And YOU are ranting based on words that didn't address prescribed drugs. Which makes you drama queen with no reading comprehension, and someone having a shrill hissy fit over which I imagine your late mother would be embarassed, since observations about the hemp-obsessed subculture have absolutely nothing to do with the nature of her demise.
I do like your fantastically ironic bitching about arrogance, though. Fine work.
Just because something is used as propaganda, it does not magically become false.
Well that's just, like, your opinon, man.
True, though. But this is still just about stoners looking for another avenue. A familiar refrain from the crowd that thinks they'd be better off with a tires, a spouse, underwear, and air craft carriers all made out of hemp.
My central point is only that photographs(1) are objects
But this is where I think we disagree. A print is an object. Making a photograph is a process. There are many routes to that print (or projected slide, or gird of pixels on a tablet, etc).
No, photographs (here, sticking with your notion of not referring to digitally captured images as photographs, only things that use something chemically photosensitive) are manipulated. Every single one of them. Film speed and tonal behavior? Lens behavior like field curvature, chromatic smearing, and non-infinite depth of field? Choice of chemistry? Grain? Paper stock? How it's all souped? Filters to deal with color temps? The photographer's own choice of exposure method? The use of reflectors or supplementray lighting?
Every projection of the scene by a lens onto a two-dimensional surface placed by the photographer somewhere that records that projection according to his or her thoughts on composition is a manipulation from beginning to end. The entire concept of a "real" image is just silly. Chemical production of grains that are patterned after the projected light, or variations in a grid of pixels pushed through an A to D process... a distinction of no distinction other than the need to master a different set of tools.
Why do we have laws at all then? Why do we say don't have sex with children when criminals are just going to do it anyway?
Really bad analogy. Your implication is that we could stop people from having sex with children by banning children.
The analogy you're looking for is that just like we have laws that carry penalties for abusing kids, we have penalties for killing people. Using rifles, or using blunt instruments like pipes and bats (which are used far more often than rifles to murder people, says the FBI).
So yes: we have laws that "ban" murder, by making it really suck to be a murderer that's been caught having murdered someone. Just like it sucks to be someone that's been caught having abused a kid.
I always suspect that companies in these cases deserve what happens to them
Did you see the outfit that ERP was wearing? That general ledger module was WAY above it's knee. And I think the CRM middleware was wearing a lot of perfume. Totally asking for it.
No, it's a cultural thing. Some demographics seem obsessed with being seen having one in their ear, and some just break them out when it's actually useful to use one.
I live in the DC area. This is a very easy thing to observe, over and over again, as you move from one demographic to another. It's strange, but it's plain as day.
Can we all just agree that carrying forward the ancient concept of copyright is ridiculous in a world where it cannot be enforeced without draconian measures?
What's Draconian about a cease and desist letter? It takes minutes to write one, and it takes the people ripping off someone else's work to further their own commercial activities minutes to take down the ripped-off material. It takes them even less time to decide not to rip stuff off in the first place. Hey, look! Nothing draconian involved.
Oh, you mean the draconian measures required when someone has had it pointed out to them that they're ripping off someone's work to avoid paying for the marketing material they're using in their own money-making activities and refuse to stop? The only thing that could make that draconian is the deliberate action of the person ripping off the work. It's a self-inflicted wound, and so no, "we" can't all agree on anything at all resembling what you're saying.
Because Segways are lame. They’re too rational. They fail to acknowledge all the irrational reasons people love their cars.
Yes, irrational reasons like... rain. Or passengers. Or payload. Or personal security. Or range. Or speed.
Google Glass fails to acknowledge that walking around with a camera mounted on the side of your face at all times makes you look dorky.
Look, there are armies of douche-Borgs walking around with bluetooth earpieces in, thinking not that they fall enough below some painful threshold of dorkiness while wearing them, but rather that they look cool doing so. These are the spinning hubcaps of phone accessories.
Rape where the victim is white gets more severe punishments than where the victim is black.
Where? In which jurisdiction? Are you talking about county, state, or federal prosecutions? What numbers are you citing? Which sentencing guidelines are you saying are based on skin color?
Black defendants in Washington, D.C. are much more likely to be exonerated (through jury nullification) than white defendants.
That complaint is a cultural one. You're complaining about the behavior of jurors, not the structure of the laws under which they operate. A significant enough, plainly race-based action by jurors would be simple grounds for a re-trial.
NYPD Stop-and-frisks are around 2.3 million for blacks but 450K for whites.
NYPD stop-and-frisks are also conducted - for obvious reasons - in much higher numbers where actual crime is much, much higher. Where illegal weapons, drug trade and the rest are more common. It sounds like your main complaint here is the ethnic background of the people who live and walk the streets in areas where there are lots more criminals.
Pot use is higher among whites while pot arrests are higher among blacks.
I notice that you're carefully avoiding any discussion of the circumstances in which such arrests take place. There's a big difference between in-the-house suburban pot heads and in-the-street urban pot heads.
