--While that is a completely fair thing to point out, there is a very important thing that it misses: other people can put information about you online, without your permission, and that information is just as subject to analysis as what you put up.
Absolutely true. However, this information also falls under libel laws in cases which it false and harms the subject.
---The two best examples that come to mind right away: ---1. Facebook allows users to tag photos with the names of the people who appear in them.
It may be a stretch to call it this, but posting stories and pictures usually is a form or journalism, regardless the content and methodology of dissemination. Also, photographers need a release whenever the photo is not taken in a public area, or accessible from a public area of a person who does not consent. It is not a crime to fail to get a release, but a nice tort claim.
---2. Google Street View puts photos of your residence without asking you for permission, and correlates it to a bunch of other stuff like geographic information, satellite images, yellow page listings, web search results, etc..
Google, as long as they obey the law in terms of public/private property, they have full legal standing, and shouldn't be regulated. However, they did get in trouble when they went down private roads, with nice posted NO TRESPASSING signs peppered all over, which the GooCam dutifully captured.
---Notice that both of these acts are perfectly legal, and while the second arguably should be regulated and restricted by law (the aggregation, correlation and publication parts, not the picture-taking part), the first one ought not to.
Sounds like Google-Hatred. Somehow we should just make a law for Google, because they spy on us!! Guess what: You have as much access to the same pictures as I do. And if there is any sort of law, it's that I'd like posting on who (specific names/residences) viewed some area in high resolution. You know, watch the watchers. Sous-veilance.
If you are concerned about your identity, do you think your domain registrar would give it up if somebody claimed that massive spam was coming out of that interface? I know Google wont leak information (look at their newsgroup stance). How about po-dunk registrars with false excuses that scare (like Identity theft, Spam, Botnet and such).
Google has my information. I havent seen them be evil to me or people I know. I dont trust my registrar, or most other websites asking for information.
Wasn't there a data-mining incident where Netflix "scrubbed db" and IMDB was combined so that users were uniquely identifiable? I mean, if enough information was mined, how many unique people would we come up with?
Google and all the others are just putting the screws where they would logically tighten. It's as much google's fault as it is everybody who holds individuals data (and google probably does so much more securely).
---I stopped reading there. The last thing countries with poor healthcare need is a for-profit companies trying to make a buck off the fact that they have poor healthcare.
Well, why not? That's industry that is moving and bolstering a new area that had little to no influence on global economy. That only means that money will be traveling there in one form or another. And donation of healthcare or goods or money will do little to no good. We can see what the Africans say about hand-outs and gimmees here. They argue that money donations go to dictators, and items (like clothing) kill the fledging businesses by dumping, en masse, products that they are trying to make a living with. Add this to overall corruption, and... it's hard to say that they dont deserve the fate they dig themselves into (and we help).
Those countries that chose socialized medicine, along with the idea that medicine shoudnt be a profit center are seeing a lack of doctors, nurses, newest equipment, up to date procedures, and other people and equipment. They also have problems of financing so many arent even solvent unless the government kicks in more money. And, after this, many countries pay upwards 20% GDP for this.
And socialized medicine fails to take in to account: services paid for services rendered. These are resources that are taken up, time used with specialists and wear'n'tear on machines that border in the millions. And break up the AMA and allow any school to teach MDs. We dont need a bunch of protectionist doctors telling how many others can be one. The bad ones will hurt somebody and get raked over the coals.
It would be logical that new==expensive and old==cheap(ish), just like every other industry has done, but that is not true with the medical industry. Well, why not? Government interference. We pile on more and more crud so that these costs have a minimum bound that is already very high. Then we add on insane judgments of pain and suffering that require major insurance. In fact, many doctors are getting out of places like prenatal due to these very reasons.
You have a problem with profit: I have a problem with governmental waste. Stop the government from creating insane requirements and bottom lines will come down
---Now, I'm not saying that medical workers shouldn't make a great living helping people. I have a problem with *corporations* making money on top of that. It's a crime, IMO, that the healthcare industry is so profitable while people are dying from a lack of healthcare. No, I have no citation, it's just how I feel.
People die. There's no stopping that for now, so we can throw all the money in the world, and have a machine-breathing, IV nutrient line, feeding tube husk that is biologically living, but maintains no consciousness. That isnt right, but where do we cross those lines? Messy answer, but the only answer now is "You can keep them alive as long as you have the money for it." And in the end, they still die.
