Intellectual Property is like Government Benefit or Military Intelligence, an oxymoron. Sure people desire compensation for effort (note I said desire, not deserve and cetrtainly not entitlement). But not that way. Find another.
Yea WIKILEAKS should be stopped. People paying attention knew the truth all along, this chit endangers lives. I'm all for freedom of information but I have no use for "whistle-blowers". Perhaps we should relabel them all "bomb-throwing Anarchists" and react accordingly. Nothing wrong with either the Truth (as if!) or with Anarchy, but I do not like bomb throwing. INTERESTING post nonetheless, how Wikileaks and the truth relate is the heart of the whole matter IMHO.
Many have noted that a touch-oriented GUI is not helpful for a lot of things. Looks like the option of keyboards mice command lines and hopefully 'traditional' application menus command line switches etc will remain as well.
oooh point proved. iphone and ipad and iScrewU are worthless BS whether popular with id10ts or not. Jobs may be a genius at what 'people' like but that's what I hate about Apple...as I hate people in the general sense, and generally hate most people...
MS said that a "knowledge" "worker" actually did anything productive using the Ribbon? "Knowledge" and "work" and "ribbon" go together...like...this is a hard one lol...F and kill for peace and chastity?
And if its wrong to do it by public law, its even worse for a monopoly or quasi-monopoly to do it as a so-called "free enterprise" aka Unnaccountable Huge Bureaucracy.
Banding together or using government to deal with annoying as opposed to criminal activity is the problem here. When the perpetrator (ie facebook google et al) offers a free service they can't be "robbed". Unless we are getting "screaming fire in a crowded theater" type consequences the worst things that are happening is the infuriation of some readers of some annonymous posts, and violations of "inteelectual property" and/or "privacy. I see NO EXCUSE for laws protecting against any of that. Whats wrong with pissing people off, telling true stuff they don't want told, or redistributing so-called "intellectual property", especially in the later case if one has paid for one's own copy? Sure most people disagree with me but F what most people think, its almost always wrong and in my not at all humble opinion, totally irrelevant.
If what's being "protected" is a part of the Dept of Homeland Security I'd say my few nickles worth of pop culture is far more valueable. Of course I have a more tamper-resistent lock, from Ace hardware....
NOPE. The point of "terror" is to be known, not to remain undetected. Breaching the damn lock is almost as good as getting to, busting, etc. whatever the lock is supposed to keep safe, inaccessible to the unauthorized, etc....
Exactly. No such thing as security, although there are such things as making "violations" more difficult or maybe even trying to do somehing to reduce, punish, or otherwise affect the number doing "violations" ("violations" = whatever the F a "breach of "Security" is for the matter at hand, if any)
Above comment MINE get so PO'd about the whole war on terrorism - perhaps not as bad as the war on drugs at least there is a problem in there somewhere and maybe an enemy somewhere as well...that I FORGOT I was not logged in, thought I had that on auto, guess not lol
wow this is really neat. So many real life things have changed so much in my life time thanks to technology (ATM's? Lasers? wireless phones?). Most changes really expand the flexibility of something already done, which is of course impressive enough.
THIS might be world-shaking. NEVER seen anything that empowered customers (students) workers (teachers) and heirarchs/companies (the schools) all at once.
Fine with me if they shoot Manning. And if Wired helps them get around to shooting Manning, let's give Wired a medal. Nothing wrong with lies told to traitors and other heinous criminals.
As long as child pornography or mutilated dead bodies, or whatever, must be treated differently than marilynmanson, or whatever, the problem remains the same: one person wanting to control what another person sees, says or does.
I'm all in favor of people claiming the right to some say over what is done TO THEM or BY THEM. Let it stop there.
Would you black hole a site simply because I say so? No? Then why pay any attention to the US Government or the UN.
Perhaps what we need are Frank Herbert's "Family Atomics": make every point of view fully mayhem-capable. Then we are down to two choices, tolerance for all or mayhem for all. Both choices seem morally superior to censor-ware...
I am an idealist - I believe that people should make their own decisions. I morally distrust democracy because people can vote "for free" - the consequences of voting for subsidies, which tend to impoverish society as a whole, do not come to those who vote that way. So far, the alternative forms of government actually tried have all been worse. That does not prove that a more libertarian democracy would not be an improvement.
