I've actually been called a war profiteer by someone with no idea what they were talking about. Things play out pretty simlply to the person with no experience or stake in the military, or armed conflict.
To the simple mind, anyone working for the military in any capacity, is a "war profiteer", from the 18 yr old infantryman, to the lunch lady serving food on a base back in the US.
A video game manufacturer, or a movie studio, or X cultural enterprise depicting armed conflict does not have a stake in the creation or continuation of armed conflict profit, and as such, are not profiteers.
I tire of people who insist that media which deals in the depiction of conflict are somehow predetorial.
Because unless the state is providing some sort of service to the entity from which you are downloading content, it should not expect to receive money from that entity. You know, things like roads, police, utilities, etc. That's what taxes are for, you know.
Unless that brick and mortar store is located within the state, then I hesitantly agree with you.
Perhaps our ideas of what constitutes "fair" differ. If "fair" to you is giving the state whatever taxes it legislates that you owe, then yes, that this proposal is "fair".
Be happy. be hopeful. Or shut up and let the rest of us be happy and hopeful.
Sounds rather like "You're either with us or against us... "
No, it sounds nothing like that. The latter is an exclusive statement, and a false dichotomy. The idea that several want to be happy and hopeful, and the (voting) minority want to be disdainful about the outcome of the election is in no way "for us or against us".
I think you've intentionally misinterpreted that idea.
Can you name any country that has been "taken over" by Islam in the last few hundred years, that hasn't had a majority Muslim influence prior?
From what I've heard, Qatar and the UAE are pretty secular/liberal.
Besides, these all sound like characteristics of countries that have been "overrun" by Christianity too.
Nice partisanship though. It has nothing to do with the original story.
And government oversight/police state fanatics never stop amazing me.
What people like you don't seem to realize is that when you say that it's ok to give away your rights, you're saying that it's ok to give away mine, as well.
Luckily, the country isn't so large that other forms of travel are not feasible.
Not like in the US, where if you're in NY, trying to go to LA (or other destinations west), air travel is one of the few options available.
I'm starting to wonder if there's some running joke, or competition, between lawmakers/politicians in the US and UK, seeing who can come up with the most idiotic, errrr I mean, essential to safety and liberty, stresses on freedom. Or maybe they're angling for the population to revolt.
Either way, laws like this win. If you follow them, you'll be safe, and so we must maintain them, because to maintain freedom and safety, we must be EVER VIGILANT. If they are broken, or cause civil unrest, they are justified in their creation, because look how many people there will be who want to wreak havoc on safety and order.
I never fly, unless absolutely necessary. If they want to make poorly thought regulation part of the new safety routine, I don't involve myself.
I don't know if you've even considered moving your reserve allegiance to a different state, but the RIANG has the 102nd Information Warfare Squadron. I used to be in it, and still have some friends that are.
It's a very cool position, but I don't what sort of particulars I should mention on here. Lots of contingency operations for organizations who deal with information warfare (network defense, etc).
I can put you in touch with people, if you'd like.
The daily Web comic, called Heroes Happen Here, features tech savvy crime fighters like Lord Firewall, who "stands between chaos and order" and says things like "begone vermin!"'
So, does this "Lord Firewall" work for, or against, Microsoft?
I'd be worried about anyone, IT or otherwise, who "says things like "begone vermin!""
This is a subject I've spent a great deal of time conjecturing about, and I've come up with a few root causes:
1) Lane movement: I have found that the number of drivers changing lanes has an incredible effect on the speed and density of traffic. This is usually exacerbated by poorly designed onramps/offramps. I commuted from Baltimore toward DC every day for about 6 months. Some of the exchanges there are remarkably short, try and accomdate cars both getting off and on 295 (Baltimore DC Parkway), and there is very little in the way of a usable viewshed (lots of trees). That single interchange caused more traffic then I care to think about
2) Similar to the lane movement is lane reduction. On the same road back into Baltimore, "construction" forces 3 lanes to 2, then 2 to 1 (left to right). End result: People in the left most lane get into the middle lane, causing a bit more congestion, then those people try to get into the right most lane, joining the cars already there. Once the right most lane becomes clogged, people don't want to wait in that lane, and fly by in the now open (but closing ahead) left lane(s). The effect is similar to ramming a funnel of BBs into a tube. If the BB's are already lined up, they flow smoothly. If the are being funneled, they will congest.
3) Rubbernecking. Self explanatory
4) Accidents. Again, self explanatory. Many could be avoided with a bit of caution.
