What, so libertarians now want to be given a place of their own? Is there any part of their philosophy which isn't hypocritical through the core?
Screw that, they should have to defend their claims against a military onslaught, just like countless other countries/peoples have had to do over the years.
Take for example Native Americans, whose land was seized by force. Libertarians are OK with that, but not OK with having to carve out their own land in a similar way?
Gutless hypocritcal cowards, that what libertarians are.
1) since when does a right include automatic access to another's labor? Speech, privacy, and all the fun rights listed in the US Constitution don't require another's labor, time, or money. Your "right" to health care does. Why is that?
Same as education, which under your "brilliant" logical healthcare reasoning, is also a claim on another person's labor. Therefore, education is a privilege so it and healthcare are only for the elite?
So as a counterpoint to your "small problem" - how the hell can you run a modern 21st century superpower without providing the basics for its own citizens? The US is the wealthiest nation in the history of the world and can't get these two things correct, because some greedy disgusting people at the top want to continuing maximizing their benefit to themselves?
It's hard to argue that this is ethical behavior...
Sounds like the free market to me, buyers and sellers auctioning off products in a competitive environment. Perhaps corporations with their billions of quarterly profits can reinvest that money into buying exploits so they can fix them.
This is incompatible with an infrastructure that is so hostile towards public transportation (outside of some lucky big cities). I live in some backwater suburb in FL and I can't get to a pub to have a couple of drink with a buddy without incurring an extra 20$ in cab fare? In Europe this was easy, you just hop on the bus/U-Bahn/tram and viola. Also in the suburbs.
Too damn bad, move out of the boondocks if you simply must get drunk and also have cheap transportation home.
This is a technical problem, I am pretty certain it will be addressed
Oh it's way more than a technical issue, I think this issues stretches all the way to the core philosophy of BitCoin. To sum up: how to you "force" a software upgrade into a system with no central authority, and indeed is designed and aimed towards anti-authority types? Wouldn't a forced upgrade by exactly the kind of *coercion* these people are always going on about?
What's the incentive for folks to upgrade? In the pure selfishness randian libertarian anti-authority mindset, why would I exert any effort to *help* the new clients out? Their blocks aren't recognized - BFD to me, I don't care at all. *My* blocks are and that's all I care about. Right?
I see how BitCoin handles this as crucial, and they are fucked either way they go. Force an upgrade - this means arbitrary changes can be coerced in, death knell to the currency (today's upgrade might be client bug fixes, tomorrows forced upgrade might introduce government control, cryptographic weakening, anonymity breaking). Don't force an upgrade - future bugs, errors in implementation, etc undermine confidence and threaten to bring down the currency. People that want the 0.8 client to reign will need to stage a compute network takeover.
The only effect of your client producing blocks too big is getting them not accepted by anyone else.
So what's the incentive for everyone else to upgrade their client software and help you (0.8 clients) out?
Several other posters keep mentioning other currencies have done this (reissue new currency) but entirely miss the point that it was a central authority that forced the issue. Given BitCoin has no central authority and can't require this kind of upgrade (oh the irony that BitCoin needs a central authority to coerce its network to upgrade) how is this going to work?
It seems to me people that want to use the 0.8 client will need to stage a compute power takeover. If I'm running a bunch of nodes on an earlier client, why do I give a crap that the coins you produce aren't recognized by my nodes? Given an ultra selfish libertarian/randian anti coercion attitude, how will you reconcile the cooperation needed so 0.8 clients are accepted? If I'm invested in a lot of hardware or miners on an earlier client, I can't see how I give a flying crap about helping the new client out. Right?
Sure, countries replace currency all the time. But in all those cases there is a central control "the government" which makes it happen "legal force/coercion".
BitCoin doesn't have either. In fact, it is expressly designed to avoid that. There is no central control and the whole experiment appeals to an anti-central-authority no-coercion crowd. Given that, how BitCoin coerces - isn't forcing a software upgrade a type of coercion? - the network of miners into upgrading is kind of an open question.
Fundamentally, how do you push out needed software fixes/upgrades in a decentralized anti-authority crowd. I'd laugh my ass off if this does cause a currency fork or if the BitCoin devs mandate the upgrade. The latter shows that sometimes having a central authority is needed.
Yes, "that's all" clients need to do. But since the BitCoin enthusiasts are generally anti-government anti-central-control Libertarian types, how do you force anyone in particular to upgrade? Won't they see that as some sort of central control coercing them against their will?
