I hate to be off-topic, but I don't watch the news as much as I once did...
Do you really think it was Rumsfeld or any other administraion official who instructed the prison guards to document their deeds with photos, and then leak them to the press? Not a very smart move, huh? Chances are, they acted alone on that one. So, why not the abuse as well? Any connection to the top, saying Bush/Rumsfeld are directly responsible to the abuse, is a load of speculative crap. Where's your proof?
Is it being investigated by an unbiased committee (or at least a committee that represents both biases)? Or is everyone just throwing around comments without any attempt to find the truth?
I don't know if the assumption people are innocent is in the constitution or the law or just something the government supposedly follows, but I oppose any laws that go against the "you are assumed to be innocent until proven otherwise"
How is this different from the FWing function at all? Say I send you an e-mail bitching about person X, you FW it to person X. The FW function has many issues for privacy, google reading your e-mail for advertising purposes and linking it with the RECEIVER is only one small issue in the big scheme of things.
But this bill doesn't protect those who have their e-mails FW'd to gmail accounts. Your e-mail will still be scanned. No, this bill is designed to protect gmail users against their wish. If people wanted to be protected, they don't have to sign up for gmail. But now those who didn't mind google storing the information don't have a choice.
Even if it comes through Poland or China, it is american spam.
A way to combat spam is to go to the host that the spam is stored on. That happens to be in China at the moment. Sure it might be Americans doing it, but it's on China's servers.
By the way, other theories include the theory of gravity, relativity theory etc... all pretty much proven, ask Hiroshima about E=mc^2 if you don't believe that one:P
[MODE TYPE="sarcasm"]OMG!!!!11 If one widely accepted theory is true they all must be true [/MODE]
I know that's not what you're saying, but it's hinted at. I can also offer counter examples such as "people once believed in the theory that the world is flat and I reckon that at the time the nay-sayers were told 'If you don't believe us go sail around the world' and because of various problems they failed (well, except for one smart ass)." But that sounds like I'm saying "If one popular theory is untrue then they must all be untrue" which I'm not;)
This theory is interesting, but it is nothing more then a possible way to explain what happened. To compare any theory about dinosaurs dying with the gravity theory is absurd. One is obviously more proveable then the other.
And they'll be charging $2 per song right? I somehow doubt it.
That then begs the question, why bother? Why not use something like itunes?
It sure sounds cool to say "you can buy songs just by tapping your mobile onto a poster" but there are things to think about: * DRM - am I allowed to make unlimited copies? How about 1 so I don't have to keep the song on my mobile phone? * Cost - No more CDs means the price goes down, right? Most likely not. They'll probably charge however much singles cost per download. At least whilever the song is new, they might bring it down to a more reasonible price afterwards.... maybe.
Itunes == good idea Poster != good idea
They use the same principles, but I just can't see this poster idea being quite as good as itunes. If it is priced around the same as itunes and your allowed a reasonable amount of copies, then whoever uses it could be a serious competitor to itunes. Otherwise, forget about it.
We have a similar set up in Australia. The music is stored on a computer in "a wall" and you select it by pressing numbers.
The parent's idea is just technology for the sake of technology. Not everyone has walkman's. Not everyone carries them everywhere. Not everyone plans to go to a music store but are just walking past and decide to pop in.
I don't see the point to puttting the new technology into something that already has a solution. There are little benefits to the parents suggestion but there are many disadvantages.
I personally don't look at a movie and say "oh it's a 2D movie it must be good" or "oh god! It's yet another 2D movie." I could care less on what tools are used (although I do like the look of 2D over 3D), what I like is the storyline and acting. I imagine I'm not alone in this.
As long as Pixar keeps focusing on these they'll be right I reckon.
As more evidence comes out daily of the ties between the leaders of petroleum producing countries and terrorists (not to mention the human rights abuses in their own countries),
It's not the Iraqi's fault that Bush came along and decided to invade their country and then allow his soldiers to abuse their human rights. Honestly!
I disagree that TV is dead. How many homes have TVs in them? How many homes have internet access in them? I think you'll find that there are more homes with tvs then there are homes with the internet.
However I do think one day tv (as we know it) will die. But I think that is a fairly long way off for now.
Lots of MUDs (text-based online games) have people connect to their game by telnetting to their server via port 25.
If they blocked port 25 to stop mail servers would this also stop people telnetting to port 25?
"I will defend your post and mod you up and then I will disagree with it vehemently"
Just because you disagree with something doesn't mean it should be modded down. If you think it is just a popularity contest, do your part.
I think calling religions "superstitious nonsense" is being flammatory. And no. I am not religious.
Just because you do not believe in the religion in question doesn't mean that those who do are wasting their time.
I think whether or not aliens would convert to our religions is an interesting question. I personally don't think they would, and I don't think we would convert to theirs (if they had any). But how to convert them to ours, while I think is an arrogant thought, is quite purposeful to others.
Show some respect.
Slashdot Mirror
I hate to be off-topic, but I don't watch the news as much as I once did...
Do you really think it was Rumsfeld or any other administraion official who instructed the prison guards to document their deeds with photos, and then leak them to the press? Not a very smart move, huh? Chances are, they acted alone on that one. So, why not the abuse as well? Any connection to the top, saying Bush/Rumsfeld are directly responsible to the abuse, is a load of speculative crap. Where's your proof?