5)Tailgaiting: If one follows too closely to the car in front of them, the car behind will tend to break more quickly, and frequently, thereby causing the cars behind them to roughly do the same (depending on how closely the cars behing the tailgater are following). I've seen this happen, the break lights all light up in a row, with a moment break between each car in the series.
6)Similarly, brake riding. If a "lead" car (relative) applies to breaks too frequently, the car behind them will most likely do the same, all the way down the line. Butterfly effect.
Traffic moves like a worm, not like a string. Even in heavy traffic situations, traffic will not clear with there is no obstruction. Cars in the middle will lurch forward a bit, then stop, the cars behind will move similarly.
The average driver is concerned with one person, themselves. If this average driver would be reminded that driving is a communal activity (on the whole), and adjust driving habits, I would like to think that the majority of traffic in this country could be aleviated.
Unfortunately, that is too much credit to give the average driver.
Wow, I just now saw a post written by someone who apparently can't see. Can't see the difference between shopping for food, walking, and hunting with a loaded rifile.
Sesame Street said it best in the song "One of these things is not like the other."
I'm glad you can equate being out in public with hunting animals. I mean, it's almost the same thing, perhaps, depending on where one lives
Next up, a bill detailing driving "rights" for the blind. Of course, driving is a privledge. What about "sport" hunting, right or privledge?
It's called a disability for a reason, as in, one is unable to perform an activity that someone with complete physical functionality may perform.
Of course, it is your right to be so easily offended. I hope you've not made any off color jokes in your lifetime.
"Sents per kilobyte" doesn't make any sense". I know, that's not what I'm saying. I'm quite sure that the 1st supervisor said somewhere ".002 per Kb sent, as in.002 for every Kb of data sent from the phone/laptop/whatever. He just didn't say.002 of what.
I'm just assuming that the confusion may have been borne in the difference between the usage of "sent" or "cent" or "cents".
Someone has already mentioned this, but it seems to have gotten lost in the mathematics misunderstanding frey.
What the 1st supervisor actually said was ".002 per Kb Sent". He didn't say if the ".002" was in dollars or cents, nor did he denote if it was a "$" attached to the front of that number, or if there was a "c" on the back of it. He may have assumed that the called knew that there was a $ on the front.
So, assuming there was a $ in front of the per Kb rate, the company was correct. Perhaps the caller heard "cents" rather then "sent". I could understand that happening, even under further questioning; "That's.002 cents per Kb?" "Uhh, yes, sir, per Kb sent."
Even thought this may have been the case, the phone reps were still a bit silly in their calculations.
I don't think you really fixed it. You changed it, but not for the better.
I'm going over there for a year, next month. I know that it's a shithole. I think it's unwinnable (not that there will ever be a declared victory either way, we're not talking about a chess game). I am realistic in my expectations that my presence will not provide any benefit for anyone on either side of this conflict.
Just because troops are dying does not mean it's warranted, justified, or honorable. Every US servicemember's death in this conflict has been in vain, and many servicemembers know that. Some fool themselves into thinking "We're doing a good job", because that's what they're being told.
I, for one, am not having any of it, and firmly believe that this was a mistake, from start to finish.
If you bothered to buy the music from real stores (online, or at a shop), then maybe we'd be seeing some cheaper prices for CD's etc.
AHH HAA HAA!!!!HO HA HA!!!!..Oh, God....*wipes tears from eyes*
May I assume that you've started buying CDs within the last few years? I've been buying cd's since the late 80's/early 90's. If anything, I've seen a price increase. Perhaps newer CDs may only be priced for a much more reasonable $13.99 instead of $17.99 or so, and there are certainly $2.99 (or so) CD bins, but why the hell would you think that prices would come down?
Using your logic, CD prices should be at an all time low right about now, or at the very least, pre 2000 (or so), before the onset of this whole Napster/filesharing/pirating/stealing debacle.
They will always claim piracy, no matter how high or low their sales numbers are. I don't buy RIAA sanctioned music anymore, and I don't pirate/share/download (whatever). I'm sure that someone could spin it that they are losing sales from my not buying RIAA sanctioned music, and someone is a "pirate" because of that.
Well, I'm glad you got the general premise, that I was parroting back, replacing the term "student" with "teacher", to turn the exactly opposite circumstance. All replacements are intended.
Perhaps, AC, if you have a correction to suggest, you should let me know where it should lie.