These are a few easily quantifiable bits of data
Which hasn't stopped you, of course!
You also get the white "privilege" (horrible name for it) factor, i.e. you basically get treated with slightly more respect by default if you're white.
I can tell you don't get out much, or at least not out of your neighborhood.
Because the student who deliberately blew up something at school intended to do so. Which couldn't possibly more at odds with well known school policies. You really think that intent doesn't matter? That's exactly why there are different kinds of manslaughter and murder charges. Likewise with assault and any number of other similar matters. Intent is a huge factor in arrests, prosecution, conviction, and sentencing on all sorts of matters. There doesn't seem to be any confusion over whether or not she acted deliberately - she gathered the materials together specifically, intentionally because they would make a big bang at her school.
An accidental death caused by a white boy gets no punishment
Because it was a kid unaware of what was going to happen.
An accidental chemical hazard that kills no one, but is caused by a black girl gets charged with felonies.
No accident, and that's the point. She knew what would happen, and did what she did AT SCHOOL, around kids, precisely because what would happen (an explosion) did happen - just as she intended. Are you that unable to grasp the difference? Apparently.
The War on these drugs is one of the most racist policies we have
Why? Which part of the laws being prosecuted take race into consideration? Or is it that you're the worst racist in the bunch by implying that people with a certain skin color just can't stop themselves from abusing specific drugs and getting involved in crime surrounding trafficking in it? Or are you just a confused racist, in the sense that you think an equal number of different looking people should be convicted of different things - whatever is necessary - in order to make the outcome statistically similar, regardless, and based solely on skin pigment?
Please list the institutions (and their defined rules/structures) that take race into account. Other, I mean, than quota-based admission/hiring/testing policies that favor particular skin colors, heritage, or gender. Is that what you're referring to?
You can simply compare punishments for the same crime meted out by our justice system
Such as? Or are you confusing things like murder rates within a particular group with murder convictions? Rampant violence and the attending legal consequences vary from place to place as a function of culture. Or are you saying that there is some institutional structure in Chicago that creates wildly more gang violence than is found in, say, ethnically (demographically) similar areas around Washington DC? Which institution are you referring to? Please be specific.
You must be really bad at understanding things. A bit of hyperbole is sometimes used to emphasize the surprise one might experience at discovering how much better something is than might be expected.
Agreed. I think I'd rather listen to music in my Suburban (which is Bose-ified) than pretty much any environment I've managed to create indoors at home.
Slashdot Mirror
And YOU are ranting based on words that didn't address prescribed drugs. Which makes you drama queen with no reading comprehension, and someone having a shrill hissy fit over which I imagine your late mother would be embarassed, since observations about the hemp-obsessed subculture have absolutely nothing to do with the nature of her demise. I do like your fantastically ironic bitching about arrogance, though. Fine work.
Just because something is used as propaganda, it does not magically become false.
Well that's just, like, your opinon, man.
True, though. But this is still just about stoners looking for another avenue. A familiar refrain from the crowd that thinks they'd be better off with a tires, a spouse, underwear, and air craft carriers all made out of hemp.
My central point is only that photographs(1) are objects
But this is where I think we disagree. A print is an object. Making a photograph is a process. There are many routes to that print (or projected slide, or gird of pixels on a tablet, etc).
Photographs(1) can be manipulated
No, photographs (here, sticking with your notion of not referring to digitally captured images as photographs, only things that use something chemically photosensitive) are manipulated. Every single one of them. Film speed and tonal behavior? Lens behavior like field curvature, chromatic smearing, and non-infinite depth of field? Choice of chemistry? Grain? Paper stock? How it's all souped? Filters to deal with color temps? The photographer's own choice of exposure method? The use of reflectors or supplementray lighting?
... a distinction of no distinction other than the need to master a different set of tools.
Every projection of the scene by a lens onto a two-dimensional surface placed by the photographer somewhere that records that projection according to his or her thoughts on composition is a manipulation from beginning to end. The entire concept of a "real" image is just silly. Chemical production of grains that are patterned after the projected light, or variations in a grid of pixels pushed through an A to D process
Bad example, because it actually is tracked who owns and uses a car. Or what did you think those license plates are for?
Bad analogy. Criminals steal cars - expressly for the purpose of using them in a crime - all the time.
Why do we have laws at all then? Why do we say don't have sex with children when criminals are just going to do it anyway?
Really bad analogy. Your implication is that we could stop people from having sex with children by banning children.
The analogy you're looking for is that just like we have laws that carry penalties for abusing kids, we have penalties for killing people. Using rifles, or using blunt instruments like pipes and bats (which are used far more often than rifles to murder people, says the FBI).
So yes: we have laws that "ban" murder, by making it really suck to be a murderer that's been caught having murdered someone. Just like it sucks to be someone that's been caught having abused a kid.
Why is there no accountability for government workers?
Public employee unions.
You loose your right to post on /.
Is there a way that can be tightened back up?
Isn't there some utility that could be added to all systems and unify password management?
