How about restoring the sabre-tooth tiger? We can use such big predatory cats with fangs longer than their heads to scare the shit out of hikers and other outdoor adventurers right here in North America. >:)
I'm not totally against the US, but the environmental unawareness and the virus-like spread (via entertainment, works wonders on young people) of the culture to replace other cultures is what I'm mostly against.
What's wrong with the latter--leaving the young people to their own choice of entertainment, etc.? If you think they watch too much American movies and TV, put out something that can actually compete with Hollywood in terms of production quality. You Europeans will just have to put aside your ethnic/linguistic/cultural differences and form a single European cultural cluster to form your own equivalent of Hollywood and make it happen.
Personal freedom isnt dead in Sweden. There hasnt been a verdict yet (he'll be freed, imho), only a report in a german mag. where they probably dont know anything about swedish law.
Either you don't live here or you are blind. Bar the far east, Sweden has one of the most collective value systems in the world. There has never been individual freedom here, which is why we thrived for a while (50s-60s-70s) and then went right to the shitter today. Same reason places like SIngapore can thrive now, but are heading straight for the shitter tomorrow.
This raises an interesting thought. I wonder, how much better would individualistic, freedom-obsessed Americans (or other westerners) fare if they were squeezed into a small, resource-void plot of land like Singapore to call a country of their own. Say what you want about the American regime, but until now America has had better individual freedom then we do - by a long run. American kids may be forced to say the pledge of allegance in the morning, but that is nothing compared to silent indoctrination into the social (-ist) system that goes on from the the very start here.
Why give any examples when others are so eager to do it for you? I make posts dissing the US (where I have not lived for almost a decade) here all the time, and most of the time they are either ignored, or granted with just critisism and comment.
Being the imperialists and the world's self-appointed police, the USA quite rightly gets criticized from the world over, and I guess they're used to it by now. Yet, although their are probably 100x as many Americans reading this as Swedes, one Sweden dissing comment deep down in a thread gets me 7 angry replies in half an hour.
Which is sort of what I was talking about...
Sounds sort of like Canada (where I live), but worse.
A nonagressive nation like Sweden normally doesn't warrant criticism from abroad, but I thought they would be more tolerant of criticism from within.
Anyways, my advice to you is to leave this remote northern ant colony you have for a nation over there for someplace where you can enjoy more personal freedom, and where things are happenin'. But stay the hell away from the anti-crypto USA.
[If he is] just providing data on his web page, which our browsers interpret as links to the forbidden items... he is just spreading his knowledge and information, which must have absolutely no restrictions whatsoever.
Oh, really? Does that mean you will not object if I publish your credit card information on my website?
This would be more a matter of how you obtained my credit card information in the first place, be it through fraudulent means or breach of confidentiality.
This is not stupid. He's helping people breaking the law. This is enough to get sued. Technology does not matter at all here.
Is he telling his readers to actively download the illegal files, or is he just providing data on his web page, which our browsers interpret as links to the forbidden items? In the former case, he is guilty of soliciting and conspiring to illegal activity, whereas in the latter, he is just spreading his knowledge and information, which must have absolutely no restrictions whatsoever.
I would be guilty of conspiring to terrorist activity if I were to tell you to build and take out a city with a nuclear bomb, but for just telling you how you can build one, I'm no guiltier than your ninth-grade science teacher.
My first reaction to the story was "good for her". somebody should be brave enough to stand up. Even if her son didn't watch this brain numbing waste of time, I'd be more worried about his peers that do... don't you get it???????
Yeah, people like you and that other bitch (the subject of the article) take it upon yourselves to decide what is best for everybody else and their children, and try to censor accordingly. this mind rotting cheap crap is in a class with Fred Green, Howard Stern and Jerry Springer.
Well, maybe their influence will help to offset that of the Christian Right and other traditional/conservative/religious garbage seen especially on Sunday morning TV and the Vision channel. There wouldn't be a healthy balance if there weren't a Howard Stern or a Marilyn Manson for every Billy Graham and Kathie Lee Gifford out there in our popular culture. It has nothing to do with satire or art or anything of value....