To me, this is the most fascinating about BitCoin so far and I'm interested to see how it is handled. In a network with no central control made of anti authority anti coercion attitudes, how to you force a client software upgrade? Maybe some dedicated hardware miners can't upgrade?. Especially if a significant block of miners remains on pre-bugfix clients? Maybe they just won't give a shit and ignore post-bugfix signature blocks.
...and the massive financial cost upheavals induced by Obamacare had nothing to do with that happening, right?
No, it didn't. Private Corporation XYZ said let's make 2 billion a quarter PROFIT (and throw our employees under the bus) instead of 1.99 billion a quarter PROFIT (and cover their healthcare). Fuck them and you for being their brainless apologist.
yet there are still progressives blaming presidents who are long gone.
As they should, because the bills and spending Bush ran up didn't magically vanish when his terms ended. He left the country fighting 2 basically unfunded wars, deep tax cuts, and a special going away present of a Wall Street bailout. Did you forget all that stuff?
The government has the power to ruin people's lives
Um... so do private citizens and corporations.
Now whether such power is legal or not may not matter to the victim, nor would the many hurdles they have to jump to get compensated.
Again, the original article was about using drones and deploying infra-red cameras in the Canadian wilderness, which sounds to me like a fantastic way to use this technology. It's a lot better than waiting X numbers of days and then massing enough people for a manhunt through a giant area, and the expenses that would incur.
On the other hand if the victim were libertarian they should have just let him die, since he failed to negotiate the proper monitoring contracts and insurance needed for his trip. He could have had a direct and final lesson about risk mitigation.
Cable TV is: 1. Not a monopoly, not that it matters....
Beyond basic protections against fraud, what the hell regulation does it need?
They sure had no issue invoking powers usually reserved for utilities/public works/government though... to use utility easements and real-estate right-of-way exemptions and so on to dig up private property to lay their cables.
If they want to hide behind "we're not a monopoly" then fine, however every time property is bought/sold they can re-negotiate access rights as a NON government/utility entity. Or do you think every private corporation, non-utility, gets to dig up private property for their business model?
They ride in on the same access rights and exemptions electricity, water, gas, sewer lines do. So if they act like a monopoly, get legal exemptions that are reserved for government/utilities, I don't care if they technically aren't one, they get to behave like one including somebody higher up in government placing some limits on their behavior.
What I don't get is spending the time typing this long rant which is a thinly veiled opinion post. You don't get this and can't see that... your whole life must be one ongoing shock that other people like different stuff? Don't get drip-fed, paid-for entertainment? Like cable TV? I mean, I don't have cable either but I also don't waste my time ranting against people who do. I don't give a crap about what they do. Seriously, are you that self-unaware or ignorant and can't recognize that saying "I have 500 games on Steam" is fundamentally the same issue you're railing against? Other than the self-awarded superiority complex that you're hobby is inherently better than they're hobby. It's just pathetic.
People keep claiming that they want to keep their guns because they need to protect themselves if their rights are taken away by the government...
HELLO???? At what point do you start defending yourselves?
What you (meaning in general, not you specifically) is an organization like the NRA which beats the drum for Amendments 4+ as much as the NRA beats the drum for Amendment 2. But, the NRA is largely a gun manufacturer's rights organization, more so than one representing the actual people that are members. That in turn comes down to incentive and profit - there is money to be made yelling about Amendment 2, but not so much for Amendment 4+. Call that a free market failure.
Bullshit - my papers and effects are my papers and effects, regardless of where I keep them.
Could you imagine how hard it would be for banks to sell safety deposit space, if there was no guarantee other people weren't able to rifle through your shit?
It comes down to the legal argument over an expectation of privacy. You expect a bank to keep the contents of a safety deposit box private. Arguing unencrypted emails, facebook posts, tweets, etc. You expect your home to be private. Claiming you expect email (especially unencrypted ones), facebook posts and twitter messages to be treated with the same privacy is a stretch of varying degrees. Some of the methods are 100% opposite the "expectation of privacy", e.g. people participating want to reach as many others as possible.
You're just here when Democrats hold the White House. When Republicans were there and in power, they'd just marginalize any complainers as "Un-American" or "unpatriotic" and so forth. Their sheep-like following would parrot the party line and that's why the USA is in trouble, half the populations are Anti-government retards then magically become government worshippers should the White House shift. This 180 degree turn every so often has scrambled their brains.
Would you care to revise your statement, Mr. Internet Pundit?
Please, people who lived under actual crazy dictators like Mao and Stalin knew what real tyranny is. Citizens of North Korea know what real tyranny is.
Crying about how the checks and balances inherent in the system don't always work out 100% to your liking is a goddamn insult to millions of people actually living in shitty conditions under real tyrants.
