If I buy a car and it turns out it can't make right turns or go in reverse, but that fact was not made clear at the time of purchase...
The game functions exactly as it was advertised. Developers aren't responcible for warning you about every element in the game that could possibly offend you. As long as it's not being marketed as a game for little kids or something like that, then the analogy just doesn't hold.
Just because there are groups of people that are sworn to our destruction, doesn't mean we should do anything about it.
It's not like the world suddenly declared war on us November 11th. Terrorism wasn't a new problem, it just had never had such a wildly successfull attack. There are ways to step up your efforts without trampling civil liberties or destroying any credibility we had as a country.
I think the answer to not allowing our civil liberties to be erroded away is to give terrorists a lawyer. Not all terrorism is committed by foreigners.
Yes, I would have called both of those terrorism before 9/11 and should hope you'd continue to call them afterward. If you don't believe that they are terrorism then tell me, what exactly is your definition of terrorism?
Really? In high school science class I was taught what the speed of light was, but I never went out and measured it myself. It was from a credible source who has no motivation for lying about the speed of light because he doesn't have a personal interest in what number it comes out to be, his job is just to report what it actually is. There are plenty of news agencies outside the US who, while they may not be perfect, aspire to that standard. The US media needs to seriously rethink their concept of credibility.
Moreover, that sort of hen-pecking at Newton and Leibniz is not really productive. No one cares more about precision and correctness in definitions than mathematicians, and yet mathematicians still assign credit to those two.
Welcome to the point sherlock. I'm not henpecking, I'm just stating a fact. They're not perfect, knowone is. People seem to be under the impression that they are 100% responcible for calculus as we know it. They certainly deserve credit for the bulk of it, but they had help along the way.
if someone comes up with a mod, how does that make everything that went before it "incorrect"?
It doesn't. What makes it incorrect is the fact that it was incorrect. Incorrect might not be the right word, it was not mathematically rigorous. There were instances when he treated an infintesimal as a zero and discarded it, there were instances where he treated it as a non-zero and divided it. Math is rigorous. You need a set of rules that hold in all situations.
Did you bother to read the rest of the post where I pointed out that they were both geniuses and knowones perfect? I'm not nitpicking them and saying that they fucked up. I'm just stating a fact, that they are not solely 100% responcible for the development of calculus as many people believe.
It's pretty well known that Einstein didn't come up with relativity on his own. The equations and some of the analysis had already been done by Lorentz. Unfortunately Lorentz didn't want to fully accept the conclusions and he had a far narrower view of the effects. Einstein came along and formulated a diffrent derrivation of all the formulas and a far far wider interpretation.
When he said that he was referring almost exclusively to Gallileo who formulated the laws of motion in a slightly different fasion many years before Newton did. That doesn't take anything away from the man's genius mind you. He did most of his work when he was 22 years old. Just slightly older then I am. Pretty amazing.
Keep in mind that calculus as we know it has been modified somewhat from their original formulation. For instance, both Newton and Leibinitz incorrectly used infintesimals in their definitions. It wasn't until the 1800's that Karl Weierstrass formulated the limit definition that we use today.
The person responcible is the person who put the content on the site. Holding ISPs responcible for what their customers do is like holding the post office responcible if you get a mail bomb. You should hold accountable the person responcible, not the easiest target.
No, I'm pointing out the painfully obvious flaw in your logic. By the time you see the picture you've already committed the crime.
Everyone can always claim that they didn't know it was a child porn site. They could claim that the pictures never loaded into the browser, or maybe someone else was spoofing their IP. This just isn't a good way to go about things.
And who cares if you catch a couple of perv's anyway? The people that are doing the real harm are still out there. The time and energy should be spent where it can do some decent good.
Now if you went searching for legit porn, found was appeared to be a legal site, signed up and it had a section with child porn that you clicked on whether inadvertently or not then that would be entrapment.
It's not semantics. The first is sick in the head and does things that will destroy shildrens lives. The second is just sick in the head. It's a big diffrence.
By that logic, pictures of dead people encourages murder. People do not allways want to act out their fantasies. Many people are perfectly happy with a fantasy remaining a fantasy.
Then everyone will just claim that they thought it was a legit site. Some will be telling the truth and some will be lieing. There's no way to differentiate between the two, at least not within reasonable doubt.
Slashdot Mirror
Um.... no.
