That's not the issue. The issue is that ISP's sell it as "you get every weekend at the lakefront cottage" with no restrictions when they really mean "you get any weekend" there and that RV's are banned from the property.
So they get what they get, and if they throttle me, I'll sue them for false advertising. So far, they haven't had a chance, since I don't use BitTorrent.
I have a MBP, and I have no issues with shutting down and closing the lid. In fact, one time I even closed the lid a bit too soon and it went to sleep during shutdown. I walked away from it for a few minutes and when I came back, I noticed the light on the latch was throbbing. So I opened it. It woke up, continued to shut down, and when it fully powered down, I closed it again and packed it up. I've been using this machine for 3 months now, and haven't had a single crash. (Except for the usual beta-software-died-unexpectedly sort of thing.)
In fact, I've had none of the problems reported about the MB/MBP's. No excessive heat issues (it's no hotter than my old G3 Powerbook), no bulging or exploding batteries, no scarred/discolored/peeling/whatever case, nothing. Not even a dead pixel on the LCD.
The EFI environment variables are different. I ran nvram -p on my system a minute ago and it only listed 3 variables. Just booting into OF and typing dev/ on my old PPC macs shows a couple dozen variables. I'm sure they still have equivalents in EFI, but I don't know if anyone outside of Apple's Ubersecret R&D Lab has figured them out yet.
Meanwhile, everyone fellates Steve Jobs because what is "easy" in Windows and "tricky" in Linux is "automatic" in MacOS X, and that which is "practically fricking impossible" in Windows and "difficult" in Linux ranges from "easy" to "difficult" in MacOS X.
I have a wireless keyboard and mouse for my HTPC. That way, I can sit across the room and control the HTPC, and not have a bunch of wires strung across my living room. They're bluetooth-connected, so they're quite reliable (some wireless peripherals can't keep a connection very well). And the battery life is actually quite good (1 year for the mouse, but I left it on overnight a few times, the keyboard gets less use and doesn't die so quickly - it's still on its first set of batteries).
I think the major difference is that Bluetooth doesn't suck (it's not perfect, though) and other wireless technologies do.
Sure they do. Any time you say "Nuthin'!", a beaver will attack you and bite your nipple off. Bonus points if the beaver is unconscious up until the nipple-biting part. More bonus points if you hold it up by the tail during this ordeal.
Or write a wrapper API and call it externally. Sure, you lose performance, but you essentially isolate the GPL-ed code from your own, allowing you to use whatever license you want. Only the wrapper has to be GPL-ed, and that can be given out as a service to your fellow GPL-hating devs.
I've seen many of TOS episodes, but not all. And I've been a fan since the mid-TNG days (when my parents finally let me stay up late enough to watch). I wish I could see all of TOS, but the DVD's are just too friggin' expensive. If they were priced like Stargate SG-1 (~$50 per season), I'd buy them. But they're 2x the price, and it's just not worth it to me. And don't tell me to use BitTorrent, since I have AT&T DSL (slow as molasses, and using BT is a good way to get that already-slow speed cut in half).
My suggestion for getting a new generation of trekk[ies|ers] is to lower the price on the TOS DVD boxed sets. Make it $50/season and i'll buy. Make it lower and even more people will buy. They're just not worth $100/season. Neither is TNG or DS9. And Voyager and Enterprise aren't worth $50/season. Unless you pack in some 7-of-9 and T'pol DVD "specials" (sans clothing). And it's not like they're above exploiting some T&A to push either of those shows.
Re:I don't care for these commercials
on
New "Get a Mac" TV ads
·
· Score: 2, Informative
[waaah waaah waaah] Home & End [waaah waaah waaah]
Because Home and End are supposed to go to the "home" or the "end" position of the file. If you want to go to the beginning or end of the current line, use apple-left-arrow or apple-right-arrow. It's much easier on a laptop keyboard. Home is fn-left-arrow and End is fn-right-arrow, making it a matter of holding a different meta key depending on what you want it to do.
Things I thought of when I clicked that link: - "Oh god it burns!" (red background = bad) - "'This site permanently shut down' - yeah right. I wonder how much the domain will go for at auction..." - "Please, please, please don't be goatse..." - "Why is there a Sun logo in the favicon?"
When Richard Stallman is able to strongarm [Red Hat] into [releasing the code to the extensions they made to the GNU/Linux operating system], then your comparison will make sense.
Oh, wait... he already can, and it already does. You lose.
