It's a perfectly natural phenomenon(da-daaa-da-da-da...). It's a simple fact that that's how things work. As with most everything, self interest is the prime motivator. So the effect one might have on others is entirely lost. For instance when people vote for the president, they're not thinking about their neighbors(just the opposite, they try to vote against their neighbors), or the country. They are voting to put an extra dollar in their own wallet, and will quickly accept anybody's promise to that effect, no matter how detrimental to the rest. The government we all have is the result. In that same spirit, it's a government only concerned with itsself interests.
The moment I can move freely to another one, it's all yours. Maybe you believe in the sovereignty of the group overrules that of the individual. I believe in just the opposite, so I don't believe your analogy quite holds up.
Why would DoJ want to get into your personal business? I guess they have other things to worry about, right? If they want to get into your personal business, don't they have a strong reason to do that?
The American government, like all governments have political enemies, that present a threat to their power, revenue, etc. It's easier if they can just track everybody without going through a lot of paperwork. Considering that the DoJ is very weak on crime right now, I believe it's safe to assume that much of their work is political in nature and should be watched closely. Under these circumstances, we give them far too much authority.
Most laws are written for the benefits of specific segments of the economy and personal gain, IP law in particular. Prohibition is another set of laws meant to prop up another segment, the law enforcement and prison industries. And yes, I am talking about the business of IP law that is thriving because of the present law. Anybody who tries to apply economics or law equally to everybody would be called a communist. The set of laws we have now are to create an economic stratification that causes money to flow, giving everybody a chance to skim. I can no longer say if it's good or bad. It is simply the accepted way of human interaction. Believe me, I feel the same way about licenses that you do. Check previous posts. I see IP law for what it is, and it ain't purdy. I'm simply trying to give an honest opinion from the point of view of the other side, since honesty is not exactly their forte, and would only show that they are butt naked.
I didn't mean to sound harsh or anything, and I wasn't even comparing the two. I was just hoping to avoid confusion and save a bunch of ranting and raving about off topic details(too late for me...) and turning the thread into a political flame fest. I would also think that aerodynamic forces from a good, stiff breeze are a lot more stressful on a structure than a puny airplane, as was evidenced by both incidents. BUT, since I haven't done the math, I wouldn't know.
Yes. it a common saying amongst authoritarians all over the world, and it's picking up steam in the States also. And much to their delight, it works rather well in silencing the critics and swaying public opinion.
We certainly have freedom and privacy notions, but seems it is not as much as americans do have:-)
The Americans are losing theirs. They need help. But that can only come from each individual themselves. They got a good start out the gate a couple of hundred years ago, but now they're losing ground fast.
Brasil, eh? What's the favorite beverage? Got good beer? With all that vegetation over there, you must be able to ferment some pretty wicked stuff.
"Wrong"...for now. This will not be the final word on the matter. As it is, local storage provides plausible deniability of the existence of whatever is being demanded of me. That's something Google can never offer. If they want something from me, they had better come up with a warrant bearing criminal charges against me. And I sure don't my data to get "lost" like what's been happening with the credit card companies, etc. In order to avoid a fight, I will provide for my own security.
TFA points out (not that you did) that this refers to virtualization...
Ah, but he did...
FTSummary: "Mathew Ingram from Canada's Globe and Mail writes that Microsoft will require at least the $299 Business version of Vista or higher if installing on a Mac with virtualization.
Burma's Computer Science Development Law 1996 is a perverse model for authoritarian regimes to follow in this era of globalisation. Far from ''developing computer science", it inhibits this by establishing extensive controls on the ownership of computers and computer links. Basically, a government licence is needed to own a computer and to operate a computer network. Those deemed to be undermining national security, face 10 years imprisonment.
This will have to happen here if we are to remain on our current course. There can be no other way.