You don't see any element of satire in the show? Either you are very thick or you have never seen the show and just flock like sheep to your church/parental organizations and lobby groups and blindly accept their party line in its condemnation. The entire South Park movie was dedicated to the satirization and mockery of self-righteous people just like you who try to control speech and entertainment for the "good of society".
And in case you haven't noticed, Southpark does have its share of moral messages, usually through it's "You know, I learned something today..." segments. But since they usually advocate liberal values (pro-gay, anti-censorship, etc.), I guess it's still very much "filth" to you. it is about competiting for attention in a cheap, nasty and dangerous way. it's about making money.
Paramount Pictures wanted the Southpark movie to be a PG-rated movie to reach a wider audience, but Matt Stone and Trey Parker (Southpark's creators) resisted the corporate armtwisting and made it as they like it, resulting in an R rating, despite the reduction in potential revenue. This shows they have a lot more integrity than just about everybody else in showbiz these days.
Just what commercial programming isn't about making money anyhow? At it's best shock comedy may have started with a point, but lets be honest about where it has gone.
Well, it certainly provides an interesting alternative to the boring, mundane, wholesome, conservative crap that is so commonplace out there in the world. Besides, some of Southpark's irreverent knocks against religion and society's other sacred institutions provide a badly needed release for those of us annoyed and fed up with all the propaganda fed to us all the time by church and state, and for many of us, Mom and Dad as well. cloak it in freedom of speech if you will. or if you must. she has a right to her opinion so give the lady a break people.
Yes, and we have the right to express our opinions about her also, as we have done.
Paul Bernardo is locked up for a loooooong time. Why isn't O.J. Simpson?
Because OJ can afford a very expensive team of lawyers. And he can play football too.
Clifford Olson gets out in less than 10 years from now. Where are Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer to be found? And what about this 25 years maximum? Maybe we can use a lesson or two from Texas. --A somewhat irratated Canuck
--Another irritated Canuck fed up with our own justice system
Sounds like we are dealing with a second-rate white male geek who likes to imagine his own mediocre success is caused by female, racial, and communist conspiracies.
How's this any worse than any second-rate coloured female geek-wannabe who likes to imagine her own mediocre success is caused by corporate right-wing white male-chauvanist conspiracies, or any of her sympathizers?
Slashdot Mirror
How about restoring the sabre-tooth tiger? We can use such big predatory cats with fangs longer than their heads to scare the shit out of hikers and other outdoor adventurers right here in North America. >:)
I'm not totally against the US, but the environmental unawareness and the virus-like spread (via entertainment, works
wonders on young people) of the culture to replace other cultures is what I'm mostly against.
What's wrong with the latter--leaving the young people to their own choice of entertainment, etc.? If you think they watch too much American movies and TV, put out something that can actually compete with Hollywood in terms of production quality. You Europeans will just have to put aside your ethnic/linguistic/cultural differences and form a single European cultural cluster to form your own equivalent of Hollywood and make it happen.
Personal freedom isnt dead in Sweden. There hasnt been a verdict yet (he'll be freed, imho), only a report in a
german mag. where they probably dont know anything about swedish law.
Either you don't live here or you are blind. Bar the far east, Sweden has one of the most collective value systems in the
world. There has never been individual freedom here, which is why we thrived for a while (50s-60s-70s) and then
went right to the shitter today. Same reason places like SIngapore can thrive now, but are heading straight for the
shitter tomorrow.
This raises an interesting thought. I wonder, how much better would individualistic, freedom-obsessed Americans (or other westerners) fare if they were squeezed into a small, resource-void plot of land like Singapore to call a country of their own.
Say what you want about the American regime, but until now America has had better individual freedom then we do -
by a long run. American kids may be forced to say the pledge of allegance in the morning, but that is nothing compared to silent indoctrination into the social (-ist) system that goes on from the the very start here.
Why give any examples when others are so eager to do it for you? I make posts dissing the US (where I have not lived
for almost a decade) here all the time, and most of the time they are either ignored, or granted with just critisism and
comment.
Being the imperialists and the world's self-appointed police, the USA quite rightly gets criticized from the world over, and I guess they're used to it by now.
Yet, although their are probably 100x as many Americans reading this as Swedes, one Sweden dissing
comment deep down in a thread gets me 7 angry replies in half an hour.
Which is sort of what I was talking about...
