Why don't we maintain a list of filtered keywords and add them to every site we control or can find. Rather than makeing code words, let's flood the filters with noise. If they want to censor things, let them censor the whole web.
Who funded the advertising campaigns that have enlisted hordes of unaware public to bush camp? (oil camp in fact)?
It's actually fairly well accepted the Bush won on a variety of issues, not the least of which was that we wern't sure if his opponent was actually alive, bolstered by the so called 'religious right'. His stand on Gay Marriage, Abortion and any number of other issues were contributing factors also. It's possible the oil companies were the funding behind advertisments and publicity (I think campaign donations are all public record), but nobody paid the democrats to run a spineless wimp that couldn't even come out and say he was actually against the war and would bring the US soldiers home. I might have voted for him if he had.
Who have rigged 2004 elections with what resources? Diebold machines?
That's just paranoia. I can't be 100% sure there was no tampering involved, but if there was it was at the local level. Bush didn't need tampering to win the election - the Democrats pretty much beat themselves.
...the thing you can purchase paid 'lobbyists' to effect congressional and national opinion, perpetuating lies or facts nomatter what, absolutely appalling for me. The absurdity is in that it is acceptable to your public. If that would be in my country, the people who were paid lobbyists would be disregarded as 'henchmen', despite my country having a shorter experience with democracy.
Not sure where your country is, but political corruption is hardly unique. Paid lobbyists are one of the BEAUTIFUL things about the US. It's a free country. If I can get a job walking around Washington encouraging government officials to support my platform that is perfectly legal. Nothing anybody can do, at least not until I break the law with illegal contributions, fraud, etc.. like Jack Abramoff. The problem isn't the lobbyists, it's the elected officials that listen to them. Unfortunately their constituencies don't typically know or care when the officials are being influenced, or at least don't express their displeasure at the voting booth.
They have grabbed the government, they have started a war, they have passed phletora of laws limiting personal freedom, and u.s. citizens are dying in a remote war for those oil interests to prosper more.
Huh, I seem to remember voting for a president. I also seem to remember a majority voting for an incumbent President that intended to keep the war going. I won't say the oil interests aren't influencing some of the decisions that are made, but I don't see a big groundswell of citizens protesting the war. Saying the oil interests have CONTROL is a bit extreme, don't you think? Perhaps they control your life, but I'm pretty sure I still have quite a bit of wiggle room in mine.
In u.s., big businesses legalize almost everything to meet their ends, in expense of the people. Which means the MAJORITY of the nation.
Now I'm as paranoid as the next guy, but to say businesses legalize 'almost everything' is a bit of an exaggeration. There are plenty of laws on the books that business doesn't like, things like the SEC, FCC, HIPPA, GLBA, OSHA and the EPA. There is no doubt a good amount of government corruption and laws, like the DMCA, being pushed through by big business, but 'almost everything' is extreme.
But IN THE END what happens is that THE MAJORITY of the people, EVEN the ones who label opposition DOES NOT get anything out of what big corporations do, they are just messed up further.
And the small business owner gets the shaft on both ends. The issues that the big corporations don't care about get bypassed and the liberal commies make life hell for the little guy.
Yet, still u.s. people do not rise up to the fact that, if you let businesses TOO MUCH FREEDOM, some get too big and TAKE CONTROL OF SOCIETY.
Like who? Name ONE company that has taken control of society in recorded history? Sure, several have had significant influence, perhaps more than they should have, but historically governments have been much more oppressive than corporations have. Personally I'm much more afraid of a Dictator than I am a CEO.
Imagine if only one company was allowed to have trucks capable of carrying water...
We do this all the time. Don't know about where you live, but there is only one set of pipes that bring water to my house, only one cable company in town and only one electric company. There is no reason a private company can't own a utility and have service work adequately well with minimal oversight. If the government can't oversee and regulate what's going on now, what makes you think that public ownership would result in better service?
I see no reason to conclude that reducing CO2 emissions will necessarily lead to the "crippling" of western economies.