The concept of "freedom", "privacy", etc etc etc,..." is far beyond the understanding of people who believe that the quest for such things is "hiding" something, and I'm not articulate or eloquent enough to educate them without appearing to be trolling. Though it can be accomplished, learning the about value of "freedom", "privacy", etc etc etc,..." as an adult is much more difficult than it would be to learn it early on. I'm am sorry that your culture taught you that people who want "freedom", "privacy", etc etc etc,..." are hiding something. Please do what you can to counter such indoctrination, and if you succeed, then maybe you can help the Americans do the same thing.
Keeping it local reduces your chances of becoming a victim of DoJ fishing expeditions. Your lawyers are more likely to fight for your rights than Google's.
That's all fine and dandy, but that's not the way they see it. They put copyright on the books to acquire total control of how and when and where you see their product. They look for stability. They can't work in an unpredictable market. Rightly or wrongly, they feel that this control will provide the desired stability in the market. Of course I disagree with them and don't approve of the true nature of IP law. But money and guns speak louder than words. This will all go away when people realize the true intent of the law and vote accordingly to have it abolished. For now the status quo will stand.
Sometimes you'd have to step back and wonder, "Are these corporations run by idiots?" The answer is an emphatic "Yes"
Hmmm, Let's compare your basement to their mansion. Let's compare your lonely splendor to his wife screwing the pool boy, then being drowned in the bathtub and the body thrown into the pool to make it look like an accident (Man! If only OJ had it so easy)...wait a minute...that doesn't work. Oh well, you get the idea.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a perfectly natural phenomenon(da-daaa-da-da-da...). It's a simple fact that that's how things work. As with most everything, self interest is the prime motivator. So the effect one might have on others is entirely lost. For instance when people vote for the president, they're not thinking about their neighbors(just the opposite, they try to vote against their neighbors), or the country. They are voting to put an extra dollar in their own wallet, and will quickly accept anybody's promise to that effect, no matter how detrimental to the rest. The government we all have is the result. In that same spirit, it's a government only concerned with its self interests.
Oops, sorry. I thought I was replying to the original poster... Feel free to ignore..
The moment I can move freely to another one, it's all yours. Maybe you believe in the sovereignty of the group overrules that of the individual. I believe in just the opposite, so I don't believe your analogy quite holds up.
...google "incompetent idiot", the first result is the one you want.
:-)
And many the other results show she's in good company
Why would DoJ want to get into your personal business? I guess they have other things to worry about, right? If they want to get into your personal business, don't they have a strong reason to do that?
The American government, like all governments have political enemies, that present a threat to their power, revenue, etc. It's easier if they can just track everybody without going through a lot of paperwork. Considering that the DoJ is very weak on crime right now, I believe it's safe to assume that much of their work is political in nature and should be watched closely. Under these circumstances, we give them far too much authority.
Excuse me??? What reality are you in?
Sounds like presidential material to me. Worked in '04
Most laws are written for the benefits of specific segments of the economy and personal gain, IP law in particular. Prohibition is another set of laws meant to prop up another segment, the law enforcement and prison industries. And yes, I am talking about the business of IP law that is thriving because of the present law. Anybody who tries to apply economics or law equally to everybody would be called a communist. The set of laws we have now are to create an economic stratification that causes money to flow, giving everybody a chance to skim. I can no longer say if it's good or bad. It is simply the accepted way of human interaction. Believe me, I feel the same way about licenses that you do. Check previous posts. I see IP law for what it is, and it ain't purdy. I'm simply trying to give an honest opinion from the point of view of the other side, since honesty is not exactly their forte, and would only show that they are butt naked.
I wasn't trying to compare anything. I simply wanted to correct an honest mistake.
I didn't mean to sound harsh or anything, and I wasn't even comparing the two. I was just hoping to avoid confusion and save a bunch of ranting and raving about off topic details(too late for me...) and turning the thread into a political flame fest. I would also think that aerodynamic forces from a good, stiff breeze are a lot more stressful on a structure than a puny airplane, as was evidenced by both incidents. BUT, since I haven't done the math, I wouldn't know.
