Wealth, fame, and power, man. The old and ugly guys you mention would look rather ridiculous acting so self-confident and high on themselves if they didn't have these important traits to back them up.
I say we have to draw the line if the sites actually advocate doing some harm or evil, for example, telling their visitors that the
Jews must all be sent to concentration camps and gassed to death, or condoning harm or violence against anyone in any other
way, in which case, it would not be a free speech matter, but a matter of soliciting or conspiring to evil activity, much like
telling a hitman to kill your ex-wife or something to that effect.
Of course, there is also the matter of defamation and the damage that comes with it. Imagine wrongfully being accused of being the town child molestor. Kind of like the Jews being accused of making up the story about the holocaust to swindle money from the Germans and Swiss Bank accounts.
I would not. Not because I like Nazis, but because it's easier to keep track of them when they're out in the open, and because
shutting them down would only serve to give them credibility, additional propaganda ("The Jews in the government are trying
to suppress our message!"), and power.
I say we have to draw the line if the sites actually advocate doing some harm or evil, for example, telling their visitors that the Jews must all be sent to concentration camps and gassed to death, or condoning harm or violence against anyone in any other way, in which case, it would not be a free speech matter, but a matter of soliciting or conspiring to evil activity, much like telling a hitman to kill your ex-wife or something to that effect.
No one will manufacture user-control free media if they RIAA/MPAA/IDSA/BSA get their way. They'll pay, sue, threaten,
or legislate manufacturers into manfucturing only media and hardware with user-control measures built in. Eventually it will
be illegal to own any media which is not produced by an authorized producer, which is not does not allow them total control
over your actions, and which does not come from a certified manufacturer.
The prospect of this nightmare scenario makes you wonder which side really won the Cold War. We may have beaten the Stalinist dictatorships in the short term, but giving the powers that be control over the technology available to us will eventually gravitate us towards Orwell's "1984" scenario.
Now, what's next? That we'll be required to use only devices that not only honour copyright protection, but also control content, as decided by our authorities, corporate and government? How about mechanisms to monitor our activities as well?
Needless to say, this will tremendously retard advances in computer science, the physical sciences, and many other fields, but
the powers that be don't give a fuck.
Not only that, they'll love it. Imagine, limitless monopoly-assured profit for very little money spend on R&D?
This is one of the tenets of socialism: preventing exploitation of the workers by big business. Consequently, and quite stupidly,
the quality of life of the workers suffers (how long does it take to get an MRI in Canada?) because the services that "big
business" provides to the workers are necessarily low in quality and highly regulated by the government. I live in the US, I can
go get medical care tomorrow if I wanted it, I can pay whatever price I think is fair for Internet access, and I don't particularly
feel exploited by any business, thank you very much.
And if you can't afford it, you're SOL.
I'm sure we agree on both sides of the border that education is an essential service and justified use of public funds, so that even the poor kids can get their education. Well, in this day and age, technology is a more powerful educating tool that keeps us in touch with the happenings in the real world and informed on matters more relevant than what can be taught in a classroom. So for this reason, public funding is justified to keep the poor on the same level (or as close to it as possible) as the rich, and not doom them to a vicious circle of ignorance and lower social status.
Convicted hackers should be *more* desireable from a corporate perspective as they have documentation substantiating their knowledge and are better able to "think like the enemy." They could probably be hired for a lower salary as they would not have the same expectations of somebody who has not recently been in prison.
Hackers who hack for the thrill or the experiment of it, I can accept, once they've reformed and grown up. Crackers, on the other hand, who are essentially thieves who hack for their own monetary gain, I would stay the hell away from.
It will be the final downfall of the simpsons:O(
Every tv show kills themselves when the finally make a movie. Examples: Beavis and Butthead, Southpark (that one happend
REALLY fast), The X-Files (debatable).
It's not going to cause the show's downfall. It is already on its way down, and making a movie is seen as the last chance to squeeze out the cash cow for it. Although I do feel the movie's chances of success would be much better if it were made during the peak of its popularity, or shortly thereafter.
