So it looks like there are several "definitions", the American one, and others. The UN one is reasonably well worded to only define those who use violence against civilians. The American one can have you locked up on terrorism charges for staging a smoke-in. So conveniently broad its law is. You know, you obviously write very well and logically, but you still sound like a History channel program explaining all these nice, warm and fuzzy, little rules about how people are supposed to operate. You seem to believe that things actually work that way, all neat and tidy. But all your fancy, eloquent laws mean nothing when people can and do claim immunity. The discussion could be much more interesting you would drop the pretenses. As far as your french terrorism tale goes, it boils down to this. You believe the official version. I don't. I've seen it all before with another war. And it appears that other previous wars have yet to be truthfully explained. So excuse me if I don't exactly believe what I see on your ten o'clock news. It's almost sounds like they're just replaying the tapes from 35 years ago. I hear the same thing word for word. It won't be long now before we hear about "peace with honor". I'm interested in knowing what, to you, makes them sound any more believable now. Simply because you saw the buildings get hit? What is there that makes you think, in light of past deceptions, that the government is going to come forward with real facts this time when they have every reason to lie? And this one they can't let go of. There's no way. The truth will bring down this government. And truth be told, there should be criminal charges brought against those at the highest levels. So your law is screwed in my book. There's nobody worthy holding it up. And nobody seems interested in finding someone who is. But even without your law, I can still be civil towards others. And I've noticed that even with an iron fist, that society can be pretty savage. Could be because the laws are made by the same kind of people that violate them.
Actually, for law enforcement, it's not an expense, it's a windfall of budget increases, more employment, its entire infrastructure benefits, on and off the books. For the taxpayers...well, it's all a matter of how they feel, regardless of actual crime stats.
Cool. Do they have speakers with an Elliot Ness voice telling you to "drop that weapon"? In fact what a great way to clear the streets. Play back gunshots(machine gun fire would be best), instead of recording them.
Ok, you can go, but don't leave town. We'll be in touch if we have any more questions. You can have the brain back after it's been cleaned by the Association.
If it comes to a point that everyone and their grandmother can pirate high defintion content with the click of an icon, can Microsoft make a Windows Update that removes this "feature".
Well, I know now what song is going to be stuck in my head for the next few hours...
Yeah, well, in that case, make sure you pay the RIAA its $100,000 usd, or whatever they tell you its worth for all the times it plays back in your head. And make sure to keep it to yourself. Any whistling or humming of said song will constitute a "public performance" or some other copyright violation if anybody hears you. For your sake, it's best not to remember anything you ever heard. Remember, the brain can be used as a circumvention device. Try not to get caught in possession of one.
The use of commodity equipment is a necessary part of our austerity measures to keep the economy afloat. Sacrifices must be made. So a few folks bite the big one. We're talking about money here. That's all that matters...
If the owner's rights aren't violated, then the constitution shouldn't be an issue. I'm not certain if an employee has any issue here. it's not his property. If an employee wishes to have certain rights as related to company property, then I believe it's up to them to organize, unite, all those things that they're not doing right now to insure that elected representatives will resolve it. The corps seem to have it together in this regard. Well, they got the money to swing it any way they wish. So then, let's pool ours. Added up together, we have 'em beat by a long shot. We have the power to completely remake the constitution if we ever decide to use it. Right now, we are letting the whackos remake it, and it sure ain't purdy.
But when your talking to a terrorist on the phone or a know drug dealer who is under surveilance, You are increasing the likly hood or probability of guilt. Would you not agree?
NO! Why the hell should I? The definition of "terrorist" is every bit as alive as the constitution. Meaning the guy with the biggest gun makes the definition. "known", what a laugh. Get over it, wouldya? You're trying to use every buzzword in the book to justify these people. We shouldn't talk to people just because they're under surveilance? Man, if you could only feel the wrong end of the "big stick". Your nick is starting to make sense. I like it.