Yeah, they call themselves Marimar, or something like that. That's not to say that outsideers didn't conntinue to call it Burma. BTW, Here ya go
Yes. it a common saying amongst authoritarians all over the world, and it's picking up steam in the States also. And much to their delight, it works rather well in silencing the critics and swaying public opinion.
:-)
We certainly have freedom and privacy notions, but seems it is not as much as americans do have
The Americans are losing theirs. They need help. But that can only come from each individual themselves. They got a good start out the gate a couple of hundred years ago, but now they're losing ground fast.
Brasil, eh? What's the favorite beverage? Got good beer? With all that vegetation over there, you must be able to ferment some pretty wicked stuff.
This 'License' business is way out of control.
It seems that way from my point of view also, but apparently business is thriving as IP law becomes more powerful.
When and how did this ever change?
297 years ago.
You're on a good rant. It should be heard far and wide.
The problem with putting his work in the public domain is that you can take the work and make a copyrighted modified version.
And that is among the reasons that copyright law must be abolished. To prevent exactly that.
"Wrong"...for now. This will not be the final word on the matter. As it is, local storage provides plausible deniability of the existence of whatever is being demanded of me. That's something Google can never offer. If they want something from me, they had better come up with a warrant bearing criminal charges against me. And I sure don't my data to get "lost" like what's been happening with the credit card companies, etc. In order to avoid a fight, I will provide for my own security.
TFA points out (not that you did) that this refers to virtualization...
Ah, but he did...
FTSummary: "Mathew Ingram from Canada's Globe and Mail writes that Microsoft will require at least the $299 Business version of Vista or higher if installing on a Mac with virtualization.
(emph. mine)
Coming soon to a country near you
Burma's Computer Science Development Law 1996 is a perverse model for
authoritarian regimes to follow in this era of globalisation. Far from
''developing computer science", it inhibits this by establishing extensive
controls on the ownership of computers and computer links. Basically, a
government licence is needed to own a computer and to operate a computer
network. Those deemed to be undermining national security, face 10 years
imprisonment.
This will have to happen here if we are to remain on our current course. There can be no other way.
MS is shooting itself in the foot.
Yeah well, they got lots of ammo. May as well use it.
...but why do you want to always hide everything?
The concept of "freedom", "privacy", etc etc etc,..." is far beyond the understanding of people who believe that the quest for such things is "hiding" something, and I'm not articulate or eloquent enough to educate them without appearing to be trolling. Though it can be accomplished, learning the about value of "freedom", "privacy", etc etc etc,..." as an adult is much more difficult than it would be to learn it early on. I'm am sorry that your culture taught you that people who want "freedom", "privacy", etc etc etc,..." are hiding something. Please do what you can to counter such indoctrination, and if you succeed, then maybe you can help the Americans do the same thing.
Borders are slavery, not protection, and is the most often used rationalization to start a war. Just tear the damn things down.
Spell "Sonk" correctly when submitting a post to Slashdot.
Keeping it local reduces your chances of becoming a victim of DoJ fishing expeditions. Your lawyers are more likely to fight for your rights than Google's.
:-) Too bad nobody caught the Columbo reference.
That's all fine and dandy, but that's not the way they see it. They put copyright on the books to acquire total control of how and when and where you see their product. They look for stability. They can't work in an unpredictable market. Rightly or wrongly, they feel that this control will provide the desired stability in the market. Of course I disagree with them and don't approve of the true nature of IP law. But money and guns speak louder than words. This will all go away when people realize the true intent of the law and vote accordingly to have it abolished. For now the status quo will stand.
Sometimes you'd have to step back and wonder, "Are these corporations run by idiots?" The answer is an emphatic "Yes"
Hmmm, Let's compare your basement to their mansion. Let's compare your lonely splendor to his wife screwing the pool boy, then being drowned in the bathtub and the body thrown into the pool to make it look like an accident (Man! If only OJ had it so easy)...wait a minute...that doesn't work. Oh well, you get the idea.