We should move to a VAT tax - taxing sales on the value added by the seller, so as not to penalize higher-priced but lower-margin sellers. Not because people in general deserve to pay more and the rich less. But because when we tax something, we get less of it. I say more income and more property are good things, but that more consumption is not always a good thing. Let's tax consumption.
And the rich would pay plenty of VAT - to the extent that they continued to buy ostentatious toys, they would pay through the nose.
The inheritance tax squabble is a TINY change. The big difference is on macro finance. Gore would increase government expenses and the complexity of tax subsidies; Bush would not. That's a fairly big issue.
I learned after comparing life under Eisenhower & Kennedy to life under their immediate successors, that you can kill the goose that lays the eggs. You can have deficits, inflation, unemployment, and a stock market declining in real value, all at the same time. Just do these things: expand regulation without regard to cost; refuse to make choices amongst pet projects and try to fight a war, end poverty, save the environment, and GREATLY increase retirement income, all at the same time.
Reagan saved us from that. He and Bush Sr. started the process that the Republican Congress and Alan Greenspan have allowed to continue, which has produced the current unprecedented boom. He slowed the growth of government. He largely ended inflation. He embarked upon a non-nuclear arms race which forced the Soviet Union into bankruptcy and collapse - to the incredible increase in our peace and safety, not to mention declining defense budgets (in real dollars).
The BIG change is that we need to do something about the Social Security welfare program. I say welfare, because receipts have nothing to do with earnings but are funded entirely by a huge, no deductions tax on WAGES. Even so I would have no objection were it not for the fact that longer lives, lengthening schooling, and earlier retirement are combining to shift us from having 4 or 5 people working for every recipient, to closer to 1 person working per recipient. No way can we afford this.
The only possible solution that does not chop the elderly or the middle class workers off at the knees is to continue and increase our economic growth. That requires investment capital and the ability for people to make wise decisions about where and how to invest. No one is wise in investing other people's money. And we can not trust the political process - the Government - to raise funds by taxes and then invest in a capitalist economy.
We can trust people in general to do their best to make productive investments with their own money. Bush foresees a future in which we move to a compulsory system of individual retirement investments. This is the one way to continue to insure that money is accumulated for retirement, and is invested in the growth of our society, and is invested productively.
Gore sees more of the same - much more.
That difference is HUGE.
I don't worry about the Supreme Court. I am as likely as anyone to think of buying a gun and taking to the hills if the government were to start requiring OR prohibiting conception, pregnancy, or child birth. What an invasion of the person!
My defense against this invasion is basically three-fold:
1. A rich society is a safe society. Economic growth more than any other thing will protect and expand liberty. So I look first to which party agenda advances or retards growth. The Democrats are all about seizing and redistributing the spoils. The Republicans are all about facilitating the creation of wealth in the first place. No contest, the Republican Agenda wins.
2. In a somewhat democratic society - and democracy is far more secure in a rich society! - the Government can not oppose the strongly held views of the overwhelming majority of people. Which is that abortion should remain available, that discrimination should not have the force of law, and that the conservation of the natural and human environment is an important priority.
3. Conservatives joining the Supreme Court are likely to remain conservative. Access to abortion has been settled law for 27 years - conservatives do not over-turn precedents with the impetuosity of liberals.
As far as Star Trek vs. Star Wars goes, I tend to vote for Star Wars. Better actors (William Shatner, an actor?) and better production values. More realistic too. Star Trek is an over-long government-sponsored Lewis & Clark Expedition, lost in the wilderness with no apparent goal. The Star Wars characters in contrast have understandable goals and pursue them in an enterprising (sic) way.
Good grief. Rumour exists to help us assess trust & truth. News is the same. Spread the words. If people don't want to be quoted or printed, then they shouldn't say things in the first place.
The only real exception is where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy and are in affect tapped. That does not apply here - expecting that a/. post would be "private" is just wrong.
Even so I'd be happy if it's never published. More mass media BS. "Some adolescent are unhappy" - who knew?
Ahah I see the problem. Email space is like a highway or the rest of the net - it ain't yours.
But when spam follows you home, it feels like its in your garage.
Well it is. Just like junk mail is in the mailbox. Part of the price for freedom of expression - that includes being subjected to the expression of others.
Slashdot Mirror
Intellectual Property is like Government Benefit or Military Intelligence, an oxymoron. Sure people desire compensation for effort (note I said desire, not deserve and cetrtainly not entitlement). But not that way. Find another.