Great site. Sure makes me redundant. But I gotta say if I can come up with the same questions before seeing any of this as the site does, at least I'm not completely farting into the wind. I thought I was standing alone in this little argument. Turns out it might be possible to bring real change after all. Should be required reading amongst the drones. It's truly amazing how they keep their eyes shut so tightly.
Sony makes up part of the RIAA front. Sony is RIAA, and RIAA is Sony. It is in their interest to control access to publishing tech. It is very RIAA related. The RIAA is Sony's tool to control the formats. Specifically a hammer. A Red Hammer (you had to be there).
Those artists sold there souls and their "rights" away to the devil. They are no longer in a position to make a complaint. The new "owners" however, have the power to conduct raids with the police? And using RICO?...yeah, that's what those rules were meant for. This can't be happening. It must be the drugs. I need another hit.
Instead of just one bird making the whole picture, we now have a million all waiting in turn the mark the part they saw. Millions of rapidly moving parts is not exactly my idea of reliable. I thought the idea of solid state was to have no moving parts to wear out.
I'm afraid that under the current circumstances, with the US sticking its nose where it doesn't belong, you will end up with your "face in the pavement" (your sig just happened to fit in), in the name of protecting Winnie the Pooh from those bloodthirsty, vicious pirates.
Slashdot Mirror
what does Vista give me and my users, that should make me cut a check?
It looks more like OS X?
Many of us are too smart to graduate from an Ivy League University and be elected President, twice.
:-Q~
Yeah, and we all know how to hack into school records and voting machines, too. Daddy, I wanna be president
Could they be somehow related to this guy? If they are, I hate to think what's in store.
So it looks like there are several "definitions", the American one, and others. The UN one is reasonably well worded to only define those who use violence against civilians. The American one can have you locked up on terrorism charges for staging a smoke-in. So conveniently broad its law is. You know, you obviously write very well and logically, but you still sound like a History channel program explaining all these nice, warm and fuzzy, little rules about how people are supposed to operate. You seem to believe that things actually work that way, all neat and tidy. But all your fancy, eloquent laws mean nothing when people can and do claim immunity. The discussion could be much more interesting you would drop the pretenses. As far as your french terrorism tale goes, it boils down to this. You believe the official version. I don't. I've seen it all before with another war. And it appears that other previous wars have yet to be truthfully explained. So excuse me if I don't exactly believe what I see on your ten o'clock news. It's almost sounds like they're just replaying the tapes from 35 years ago. I hear the same thing word for word. It won't be long now before we hear about "peace with honor". I'm interested in knowing what, to you, makes them sound any more believable now. Simply because you saw the buildings get hit? What is there that makes you think, in light of past deceptions, that the government is going to come forward with real facts this time when they have every reason to lie? And this one they can't let go of. There's no way. The truth will bring down this government. And truth be told, there should be criminal charges brought against those at the highest levels. So your law is screwed in my book. There's nobody worthy holding it up. And nobody seems interested in finding someone who is. But even without your law, I can still be civil towards others. And I've noticed that even with an iron fist, that society can be pretty savage. Could be because the laws are made by the same kind of people that violate them.
Actually, for law enforcement, it's not an expense, it's a windfall of budget increases, more employment, its entire infrastructure benefits, on and off the books. For the taxpayers...well, it's all a matter of how they feel, regardless of actual crime stats.
Cool. Do they have speakers with an Elliot Ness voice telling you to "drop that weapon"? In fact what a great way to clear the streets. Play back gunshots(machine gun fire would be best), instead of recording them.
Ok, you can go, but don't leave town. We'll be in touch if we have any more questions. You can have the brain back after it's been cleaned by the Association.
If it comes to a point that everyone and their grandmother can pirate high defintion content with the click of an icon, can Microsoft make a Windows Update that removes this "feature".
format c:
So why again I do not own the hardware in my equipment to be used HOW I WANT TO USE IT?
Because they say so!
Damn, that was easy. Okay...next question for the Answer Man.
Well, I know now what song is going to be stuck in my head for the next few hours...