It will because everyone is an extremist on one side or the other. I see articles all the time about how there should be $3.00/gallon of gas tax added, or SUV owners should be fined, Fuel mileage standards should be increased in unreasonable amounts, etc, etc... If some of these ridiculous actions go into place it will cripple the economy. OTOH, constructive things like Nuke plants, public transportation, increased technology infrastructre that would allow people to more easily telecommut, or even simple traffic engineering studies to increase traffic flow and minimize pollution from cars idling in traffic jams are overlooked.
If you are really going to do make changes do it in a way that is both constructive and fits into the capitalist system.
There are several other posts in this topic about indie artists that are posted on iTunes. Most appear to be using CDBaby, and maybe that fills the requirement.
Also, I know iTunes has podcasts and at least one podcaster is (or was) charging for the download. There must be some ways around the big label issue.
Re:Steve Vai said the same thing a couple of years
on
How iTunes Hurts Weird Al
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Exactly. If the artist submits his stuff directly to iTunes he can pocket the $.63 directly rather than giving it all to the label. Any wonder why the RIAA is nervous?
I presume you're talking about it from your point of view as a middle man rather than the artists perspective.
Does it matter? The artist doesn't make any money that doesn't pass through the 'middle man' - hence the term 'middle man'. I can't imagine iTunes or anyone else has a contract that pays MORE if the artist has a manager.
I didn't know he actually ever toured, but you hit the nail on the head. He is one of few artists who make most of his money off of CD sales. In his case iTunes probably does hurt - of course I can't imagine he is too hard up for money...
Ah, but it is a free market, at least in most places. I don't know of many places that only have one avaliable ISP. We don't have terribly good coverage where I live, but we have Qwest, Comcast and several wireless providers. As long as there is a choice no major ISP can charge more.
The other thing is I don't see how anyone can extort Google or any other major content/hosting provider. People pay for an ISP to connect them to the sites they want to see. If their customers suddenly find Google hard to get to they will be upset and start looking for alternative connections.
Exactly - something I've said all along in this argument. Big sites like Google or Ebay aren't going to pay. If AT&T or Qwest or Comcast throttle their connections they can just throttle it on their end too, or drop off completely. Make a big news announcement that your ISP, AT&T, is responsible for slow access to Google and recommend customers switch to a better service. That would be a PR and Sales disaster for the ISP.
I think net neutrality is a good idea in theory, but I am VERY afraid of the government getting involved. Let's sit back and let the free market work this out.
I'm no Apple fanboy and I think Jobs is probably more dangerous and potentially evil than Gates (at least Gates is predictable). That said, I can think of two good things about Apple.
iPod/iTunes - You have to admit, while the iPod isn't the end all/be all of mp3 players it's better than most other products and combining it with iTunes changed the world
OSX - Much better than Windows, but easier to deal with the Linux.
Overall I think their products are high quality. They don't offer me the versatility I want, so I don't buy them, but most of what they make is very solid.
BTW- whatever happened to the venerable HP calculators!? Not geeky enough for the new yuppie-fied HP?
That's funny. The area where I live used to have three HP plants within 10 miles or so of each other. In high school(late 80s) many of my classmates had parents that were HP employees, and had HP calculators. The parents bought them on the employee discount, which was good at the time, but most of the students had a tough time with RPN.
HP used to be a dominant employer in the area and significantly impacted the local culture. Now the majority of employees have been laid off and only one of the three plants is actually still HP.
So I suspect that if everyone traveled without ID, today's TSA airport processes would fail big time.
What do you mean by 'fail'? Terrorists would take over a plane? Maybe nobody would be allowed to fly - bet the airlines would be keen on that scenario. If EVERYBODY defected business would go on as usual. No way the airline industry is going to stand for stopping large quantities of people from boarding planes.
Slashdot Mirror
Why don't we maintain a list of filtered keywords and add them to every site we control or can find. Rather than makeing code words, let's flood the filters with noise. If they want to censor things, let them censor the whole web.
Not as much as they would like.
Since he's in charge - yes.