The point is that the kids in that daycare are very much alive at the time you allow their death, and yet the decision you claim you would make hasn't changed. It invalidates your argument that your friend is worth more because embryos are "not real people". You'd make the same decision even if the alternative is a group of real people.
The kids are in a cage. You either carry them all + a huge chunk of steel, or you leave with none. It's something to contain them like the freezer does for the embryos. Note that embryos can't run, whereas kids could... if they weren't in a cage.
Souls are a made up concept. They were created by people as a kind of adult pacifier, to stop people fretting that once they die they will entierely cease to exist. Utterly. The thought is so unsettling that people latch onto a complete fantasy to comfort and reassure themselves. Namely and intangible, unobservable, immaterial "thing" that is your "life essence", and it will go on after you die.
I find it interesting that you've come to that conclusion, especially since most "christians" refuse to, despite the fact that the Bible (the book these "christians" claim has all the answers) clearly states two things: 1) "Man came to be a living soul." and 2) "The soul that is sinning, it itself will die." On top of that, they ignore the fact that the "you will live forever as a floaty soul" idea is a blatant lie told in the very beginning of the Bible, in the story about Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden. The serpent told Eve, "you positively will not die." Eve died. So to cover the lie, the idea came about that you live on forever as a floaty soul thingy. Souls are a lie.
I can't prove souls "don't" exist.
I just did, at least for reasonable people that call themselves "christians" or "jews". You can thank me later. The general gist of how this works is: if science says souls don't exist AND the Bible says that souls don't exist, then in belief structures that involve science and/or the Bible, souls don't exist. They are a lie.
As for the parallel lines thing, well, I'm pretty sure the definition of parallel lines requires that they never intersect. If they intersect, they're (by definition) not parallel.;)
Your friend is working in a daycare. The place catches fire. Do you save your friend or the cage full of screaming toddlers? Most pick the friend.
Hint: cages weigh as much as freezers, and most people can't lift them. It's not hypocrisy, it's just efficient use of resources. You don't throw away your life AND your friend's life on a mission with a 99.9% chance of failure when you can save yourself and your friend with an equal chance of success. And I doubt most people would disagree that toddlers are people too. Of course, this ignores the fact that there may be enough time to save some or all of the toddlers/embryos before the fire reaches a critical point, or that it's possible that the freezers won't be harmed by the fire and there's no sense worrying about it anyway.
It's not really AI. Mostly, I think it's a matter of setting a few thresholds, monitoring instantaneous updates, and when thresholds are crossed by updated data, triggering some buy/sell events. Subjects/targets would be watchlisted by a human, and the computer would handle the actual transactions (with reaction time faster than that of a human). This would lead to human buy/sell calls being either enforced by the rules of the market, or edged out completely in favor of computer-handled transactions. Or both - think NYSE vs. NASDAQ.
Just as a quick outline of how such software would work: 1) Set up watchlist. "I want to watch stocks A, B, C, D, and anything that jumps more than 5% in the opening 15 minutes." 2) Set up threshold. "Buy A when it reaches $15.00. Sell A when it drops 10% of its profit over the buy value. Buy B..." 3) Let the "AI" do its work. When "A" reaches the designated price (with an update time measured in the milliseconds), the automated buyer AI triggers a "BUY A 1000" transaction. When "A" goes up over the day, the AI keeps track of your profits. When it drops off by 10.1% just after lunch, the automated seller AI triggers a "SELL A 1000" transaction.
The main idea is that you can update and send a buy/sell command faster than the rest of the market can react. Humans still control the trading profile (watchlist and threshold settings), but the trading is done with the reaction time and attention to detail that we expect from a computer.
The sticking points here are: - Once everyone uses this, there's no advantage to it. In fact, it would start a processing speed arms race. Your only advantage is when your automated system is faster than everyone else because everyone else relies on real humans on a trading floor. If everyone uses automated systems, well, invest in computer stock. Everyone will be buying more, faster, better, bigger, etc. computers to gain the ever-fleeting edge. - Because bankers are frequently curmudgeonly, they don't want this system to "dehumanize" their industry. So they intentionally set up barriers (either regulatory or technical) to prevent this system from taking over. Ever notice how every stock quote site/widget ever made has a "quotes may be delayed by X minutes" disclaimer? That's not a technical restriction. That's a preventive measure against software like what I just described. This is something that needs to be overcome. Probably by threats of violence. - Technical restrictions would be problematic as well. How many systems are going to simultaneously ask to be put on a listener list? How many systems are going to simultaneously ask to be removed from the list? How many hojillion bytes of data are transmitted to the listeners? IPv6 multicast might help here, but it's still a pretty big problem, and without IPv6, it's a complete roadblock. And if this is to use existing quote-request systems, well, forget it. Hammering a server with requests is a good way to get blocked. And face it, you have to hammer a server to get updates in the sub-second range. We need more and better infrastructure to support something like this.