Is it being investigated by an unbiased committee (or at least a committee that represents both biases)? Or is everyone just throwing around comments without any attempt to find the truth?
I don't know if the assumption people are innocent is in the constitution or the law or just something the government supposedly follows, but I oppose any laws that go against the "you are assumed to be innocent until proven otherwise"
How is this different from the FWing function at all? Say I send you an e-mail bitching about person X, you FW it to person X. The FW function has many issues for privacy, google reading your e-mail for advertising purposes and linking it with the RECEIVER is only one small issue in the big scheme of things.
But this bill doesn't protect those who have their e-mails FW'd to gmail accounts. Your e-mail will still be scanned. No, this bill is designed to protect gmail users against their wish. If people wanted to be protected, they don't have to sign up for gmail. But now those who didn't mind google storing the information don't have a choice.
Even if it comes through Poland or China, it is american spam.
A way to combat spam is to go to the host that the spam is stored on. That happens to be in China at the moment. Sure it might be Americans doing it, but it's on China's servers.
When I was in China, I didn't see the police beating people on every street corner
:P
The police were beating people on every second street corner
By the way, other theories include the theory of gravity, relativity theory etc... all pretty much proven, ask Hiroshima about E=mc^2 if you don't believe that one :P
;)
[MODE TYPE="sarcasm"]OMG!!!!11 If one widely accepted theory is true they all must be true [/MODE]
I know that's not what you're saying, but it's hinted at. I can also offer counter examples such as "people once believed in the theory that the world is flat and I reckon that at the time the nay-sayers were told 'If you don't believe us go sail around the world' and because of various problems they failed (well, except for one smart ass)." But that sounds like I'm saying "If one popular theory is untrue then they must all be untrue" which I'm not
This theory is interesting, but it is nothing more then a possible way to explain what happened. To compare any theory about dinosaurs dying with the gravity theory is absurd. One is obviously more proveable then the other.
A creature snorting fire sounds absurd
:grin:
I agree. The creature would have been snorting cocaine or something
(I found the imagine amusing)
Yeah, it happened to the dinosaurs and look at them :)
:P
We'll be fine
And they'll be charging $2 per song right? I somehow doubt it.
That then begs the question, why bother? Why not use something like itunes?
It sure sounds cool to say "you can buy songs just by tapping your mobile onto a poster" but there are things to think about:
* DRM - am I allowed to make unlimited copies? How about 1 so I don't have to keep the song on my mobile phone?
* Cost - No more CDs means the price goes down, right? Most likely not. They'll probably charge however much singles cost per download. At least whilever the song is new, they might bring it down to a more reasonible price afterwards.... maybe.
Itunes == good idea
Poster != good idea
They use the same principles, but I just can't see this poster idea being quite as good as itunes. If it is priced around the same as itunes and your allowed a reasonable amount of copies, then whoever uses it could be a serious competitor to itunes. Otherwise, forget about it.
We have a similar set up in Australia. The music is stored on a computer in "a wall" and you select it by pressing numbers. The parent's idea is just technology for the sake of technology. Not everyone has walkman's. Not everyone carries them everywhere. Not everyone plans to go to a music store but are just walking past and decide to pop in. I don't see the point to puttting the new technology into something that already has a solution. There are little benefits to the parents suggestion but there are many disadvantages.
I personally don't look at a movie and say "oh it's a 2D movie it must be good" or "oh god! It's yet another 2D movie." I could care less on what tools are used (although I do like the look of 2D over 3D), what I like is the storyline and acting. I imagine I'm not alone in this. As long as Pixar keeps focusing on these they'll be right I reckon.
Once we start giving up certain abilities we are currently allowed the spammers have won (this is different to running mail servers).
As more evidence comes out daily of the ties between the leaders of petroleum producing countries and terrorists (not to mention the human rights abuses in their own countries), It's not the Iraqi's fault that Bush came along and decided to invade their country and then allow his soldiers to abuse their human rights. Honestly!
Might have lots of CO2, but they're kinda missing that other ingredient.
I disagree that TV is dead. How many homes have TVs in them? How many homes have internet access in them? I think you'll find that there are more homes with tvs then there are homes with the internet. However I do think one day tv (as we know it) will die. But I think that is a fairly long way off for now.
Lots of MUDs (text-based online games) have people connect to their game by telnetting to their server via port 25. If they blocked port 25 to stop mail servers would this also stop people telnetting to port 25?
oh shit. That's the funniest thing I've ever read here.
the article makes these stupid soviet russia jokes
"I will defend your post and mod you up and then I will disagree with it vehemently" Just because you disagree with something doesn't mean it should be modded down. If you think it is just a popularity contest, do your part. I think calling religions "superstitious nonsense" is being flammatory. And no. I am not religious.
Just because you do not believe in the religion in question doesn't mean that those who do are wasting their time. I think whether or not aliens would convert to our religions is an interesting question. I personally don't think they would, and I don't think we would convert to theirs (if they had any). But how to convert them to ours, while I think is an arrogant thought, is quite purposeful to others. Show some respect.