Yea WIKILEAKS should be stopped. People paying attention knew the truth all along, this chit endangers lives. I'm all for freedom of information but I have no use for "whistle-blowers". Perhaps we should relabel them all "bomb-throwing Anarchists" and react accordingly. Nothing wrong with either the Truth (as if!) or with Anarchy, but I do not like bomb throwing. INTERESTING post nonetheless, how Wikileaks and the truth relate is the heart of the whole matter IMHO.
Many have noted that a touch-oriented GUI is not helpful for a lot of things. Looks like the option of keyboards mice command lines and hopefully 'traditional' application menus command line switches etc will remain as well.
what not a bsd or gnu derivative omg shades of PARC something new?
INFORMATIVE!!
Insightful, funny, and dare I say it, "me too", "like he said" etc.
That is exactly the problem. The whole concept of pocket computers sucks totally, and "touch" is one reason why.
Bull. Lotus-style ring menu created the whole concept of "menu" as an option for CLI and has yet to be improved.
hate touch sensitive what a crock
yea more of that GD context sensitive bs.
oooh point proved. iphone and ipad and iScrewU are worthless BS whether popular with id10ts or not. Jobs may be a genius at what 'people' like but that's what I hate about Apple...as I hate people in the general sense, and generally hate most people...
MS said that a "knowledge" "worker" actually did anything productive using the Ribbon? "Knowledge" and "work" and "ribbon" go together...like...this is a hard one lol...F and kill for peace and chastity?
Good reason for pivate thermonuclear weapons. The death of all nations could not come too soon.
And if its wrong to do it by public law, its even worse for a monopoly or quasi-monopoly to do it as a so-called "free enterprise" aka Unnaccountable Huge Bureaucracy.
Banding together or using government to deal with annoying as opposed to criminal activity is the problem here. When the perpetrator (ie facebook google et al) offers a free service they can't be "robbed". Unless we are getting "screaming fire in a crowded theater" type consequences the worst things that are happening is the infuriation of some readers of some annonymous posts, and violations of "inteelectual property" and/or "privacy. I see NO EXCUSE for laws protecting against any of that. Whats wrong with pissing people off, telling true stuff they don't want told, or redistributing so-called "intellectual property", especially in the later case if one has paid for one's own copy? Sure most people disagree with me but F what most people think, its almost always wrong and in my not at all humble opinion, totally irrelevant.
If what's being "protected" is a part of the Dept of Homeland Security I'd say my few nickles worth of pop culture is far more valueable. Of course I have a more tamper-resistent lock, from Ace hardware....
NOPE. The point of "terror" is to be known, not to remain undetected. Breaching the damn lock is almost as good as getting to, busting, etc. whatever the lock is supposed to keep safe, inaccessible to the unauthorized, etc....
Exactly. No such thing as security, although there are such things as making "violations" more difficult or maybe even trying to do somehing to reduce, punish, or otherwise affect the number doing "violations" ("violations" = whatever the F a "breach of "Security" is for the matter at hand, if any)
Above comment MINE get so PO'd about the whole war on terrorism - perhaps not as bad as the war on drugs at least there is a problem in there somewhere and maybe an enemy somewhere as well...that I FORGOT I was not logged in, thought I had that on auto, guess not lol
wow this is really neat. So many real life things have changed so much in my life time thanks to technology (ATM's? Lasers? wireless phones?). Most changes really expand the flexibility of something already done, which is of course impressive enough.
THIS might be world-shaking. NEVER seen anything that empowered customers (students) workers (teachers) and heirarchs/companies (the schools) all at once.
Fine with me if they shoot Manning. And if Wired helps them get around to shooting Manning, let's give Wired a medal. Nothing wrong with lies told to traitors and other heinous criminals.
As long as child pornography or mutilated dead bodies, or whatever, must be treated differently than marilynmanson, or whatever, the problem remains the same: one person wanting to control what another person sees, says or does.
I'm all in favor of people claiming the right to some say over what is done TO THEM or BY THEM. Let it stop there.
Would you black hole a site simply because I say so? No? Then why pay any attention to the US Government or the UN.
Perhaps what we need are Frank Herbert's "Family Atomics": make every point of view fully mayhem-capable. Then we are down to two choices, tolerance for all or mayhem for all. Both choices seem morally superior to censor-ware...
I am an idealist - I believe that people should make their own decisions. I morally distrust democracy because people can vote "for free" - the consequences of voting for subsidies, which tend to impoverish society as a whole, do not come to those who vote that way. So far, the alternative forms of government actually tried have all been worse. That does not prove that a more libertarian democracy would not be an improvement.