In Missouri, it's quite simple to get non-accident moving violations turned into non-moving violations, thus negating the revenue received by the asshats that write you tickets.
You basically argue that the police officer a) didn't have up-to-date certification on the equipment or b) did not have properly calibrated equipment. Failing that (or if it isn't a speeding ticket), you call him to the stand. If he's there, there are a couple of other questions to ask (basically calling into question whether his identification of you and your vehicle is correct), and you request that the ticket be downgraded to a non-moving violation (due to the officer's uncertainty). If the he isn't there, the officer is held in contempt (for not showing up for a court date), the case is dismissed, and the court costs fall on the losing side (the officer and the municipality that employs him).
You can even pay a lawyer to do all of this for you without your presence. It costs about the same as a ticket would (around $100), but you don't get any penalties on your license or insurance.
You have no idea what you're talking about, do you? I'm sure it'll make your head hurt, but let's do some math.
Given conditions: - In a population (P), let's make a liberal estimate of 1% "hardcore" 39% "casual" and 60% non-gamers. - A console's lifetime is 5 years. - "Hardcore" gamers buy 5 games a year. - "Casual" gamers buy 1 game a year (this accounts for the fact that they're likely to buy 2 or 3 games for the first 2 years and none after that). - Non-gamers will buy nothing. - A game console costs $X. - A game costs $Y.
Over the course of the lifespan of a given console: - A hardcore gamer will bring in $Y + 25X. - A casual gamer will bring in $Y + 5X. - A non-gamer will bring in $0.
Now applying this to a population of 100: - "Hardcore" gamers bring in $Y + 25X - "Casual" gamers bring in $39Y + 195X
Now for a population of 1,000,000: - "Hardcore": $1000Y + 25,000X - "Casual": $390,000Y + 1,950,000X
It's pretty clear with these numbers (admittedly, they came straight from my ass), that the "hardcore gamer" crowd is worth nothing when compared to the awesome crowds of the unwashed masses. Nintendo is aiming specifically at these "casual" gamers. You mention that "mom and pop may buy a Wii and [1 or 2] games" and that "the average Xbox360 owner already has [4 or 5] games", but what you're missing is that "mom and pop" outnumber "the average Xbox360 owner" by 200:1 or more. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Nintendo doesn't need hype to sell their console, and that PS and Xbox fanbois need to get used to being the minority. Hey, us Nintendo fanboys had to grow up, now you do too.
What if the president goes on a criminal rampage in plain sight? If he robbed a bank and took a few hostages, would the Secret Service jump in front of a SWAT sniper's bullet to save him? Would he get away without punishment? Somehow I doubt it.
Now for the next question: What if the president goes on a criminal rampage out of sight? What if he wipes his ass with the constitution? What if he destroys the few remaining shreds of democracy left in the current system? Would he get away without punishment? I'll leave the answer up to you.
The difference is that for things that fall into these categories (verbal aggression and thought crime), there must be no enforcement except against tangible violations. So you can spout off about murdering someone all you want, and yes, it is aggressive. You can think about taking someone's stuff all you want, and yes, it is a crime (and has been throughout human history - it's known as "covetousness", which can be described in modern law terms as "intent to steal"). But until you act on those words or thoughts, enforcement of the law should be strictly hands-off. A visit from the police to warn you that you might be headed down the wrong path, or that you really shouldn't talk to people a certain way - fine. But no pushing, shoving, fingerprinting, handcuffing, etc. is allowed. But once you do inflict real harm on someone (and none of this "emotional stress" bullshit), then you pay, and in a big way.
Then again, humans have never been capable of ruling each other, so why should they start now?
Slashdot Mirror
That's not the issue. The issue is that ISP's sell it as "you get every weekend at the lakefront cottage" with no restrictions when they really mean "you get any weekend" there and that RV's are banned from the property.
So they get what they get, and if they throttle me, I'll sue them for false advertising. So far, they haven't had a chance, since I don't use BitTorrent.
To that, you send back:
- Check-writing fee (+$0.01 over their returned one)
- Monopolistic Asshole Relief Fund Fee, $15.00
- Billing Fee, $5.00
- BOFH Fee, $500.00
- Halibut Fee, $7.83
With each iteration, invent more fees. See how long it is before this escalates into all-out war.
