This is funny, because the other day I filed an 'obscenity complaint' at the FCC's website complaining about the 'obscene' way all the stations crank up the volume on commercials and suggesting that the average volume of commercials be required to roughly match the average volume of the previous 30 minutes of programming/commercials. There is an objective measure of volume (dB), but there is no objective measure of 'loudness'. Loudness is subjective. The stations DO NOT crank up the volume of commercials - doing so would actually be illegal, and they could lose their broadcast licence. The volume of the commercial is always the same volume or lower volume as the show: digitize it, look at it, and see for yourself.
They crank up the 'loudness', which is totally subjective. There is no way the FCC can go after commecials for being 'loud', unless they created some new extremly byzantine rules about dynamic range, which would basicly fuck up the whole art of mixing and music production and ruin a lot of good music.
I hope you can read Barcode or whatever gets printed as machine-readable on the ballot? Machines can read plain text. For example, when I deposit a check at the bank, they have a machine that optically reads the bank routing numbers from the bottom of the check.
Forget a barcode, just have a fixed pitch machine readable typeface with all the information at specific locations on the printed ballot, and you are good to go.
Why would ANYONE go through the trouble of bribing or threatening the vote when they can just hack the vote? Because hacking the vote requires an active conspiracy... where as threatening someone for the way they vote can be something as subtle as an employer selecting certain employees over other employees for the next layoff.
The person hacking the vote must fully accept the concept that what they are doing is fraud... that they could get cought and go to prison... there is a huge psychological barrier they must cross. The person who decides to retailate against people whose voting they don't agree might not even conciously be aware they are doing it, let alone have to worry about getting caught.
For the rest I do not understand why people are so afraid of saying who they voted for because you should always be proud of what you voted for. 1. You could be a target of violence for the way you vote. 2. You could be expelled from your church for the way you vote. 3. Your employer could fire you for the way you vote.
All property rights are "government-granted monopolies". Nope. There have been plenty of stateless societies in history that have had property rights (such as medieval Iceland, or the 'Iroquois Confederacy' of North America).
People tend to respect the property of others, because not doing so tends to end in violence. Since physical property is scarce, people will often use violence to defend their property (despite the high costs and great personal risk). State enforced property rights are just an extention of people's own natural ability for self-defence (in a modern urban setting, it makes sense to have a professional police force, the same way people specialize in medicine, cooking, computer programming, or any other human activity)
However, there has never been any stateless society with 'intellectual property'. Since information has no inherent scarcity, few people would be willing to resort to violence (and the terrible risks and costs involved) in order to defend those 'property rights'. People only claim to own information when there is a tax funded police and court system that will carry out the violence on their behalf with no personal cost to themselves. 'Intellectual Property' ownership only makes sense if you are able to externalize the costs of defending your claimed 'property rights'.
Isn't it ironic that the consumer vigorously defends his right to "choice" but won't make a move until the choice is made for him?
No, the consumer has clearly chosen not to spend his/her money on more unnecessary crap like Blu-Ray or HD-DVD players. The consumer has decided that normal DVD is plenty fine for them right now.
If you give science and engineering educations away for free, you aren't going to increase the number of people who recieve science and engineering educations. You are going to allocate the existing science/engineering slots in a slightly different way. If a university has the capacity to educate 100 graduates a year, that capacity is not going to increase because those students had their tuition paid by the government.
Perhaps if they had some sort of program for actually increasing the capacity of universities to churn out science/engineering graduates, it might make a difference... but you would do that with subsidies directly to the university itself, not by writing checks out to students.
It is going to make even less of a difference, because pretty much everyone going into a university science or engineering program is eligible for a subsidized loan. No one is forgoing an engineering or science degree because of the costs of tuition as it is.
Mmmm. 100 thousand buildings in the US vs 1.5 million in Denmark. No! 100 thousand building in lower Manhattan and the Battery... and it is the largest district heating system in the world!