We should move to a VAT tax - taxing sales on the value added by the seller, so as not to penalize higher-priced but lower-margin sellers. Not because people in general deserve to pay more and the rich less. But because when we tax something, we get less of it. I say more income and more property are good things, but that more consumption is not always a good thing. Let's tax consumption.
And the rich would pay plenty of VAT - to the extent that they continued to buy ostentatious toys, they would pay through the nose.
The inheritance tax squabble is a TINY change. The big difference is on macro finance. Gore would increase government expenses and the complexity of tax subsidies; Bush would not. That's a fairly big issue.
I learned after comparing life under Eisenhower & Kennedy to life under their immediate successors, that you can kill the goose that lays the eggs. You can have deficits, inflation, unemployment, and a stock market declining in real value, all at the same time. Just do these things: expand regulation without regard to cost; refuse to make choices amongst pet projects and try to fight a war, end poverty, save the environment, and GREATLY increase retirement income, all at the same time.
Reagan saved us from that. He and Bush Sr. started the process that the Republican Congress and Alan Greenspan have allowed to continue, which has produced the current unprecedented boom. He slowed the growth of government. He largely ended inflation. He embarked upon a non-nuclear arms race which forced the Soviet Union into bankruptcy and collapse - to the incredible increase in our peace and safety, not to mention declining defense budgets (in real dollars).
The BIG change is that we need to do something about the Social Security welfare program. I say welfare, because receipts have nothing to do with earnings but are funded entirely by a huge, no deductions tax on WAGES. Even so I would have no objection were it not for the fact that longer lives, lengthening schooling, and earlier retirement are combining to shift us from having 4 or 5 people working for every recipient, to closer to 1 person working per recipient. No way can we afford this.
The only possible solution that does not chop the elderly or the middle class workers off at the knees is to continue and increase our economic growth. That requires investment capital and the ability for people to make wise decisions about where and how to invest. No one is wise in investing other people's money. And we can not trust the political process - the Government - to raise funds by taxes and then invest in a capitalist economy.
We can trust people in general to do their best to make productive investments with their own money. Bush foresees a future in which we move to a compulsory system of individual retirement investments. This is the one way to continue to insure that money is accumulated for retirement, and is invested in the growth of our society, and is invested productively.
Gore sees more of the same - much more.
That difference is HUGE.
I don't worry about the Supreme Court. I am as likely as anyone to think of buying a gun and taking to the hills if the government were to start requiring OR prohibiting conception, pregnancy, or child birth. What an invasion of the person!
My defense against this invasion is basically three-fold:
1. A rich society is a safe society. Economic growth more than any other thing will protect and expand liberty. So I look first to which party agenda advances or retards growth. The Democrats are all about seizing and redistributing the spoils. The Republicans are all about facilitating the creation of wealth in the first place. No contest, the Republican Agenda wins.
2. In a somewhat democratic society - and democracy is far more secure in a rich society! - the Government can not oppose the strongly held views of the overwhelming majority of people. Which is that abortion should remain available, that discrimination should not have the force of law, and that the conservation of the natural and human environment is an important priority.
3. Conservatives joining the Supreme Court are likely to remain conservative. Access to abortion has been settled law for 27 years - conservatives do not over-turn precedents with the impetuosity of liberals.
As far as Star Trek vs. Star Wars goes, I tend to vote for Star Wars. Better actors (William Shatner, an actor?) and better production values. More realistic too. Star Trek is an over-long government-sponsored Lewis & Clark Expedition, lost in the wilderness with no apparent goal. The Star Wars characters in contrast have understandable goals and pursue them in an enterprising (sic) way.
Good grief. Rumour exists to help us assess trust & truth. News is the same. Spread the words. If people don't want to be quoted or printed, then they shouldn't say things in the first place.
/. post would be "private" is just wrong.
The only real exception is where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy and are in affect tapped. That does not apply here - expecting that a
Even so I'd be happy if it's never published. More mass media BS. "Some adolescent are unhappy" - who knew?
Wondferful response. But it might get ya fired if they found out you had fooled them.
Ahah I see the problem. Email space is like a highway or the rest of the net - it ain't yours.
But when spam follows you home, it feels like its in your garage.
Well it is. Just like junk mail is in the mailbox. Part of the price for freedom of expression - that includes being subjected to the expression of others.