So if I follow you correctly, it seems that copyright and patent are more tools of socialism rather than whatever we have now. Interesting viewpoint, considering the idea of not being able to properly calculate costs and gains.. It makes sense.
Now, they mentioned the Austrian School.. That's the minarchists and anarcho-capitalists idea of thought, right?
-I can point to a number of tribes who were perfectly happy without property rights until those rights were introduced and the tribes tore themselves apart.
As a anthropology minor, I contest that statement. They also accepted property rights, but not as an individual. They instead saw that the whole tribe belonged to the land, and not in reverse. That's why that Indian (I believe Iroquois) accepted wampum for what is now Manhattan: The land is here, and you are temporary. You cannot buy what lasts longer than you.
We (Americanized Europeans) saw that one could take a parcel of land, protect it by force, and the government of that peoples would protect your right to exclusivity. Contrast that to the idea of the American Indian where the the lands were Raven, Sioux, Cherokee, or the hundreds of other tribes.
It really is a radical viewpoint that does compare to the whole GNU idea.
You say copyright is bad. You give examples. It seems logical, except for one point.
Copyright was a compromise so that artists and inventors would keep doing as such, and the best (read: the best we could come up with) is to award exclusive time in which they can recoup their costs and perhaps get a bit extra.
If copyright was eradicated, what do we put in place so that artists and inventors are fairly compensated? Remember: our Constitution says "To promote the Progress of Science and Useful Arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings".
The way one plays windows games via Wine is to create a separate account with X that only spawns an xterm. One gets better performance than Windows does, doing this way.
Perhaps one could load a 2d Windows platformer via Gnome or KDE, but it'd probably be slow. oh well.
---In this case, there is no breach of Microsoft's property.
But there is to the customers.
Normal sales transactions include paying for an object. Money and object are transfered at sale, in which ownership is transfered.
With software, that is not so. They claim some additional title after the fact by reason of DRM, or remote orders, or by tattle-taling on you. Tell the people who got their machine disabled by Microsoft because of some anti-pirate code and tell me that blackmailing their data isnt a form of Broken Window.
I would claim that the Broken Window Fallacy is true for the users: they are the ones who are punished and have gained something "broken" and must fix.
Our relatives screwed over, or helped screw over natives who didnt fight back effectively. Because they are technologically inferior, they must be inferior completely. And that means whatever our relatives did was right, because we're here, and they're not.
1: Make sure hardware device works (ethernet plugged in, wifi card connected to AP) 2: turn on DHCP on computer. Hint: go to network settings and click on the damned button. 3: Youre done. go to google
If you cant, and are bitching about a 8 year old install of WinME, reinstall and kick yourself in the ass. You should have reinstalled bitch. Mr. Eye-Tea consultant should have known better.
Now, the big question is who you work for: I want to avoid your company because of your ineptitude.
As long as you use a non-polar solvent (I use ethanol or isoproplyl alcohol) of high purity and allow for a hour or 2 of drying time, you should be all right.
Ive cleaned motherboards with 90% ethanol (everclear is only good for cleaning, not drinking) and powered them on in an hour with no problems whatsoever.
And that goes back to one of the premises that pirates (me included) use to download whatever we like.
Pirate products are usually better quality, less malware and user harassment, and cheaper to boot. Why pay for worse quality when free is better quality?
If exact position was known, if exact velocity of thrown balls was known, and exact velocity of wheel is known, and exact accelerations of balls and wheel was known, we could calculate final position.
That's the key with this: Any source of true randoomness is covered in heavy physics in which if we Knew the states, we could calculate them to their final resting position.
Slashdot Mirror
--While that is a completely fair thing to point out, there is a very important thing that it misses: other people can put information about you online, without your permission, and that information is just as subject to analysis as what you put up.
Absolutely true. However, this information also falls under libel laws in cases which it false and harms the subject.
---The two best examples that come to mind right away:
---1. Facebook allows users to tag photos with the names of the people who appear in them.
It may be a stretch to call it this, but posting stories and pictures usually is a form or journalism, regardless the content and methodology of dissemination. Also, photographers need a release whenever the photo is not taken in a public area, or accessible from a public area of a person who does not consent. It is not a crime to fail to get a release, but a nice tort claim.
---2. Google Street View puts photos of your residence without asking you for permission, and correlates it to a bunch of other stuff like geographic information, satellite images, yellow page listings, web search results, etc..