You might throw Social Security in there too (funny how conservatives and Republicans are so frothingly anti-socialist,
refusing to support universal health care, yet supporting one of the most socialized of programs: Social Security).
This is actually exactly the type of reason that I have become a libertarian. I was a card carring member of the Republican
party (which is unusual for someone my age). One of the single greatest things about the libertarian idealogy is that it is
completely non hypocritical. There is not a single conflicting belief. You pointed out a good one above. The reason why the
Republicans often support the Social Security program is because it is important to many of the members of the Republican
Party (mainly the baby boomers and the older generation). Its completely hypocritcal and it reminds me that people are
totally self serving even if they act like they aren't.
Maybe the official Libertarian stance on the issue of social welfare isn't so hypocritical, but how about the individual members themselves? I suspect almost all supporters of full-blown libertarianism are able-bodied and well off people fully capable of working and taking care of themselves, who take this fact for granted.
But what if one day, what if, through some crippling injury (eg. auto, skiing accident, etc.) or illness (eg. Alzheimers, Parkinsons, Lou Gehrigs, etc.), your ability to work is taken away from you. Do you have enough saved up to last you through till your natural death? Or will Mom and Dad look after you till you die? Or are you willing to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger to save yourself the dishonour of collecting welfare and "robbing the taxpayer"?
I don't think the gov't should have a direct hand in the administration of the ISP, but obviously, since being technologically connected is essential in keeping in touch with today's world, it makes sense that public resources should be provided to ensure that everyone is granted unfettered access to the Internet. Unless you prefer certain segments of the population remain poor, ignorant, and powerless.
What about schools? We expect our tax dollars to support them to educate our children. Likewise, perhaps some "socialized" system supporting Internet access is a good thing to keep the segment of the population who otherwise couldn't afford it informed and educated.
As a customer of @Home, I would like vote with my feet, but since they have the monopoly on cable Internet in my area, there isn't really much I can do.
Satan is portrayed as being an affable character that is liked by the townspeople.
Well, isn't it about time somebody balanced things and put a positive light on him for a change, since you Christians never cease to villify him, and blame him for all the evil in the world and for all your problems?
Newton's Third Law has it that for every force, there's an equal and opposite counterforce. If Christians can have their share of shows and influences in the popular media, then its counterbalancing influences should have their place in it too.
Maybe you should reanalyze your own beliefs and religious principles, and clue in on the possibility that the root of all the Christian-bashing in contemporary popular youth culture may be in a backlash to all the Christian fundamentalism, intolerance, and oppression that gets shoved into the faces of the poor kids.
Why not take development of this and many other such IT projects be taken outside of the USA, since its government insists on being so oppressive? I know it'll be a big inconvenience, with a lot of the world's major tech corporations and developers based in the US, but I'm beginning to think the long-term benefits from doing so will outweigh the short-term costs. Besides, it's about bloody time the IT community fully realized the global scope of its work and stopped revolving so dependently on the USA or any single nation.
These sort of posts shouldn't be labeled as 0:Redundant. They should be moderated as 0:Stupid.
Well, it was actually my first time partaking in a discussion about patents here, and my post was intended as a quick one-line attempt at humour, sarcasm, and commentary on the current state of patent laws and politics. If the same or similar jokes have been said here in the past already, then I'm sorry. Geez!
Anyway, I'd suggest you go off and have a really long think about someone like Ghandi, or the Dalai Lama, or someone along those lines - it might restore a modicum of your faith in your species.
Like Ghandi who was shot dead, and the Dalai Lama who is now living in exile? Not much encouragement there.
Good thinking. I'll provide a home for it, provided it doesn't offend my sensibilities and contravene Canadian law. What better place to station it than just 30 miles away from the USA national boundary in Beautiful Vancouver BC.
Did anybody here see the RCAF skit on last week's episode with the same name ("Microsoft Monopoly") and the exact same idea? Does anybody know of a streaming video or a transcript for it anywhere?