And in case you didn't get it, the "halibut" fee is "just for the halibut" (say it out loud).
I have a MBP, and I have no issues with shutting down and closing the lid. In fact, one time I even closed the lid a bit too soon and it went to sleep during shutdown. I walked away from it for a few minutes and when I came back, I noticed the light on the latch was throbbing. So I opened it. It woke up, continued to shut down, and when it fully powered down, I closed it again and packed it up. I've been using this machine for 3 months now, and haven't had a single crash. (Except for the usual beta-software-died-unexpectedly sort of thing.)
In fact, I've had none of the problems reported about the MB/MBP's. No excessive heat issues (it's no hotter than my old G3 Powerbook), no bulging or exploding batteries, no scarred/discolored/peeling/whatever case, nothing. Not even a dead pixel on the LCD.
Every model of Mac plays a different startup sound. If you play them all in order, you'll hear a tune...
The EFI environment variables are different. I ran nvram -p on my system a minute ago and it only listed 3 variables. Just booting into OF and typing dev / on my old PPC macs shows a couple dozen variables. I'm sure they still have equivalents in EFI, but I don't know if anyone outside of Apple's Ubersecret R&D Lab has figured them out yet.
Meanwhile, everyone fellates Steve Jobs because what is "easy" in Windows and "tricky" in Linux is "automatic" in MacOS X, and that which is "practically fricking impossible" in Windows and "difficult" in Linux ranges from "easy" to "difficult" in MacOS X.
He prefers you don't wear lipstick.
I have a wireless keyboard and mouse for my HTPC. That way, I can sit across the room and control the HTPC, and not have a bunch of wires strung across my living room. They're bluetooth-connected, so they're quite reliable (some wireless peripherals can't keep a connection very well). And the battery life is actually quite good (1 year for the mouse, but I left it on overnight a few times, the keyboard gets less use and doesn't die so quickly - it's still on its first set of batteries).
I think the major difference is that Bluetooth doesn't suck (it's not perfect, though) and other wireless technologies do.
Sure they do. Any time you say "Nuthin'!", a beaver will attack you and bite your nipple off. Bonus points if the beaver is unconscious up until the nipple-biting part. More bonus points if you hold it up by the tail during this ordeal.
Telegraph porn: "Ooh baby let me fondle your dits and twiddle your dahs"
Perhaps someone should strangle her, then we can all blame the woman's death on stupid politics and get those outlawed too.
Someone needs to take one for the team.
Or write a wrapper API and call it externally. Sure, you lose performance, but you essentially isolate the GPL-ed code from your own, allowing you to use whatever license you want. Only the wrapper has to be GPL-ed, and that can be given out as a service to your fellow GPL-hating devs.
I've seen many of TOS episodes, but not all. And I've been a fan since the mid-TNG days (when my parents finally let me stay up late enough to watch). I wish I could see all of TOS, but the DVD's are just too friggin' expensive. If they were priced like Stargate SG-1 (~$50 per season), I'd buy them. But they're 2x the price, and it's just not worth it to me. And don't tell me to use BitTorrent, since I have AT&T DSL (slow as molasses, and using BT is a good way to get that already-slow speed cut in half).
My suggestion for getting a new generation of trekk[ies|ers] is to lower the price on the TOS DVD boxed sets. Make it $50/season and i'll buy. Make it lower and even more people will buy. They're just not worth $100/season. Neither is TNG or DS9. And Voyager and Enterprise aren't worth $50/season. Unless you pack in some 7-of-9 and T'pol DVD "specials" (sans clothing). And it's not like they're above exploiting some T&A to push either of those shows.
[waaah waaah waaah] Home & End [waaah waaah waaah]
Because Home and End are supposed to go to the "home" or the "end" position of the file. If you want to go to the beginning or end of the current line, use apple-left-arrow or apple-right-arrow. It's much easier on a laptop keyboard. Home is fn-left-arrow and End is fn-right-arrow, making it a matter of holding a different meta key depending on what you want it to do.
Things I thought of when I clicked that link:
- "Oh god it burns!" (red background = bad)
- "'This site permanently shut down' - yeah right. I wonder how much the domain will go for at auction..."
- "Please, please, please don't be goatse..."
- "Why is there a Sun logo in the favicon?"
When Richard Stallman is able to strongarm [Red Hat] into [releasing the code to the extensions they made to the GNU/Linux operating system], then your comparison will make sense.