(where did they get their filtering and monitoring hardware from again? Oh right: We gave it to them)
You might want to address your "open letter to a US official" to corporate America as well... they're happily selling the tools of oppression for profit. Come to think of it, they make big profits off selling guns and ammo as well.
This site explains a lot of the issues many people have with xkcd as well as a well-reasoned response to a lot of the people who seem to get upset by what I think is pretty fair criticism.
Explains? It's a bunch of crap explanations along the lines of "I think this sucks". Oh wow, that's just a fantastic.
I don't get the XKCD hate. If you don't like it, DON'T READ IT. People that loudly proclaim how much they don't like XKCD come off as either butthurt douchebags suffering from some kind of "hey notice me I'm awesome too" syndrome, or they are somehow going for the "I'm über trendy because I disdain that which many other like", so they're angling for the hipster's hipster.
Figures you'd post anonymous; too chicken shit to even attach a pseudonym to your post. You're probably the guy behind xkcdsucks.blogspot.com. And that guy, whoever he is, must have an even emptier existence to bother.
Even if you don't like every XKCD comic (I don't) you have to admit (well, unless you're some entrenched opinionated asshole) that his infographics are pretty awesome. Stuff like the gravity well, oceans, money, radiation, movie plotlines, etc.
consider this though: if it were privatized, and their employees did something that violated your rights, you would have some realistic hope of legal recourse.
Or they'd get indemnified and become unsueable, before operating. Please, corporations don't give a flying crap about protecting your rights either, they are predatory animals looking to siphon maximum cash from you.
Actually this was a very common term used by the Obama administration... Rahm Emanuel was the king of this.
When did the democratic party go from "power to the people" to "power to the establishment"? Seriously, they make the republicans looks like the best choice anymore.
Before you go sweeping this all onto the Democrats, why don't you count up how many times the Bush administration capitalized on various disasters. For that matter, you should read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" for a bigger perspective.
Republicans the best choice? Those ARE the folks who gave us the TSA, in case your memory is conveniently lost.
Slashdot Mirror
What, so libertarians now want to be given a place of their own? Is there any part of their philosophy which isn't hypocritical through the core?
Screw that, they should have to defend their claims against a military onslaught, just like countless other countries/peoples have had to do over the years.
Take for example Native Americans, whose land was seized by force. Libertarians are OK with that, but not OK with having to carve out their own land in a similar way?
Gutless hypocritcal cowards, that what libertarians are.
1) since when does a right include automatic access to another's labor? Speech, privacy, and all the fun rights listed in the US Constitution don't require another's labor, time, or money. Your "right" to health care does. Why is that?
Same as education, which under your "brilliant" logical healthcare reasoning, is also a claim on another person's labor. Therefore, education is a privilege so it and healthcare are only for the elite?
So as a counterpoint to your "small problem" - how the hell can you run a modern 21st century superpower without providing the basics for its own citizens? The US is the wealthiest nation in the history of the world and can't get these two things correct, because some greedy disgusting people at the top want to continuing maximizing their benefit to themselves?
It's hard to argue that this is ethical behavior...
Sounds like the free market to me, buyers and sellers auctioning off products in a competitive environment. Perhaps corporations with their billions of quarterly profits can reinvest that money into buying exploits so they can fix them.
This is incompatible with an infrastructure that is so hostile towards public transportation (outside of some lucky big cities). I live in some backwater suburb in FL and I can't get to a pub to have a couple of drink with a buddy without incurring an extra 20$ in cab fare? In Europe this was easy, you just hop on the bus/U-Bahn/tram and viola. Also in the suburbs.
Too damn bad, move out of the boondocks if you simply must get drunk and also have cheap transportation home.
0.05 is unreasonable. It is de facto prohibition, and unconstitutional.
Unconstitutional, seriously?
This is a restriction on drinking then driving, where exactly is that a guaranteed right in the Constitution?
This is a technical problem, I am pretty certain it will be addressed
Oh it's way more than a technical issue, I think this issues stretches all the way to the core philosophy of BitCoin. To sum up: how to you "force" a software upgrade into a system with no central authority, and indeed is designed and aimed towards anti-authority types? Wouldn't a forced upgrade by exactly the kind of *coercion* these people are always going on about?
What's the incentive for folks to upgrade? In the pure selfishness randian libertarian anti-authority mindset, why would I exert any effort to *help* the new clients out? Their blocks aren't recognized - BFD to me, I don't care at all. *My* blocks are and that's all I care about. Right?