Employers would have to correct injury-causing workplace conditions that require repetitive motion, overexertion or awkward posture under proposed regulations the Labor Department was announcing Monday.
With reference to a lawsuit that has been in the news recently, does this also apply to phone sex workers who may injure themselves by masturbating too much?;)
Slashdot Mirror
Model yourself after the drip by the same name on Doctor Who, and you can kiss all your chick attraction prospects goodbye. ;)
http://www.askmen.com/men/business_politics/33b_bi ll_gates.html
http://www.askmen.com/men/entertainment/44b_brad_p itt.html
A rating of 99/100 for women magnetism for Bill Gates, and only 93/100 for Brad Pitt? Whoever says geeks can't be sexy?
Wealth, fame, and power, man. The old and ugly guys you mention would look rather ridiculous acting so self-confident and high on themselves if they didn't have these important traits to back them up.
Here is a more realistic and perhaps inevitable situation to consider than Vulcans landing on Earth.
How about when human and animal hybrids are produced from genetic tampering. Should the resulting lifeforms have the same rights as humans?
Of course, there is also the matter of defamation and the damage that comes with it. Imagine wrongfully being accused of being the town child molestor. Kind of like the Jews being accused of making up the story about the holocaust to swindle money from the Germans and Swiss Bank accounts.
I say we have to draw the line if the sites actually advocate doing some harm or evil, for example, telling their visitors that the Jews must all be sent to concentration camps and gassed to death, or condoning harm or violence against anyone in any other way, in which case, it would not be a free speech matter, but a matter of soliciting or conspiring to evil activity, much like telling a hitman to kill your ex-wife or something to that effect.
The prospect of this nightmare scenario makes you wonder which side really won the Cold War. We may have beaten the Stalinist dictatorships in the short term, but giving the powers that be control over the technology available to us will eventually gravitate us towards Orwell's "1984" scenario.
Now, what's next? That we'll be required to use only devices that not only honour copyright protection, but also control content, as decided by our authorities, corporate and government? How about mechanisms to monitor our activities as well?
Needless to say, this will tremendously retard advances in computer science, the physical sciences, and many other fields, but the powers that be don't give a fuck.
Not only that, they'll love it. Imagine, limitless monopoly-assured profit for very little money spend on R&D?
And if you can't afford it, you're SOL.
I'm sure we agree on both sides of the border that education is an essential service and justified use of public funds, so that even the poor kids can get their education. Well, in this day and age, technology is a more powerful educating tool that keeps us in touch with the happenings in the real world and informed on matters more relevant than what can be taught in a classroom. So for this reason, public funding is justified to keep the poor on the same level (or as close to it as possible) as the rich, and not doom them to a vicious circle of ignorance and lower social status.
Hackers who hack for the thrill or the experiment of it, I can accept, once they've reformed and grown up. Crackers, on the other hand, who are essentially thieves who hack for their own monetary gain, I would stay the hell away from.
It's not going to cause the show's downfall. It is already on its way down, and making a movie is seen as the last chance to squeeze out the cash cow for it. Although I do feel the movie's chances of success would be much better if it were made during the peak of its popularity, or shortly thereafter.
Maybe the official Libertarian stance on the issue of social welfare isn't so hypocritical, but how about the individual members themselves? I suspect almost all supporters of full-blown libertarianism are able-bodied and well off people fully capable of working and taking care of themselves, who take this fact for granted.
But what if one day, what if, through some crippling injury (eg. auto, skiing accident, etc.) or illness (eg. Alzheimers, Parkinsons, Lou Gehrigs, etc.), your ability to work is taken away from you. Do you have enough saved up to last you through till your natural death? Or will Mom and Dad look after you till you die? Or are you willing to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger to save yourself the dishonour of collecting welfare and "robbing the taxpayer"?
Do you really have the guts now?
Don't assume we're in it for the guys.
</i>
<p>
You've got to be kidding! (Geek guys...come on!)