Oh, wait... he already can, and it already does. You lose.
The point is that the kids in that daycare are very much alive at the time you allow their death, and yet the decision you claim you would make hasn't changed. It invalidates your argument that your friend is worth more because embryos are "not real people". You'd make the same decision even if the alternative is a group of real people.
The kids are in a cage. You either carry them all + a huge chunk of steel, or you leave with none. It's something to contain them like the freezer does for the embryos. Note that embryos can't run, whereas kids could... if they weren't in a cage.
Souls are a made up concept. They were created by people as a kind of adult pacifier, to stop people fretting that once they die they will entierely cease to exist. Utterly. The thought is so unsettling that people latch onto a complete fantasy to comfort and reassure themselves. Namely and intangible, unobservable, immaterial "thing" that is your "life essence", and it will go on after you die.
;)
I find it interesting that you've come to that conclusion, especially since most "christians" refuse to, despite the fact that the Bible (the book these "christians" claim has all the answers) clearly states two things: 1) "Man came to be a living soul." and 2) "The soul that is sinning, it itself will die." On top of that, they ignore the fact that the "you will live forever as a floaty soul" idea is a blatant lie told in the very beginning of the Bible, in the story about Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden. The serpent told Eve, "you positively will not die." Eve died. So to cover the lie, the idea came about that you live on forever as a floaty soul thingy. Souls are a lie.
I can't prove souls "don't" exist.
I just did, at least for reasonable people that call themselves "christians" or "jews". You can thank me later. The general gist of how this works is: if science says souls don't exist AND the Bible says that souls don't exist, then in belief structures that involve science and/or the Bible, souls don't exist. They are a lie.
As for the parallel lines thing, well, I'm pretty sure the definition of parallel lines requires that they never intersect. If they intersect, they're (by definition) not parallel.
Your friend is working in a daycare. The place catches fire. Do you save your friend or the cage full of screaming toddlers? Most pick the friend.
Hint: cages weigh as much as freezers, and most people can't lift them. It's not hypocrisy, it's just efficient use of resources. You don't throw away your life AND your friend's life on a mission with a 99.9% chance of failure when you can save yourself and your friend with an equal chance of success. And I doubt most people would disagree that toddlers are people too. Of course, this ignores the fact that there may be enough time to save some or all of the toddlers/embryos before the fire reaches a critical point, or that it's possible that the freezers won't be harmed by the fire and there's no sense worrying about it anyway.
In short, your illustration is very flawed.
Screw you! The internets was written in English! We own it and you suck! You foreigners get off... err... on my lawn and cut my grass!
Sincerely,
The U.S.A.
(Notice for the humor impaired: This post is a joke.)
It's not really AI. Mostly, I think it's a matter of setting a few thresholds, monitoring instantaneous updates, and when thresholds are crossed by updated data, triggering some buy/sell events. Subjects/targets would be watchlisted by a human, and the computer would handle the actual transactions (with reaction time faster than that of a human). This would lead to human buy/sell calls being either enforced by the rules of the market, or edged out completely in favor of computer-handled transactions. Or both - think NYSE vs. NASDAQ.
Just as a quick outline of how such software would work:
1) Set up watchlist. "I want to watch stocks A, B, C, D, and anything that jumps more than 5% in the opening 15 minutes."
2) Set up threshold. "Buy A when it reaches $15.00. Sell A when it drops 10% of its profit over the buy value. Buy B..."
3) Let the "AI" do its work. When "A" reaches the designated price (with an update time measured in the milliseconds), the automated buyer AI triggers a "BUY A 1000" transaction. When "A" goes up over the day, the AI keeps track of your profits. When it drops off by 10.1% just after lunch, the automated seller AI triggers a "SELL A 1000" transaction.
The main idea is that you can update and send a buy/sell command faster than the rest of the market can react. Humans still control the trading profile (watchlist and threshold settings), but the trading is done with the reaction time and attention to detail that we expect from a computer.
The sticking points here are:
- Once everyone uses this, there's no advantage to it. In fact, it would start a processing speed arms race. Your only advantage is when your automated system is faster than everyone else because everyone else relies on real humans on a trading floor. If everyone uses automated systems, well, invest in computer stock. Everyone will be buying more, faster, better, bigger, etc. computers to gain the ever-fleeting edge.