Not to belittle the achievement, but it's an order of magnitude difference. Most major cities in the United States have had district heating for the last hundred years at least. The article the poster linked to (which you obviously didn't bother to read) is only about the district heating in one part of New York City.
Well big centralised plants are an economic result of cheap fuel But mostly of NIMBY. No one in the U.S. wants to live anywhere near a coal or nuclear power plant. It doesn't matter the cost of fuel, if the price goes up, people still aren't going to let a power plant be built nearby.
Isn't it about time you find a more efficient way to generate power, turbines and generators that don't waste so much heat that we just went to all that trouble to make in the first place? The last new nuclear reactor in the U.S. was ordered in the 1970s.
Seeing as it is approaching nearly 40 years since since the last reactor project was started... no, it isn't about time they find a more efficient way to generate power. Perhaps if they ever decide to build some new nuclear reactors, those will be a little more efficent. But nuclear technology has been at a standstill for at least a generation in the U.S..
Anyone who voted for Nader is now directly responsible for the Bush Presidency. Anyone who voted Democratic is directly responsible for the Bush presidency. Wake up! There is only one party!
I think this is fucking bullshit. Why the fuck are TradeGroups getting into our schools and doing their bidding. What, are the steel unions next? Will the Printing Union be putting posters around saying "Don't use a photocopier - it's steeling!" Public education was established to create a literate and obedient industrial working class. Public education has always been first and foremost about propoganda and social conditioning.
The propoganda and social conditioning changes with the times, but trade groups operating in schools is nothing new... it goes back to the development of the first modern cumpulsary schooling in 19th century Prussia.
I don't know what country you live in but in mine, the government is by no means above the law. There are institutions providing oversight to whom you may take complaints and even if they fail, you can go directly to the department and the minister if need be. "Dude! My country (which I can't mention, lest you show me evidence otherwise!), is like so totally perfect and democratic and superior. If I, like, told you which country I am from (which I won't), you would see how democratic and uncorrupt we are! But you will just have to realize, that my un-nameable anonymous country is like so totally rockin!"
Sure buddy, keep watching your state-run news and believing the hype!
One copy, this is covered by the same law that covers the reselling of used books/cds/software. Its very different.
Except with any digital file a copy MUST be made in order to be shared.
A copy does not need to be made of a magazine to lend you a copy. I just hand you a magazine and you read it. But if I want to lend you a pdf I have purchased, I must copy it to your machine, and then delete it from my machine.
At some point we have to admit that new technologies have moved beyond old printing-press era concepts like "copyright".
It's all about money. Damn the environment, health, people's lives, future as long as someone is making a ton of money. No, it is all about scared mothers thinking about the children. Billy has the sniffles, try telling Billy's mom that there is nothing you can give him for it! Or that little billy doesn't have to worry about bacteria on his hands, because it is very unlikely that it will make him sick! And watch how quick some mom is going to try to strangle you for not wanting to protect the children.
I am suprised that the government hasn't banned non-bacterial soap yet.
Not all software needs to be engineered to space shuttle reliability. But Windows is sure engineered to space shuttle reliability! It only crashes once in a while! Bud-um-bum-bum!
Bullcrap. In a nutshell, corporations are above the law. However, the alternative to corporations: Government controlled monopolies, are also above the law (try suing the Social Security administration or IRS for compromising your data!!). And the police and justice system that is supposed to "regulate" the corporations are above the law (or do you expect the FBI to be abolished and the President to go to prison for those illegal wiretaps they were doing?!).
All large social entities: governments, corporations, religions, are above the law, because the concepts of law and justice apply to individuals, not masses of people.
Unfortunately the termination of a corporation does not entail the termination of the people responsible for it. So you think failing to prevent a SINGLE security breach should be a capital offense?
Do we get to get to terminate any number of government agencies that have had security breaches, for failing to have perfect security?
Just how good is the security on your box? Want to give us an IP and let us find out?
Yes, but nothing's stopping these people from forming a new company and doing the same thing again.