Yeah, well, in that case, make sure you pay the RIAA its $100,000 usd, or whatever they tell you its worth for all the times it plays back in your head. And make sure to keep it to yourself. Any whistling or humming of said song will constitute a "public performance" or some other copyright violation if anybody hears you. For your sake, it's best not to remember anything you ever heard. Remember, the brain can be used as a circumvention device. Try not to get caught in possession of one.
The use of commodity equipment is a necessary part of our austerity measures to keep the economy afloat. Sacrifices must be made. So a few folks bite the big one. We're talking about money here. That's all that matters...
If the owner's rights aren't violated, then the constitution shouldn't be an issue. I'm not certain if an employee has any issue here. it's not his property. If an employee wishes to have certain rights as related to company property, then I believe it's up to them to organize, unite, all those things that they're not doing right now to insure that elected representatives will resolve it. The corps seem to have it together in this regard. Well, they got the money to swing it any way they wish. So then, let's pool ours. Added up together, we have 'em beat by a long shot. We have the power to completely remake the constitution if we ever decide to use it. Right now, we are letting the whackos remake it, and it sure ain't purdy.
Give me liberty, or give me. . .ooooooooooooooo, shiney!
Or maybe, possibly, "Give Me Convenience, or Give Me Death"
As for your percentages, the standard plus or minus five percent should be about right.
But when your talking to a terrorist on the phone or a know drug dealer who is under surveilance, You are increasing the likly hood or probability of guilt. Would you not agree?
NO! Why the hell should I? The definition of "terrorist" is every bit as alive as the constitution. Meaning the guy with the biggest gun makes the definition. "known", what a laugh. Get over it, wouldya? You're trying to use every buzzword in the book to justify these people. We shouldn't talk to people just because they're under surveilance? Man, if you could only feel the wrong end of the "big stick". Your nick is starting to make sense. I like it.
is to 'make people accountable for their actions without artificially restricting those actions.'" emphasis mine
That will be absolutely impossible while IP law remains on the books. Its entire reason for existence is to artificially restrict action, access, etc.
For reasonably accurate results, they probably should get a few more years worth of data. Say about 50,000 oughta do it.
Judge Wells asked IBM to help SCO out in any way he could."
How should we address "him"?
Mister?
Doctor?
Sir?
Lord?
Savior?
Hey, Meester?
Great site. Sure makes me redundant. But I gotta say if I can come up with the same questions before seeing any of this as the site does, at least I'm not completely farting into the wind. I thought I was standing alone in this little argument. Turns out it might be possible to bring real change after all. Should be required reading amongst the drones. It's truly amazing how they keep their eyes shut so tightly.
I think they should make 'em wait until they're 65. And only sell them by perscription, covered by medicare of course.
Yeah, there's a reset button. You just gotta hit it really hard. Oh, wait, maybe that was the "off" button.
Sony makes up part of the RIAA front. Sony is RIAA, and RIAA is Sony. It is in their interest to control access to publishing tech. It is very RIAA related. The RIAA is Sony's tool to control the formats. Specifically a hammer. A Red Hammer (you had to be there).
Those artists sold there souls and their "rights" away to the devil. They are no longer in a position to make a complaint. The new "owners" however, have the power to conduct raids with the police? And using RICO?...yeah, that's what those rules were meant for. This can't be happening. It must be the drugs. I need another hit.
Instead of just one bird making the whole picture, we now have a million all waiting in turn the mark the part they saw. Millions of rapidly moving parts is not exactly my idea of reliable. I thought the idea of solid state was to have no moving parts to wear out.
I'm afraid that under the current circumstances, with the US sticking its nose where it doesn't belong, you will end up with your "face in the pavement" (your sig just happened to fit in), in the name of protecting Winnie the Pooh from those bloodthirsty, vicious pirates.
Who gave the RIAA the right to say that I can't watch some movie that I legally acquired, in my computer, because I run Linux?
The Government of The United States of America. You gotta problem with that? - GWB