Google, as long as they obey the law in terms of public/private property, they have full legal standing, and shouldn't be regulated. However, they did get in trouble when they went down private roads, with nice posted NO TRESPASSING signs peppered all over, which the GooCam dutifully captured.
---Notice that both of these acts are perfectly legal, and while the second arguably should be regulated and restricted by law (the aggregation, correlation and publication parts, not the picture-taking part), the first one ought not to.
Sounds like Google-Hatred. Somehow we should just make a law for Google, because they spy on us!! Guess what: You have as much access to the same pictures as I do. And if there is any sort of law, it's that I'd like posting on who (specific names/residences) viewed some area in high resolution. You know, watch the watchers. Sous-veilance.
Id ask you a different question:
If you are concerned about your identity, do you think your domain registrar would give it up if somebody claimed that massive spam was coming out of that interface? I know Google wont leak information (look at their newsgroup stance). How about po-dunk registrars with false excuses that scare (like Identity theft, Spam, Botnet and such).
Google has my information. I havent seen them be evil to me or people I know. I dont trust my registrar, or most other websites asking for information.
What do you expect?
Wasn't there a data-mining incident where Netflix "scrubbed db" and IMDB was combined so that users were uniquely identifiable? I mean, if enough information was mined, how many unique people would we come up with?
Google and all the others are just putting the screws where they would logically tighten. It's as much google's fault as it is everybody who holds individuals data (and google probably does so much more securely).
---I stopped reading there. The last thing countries with poor healthcare need is a for-profit companies trying to make a buck off the fact that they have poor healthcare.
Well, why not? That's industry that is moving and bolstering a new area that had little to no influence on global economy. That only means that money will be traveling there in one form or another. And donation of healthcare or goods or money will do little to no good. We can see what the Africans say about hand-outs and gimmees here. They argue that money donations go to dictators, and items (like clothing) kill the fledging businesses by dumping, en masse, products that they are trying to make a living with. Add this to overall corruption, and... it's hard to say that they dont deserve the fate they dig themselves into (and we help).
---The whole profit-from-other's sickness just... well... sickens me.
Those countries that chose socialized medicine, along with the idea that medicine shoudnt be a profit center are seeing a lack of doctors, nurses, newest equipment, up to date procedures, and other people and equipment. They also have problems of financing so many arent even solvent unless the government kicks in more money. And, after this, many countries pay upwards 20% GDP for this.
And socialized medicine fails to take in to account: services paid for services rendered. These are resources that are taken up, time used with specialists and wear'n'tear on machines that border in the millions. And break up the AMA and allow any school to teach MDs. We dont need a bunch of protectionist doctors telling how many others can be one. The bad ones will hurt somebody and get raked over the coals.
It would be logical that new==expensive and old==cheap(ish), just like every other industry has done, but that is not true with the medical industry. Well, why not? Government interference. We pile on more and more crud so that these costs have a minimum bound that is already very high. Then we add on insane judgments of pain and suffering that require major insurance. In fact, many doctors are getting out of places like prenatal due to these very reasons.
You have a problem with profit: I have a problem with governmental waste. Stop the government from creating insane requirements and bottom lines will come down
---Now, I'm not saying that medical workers shouldn't make a great living helping people. I have a problem with *corporations* making money on top of that. It's a crime, IMO, that the healthcare industry is so profitable while people are dying from a lack of healthcare. No, I have no citation, it's just how I feel.
People die. There's no stopping that for now, so we can throw all the money in the world, and have a machine-breathing, IV nutrient line, feeding tube husk that is biologically living, but maintains no consciousness. That isnt right, but where do we cross those lines? Messy answer, but the only answer now is "You can keep them alive as long as you have the money for it." And in the end, they still die.
The reason is that rich people are seen as doing something "Right", regardless how wrong or immoral or illegal it is.
Poor people are seen as stupid, "Wrong", and somehow a messed up life, no matter how simple and honourable they may truly be.
Ow! My Mods!
or ill kick you in the ass.. face.. ass!
But the rapidshare link and the resulting 45$ book for free makes it "legit".
muhahaha
Makes for a great way to short stock.
Create blog-o-riffic news that's fake and cash in on the stocks.
So if I follow you correctly, it seems that copyright and patent are more tools of socialism rather than whatever we have now. Interesting viewpoint, considering the idea of not being able to properly calculate costs and gains.. It makes sense.