Sounds sort of like Canada (where I live), but worse.
A nonagressive nation like Sweden normally doesn't warrant criticism from abroad, but I thought they would be more tolerant of criticism from within.
Anyways, my advice to you is to leave this remote northern ant colony you have for a nation over there for someplace where you can enjoy more personal freedom, and where things are happenin'. But stay the hell away from the anti-crypto USA.
[If he is] just providing data on his web page, which our browsers interpret as links to the forbidden items
spreading his knowledge and information, which must have absolutely no restrictions whatsoever.
Oh, really? Does that mean you will not object if I publish your credit card information on my website?
This would be more a matter of how you obtained my credit card information in the first place, be it through fraudulent means or breach of confidentiality.
If I tell you to go to the corner of 3rd and Main to get some weed, that's not illegal anyway.
"Tell you to" or "tell you how to"? Note this fundamental difference.
This is not stupid. He's helping people breaking the law. This is enough to get sued. Technology does not matter at
all here.
Is he telling his readers to actively download the illegal files, or is he just providing data on his web page, which our browsers interpret as links to the forbidden items? In the former case, he is guilty of soliciting and conspiring to illegal activity, whereas in the latter, he is just spreading his knowledge and information, which must have absolutely no restrictions whatsoever.
I would be guilty of conspiring to terrorist activity if I were to tell you to build and take out a city with a nuclear bomb, but for just telling you how you can build one, I'm no guiltier than your ninth-grade science teacher.
My first reaction to the story was
"good for her". somebody should be brave enough to stand up. Even if her son didn't watch this brain numbing waste of
time, I'd be more worried about his peers that do... don't you get it???????
Yeah, people like you and that other bitch (the subject of the article) take it upon yourselves to decide what is best for everybody else and their children, and try to censor accordingly.
this mind rotting cheap crap is in a class with
Fred Green, Howard Stern and Jerry Springer.
Well, maybe their influence will help to offset that of the Christian Right and other traditional/conservative/religious garbage seen especially on Sunday morning TV and the Vision channel. There wouldn't be a healthy balance if there weren't a Howard Stern or a Marilyn Manson for every Billy Graham and Kathie Lee Gifford out there in our popular culture.
It has nothing to do with satire or art or anything of value....
You don't see any element of satire in the show? Either you are very thick or you have never seen the show and just flock like sheep to your church/parental organizations and lobby groups and blindly accept their party line in its condemnation. The entire South Park movie was dedicated to the satirization and mockery of self-righteous people just like you who try to control speech and entertainment for the "good of society".
And in case you haven't noticed, Southpark does have its share of moral messages, usually through it's "You know, I learned something today..." segments. But since they usually advocate liberal values (pro-gay, anti-censorship, etc.), I guess it's still very much "filth" to you.
it is about
competiting for attention in a cheap, nasty and dangerous way. it's about making money.
Paramount Pictures wanted the Southpark movie to be a PG-rated movie to reach a wider audience, but Matt Stone and Trey Parker (Southpark's creators) resisted the corporate armtwisting and made it as they like it, resulting in an R rating, despite the reduction in potential revenue. This shows they have a lot more integrity than just about everybody else in showbiz these days.
Just what commercial programming isn't about making money anyhow?
At it's best shock comedy may
have started with a point, but lets be honest about where it has gone.
Well, it certainly provides an interesting alternative to the boring, mundane, wholesome, conservative crap that is so commonplace out there in the world. Besides, some of Southpark's irreverent knocks against religion and society's other sacred institutions provide a badly needed release for those of us annoyed and fed up with all the propaganda fed to us all the time by church and state, and for many of us, Mom and Dad as well.
cloak it in freedom of speech if you will. or if you
must. she has a right to her opinion so give the lady a break people.
Yes, and we have the right to express our opinions about her also, as we have done.
Paul Bernardo is locked up for a loooooong time. Why isn't O.J. Simpson?
Because OJ can afford a very expensive team of lawyers. And he can play football too.
Clifford Olson gets out in less than 10 years from now. Where are Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer to be found? And what about this 25 years maximum? Maybe we can use a lesson or two from Texas.
--A somewhat irratated Canuck
--Another irritated Canuck fed up with our own justice system
"...and that makes me a saaad panda." ;)