The game functions exactly as it was advertised. Developers aren't responcible for warning you about every element in the game that could possibly offend you. As long as it's not being marketed as a game for little kids or something like that, then the analogy just doesn't hold.
It's not like the world suddenly declared war on us November 11th. Terrorism wasn't a new problem, it just had never had such a wildly successfull attack. There are ways to step up your efforts without trampling civil liberties or destroying any credibility we had as a country.
I think the answer to not allowing our civil liberties to be erroded away is to give terrorists a lawyer. Not all terrorism is committed by foreigners.
The sentate is a much more complex entity. Passing bills is not the only worthwhile way to spend one's time as a senator.
Believe it or not, there's more to being a senator then passing bills.
Yes, I would have called both of those terrorism before 9/11 and should hope you'd continue to call them afterward. If you don't believe that they are terrorism then tell me, what exactly is your definition of terrorism?
Maybe when an appropriate amount of bug-repellant has worked in the past we shouldn't drown ourselves in it because of a single failure.
Really? In high school science class I was taught what the speed of light was, but I never went out and measured it myself. It was from a credible source who has no motivation for lying about the speed of light because he doesn't have a personal interest in what number it comes out to be, his job is just to report what it actually is. There are plenty of news agencies outside the US who, while they may not be perfect, aspire to that standard. The US media needs to seriously rethink their concept of credibility.
I'm a math major, I should have known better anyway lol....
Welcome to the point sherlock. I'm not henpecking, I'm just stating a fact. They're not perfect, knowone is. People seem to be under the impression that they are 100% responcible for calculus as we know it. They certainly deserve credit for the bulk of it, but they had help along the way.
It doesn't. What makes it incorrect is the fact that it was incorrect. Incorrect might not be the right word, it was not mathematically rigorous. There were instances when he treated an infintesimal as a zero and discarded it, there were instances where he treated it as a non-zero and divided it. Math is rigorous. You need a set of rules that hold in all situations.
Did you bother to read the rest of the post where I pointed out that they were both geniuses and knowones perfect? I'm not nitpicking them and saying that they fucked up. I'm just stating a fact, that they are not solely 100% responcible for the development of calculus as many people believe.
It's pretty well known that Einstein didn't come up with relativity on his own. The equations and some of the analysis had already been done by Lorentz. Unfortunately Lorentz didn't want to fully accept the conclusions and he had a far narrower view of the effects. Einstein came along and formulated a diffrent derrivation of all the formulas and a far far wider interpretation.
When he said that he was referring almost exclusively to Gallileo who formulated the laws of motion in a slightly different fasion many years before Newton did. That doesn't take anything away from the man's genius mind you. He did most of his work when he was 22 years old. Just slightly older then I am. Pretty amazing.
Keep in mind that calculus as we know it has been modified somewhat from their original formulation. For instance, both Newton and Leibinitz incorrectly used infintesimals in their definitions. It wasn't until the 1800's that Karl Weierstrass formulated the limit definition that we use today.
The person responcible is the person who put the content on the site. Holding ISPs responcible for what their customers do is like holding the post office responcible if you get a mail bomb. You should hold accountable the person responcible, not the easiest target.
The diffrence is that child pornography is a legal matter, copyright violations are a civil matter.
But I bet it'll be a new low in dirty politics.
That still doesn't explain a crater.
Everyone can always claim that they didn't know it was a child porn site. They could claim that the pictures never loaded into the browser, or maybe someone else was spoofing their IP. This just isn't a good way to go about things.
And who cares if you catch a couple of perv's anyway? The people that are doing the real harm are still out there. The time and energy should be spent where it can do some decent good.
Now if you went searching for legit porn, found was appeared to be a legal site, signed up and it had a section with child porn that you clicked on whether inadvertently or not then that would be entrapment.
Obviously ignorance is a defense.
It's not semantics. The first is sick in the head and does things that will destroy shildrens lives. The second is just sick in the head. It's a big diffrence.
By that logic, pictures of dead people encourages murder. People do not allways want to act out their fantasies. Many people are perfectly happy with a fantasy remaining a fantasy.
Then everyone will just claim that they thought it was a legit site. Some will be telling the truth and some will be lieing. There's no way to differentiate between the two, at least not within reasonable doubt.
The reason schools don't complain about .edu is because there is no downside to it, the same can't be said about .xxx