I don't think the gov't should have a direct hand in the administration of the ISP, but obviously, since being technologically connected is essential in keeping in touch with today's world, it makes sense that public resources should be provided to ensure that everyone is granted unfettered access to the Internet. Unless you prefer certain segments of the population remain poor, ignorant, and powerless.
What about schools? We expect our tax dollars to support them to educate our children. Likewise, perhaps some "socialized" system supporting Internet access is a good thing to keep the segment of the population who otherwise couldn't afford it informed and educated.
Let's compare:# /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/glibc-2.1.3.tar.gz /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/glibc-2.1.3.tar.gz differ /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/glibc-2.1.3.tar.gz /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/glibc-2.1.3.tar.gz
<TT>
[billk@cr957697-a billk]$ su root
Password:
[root@cr957697-a billk]# rpm -ivh glibc-2.1.3-6.src.rpm
glibc #################################################
[root@cr957697-a billk]# exit
exit
[billk@cr957697-a billk]$ diff glibc-2.1.3.tar.gz
Binary files glibc-2.1.3.tar.gz and
[billk@cr957697-a billk]$ ll !*
ll glibc-2.1.3.tar.gz
-rw-rw-r-- 1 root root 8277967 Jan 31 09:32
-rw-r--r-- 1 billk users 9013927 Feb 25 06:44 glibc-2.1.3.tar.gz
[billk@cr957697-a billk]$
</TT>
As a customer of @Home, I would like vote with my feet, but since they have the monopoly on cable Internet in my area, there isn't really much I can do.
It's amazing how so many religious zombies cannot tell apart morality from obedience to god, or conscience from fear of god.
Satan is portrayed as being an
affable character that is liked by the townspeople.
Well, isn't it about time somebody balanced things and put a positive light on him for a change, since you Christians never cease to villify him, and blame him for all the evil in the world and for all your problems?
Newton's Third Law has it that for every force, there's an equal and opposite counterforce. If Christians can have their share of shows and influences in the popular media, then its counterbalancing influences should have their place in it too.
Maybe you should reanalyze your own beliefs and religious principles, and clue in on the possibility that the root of all the Christian-bashing in contemporary popular youth culture may be in a backlash to all the Christian fundamentalism, intolerance, and oppression that gets shoved into the faces of the poor kids.
Why not take development of this and many other such IT projects be taken outside of the USA, since its government insists on being so oppressive? I know it'll be a big inconvenience, with a lot of the world's major tech corporations and developers based in the US, but I'm beginning to think the long-term benefits from doing so will outweigh the short-term costs. Besides, it's about bloody time the IT community fully realized the global scope of its work and stopped revolving so dependently on the USA or any single nation.
These sort of posts shouldn't be labeled as 0:Redundant. They should be moderated as 0:Stupid.
Well, it was actually my first time partaking in a discussion about patents here, and my post was intended as a quick one-line attempt at humour, sarcasm, and commentary on the current state of patent laws and politics. If the same or similar jokes have been said here in the past already, then I'm sorry. Geez!
Anyway, I'd suggest you go off and have a really long think about someone like Ghandi, or the Dalai Lama, or
someone along those lines - it might restore a modicum of your faith in your species.
Like Ghandi who was shot dead, and the Dalai Lama who is now living in exile? Not much encouragement there.
So has anyone claimed a patent on breathing air yet? ;)
Good thinking. I'll provide a home for it, provided it doesn't offend my sensibilities and contravene Canadian law. What better place to station it than just 30 miles away from the USA national boundary in Beautiful Vancouver BC.
My address, btw, is billy@cafe.net.
Did anybody here see the RCAF skit on last week's episode with the same name ("Microsoft Monopoly") and the exact same idea? Does anybody know of a streaming video or a transcript for it anywhere?
From the article:
;)
Employers
would have to correct injury-causing
workplace conditions that require
repetitive motion, overexertion or
awkward posture under proposed
regulations the Labor Department
was announcing Monday.
With reference to a lawsuit that has been in the news recently, does this also apply to phone sex workers who may injure themselves by masturbating too much?