Here, let's modify that a bit, and see how this whole "education" thing works both ways.
It's ridiculously easy for students to abuse their ubiquity. Many often display questionable behaviour in the classroom or elsewhere, the account of which might be met with skepticism when reported to a higher authority, or might simply be flat-out not reported owing to the agressive nature of some students or due to the awkwardness inherent in getting a student chastised for an isolated incident, or the possibility of a lawsuit by the family of the student in question.
With the knowledge that behaviors are being, or might possible be, recorded by the faculty themselves, students suddenly become accountable for all their actions--as it should be. Allowing such videos on youtube, and electronic devices as whole from schools, is a broad handed tyrannical gesture and an affront to teacher's rights and free speech.
So, to ask a question to counter your logic, would having taped sessions of classroom lecture be an affront to the student's privacy? Would the student's behavior also be scrutinzed, or are we solely concerned about the actions of the staff, and liberate the students from their somewhat inherent submissive role?
I think we have to get rid of this ideal that students have very few boundaries to adhere to in school. I don't want a nation of mindless drones who do not question authority, nor do I want a generation of people who will put up an affront to authority, when feeling in any way, as people in my school used to put it, "dissed".
Being told to behave in class is not reason to claim unfair treatment, and it is definitely not a point to argue in class. If you do a search for "teacher yelling" on youtube, you'll find a few incidents of such.
Or, instead of taking a rather small snippet of the encounter, you could show the much longer version of the video which depicts the office being calm, courteous, and giving the suspect much more leeway then she probabaly deserved.
But you'd rather give an editorial, with little evidence that the suspect may have done something which would prompt this "idiot cop" to taze her.
I hope you realize that law enforcement works a bit differently here then across the pond. Would an english driver give a constable this much trouble? Hopefully not.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for posting what I wuold have said.
I've actually been called a war profiteer by someone with no idea what they were talking about. Things play out pretty simlply to the person with no experience or stake in the military, or armed conflict.
To the simple mind, anyone working for the military in any capacity, is a "war profiteer", from the 18 yr old infantryman, to the lunch lady serving food on a base back in the US.
A video game manufacturer, or a movie studio, or X cultural enterprise depicting armed conflict does not have a stake in the creation or continuation of armed conflict profit, and as such, are not profiteers.
I tire of people who insist that media which deals in the depiction of conflict are somehow predetorial.
Make a beowolf cluster? But only if they run on linux. In Soviet America, USBs insert you (into the front page on /.)
But does he use lin.... excuse me, there's a knock on the door. ^^^^^NO CARRIER
Your privacy has been violated, go hide and whine on Slashdot.
POE
Now then, where's my grain alcohol?
Ooh, I know, I know!
Because unless the state is providing some sort of service to the entity from which you are downloading content, it should not expect to receive money from that entity. You know, things like roads, police, utilities, etc. That's what taxes are for, you know.
Unless that brick and mortar store is located within the state, then I hesitantly agree with you.
Perhaps our ideas of what constitutes "fair" differ. If "fair" to you is giving the state whatever taxes it legislates that you owe, then yes, that this proposal is "fair".
Sounds rather like "You're either with us or against us... "
No, it sounds nothing like that. The latter is an exclusive statement, and a false dichotomy. The idea that several want to be happy and hopeful, and the (voting) minority want to be disdainful about the outcome of the election is in no way "for us or against us". I think you've intentionally misinterpreted that idea.
Can you name any country that has been "taken over" by Islam in the last few hundred years, that hasn't had a majority Muslim influence prior? From what I've heard, Qatar and the UAE are pretty secular/liberal. Besides, these all sound like characteristics of countries that have been "overrun" by Christianity too. Nice partisanship though. It has nothing to do with the original story.
Human rights fanatics never stop amazing me.
And government oversight/police state fanatics never stop amazing me. What people like you don't seem to realize is that when you say that it's ok to give away your rights, you're saying that it's ok to give away mine, as well.
1pm to 1pm only? I was at work for that measureless amount of time. I guess I missed it, I'll wait until FF4 is out.
Luckily, the country isn't so large that other forms of travel are not feasible.
Not like in the US, where if you're in NY, trying to go to LA (or other destinations west), air travel is one of the few options available.
I'm starting to wonder if there's some running joke, or competition, between lawmakers/politicians in the US and UK, seeing who can come up with the most idiotic, errrr I mean, essential to safety and liberty, stresses on freedom. Or maybe they're angling for the population to revolt.
