Material to be "stolen", eh? Nobody's stealing stuff from me if I offer it up online for them to take
What stupid mods thought the parent was insightful? Dude, no one's saying that they're stealing it from YOU. If you take someone's intellectual property, you are taking it from the one who owns that intellectual property.
If I broke into someone's flat and pinched all their CDs, I wouldn't be stealing from the record company, I'd be stealing from whoever I just robbed.
Yes, in that case, you're stealing the media, which was purchased by, and is owned by, the owner of the house. See the difference?
I wouldn't be making any money from the action either
So.... you don't mind if I take your big screen HDTV, as long as I enjoy if from the comfort of my living room and don't try to sell it from the back of my van?
Perhaps now the best thing for the record companies to do is auction off one single original copy of an album with bidding starting at six million dollars, wait for a community of fans to get the funds together and buy it,
You're free to start a record company with such a business model if you so desire, but why do you think you have the right to impose that business model upon others?
My definition of "theft" is something physically taken.
Perhaps, but the word "theft" was defined at a time when the only way to take something was to take it physically. I don't consider it outside the spirit of the term to define it as to take something that doesn't belong to you, or to take something that you don't have the right to take.
...derided by their peers saying that getting an education and trying to work and better themselves, they are accused of acting 'white'. [...]The sad thing is...when you hear someone say things like this...even if they ARE black, like Bill Cosby has done recently
Ok, I'll bite: When exactly did Dr. Cosby accuse young education-seeking Blacks of "acting white"?
I am vociferously opposed to copyright law, and hold that there should be a "doctrine of first communication" that prevents anyone preventing you passing on information.
So, basically, you think people should be able to make a living by selling things they create with their hands, but you don't think people should be able to make a living selling things they create with their brains?
There are no press statements from the President of the United States or Secretary of Defense calling Abu Ghraib a great victory guided by the hand of God.
Not relevant to my point, which was merely to rebut the assertion that "you don't see US forces celebrating the death of civilians.".
"Throughout history, fundamentalist theology has contradicted science a vast number of times. There has never been a single instance in which they were not only proven to be wrong, but drastically so."
I think what he meant to say was, "There has never been a single instance in which they were not proven not only to be wrong, but drastically so", or something to that effect. As it stands, it says the opposite of the point he was trying to make.
Actually, I haven't heard the crap that they are teaching these days. Would you care to enlighten us about all the "stupid ideas" they are now foisting upon "generations of leaders"?
A LASER doesn't produce light because of waves contructively interfering.
I don't think he was suggesting that. He didn't say that constructively interefering waves is what causes light to be generated. I think he was merely pointing out that the "Stimulated Emission" process causes the resulting photons to be coherent.
Are you a government-trained lawmaking expert, Mr. Rufus? No? Well then, I'm afraid you are not qualified to decide what the "whole point" of any law is.
I know I shouldn't feed the AC trolls, but I can't resist:
I did not make any comment on the "whole point" of any particular law. I commented on the whole point of civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is not a law. It is the willful and public breaking (hence illegal) of an unjust law, in the hopes of receiving the corresponding punishment, as a means of protesting that law.
"We got the call for trouble in the room. The gentleman, I was told, was preaching sedition. I knew that we had to take some steps quickly preventing that. Defcon is definitely for free speech, definitely for legal civil disobedience. But not anarchy, not psychopathic destruction of property. " [Emphasis mine]
Civil disobedience is, by definition, illegal. That's the whole point of it.
Why is it that reporters only make boneheaded statements like this when talking about computers? Last week Francis Crick died, and nobody bothered to point out that DNA structure remains double-helical.
I don't mean to pry, but I think a lot of us would really be interested in knowing what probably-fatal disease has insomnia as one of its primary initial symptoms. Could you elaborate?
I realize it's become popular over the past day or so to bash the IT color scheme, but I've got to tell you, I love it. Seriously. But that's because I have long ago switched my desktop color scheme (Yeah yeah, I use Windows 2000 and XP. Score: -1) from the default to the "desert" scheme, which the IT page matches beautifully. That bright blue has always been too much on the eyes, and the desert scheme gives just the right amount of contrast in both luminance and hue for the desktop color, window foreground and background colors, icon colors, etc. If you've tried playing around with desktop color schemes before and decided, after sampling only a few of them (or all except desert), that they all suck, then you really need to try desert. Once you have, you'll never go back.
The problem arises when the controlling child thread begins to join the grandchildren. Despite the mention of global destruction, the entire program is not exiting - just the grandchildren are being joined. When the grandchildren join, perl dies with the following error:
Are you absolutely certain that the main program thread hasn't, for whatever reason, already terminated prior to joining the grandchildren?
Slashdot Mirror
So it's only in the last couple of hundred years people have had the ability to remember stuff or write it down ?
No, but it's only in the last few decades that duplication and distribution of information has become virtually effortless.
Material to be "stolen", eh? Nobody's stealing stuff from me if I offer it up online for them to take
What stupid mods thought the parent was insightful? Dude, no one's saying that they're stealing it from YOU. If you take someone's intellectual property, you are taking it from the one who owns that intellectual property.
If I broke into someone's flat and pinched all their CDs, I wouldn't be stealing from the record company, I'd be stealing from whoever I just robbed.
Yes, in that case, you're stealing the media, which was purchased by, and is owned by, the owner of the house. See the difference?