Now, they mentioned the Austrian School.. That's the minarchists and anarcho-capitalists idea of thought, right?
err. Try downloading the archive, unraring it, and reading the PDF inside.
Hint: It matches the book displayed on Amazon.
Amazon link eh? meh.
Try this link for your "sampling" : Deep C Secrets.
Took only 15 seconds for that link. Enjoy.
-I can point to a number of tribes who were perfectly happy without property rights until those rights were introduced and the tribes tore themselves apart.
As a anthropology minor, I contest that statement. They also accepted property rights, but not as an individual. They instead saw that the whole tribe belonged to the land, and not in reverse. That's why that Indian (I believe Iroquois) accepted wampum for what is now Manhattan: The land is here, and you are temporary. You cannot buy what lasts longer than you.
We (Americanized Europeans) saw that one could take a parcel of land, protect it by force, and the government of that peoples would protect your right to exclusivity. Contrast that to the idea of the American Indian where the the lands were Raven, Sioux, Cherokee, or the hundreds of other tribes.
It really is a radical viewpoint that does compare to the whole GNU idea.
Hurricane lives in Germany. I live in the USA.
You say copyright is bad. You give examples. It seems logical, except for one point.
Copyright was a compromise so that artists and inventors would keep doing as such, and the best (read: the best we could come up with) is to award exclusive time in which they can recoup their costs and perhaps get a bit extra.
If copyright was eradicated, what do we put in place so that artists and inventors are fairly compensated? Remember: our Constitution says "To promote the Progress of Science and Useful Arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings".
It means "Clean the red sharpie off your screen".
no red here, btw. :P
The way one plays windows games via Wine is to create a separate account with X that only spawns an xterm. One gets better performance than Windows does, doing this way.
Perhaps one could load a 2d Windows platformer via Gnome or KDE, but it'd probably be slow. oh well.
---In this case, there is no breach of Microsoft's property.
But there is to the customers.
Normal sales transactions include paying for an object. Money and object are transfered at sale, in which ownership is transfered.
With software, that is not so. They claim some additional title after the fact by reason of DRM, or remote orders, or by tattle-taling on you. Tell the people who got their machine disabled by Microsoft because of some anti-pirate code and tell me that blackmailing their data isnt a form of Broken Window.
I would claim that the Broken Window Fallacy is true for the users: they are the ones who are punished and have gained something "broken" and must fix.
Thats an economic fallacy called the Window Broken Fallacy.
The gist is that a kid breaks a window,therefore stimulates the economy to "create hundreds of dollars" of potential wealth in services and such.
The fallacypart is that would have happened any number of different ways. Instead, the person with the broken window is out that much money.
Yeah. The argument goes as follows:
Our relatives screwed over, or helped screw over natives who didnt fight back effectively. Because they are technologically inferior, they must be inferior completely. And that means whatever our relatives did was right, because we're here, and they're not.
Boy, you are daft for a "IT consultant".
1: Make sure hardware device works (ethernet plugged in, wifi card connected to AP)
2: turn on DHCP on computer. Hint: go to network settings and click on the damned button.
3: Youre done. go to google
If you cant, and are bitching about a 8 year old install of WinME, reinstall and kick yourself in the ass. You should have reinstalled bitch. Mr. Eye-Tea consultant should have known better.
Now, the big question is who you work for: I want to avoid your company because of your ineptitude.
In the last 2 houses Ive lived in, we could easily cook with no power.
It was propane in the last house, and NG in our new house.
As long as you use a non-polar solvent (I use ethanol or isoproplyl alcohol) of high purity and allow for a hour or 2 of drying time, you should be all right.
Ive cleaned motherboards with 90% ethanol (everclear is only good for cleaning, not drinking) and powered them on in an hour with no problems whatsoever.
That statement is qualified in the dependancy of the large roulette ball.
Particles are a whole another story.
And that goes back to one of the premises that pirates (me included) use to download whatever we like.
Pirate products are usually better quality, less malware and user harassment, and cheaper to boot. Why pay for worse quality when free is better quality?
Wrong.
If exact position was known, if exact velocity of thrown balls was known, and exact velocity of wheel is known, and exact accelerations of balls and wheel was known, we could calculate final position.
That's the key with this: Any source of true randoomness is covered in heavy physics in which if we Knew the states, we could calculate them to their final resting position.
As per ignoring customer demands: you'd be stupid to do as such. Instead, I have a question concerning your triple boot.
Are you using a virtualization tech to keep all 3 up at the same time?