Either way, laws like this win. If you follow them, you'll be safe, and so we must maintain them, because to maintain freedom and safety, we must be EVER VIGILANT. If they are broken, or cause civil unrest, they are justified in their creation, because look how many people there will be who want to wreak havoc on safety and order.
I never fly, unless absolutely necessary. If they want to make poorly thought regulation part of the new safety routine, I don't involve myself.
I don't know if you've even considered moving your reserve allegiance to a different state, but the RIANG has the 102nd Information Warfare Squadron. I used to be in it, and still have some friends that are.
It's a very cool position, but I don't what sort of particulars I should mention on here. Lots of contingency operations for organizations who deal with information warfare (network defense, etc).
I can put you in touch with people, if you'd like.
The daily Web comic, called Heroes Happen Here, features tech savvy crime fighters like Lord Firewall, who "stands between chaos and order" and says things like "begone vermin!"'
So, does this "Lord Firewall" work for, or against, Microsoft?
I'd be worried about anyone, IT or otherwise, who "says things like "begone vermin!""
MS evangelist apologizes for "pawns" comment
Hmmmm, 1996, are we sure he didn't mean pwned? I mean, someone had to be an 31337 pioneer.
This is a subject I've spent a great deal of time conjecturing about, and I've come up with a few root causes:
1) Lane movement: I have found that the number of drivers changing lanes has an incredible effect on the speed and density of traffic. This is usually exacerbated by poorly designed onramps/offramps. I commuted from Baltimore toward DC every day for about 6 months. Some of the exchanges there are remarkably short, try and accomdate cars both getting off and on 295 (Baltimore DC Parkway), and there is very little in the way of a usable viewshed (lots of trees). That single interchange caused more traffic then I care to think about
2) Similar to the lane movement is lane reduction. On the same road back into Baltimore, "construction" forces 3 lanes to 2, then 2 to 1 (left to right). End result: People in the left most lane get into the middle lane, causing a bit more congestion, then those people try to get into the right most lane, joining the cars already there. Once the right most lane becomes clogged, people don't want to wait in that lane, and fly by in the now open (but closing ahead) left lane(s). The effect is similar to ramming a funnel of BBs into a tube. If the BB's are already lined up, they flow smoothly. If the are being funneled, they will congest.
3) Rubbernecking. Self explanatory
4) Accidents. Again, self explanatory. Many could be avoided with a bit of caution.
5)Tailgaiting: If one follows too closely to the car in front of them, the car behind will tend to break more quickly, and frequently, thereby causing the cars behind them to roughly do the same (depending on how closely the cars behing the tailgater are following). I've seen this happen, the break lights all light up in a row, with a moment break between each car in the series.
6)Similarly, brake riding. If a "lead" car (relative) applies to breaks too frequently, the car behind them will most likely do the same, all the way down the line. Butterfly effect.
Traffic moves like a worm, not like a string. Even in heavy traffic situations, traffic will not clear with there is no obstruction. Cars in the middle will lurch forward a bit, then stop, the cars behind will move similarly.
The average driver is concerned with one person, themselves. If this average driver would be reminded that driving is a communal activity (on the whole), and adjust driving habits, I would like to think that the majority of traffic in this country could be aleviated.
Unfortunately, that is too much credit to give the average driver.
Wow, I just now saw a post written by someone who apparently can't see. Can't see the difference between shopping for food, walking, and hunting with a loaded rifile.
Sesame Street said it best in the song "One of these things is not like the other."
I'm glad you can equate being out in public with hunting animals. I mean, it's almost the same thing, perhaps, depending on where one lives
Next up, a bill detailing driving "rights" for the blind. Of course, driving is a privledge. What about "sport" hunting, right or privledge?
It's called a disability for a reason, as in, one is unable to perform an activity that someone with complete physical functionality may perform.
Of course, it is your right to be so easily offended. I hope you've not made any off color jokes in your lifetime.
"Sents per kilobyte" doesn't make any sense". I know, that's not what I'm saying. I'm quite sure that the 1st supervisor said somewhere ".002 per Kb sent, as in .002 for every Kb of data sent from the phone/laptop/whatever. He just didn't say .002 of what.
I'm just assuming that the confusion may have been borne in the difference between the usage of "sent" or "cent" or "cents".
Someone has already mentioned this, but it seems to have gotten lost in the mathematics misunderstanding frey.
.002 cents per Kb?" "Uhh, yes, sir, per Kb sent."