Of course there is... the fact that they lost their shirts and destroyed their reputations pretty much means they are never going to start another company providing the same services ever again!
Lots of people on slashdot extoll the virtues of un-fettered capitalism. "No need for government regulation, sue those who breach their contract!". Unfortunately, when the company folds protecting the stakeholders there is nobody left to sue! Oooops! There goes that darn accountability!
Do you think you would be able to sue the Social Security Administration, or the U.S. Army, or any other government agency if your private information was exposed by them? Well it has happened, and no, you can't sue. Sovereign immunity!
But the government has a flag, and a national song, and they can shoot you if they want, so it is like totally OK and progressive for them to be beyond accountability!
Yes, those evil corporations and their sinister plans to reduce CO2 emmisions and increase funding for mass transit?
I think these cameras are bullshit, but lets not pretend that progressives and socialists are not more than eager to construct their own police state. This camera scheme is promoted by so-called progressives who claim that they want to reduce traffic to reduce pollution and help fund mass transit with the revenues... and they are more than willing to get all Big Brother to enforce it.
The people who proposed this camera program probably think they are being as anti-corporate as you believe you are.
Actually, in most places it is against the law to videotape the police and government officials, even when they are in public and the camera is in full sight. If there is nothing to worry about being tracked in public, then why doesn't law enforcement and government want to be tracked?
Well, as far as your first point is concerned, I believe you have the same right in the US as you do in Sweden, namely challenge your speeding ticket, parking ticket, penalty ticket for not paying commuting fees and so on, in court.
Sure, you have the right to challenge a ticket. But since the courts are only open during buisness hours, and since you are going to want some legal representation if you actually plan on winning, you are looking at losing a days wages (or using up a paid vacation day which is basicly the same thing), as well as paying for a lawyer. The cost of challenging the ticket, even if you win, is going to be more than the cost of just paying the ticket.
Second, the thing with cameras is a big deal in Sweden at the moment. Why? Their numbers are exploding! Why? Speed is decreasing. As you say, it's problematic to define "too [keke] fast". On the other hand, it's no secret that lower speeds equals less pollution and less accidents. And speeds on Swedish roads has decreased by 8 percent, speeders by 40 percent since cameras came up according to the Swedish "road department".
I am sure that the Stasi in East Germany where very effective at reducing criminal activity as well. The question lies in how much privacy and freedom you are willing to sacrifice for safety, and how much potential for abuse you are willing to accept. I would rather have my privacy, than to be 0.001% less likely to be injured in an auto accident.
Slashdot Mirror
They crank up the 'loudness', which is totally subjective. There is no way the FCC can go after commecials for being 'loud', unless they created some new extremly byzantine rules about dynamic range, which would basicly fuck up the whole art of mixing and music production and ruin a lot of good music.
Forget a barcode, just have a fixed pitch machine readable typeface with all the information at specific locations on the printed ballot, and you are good to go.
The person hacking the vote must fully accept the concept that what they are doing is fraud... that they could get cought and go to prison... there is a huge psychological barrier they must cross. The person who decides to retailate against people whose voting they don't agree might not even conciously be aware they are doing it, let alone have to worry about getting caught.
2. You could be expelled from your church for the way you vote.
3. Your employer could fire you for the way you vote.
People tend to respect the property of others, because not doing so tends to end in violence. Since physical property is scarce, people will often use violence to defend their property (despite the high costs and great personal risk). State enforced property rights are just an extention of people's own natural ability for self-defence (in a modern urban setting, it makes sense to have a professional police force, the same way people specialize in medicine, cooking, computer programming, or any other human activity)
However, there has never been any stateless society with 'intellectual property'. Since information has no inherent scarcity, few people would be willing to resort to violence (and the terrible risks and costs involved) in order to defend those 'property rights'. People only claim to own information when there is a tax funded police and court system that will carry out the violence on their behalf with no personal cost to themselves. 'Intellectual Property' ownership only makes sense if you are able to externalize the costs of defending your claimed 'property rights'.