I wouldn't be making any money from the action either
So.... you don't mind if I take your big screen HDTV, as long as I enjoy if from the comfort of my living room and don't try to sell it from the back of my van?
Perhaps now the best thing for the record companies to do is auction off one single original copy of an album with bidding starting at six million dollars, wait for a community of fans to get the funds together and buy it,
You're free to start a record company with such a business model if you so desire, but why do you think you have the right to impose that business model upon others?
My definition of "theft" is something physically taken.
Perhaps, but the word "theft" was defined at a time when the only way to take something was to take it physically. I don't consider it outside the spirit of the term to define it as to take something that doesn't belong to you, or to take something that you don't have the right to take.
So I guess that means you'll be driving naked to the hospital.
almost every language shows at some stage of its development a "one two many" noun declension.
For example: "the", "both", "all".
...derided by their peers saying that getting an education and trying to work and better themselves, they are accused of acting 'white'. [...]The sad thing is...when you hear someone say things like this...even if they ARE black, like Bill Cosby has done recently
Ok, I'll bite: When exactly did Dr. Cosby accuse young education-seeking Blacks of "acting white"?
I am vociferously opposed to copyright law, and hold that there should be a "doctrine of first communication" that prevents anyone preventing you passing on information.
So, basically, you think people should be able to make a living by selling things they create with their hands, but you don't think people should be able to make a living selling things they create with their brains?
... is to minimize the sum probability of dying from either radiation or suffocation.
There are no press statements from the President of the United States or Secretary of Defense calling Abu Ghraib a great victory guided by the hand of God.
Not relevant to my point, which was merely to rebut the assertion that "you don't see US forces celebrating the death of civilians.".
But you don't see US forces celebrating the death of civilians.
Just because they're prisoners, doesn't mean they aren't civilians.
That would likely have been fatal on a motorcycle, or even many smaller regular cars.
Perhaps, but it would not likely happen on a motorcycle or smaller regular car. Was this thing even street-legal?
Oh, thanks for clarifying. I feel so much better now.
From the google cache of the site:
"Throughout history, fundamentalist theology has contradicted science a vast number of times. There has never been a single instance in which they were not only proven to be wrong, but drastically so."
I think what he meant to say was, "There has never been a single instance in which they were not proven not only to be wrong, but drastically so", or something to that effect. As it stands, it says the opposite of the point he was trying to make.
Actually, I haven't heard the crap that they are teaching these days. Would you care to enlighten us about all the "stupid ideas" they are now foisting upon "generations of leaders"?
"Random" phone calls are being monitored, using a monitoring system that is triggered by keywords, that are used during the phone conversation
Umm, if the "monitoring" is triggered by spoken keywords, then they must already be "monitoring" in order to detect the keywords.
A LASER doesn't produce light because of waves contructively interfering.
I don't think he was suggesting that. He didn't say that constructively interefering waves is what causes light to be generated. I think he was merely pointing out that the "Stimulated Emission" process causes the resulting photons to be coherent.
Not always to start with.
Yes, always to start with.
A group of people staging a sit-down isn't initially illegal (your police state may vary).
Then it isn't civil disobedience yet. It's a lawful protest. Why do people insist on using the term "civil disobedience" as a synonym for "protest"?
Are you a government-trained lawmaking expert, Mr. Rufus? No? Well then, I'm afraid you are not qualified to decide what the "whole point" of any law is.
I know I shouldn't feed the AC trolls, but I can't resist:
I did not make any comment on the "whole point" of any particular law. I commented on the whole point of civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is not a law. It is the willful and public breaking (hence illegal) of an unjust law, in the hopes of receiving the corresponding punishment, as a means of protesting that law.
"We got the call for trouble in the room. The gentleman, I was told, was preaching sedition. I knew that we had to take some steps quickly preventing that. Defcon is definitely for free speech, definitely for legal civil disobedience. But not anarchy, not psychopathic destruction of property. " [Emphasis mine]
Civil disobedience is, by definition, illegal. That's the whole point of it.
Why is it that reporters only make boneheaded statements like this when talking about computers? Last week Francis Crick died, and nobody bothered to point out that DNA structure remains double-helical.
I don't mean to pry, but I think a lot of us would really be interested in knowing what probably-fatal disease has insomnia as one of its primary initial symptoms. Could you elaborate?
I realize it's become popular over the past day or so to bash the IT color scheme, but I've got to tell you, I love it. Seriously. But that's because I have long ago switched my desktop color scheme (Yeah yeah, I use Windows 2000 and XP. Score: -1) from the default to the "desert" scheme, which the IT page matches beautifully. That bright blue has always been too much on the eyes, and the desert scheme gives just the right amount of contrast in both luminance and hue for the desktop color, window foreground and background colors, icon colors, etc. If you've tried playing around with desktop color schemes before and decided, after sampling only a few of them (or all except desert), that they all suck, then you really need to try desert. Once you have, you'll never go back.
Warning: IANA Perl Programmer.
The problem arises when the controlling child thread begins to join the grandchildren. Despite the mention of global destruction, the entire program is not exiting - just the grandchildren are being joined. When the grandchildren join, perl dies with the following error:
Are you absolutely certain that the main program thread hasn't, for whatever reason, already terminated prior to joining the grandchildren?
My rules of investment which are also followed by Warren Batty
You take financial advice from Warren Beatty?
He means:
1 Parsec = 3.08568025 × 10^16 meters