Who funded the advertising campaigns that have enlisted hordes of unaware public to bush camp? (oil camp in fact)?
...the thing you can purchase paid 'lobbyists' to effect congressional and national opinion, perpetuating lies or facts nomatter what, absolutely appalling for me. The absurdity is in that it is acceptable to your public. If that would be in my country, the people who were paid lobbyists would be disregarded as 'henchmen', despite my country having a shorter experience with democracy.
It's actually fairly well accepted the Bush won on a variety of issues, not the least of which was that we wern't sure if his opponent was actually alive, bolstered by the so called 'religious right'. His stand on Gay Marriage, Abortion and any number of other issues were contributing factors also. It's possible the oil companies were the funding behind advertisments and publicity (I think campaign donations are all public record), but nobody paid the democrats to run a spineless wimp that couldn't even come out and say he was actually against the war and would bring the US soldiers home. I might have voted for him if he had.
Who have rigged 2004 elections with what resources? Diebold machines?
That's just paranoia. I can't be 100% sure there was no tampering involved, but if there was it was at the local level. Bush didn't need tampering to win the election - the Democrats pretty much beat themselves.
Not sure where your country is, but political corruption is hardly unique. Paid lobbyists are one of the BEAUTIFUL things about the US. It's a free country. If I can get a job walking around Washington encouraging government officials to support my platform that is perfectly legal. Nothing anybody can do, at least not until I break the law with illegal contributions, fraud, etc.. like Jack Abramoff. The problem isn't the lobbyists, it's the elected officials that listen to them. Unfortunately their constituencies don't typically know or care when the officials are being influenced, or at least don't express their displeasure at the voting booth.
They have grabbed the government, they have started a war, they have passed phletora of laws limiting personal freedom, and u.s. citizens are dying in a remote war for those oil interests to prosper more.
Huh, I seem to remember voting for a president. I also seem to remember a majority voting for an incumbent President that intended to keep the war going. I won't say the oil interests aren't influencing some of the decisions that are made, but I don't see a big groundswell of citizens protesting the war. Saying the oil interests have CONTROL is a bit extreme, don't you think? Perhaps they control your life, but I'm pretty sure I still have quite a bit of wiggle room in mine.
In u.s., big businesses legalize almost everything to meet their ends, in expense of the people. Which means the MAJORITY of the nation.
Now I'm as paranoid as the next guy, but to say businesses legalize 'almost everything' is a bit of an exaggeration. There are plenty of laws on the books that business doesn't like, things like the SEC, FCC, HIPPA, GLBA, OSHA and the EPA. There is no doubt a good amount of government corruption and laws, like the DMCA, being pushed through by big business, but 'almost everything' is extreme.
But IN THE END what happens is that THE MAJORITY of the people, EVEN the ones who label opposition DOES NOT get anything out of what big corporations do, they are just messed up further.
And the small business owner gets the shaft on both ends. The issues that the big corporations don't care about get bypassed and the liberal commies make life hell for the little guy.
Yet, still u.s. people do not rise up to the fact that, if you let businesses TOO MUCH FREEDOM, some get too big and TAKE CONTROL OF SOCIETY.
Like who? Name ONE company that has taken control of society in recorded history? Sure, several have had significant influence, perhaps more than they should have, but historically governments have been much more oppressive than corporations have. Personally I'm much more afraid of a Dictator than I am a CEO.
I have the answer in two words: frozen north.
Global Warming
Imagine if only one company was allowed to have trucks capable of carrying water...
We do this all the time. Don't know about where you live, but there is only one set of pipes that bring water to my house, only one cable company in town and only one electric company. There is no reason a private company can't own a utility and have service work adequately well with minimal oversight. If the government can't oversee and regulate what's going on now, what makes you think that public ownership would result in better service?
I see no reason to conclude that reducing CO2 emissions will necessarily lead to the "crippling" of western economies.