No, the consumer has clearly chosen not to spend his/her money on more unnecessary crap like Blu-Ray or HD-DVD players. The consumer has decided that normal DVD is plenty fine for them right now.
If you give science and engineering educations away for free, you aren't going to increase the number of people who recieve science and engineering educations. You are going to allocate the existing science/engineering slots in a slightly different way. If a university has the capacity to educate 100 graduates a year, that capacity is not going to increase because those students had their tuition paid by the government.
Perhaps if they had some sort of program for actually increasing the capacity of universities to churn out science/engineering graduates, it might make a difference... but you would do that with subsidies directly to the university itself, not by writing checks out to students.
It is going to make even less of a difference, because pretty much everyone going into a university science or engineering program is eligible for a subsidized loan. No one is forgoing an engineering or science degree because of the costs of tuition as it is.
Seeing as it is approaching nearly 40 years since since the last reactor project was started... no, it isn't about time they find a more efficient way to generate power. Perhaps if they ever decide to build some new nuclear reactors, those will be a little more efficent. But nuclear technology has been at a standstill for at least a generation in the U.S..
The propoganda and social conditioning changes with the times, but trade groups operating in schools is nothing new... it goes back to the development of the first modern cumpulsary schooling in 19th century Prussia.
See this site for more information: http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/
I have a couple 18 year old disks that work fine.
Sure buddy, keep watching your state-run news and believing the hype!
Except with any digital file a copy MUST be made in order to be shared.
A copy does not need to be made of a magazine to lend you a copy. I just hand you a magazine and you read it. But if I want to lend you a pdf I have purchased, I must copy it to your machine, and then delete it from my machine.
At some point we have to admit that new technologies have moved beyond old printing-press era concepts like "copyright".
I am suprised that the government hasn't banned non-bacterial soap yet.
All large social entities: governments, corporations, religions, are above the law, because the concepts of law and justice apply to individuals, not masses of people.
Do we get to get to terminate any number of government agencies that have had security breaches, for failing to have perfect security?
Just how good is the security on your box? Want to give us an IP and let us find out?
Of course there is... the fact that they lost their shirts and destroyed their reputations pretty much means they are never going to start another company providing the same services ever again!
Do you think you would be able to sue the Social Security Administration, or the U.S. Army, or any other government agency if your private information was exposed by them? Well it has happened, and no, you can't sue. Sovereign immunity!
But the government has a flag, and a national song, and they can shoot you if they want, so it is like totally OK and progressive for them to be beyond accountability!
It isn't the teachers or the schools fault that students aren't learning science... or parents... IT IS HOLLYWOOD'S FAULT!!!!
Can we sue the movie makers for little johnny failing his physics test? Like those fat kids who sued McDonalds?
Yes, those evil corporations and their sinister plans to reduce CO2 emmisions and increase funding for mass transit?
I think these cameras are bullshit, but lets not pretend that progressives and socialists are not more than eager to construct their own police state. This camera scheme is promoted by so-called progressives who claim that they want to reduce traffic to reduce pollution and help fund mass transit with the revenues... and they are more than willing to get all Big Brother to enforce it.
The people who proposed this camera program probably think they are being as anti-corporate as you believe you are.
Actually, in most places it is against the law to videotape the police and government officials, even when they are in public and the camera is in full sight. If there is nothing to worry about being tracked in public, then why doesn't law enforcement and government want to be tracked?
Sure, you have the right to challenge a ticket. But since the courts are only open during buisness hours, and since you are going to want some legal representation if you actually plan on winning, you are looking at losing a days wages (or using up a paid vacation day which is basicly the same thing), as well as paying for a lawyer. The cost of challenging the ticket, even if you win, is going to be more than the cost of just paying the ticket.
I am sure that the Stasi in East Germany where very effective at reducing criminal activity as well. The question lies in how much privacy and freedom you are willing to sacrifice for safety, and how much potential for abuse you are willing to accept. I would rather have my privacy, than to be 0.001% less likely to be injured in an auto accident.