/11 notwithstanding).
It is truly sad that people have exchanged sex for what it was designed (beautiful expression of love between a committed man and woman) to nothing more than animal instinct and debasement.
Hmm....I think that sex was designed by that "evolution" phenomenon. You know, that animal instinct and debasement part.
It's not a left vs. right struggle, it's a class struggle.
About 600mm people have internet access, according to that Norwegian site. Let's round up at 1 mm people. That means that by having internet access and reading this website, you are in the top 20% of the world.
Aren't your part of the bourgeois you're rallying against?
Reminds me of that time when I was looking for a place to live in Berkeley. This guy had an xbox, new apple powerbooks, digital tv, ipods, tivo, etc. etc. And he was a socialist...I found that odd. Is there something I'm missing?
you sound like a libertarian :)
Well, think about the unrealistic expectations that reality tv sets for life in the real world. I have heard much anecdotal evidence about couples in their 20s where the woman has to basically act like a reality tv star in the bedroom in order to interest the guy at all because he's become so desensitized to a simple life by all the reality tv he's been seeing since he was 16.
Now, imagine now how much worse it'll be for kids who are growing up on the Internet with a world of reality tv at their fingertips. I teach at a high school where all the kids are given laptops and wireless net connectivity, and I know that all of them, male and female alike, have gone to at least one reality tv site on purpose, not to mention all of the goatse's, lemonparty's, etc. that they are tricked into viewing by their maliscious friends.
dude.
;)
so instead of reading the fairest news possible, you get your information from [in your words] biased sources to "balance" things out?
That's like affirmative action for news
I support user fees in lieu of taxes precisely because of what the grandparent was talking about--we pay so much in taxes and have no fucking clue where much of it is going. You claim that government works efficiently; the people I know who have government jobs brag about how LITTLE they have to do.
I bet if the government would itemize how peoples' taxes are being used and send it back to them with their IRS forms, we'd see more support for replacing government programs with private solutions.
Just because our global friends pay more taxes isn't an excuse for us to pay more taxes. That's like telling someone "it's ok that you failed that test, because Billy failed it even worse!" I think that forcing folks to hand over money makes them more greedy with what they have already...
I've heard that "anti-abortion" is now the politically correct term for "pro-life".
Why's that? Just curious, because you the pro-life dude would seem to know.
dear philosopher
your theories may seem self-evident to you but scientists sometimes want "proof" that they can "observe".
now make sure your margins are large enough to write in.
indeed...part b of your argument is actually used by a harvard business school prof to argue against the RIAA's claim that free music piracy hurts sales. as is said in the article, many online sites appeal to groups that are "money-poor but time-rich." indeed slashdot fits the bill.
unfortunate, because I think roads should be toll based. and I think that if I was a guy whose only passion is drawing comics, I'd rather get paid a little less by everyone than have to take the time to do some marketing.
Yeah, except for that part where Berkeley has more people than Stanford...
the good text is at the bottom, imho. start here:
They have a word in Washington for the corporate-sponsored outcry, the grassroots movement that isn't: AstroTurf. By far the most comical example of this is to be found at the Freedom to Innovate Network (Fin), a "non-partisan, grassroots network of citizens and businesses who have a stake in the success of Microsoft and the high-tech industry". Fin doesn't try particularly hard to appear independent--its website, after all, is housed on Microsoft's own--but it has as its online centrepiece a lengthy collection of testimonials from activist groups with vaguely alarming names: the Centre for the Moral Defence of Capitalism, Frontiers of Freedom, Defenders of Property Rights. Their comments appear unsolicited and independent: it certainly looks like there is a groundswell of support for the beleaguered computer giant.
In the spirit of fair use, visit the website for the full story. It's interesting but don't take it as a rallying cry. Just remember to wonder why you see a think tank write a paper next time. In fact remember to wonder why the next person you see says something, in general.
The Harvard Business Review ran an article recently claiming that illegal downloads aren't hurting the music industry's bottom line. In fact is supposes that it may help, from an economic sense. I submitted as an article but alas rejection :)
Music Downloads: Pirates--or Customers?
Professor Felix Oberholzer-Gee and co-author Koleman Strumpf floored the disbelieving music industry with their findings that illegal music downloads don't hurt CD sales. Oberholzer discusses what the industry should do next.
ever played a video game without reading the manual?
yeah, I think it's like that.
crack open your car manual one day, too. there's some useful stuff in there. like how you're supposed to check your tire pressure regularly.
reason #2: free as in beer. :)
reason #3: geek friend is evangelizing
Trillons of dollars?
I hope that you, sir, stay far away from the IPO.
There's a damn good argument to be made that Slashdot is best served when the stories are inflammatory and riddled with falsehoods.
:)
I agree completely. Interesting, since in a prior news post today, you completely disagreed with all of my comments
some more reading if you are interested:
There are several arguments made by individuals as to why they consider anonymous P2P applications desirable and in some cases necessary to freedom of speech and the free flow of information.
One argument is that true freedom of speech, especially on controversial subjects, is difficult or impossible unless individuals can speak anonymously. If anonymity was not offered, then they could be subject to threat or reprisal for voicing an unpopular view. This is one reason why voting is done by secret ballot in many democracies, to prevent this kind of intimidation. anonymous p2p
some anonymously published works (painfully short list, though)
Actually I've seen some of the most insightful comments come from Anonymous Cowards. Yes there are AC's that troll, flame, and do other shitty things. But you've seen good comments from AC's and so that's why they're here. Similarly important historical documents were sometimes posted anonymously, great literature has been written anonymously or under psuedonyms, and great web surfing has been done anonymously too :)
"And the SCOTUS is at liberty not to hear any case it doesn't like."
How does that make sense at all?
I think this law seems pretty shitty, but that line seemed a bit like flamebait to me.
"Sound Orwellian?"
Yes it does to me, but the commentary in the news article isn't necessary. Let me come to my own opinion, thanks.
PS - there is also a ruling on Intel v. AMD from today (see the SCOTUS website) but I wasn't able to sort through the legalese.
RTFA (from the Economist)
Indeed, it is extremely hard to see why Mr Thurmond has picked on Mr Bursey out of all the people in the Secret Service zone. None of the other protesters with him was arrested. Neither were any of the several hundred supporters of the president who were holding equally dangerous (but pro-Bush) signs as they stood near the hangar where the president was to speak.
The prosecutors say that Mr Bursey was not in a special "free-speech zone" that was set up for protesters half a mile from the hangar. The pro-Bush people did not need to be there because they were not protesting. Mr Bursey told the cops, defiantly, that he was under the impression that the whole of America was a free-speech zone.
Is the Economist article biased? Yes. Is there still valuable truth there? Yes. Is there truth behind your arguments? Yes. But I see a lot of rhetoric and misdirection in what you say.
perhaps you can ask the guy some questions and thus make them "frequently asked".
it seems like myuid hasn't seen enough light to get many questions in the first place.
A centralized database has too many problems related to it to be useful.
Oh a centralized database can definitely be useful. Actually that is the crux of the problem, it's *too* useful to potentially too many people.