I see how BitCoin handles this as crucial, and they are fucked either way they go. Force an upgrade - this means arbitrary changes can be coerced in, death knell to the currency (today's upgrade might be client bug fixes, tomorrows forced upgrade might introduce government control, cryptographic weakening, anonymity breaking). Don't force an upgrade - future bugs, errors in implementation, etc undermine confidence and threaten to bring down the currency. People that want the 0.8 client to reign will need to stage a compute network takeover.
Should be fun to watch this play out.
The only effect of your client producing blocks too big is getting them not accepted by anyone else.
So what's the incentive for everyone else to upgrade their client software and help you (0.8 clients) out?
Several other posters keep mentioning other currencies have done this (reissue new currency) but entirely miss the point that it was a central authority that forced the issue. Given BitCoin has no central authority and can't require this kind of upgrade (oh the irony that BitCoin needs a central authority to coerce its network to upgrade) how is this going to work?
It seems to me people that want to use the 0.8 client will need to stage a compute power takeover. If I'm running a bunch of nodes on an earlier client, why do I give a crap that the coins you produce aren't recognized by my nodes? Given an ultra selfish libertarian/randian anti coercion attitude, how will you reconcile the cooperation needed so 0.8 clients are accepted? If I'm invested in a lot of hardware or miners on an earlier client, I can't see how I give a flying crap about helping the new client out. Right?
Sure, countries replace currency all the time. But in all those cases there is a central control "the government" which makes it happen "legal force/coercion".
BitCoin doesn't have either. In fact, it is expressly designed to avoid that. There is no central control and the whole experiment appeals to an anti-central-authority no-coercion crowd. Given that, how BitCoin coerces - isn't forcing a software upgrade a type of coercion? - the network of miners into upgrading is kind of an open question.
Fundamentally, how do you push out needed software fixes/upgrades in a decentralized anti-authority crowd. I'd laugh my ass off if this does cause a currency fork or if the BitCoin devs mandate the upgrade. The latter shows that sometimes having a central authority is needed.
Just update their software.
Yes, "that's all" clients need to do. But since the BitCoin enthusiasts are generally anti-government anti-central-control Libertarian types, how do you force anyone in particular to upgrade? Won't they see that as some sort of central control coercing them against their will?
To me, this is the most fascinating about BitCoin so far and I'm interested to see how it is handled. In a network with no central control made of anti authority anti coercion attitudes, how to you force a client software upgrade? Maybe some dedicated hardware miners can't upgrade?. Especially if a significant block of miners remains on pre-bugfix clients? Maybe they just won't give a shit and ignore post-bugfix signature blocks.
...and the massive financial cost upheavals induced by Obamacare had nothing to do with that happening, right?
No, it didn't. Private Corporation XYZ said let's make 2 billion a quarter PROFIT (and throw our employees under the bus) instead of 1.99 billion a quarter PROFIT (and cover their healthcare). Fuck them and you for being their brainless apologist.
yet there are still progressives blaming presidents who are long gone.
As they should, because the bills and spending Bush ran up didn't magically vanish when his terms ended. He left the country fighting 2 basically unfunded wars, deep tax cuts, and a special going away present of a Wall Street bailout. Did you forget all that stuff?
The government has the power to ruin people's lives
Um... so do private citizens and corporations.
Now whether such power is legal or not may not matter to the victim, nor would the many hurdles they have to jump to get compensated.
Again, the original article was about using drones and deploying infra-red cameras in the Canadian wilderness, which sounds to me like a fantastic way to use this technology. It's a lot better than waiting X numbers of days and then massing enough people for a manhunt through a giant area, and the expenses that would incur.
On the other hand if the victim were libertarian they should have just let him die, since he failed to negotiate the proper monitoring contracts and insurance needed for his trip. He could have had a direct and final lesson about risk mitigation.
Cable TV is: ...
1. Not a monopoly, not that it matters.
Beyond basic protections against fraud, what the hell regulation does it need?
They sure had no issue invoking powers usually reserved for utilities/public works/government though... to use utility easements and real-estate right-of-way exemptions and so on to dig up private property to lay their cables.
If they want to hide behind "we're not a monopoly" then fine, however every time property is bought/sold they can re-negotiate access rights as a NON government/utility entity. Or do you think every private corporation, non-utility, gets to dig up private property for their business model?
They ride in on the same access rights and exemptions electricity, water, gas, sewer lines do. So if they act like a monopoly, get legal exemptions that are reserved for government/utilities, I don't care if they technically aren't one, they get to behave like one including somebody higher up in government placing some limits on their behavior.
Damn, posted too fast and missed my your/you're their/they're grammar errors.
I'm really kinda hating the no-edit thing on slashdot.
What I don't get is spending the time typing this long rant which is a thinly veiled opinion post.