- Because bankers are frequently curmudgeonly, they don't want this system to "dehumanize" their industry. So they intentionally set up barriers (either regulatory or technical) to prevent this system from taking over. Ever notice how every stock quote site/widget ever made has a "quotes may be delayed by X minutes" disclaimer? That's not a technical restriction. That's a preventive measure against software like what I just described. This is something that needs to be overcome. Probably by threats of violence.
- Technical restrictions would be problematic as well. How many systems are going to simultaneously ask to be put on a listener list? How many systems are going to simultaneously ask to be removed from the list? How many hojillion bytes of data are transmitted to the listeners? IPv6 multicast might help here, but it's still a pretty big problem, and without IPv6, it's a complete roadblock. And if this is to use existing quote-request systems, well, forget it. Hammering a server with requests is a good way to get blocked. And face it, you have to hammer a server to get updates in the sub-second range. We need more and better infrastructure to support something like this.
In Missouri, it's quite simple to get non-accident moving violations turned into non-moving violations, thus negating the revenue received by the asshats that write you tickets.
You basically argue that the police officer a) didn't have up-to-date certification on the equipment or b) did not have properly calibrated equipment. Failing that (or if it isn't a speeding ticket), you call him to the stand. If he's there, there are a couple of other questions to ask (basically calling into question whether his identification of you and your vehicle is correct), and you request that the ticket be downgraded to a non-moving violation (due to the officer's uncertainty). If the he isn't there, the officer is held in contempt (for not showing up for a court date), the case is dismissed, and the court costs fall on the losing side (the officer and the municipality that employs him).
You can even pay a lawyer to do all of this for you without your presence. It costs about the same as a ticket would (around $100), but you don't get any penalties on your license or insurance.
the real money is in hardcore gamers
You have no idea what you're talking about, do you? I'm sure it'll make your head hurt, but let's do some math.
Given conditions:
- In a population (P), let's make a liberal estimate of 1% "hardcore" 39% "casual" and 60% non-gamers.
- A console's lifetime is 5 years.
- "Hardcore" gamers buy 5 games a year.
- "Casual" gamers buy 1 game a year (this accounts for the fact that they're likely to buy 2 or 3 games for the first 2 years and none after that).
- Non-gamers will buy nothing.
- A game console costs $X.
- A game costs $Y.
Over the course of the lifespan of a given console:
- A hardcore gamer will bring in $Y + 25X.
- A casual gamer will bring in $Y + 5X.
- A non-gamer will bring in $0.
Now applying this to a population of 100:
- "Hardcore" gamers bring in $Y + 25X
- "Casual" gamers bring in $39Y + 195X
Now for a population of 1,000,000:
- "Hardcore": $1000Y + 25,000X
- "Casual": $390,000Y + 1,950,000X
It's pretty clear with these numbers (admittedly, they came straight from my ass), that the "hardcore gamer" crowd is worth nothing when compared to the awesome crowds of the unwashed masses. Nintendo is aiming specifically at these "casual" gamers. You mention that "mom and pop may buy a Wii and [1 or 2] games" and that "the average Xbox360 owner already has [4 or 5] games", but what you're missing is that "mom and pop" outnumber "the average Xbox360 owner" by 200:1 or more. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Nintendo doesn't need hype to sell their console, and that PS and Xbox fanbois need to get used to being the minority. Hey, us Nintendo fanboys had to grow up, now you do too.
What if the president goes on a criminal rampage in plain sight? If he robbed a bank and took a few hostages, would the Secret Service jump in front of a SWAT sniper's bullet to save him? Would he get away without punishment? Somehow I doubt it.
Now for the next question: What if the president goes on a criminal rampage out of sight? What if he wipes his ass with the constitution? What if he destroys the few remaining shreds of democracy left in the current system? Would he get away without punishment? I'll leave the answer up to you.
Words can be aggression. Thoughts can be crime.
The difference is that for things that fall into these categories (verbal aggression and thought crime), there must be no enforcement except against tangible violations. So you can spout off about murdering someone all you want, and yes, it is aggressive. You can think about taking someone's stuff all you want, and yes, it is a crime (and has been throughout human history - it's known as "covetousness", which can be described in modern law terms as "intent to steal"). But until you act on those words or thoughts, enforcement of the law should be strictly hands-off. A visit from the police to warn you that you might be headed down the wrong path, or that you really shouldn't talk to people a certain way - fine. But no pushing, shoving, fingerprinting, handcuffing, etc. is allowed. But once you do inflict real harm on someone (and none of this "emotional stress" bullshit), then you pay, and in a big way.
Then again, humans have never been capable of ruling each other, so why should they start now?