It will because everyone is an extremist on one side or the other. I see articles all the time about how there should be $3.00/gallon of gas tax added, or SUV owners should be fined, Fuel mileage standards should be increased in unreasonable amounts, etc, etc... If some of these ridiculous actions go into place it will cripple the economy. OTOH, constructive things like Nuke plants, public transportation, increased technology infrastructre that would allow people to more easily telecommut, or even simple traffic engineering studies to increase traffic flow and minimize pollution from cars idling in traffic jams are overlooked.
If you are really going to do make changes do it in a way that is both constructive and fits into the capitalist system.
There are several other posts in this topic about indie artists that are posted on iTunes. Most appear to be using CDBaby, and maybe that fills the requirement.
Also, I know iTunes has podcasts and at least one podcaster is (or was) charging for the download. There must be some ways around the big label issue.
it's VERY hard to get on most radio stations if you don't have support from the labels.
That's changing - quickly. Look at the Arctic Monkeys
Exactly. If the artist submits his stuff directly to iTunes he can pocket the $.63 directly rather than giving it all to the label. Any wonder why the RIAA is nervous?
I presume you're talking about it from your point of view as a middle man rather than the artists perspective.
Does it matter? The artist doesn't make any money that doesn't pass through the 'middle man' - hence the term 'middle man'. I can't imagine iTunes or anyone else has a contract that pays MORE if the artist has a manager.
I didn't know he actually ever toured, but you hit the nail on the head. He is one of few artists who make most of his money off of CD sales. In his case iTunes probably does hurt - of course I can't imagine he is too hard up for money...
Ah, but it is a free market, at least in most places. I don't know of many places that only have one avaliable ISP. We don't have terribly good coverage where I live, but we have Qwest, Comcast and several wireless providers. As long as there is a choice no major ISP can charge more. The other thing is I don't see how anyone can extort Google or any other major content/hosting provider. People pay for an ISP to connect them to the sites they want to see. If their customers suddenly find Google hard to get to they will be upset and start looking for alternative connections.
Ummm... He wrote a book while he was senator. I hear it sucks, but he wrote it.
Exactly - something I've said all along in this argument. Big sites like Google or Ebay aren't going to pay. If AT&T or Qwest or Comcast throttle their connections they can just throttle it on their end too, or drop off completely. Make a big news announcement that your ISP, AT&T, is responsible for slow access to Google and recommend customers switch to a better service. That would be a PR and Sales disaster for the ISP.
I think net neutrality is a good idea in theory, but I am VERY afraid of the government getting involved. Let's sit back and let the free market work this out.
- iPod/iTunes - You have to admit, while the iPod isn't the end all/be all of mp3 players it's better than most other products and combining it with iTunes changed the world
- OSX - Much better than Windows, but easier to deal with the Linux.
Overall I think their products are high quality. They don't offer me the versatility I want, so I don't buy them, but most of what they make is very solid.OK, I don't know about you, but somebody using the word "UNIX" has never resulting in any kind of 'mating' for me.
Actually, I'm guessing it's more along the lines of
Most people are downloading from iTunes, and we are making money so we don't care much anymore.
Isn't someone going to post that Gandhi quote???
Just go to China. Copyright is one law they don't care much about.
BTW- whatever happened to the venerable HP calculators!? Not geeky enough for the new yuppie-fied HP?
That's funny. The area where I live used to have three HP plants within 10 miles or so of each other. In high school(late 80s) many of my classmates had parents that were HP employees, and had HP calculators. The parents bought them on the employee discount, which was good at the time, but most of the students had a tough time with RPN.
HP used to be a dominant employer in the area and significantly impacted the local culture. Now the majority of employees have been laid off and only one of the three plants is actually still HP.
So I suspect that if everyone traveled without ID, today's TSA airport processes would fail big time.
What do you mean by 'fail'? Terrorists would take over a plane? Maybe nobody would be allowed to fly - bet the airlines would be keen on that scenario. If EVERYBODY defected business would go on as usual. No way the airline industry is going to stand for stopping large quantities of people from boarding planes.
Umm... so start a blog. That's what everybody else is doing. If you write outrageous enough stuff, people will link to you.