You don't get this and can't see that... your whole life must be one ongoing shock that other people like different stuff?
Don't get drip-fed, paid-for entertainment? Like cable TV? I mean, I don't have cable either but I also don't waste my time ranting against people who do. I don't give a crap about what they do.
Seriously, are you that self-unaware or ignorant and can't recognize that saying "I have 500 games on Steam" is fundamentally the same issue you're railing against? Other than the self-awarded superiority complex that you're hobby is inherently better than they're hobby.
It's just pathetic.
Argh cut and paste and preview fail. Oh well. Sentence 3 obviously misplaced and rewritten. ;)
People keep claiming that they want to keep their guns because they need to protect themselves if their rights are taken away by the government...
HELLO???? At what point do you start defending yourselves?
What you (meaning in general, not you specifically) is an organization like the NRA which beats the drum for Amendments 4+ as much as the NRA beats the drum for Amendment 2. But, the NRA is largely a gun manufacturer's rights organization, more so than one representing the actual people that are members. That in turn comes down to incentive and profit - there is money to be made yelling about Amendment 2, but not so much for Amendment 4+. Call that a free market failure.
Bullshit - my papers and effects are my papers and effects, regardless of where I keep them.
Could you imagine how hard it would be for banks to sell safety deposit space, if there was no guarantee other people weren't able to rifle through your shit?
It comes down to the legal argument over an expectation of privacy. You expect a bank to keep the contents of a safety deposit box private. Arguing unencrypted emails, facebook posts, tweets, etc. You expect your home to be private. Claiming you expect email (especially unencrypted ones), facebook posts and twitter messages to be treated with the same privacy is a stretch of varying degrees. Some of the methods are 100% opposite the "expectation of privacy", e.g. people participating want to reach as many others as possible.
So install Crossover or Virtualbox for your Windows Only app.
Crossover may not work well enough, and VirtualBox still requires a Windows install/license for the VM it is hosting.
You're just here when Democrats hold the White House. When Republicans were there and in power, they'd just marginalize any complainers as "Un-American" or "unpatriotic" and so forth. Their sheep-like following would parrot the party line and that's why the USA is in trouble, half the populations are Anti-government retards then magically become government worshippers should the White House shift. This 180 degree turn every so often has scrambled their brains.
Would you care to revise your statement, Mr. Internet Pundit?
Please, people who lived under actual crazy dictators like Mao and Stalin knew what real tyranny is. Citizens of North Korea know what real tyranny is.
Crying about how the checks and balances inherent in the system don't always work out 100% to your liking is a goddamn insult to millions of people actually living in shitty conditions under real tyrants.
(where did they get their filtering and monitoring hardware from again? Oh right: We gave it to them)
You might want to address your "open letter to a US official" to corporate America as well... they're happily selling the tools of oppression for profit. Come to think of it, they make big profits off selling guns and ammo as well.
This site explains a lot of the issues many people have with xkcd as well as a well-reasoned response to a lot of the people who seem to get upset by what I think is pretty fair criticism.
Explains? It's a bunch of crap explanations along the lines of "I think this sucks". Oh wow, that's just a fantastic.
I don't get the XKCD hate. If you don't like it, DON'T READ IT. People that loudly proclaim how much they don't like XKCD come off as either butthurt douchebags suffering from some kind of "hey notice me I'm awesome too" syndrome, or they are somehow going for the "I'm über trendy because I disdain that which many other like", so they're angling for the hipster's hipster.
Figures you'd post anonymous; too chicken shit to even attach a pseudonym to your post. You're probably the guy behind xkcdsucks.blogspot.com. And that guy, whoever he is, must have an even emptier existence to bother.
Even if you don't like every XKCD comic (I don't) you have to admit (well, unless you're some entrenched opinionated asshole) that his infographics are pretty awesome. Stuff like the gravity well, oceans, money, radiation, movie plotlines, etc.
consider this though: if it were privatized, and their employees did something that violated your rights, you would have some realistic hope of legal recourse.
Or they'd get indemnified and become unsueable, before operating. Please, corporations don't give a flying crap about protecting your rights either, they are predatory animals looking to siphon maximum cash from you.
Actually this was a very common term used by the Obama administration... Rahm Emanuel was the king of this.
When did the democratic party go from "power to the people" to "power to the establishment"? Seriously, they make the republicans looks like the best choice anymore.
Before you go sweeping this all onto the Democrats, why don't you count up how many times the Bush administration capitalized on various disasters. For that matter, you should read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" for a bigger perspective.
Republicans the best choice? Those ARE the folks who gave us the TSA, in case your memory is conveniently lost.