What the 1st supervisor actually said was ".002 per Kb Sent". He didn't say if the ".002" was in dollars or cents, nor did he denote if it was a "$" attached to the front of that number, or if there was a "c" on the back of it. He may have assumed that the called knew that there was a $ on the front.
So, assuming there was a $ in front of the per Kb rate, the company was correct. Perhaps the caller heard "cents" rather then "sent". I could understand that happening, even under further questioning; "That's
Even thought this may have been the case, the phone reps were still a bit silly in their calculations.
There, fixed it for ya.
I don't think you really fixed it. You changed it, but not for the better.
I'm going over there for a year, next month. I know that it's a shithole. I think it's unwinnable (not that there will ever be a declared victory either way, we're not talking about a chess game). I am realistic in my expectations that my presence will not provide any benefit for anyone on either side of this conflict.
Just because troops are dying does not mean it's warranted, justified, or honorable. Every US servicemember's death in this conflict has been in vain, and many servicemembers know that. Some fool themselves into thinking "We're doing a good job", because that's what they're being told.
I, for one, am not having any of it, and firmly believe that this was a mistake, from start to finish.
I've never been known as much of an optimist.
If you bothered to buy the music from real stores (online, or at a shop), then maybe we'd be seeing some cheaper prices for CD's etc.
AHH HAA HAA!!!!HO HA HA!!!!..Oh, God....*wipes tears from eyes*
May I assume that you've started buying CDs within the last few years? I've been buying cd's since the late 80's/early 90's. If anything, I've seen a price increase. Perhaps newer CDs may only be priced for a much more reasonable $13.99 instead of $17.99 or so, and there are certainly $2.99 (or so) CD bins, but why the hell would you think that prices would come down?
Using your logic, CD prices should be at an all time low right about now, or at the very least, pre 2000 (or so), before the onset of this whole Napster/filesharing/pirating/stealing debacle.
They will always claim piracy, no matter how high or low their sales numbers are. I don't buy RIAA sanctioned music anymore, and I don't pirate/share/download (whatever). I'm sure that someone could spin it that they are losing sales from my not buying RIAA sanctioned music, and someone is a "pirate" because of that.
Well, I'm glad you got the general premise, that I was parroting back, replacing the term "student" with "teacher", to turn the exactly opposite circumstance. All replacements are intended.
Perhaps, AC, if you have a correction to suggest, you should let me know where it should lie.
Here, let's modify that a bit, and see how this whole "education" thing works both ways.
It's ridiculously easy for students to abuse their ubiquity. Many often display questionable behaviour in the classroom or elsewhere, the account of which might be met with skepticism when reported to a higher authority, or might simply be flat-out not reported owing to the agressive nature of some students or due to the awkwardness inherent in getting a student chastised for an isolated incident, or the possibility of a lawsuit by the family of the student in question.
With the knowledge that behaviors are being, or might possible be, recorded by the faculty themselves, students suddenly become accountable for all their actions--as it should be. Allowing such videos on youtube, and electronic devices as whole from schools, is a broad handed tyrannical gesture and an affront to teacher's rights and free speech.
So, to ask a question to counter your logic, would having taped sessions of classroom lecture be an affront to the student's privacy? Would the student's behavior also be scrutinzed, or are we solely concerned about the actions of the staff, and liberate the students from their somewhat inherent submissive role?
I think we have to get rid of this ideal that students have very few boundaries to adhere to in school. I don't want a nation of mindless drones who do not question authority, nor do I want a generation of people who will put up an affront to authority, when feeling in any way, as people in my school used to put it, "dissed".
Being told to behave in class is not reason to claim unfair treatment, and it is definitely not a point to argue in class. If you do a search for "teacher yelling" on youtube, you'll find a few incidents of such.
Or, instead of taking a rather small snippet of the encounter, you could show the much longer version of the video which depicts the office being calm, courteous, and giving the suspect much more leeway then she probabaly deserved.
& v=SGaWDL7ofLQ
Shown here http://www.youtube.com/watch?search=&mode=related
But you'd rather give an editorial, with little evidence that the suspect may have done something which would prompt this "idiot cop" to taze her.
I hope you realize that law enforcement works a bit differently here then across the pond. Would an english driver give a constable this much trouble? Hopefully not.
Of course, it was the Pirates
Damn P2P users plunder our movie profits!!
I must admit I didn't RTA, but couldn't this system be defeated by louvres? Particularly those made of tin foil?
Or, if you don't want to get too technical, how about some dirt?