Single sign on, and tools like Active Directory aren't just in beta testing, you know?
I always suspect that companies in these cases deserve what happens to them
Did you see the outfit that ERP was wearing? That general ledger module was WAY above it's knee. And I think the CRM middleware was wearing a lot of perfume. Totally asking for it.
Might be a regional thing
No, it's a cultural thing. Some demographics seem obsessed with being seen having one in their ear, and some just break them out when it's actually useful to use one.
I live in the DC area. This is a very easy thing to observe, over and over again, as you move from one demographic to another. It's strange, but it's plain as day.
I think it's you.
No, it's not.
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
Can we all just agree that carrying forward the ancient concept of copyright is ridiculous in a world where it cannot be enforeced without draconian measures?
What's Draconian about a cease and desist letter? It takes minutes to write one, and it takes the people ripping off someone else's work to further their own commercial activities minutes to take down the ripped-off material. It takes them even less time to decide not to rip stuff off in the first place. Hey, look! Nothing draconian involved.
Oh, you mean the draconian measures required when someone has had it pointed out to them that they're ripping off someone's work to avoid paying for the marketing material they're using in their own money-making activities and refuse to stop? The only thing that could make that draconian is the deliberate action of the person ripping off the work. It's a self-inflicted wound, and so no, "we" can't all agree on anything at all resembling what you're saying.
That excuse didn't seem to work for Bayer losing the Aspirin trademark.
You keep saying that, but you really don't know the first thing about it, do you? No, you don't.
Fair Use.
You don't actually know what that means, do you?
Because Segways are lame. They’re too rational. They fail to acknowledge all the irrational reasons people love their cars.
Yes, irrational reasons like ... rain. Or passengers. Or payload. Or personal security. Or range. Or speed.
Google Glass fails to acknowledge that walking around with a camera mounted on the side of your face at all times makes you look dorky.
Look, there are armies of douche-Borgs walking around with bluetooth earpieces in, thinking not that they fall enough below some painful threshold of dorkiness while wearing them, but rather that they look cool doing so. These are the spinning hubcaps of phone accessories.
Rape where the victim is white gets more severe punishments than where the victim is black.
Where? In which jurisdiction? Are you talking about county, state, or federal prosecutions? What numbers are you citing? Which sentencing guidelines are you saying are based on skin color?
Black defendants in Washington, D.C. are much more likely to be exonerated (through jury nullification) than white defendants.
That complaint is a cultural one. You're complaining about the behavior of jurors, not the structure of the laws under which they operate. A significant enough, plainly race-based action by jurors would be simple grounds for a re-trial.
NYPD Stop-and-frisks are around 2.3 million for blacks but 450K for whites.
NYPD stop-and-frisks are also conducted - for obvious reasons - in much higher numbers where actual crime is much, much higher. Where illegal weapons, drug trade and the rest are more common. It sounds like your main complaint here is the ethnic background of the people who live and walk the streets in areas where there are lots more criminals.
Pot use is higher among whites while pot arrests are higher among blacks.
I notice that you're carefully avoiding any discussion of the circumstances in which such arrests take place. There's a big difference between in-the-house suburban pot heads and in-the-street urban pot heads.
These are a few easily quantifiable bits of data
Which hasn't stopped you, of course!
You also get the white "privilege" (horrible name for it) factor, i.e. you basically get treated with slightly more respect by default if you're white.
I can tell you don't get out much, or at least not out of your neighborhood.
The war on drugs targets and prosecutes non-whites more harshly for the same action.
Which statute are you referring to, specifically?
Why are you so obsessed over intent?
Because the student who deliberately blew up something at school intended to do so. Which couldn't possibly more at odds with well known school policies. You really think that intent doesn't matter? That's exactly why there are different kinds of manslaughter and murder charges. Likewise with assault and any number of other similar matters. Intent is a huge factor in arrests, prosecution, conviction, and sentencing on all sorts of matters. There doesn't seem to be any confusion over whether or not she acted deliberately - she gathered the materials together specifically, intentionally because they would make a big bang at her school.
The argument is that a law was technically broken, so they have no choice but to charge her. So why doesn't that argument apply to both people?
The key word you seem to be (deliberately, obviously) missing here is: intent.
Accidental shooting. Deliberate explosion, on school grounds around kids. What part of that distinction isn't clear to you?
An accidental death caused by a white boy gets no punishment
Because it was a kid unaware of what was going to happen.
An accidental chemical hazard that kills no one, but is caused by a black girl gets charged with felonies.
No accident, and that's the point. She knew what would happen, and did what she did AT SCHOOL, around kids, precisely because what would happen (an explosion) did happen - just as she intended. Are you that unable to grasp the difference? Apparently.
The War on these drugs is one of the most racist policies we have
Why? Which part of the laws being prosecuted take race into consideration? Or is it that you're the worst racist in the bunch by implying that people with a certain skin color just can't stop themselves from abusing specific drugs and getting involved in crime surrounding trafficking in it? Or are you just a confused racist, in the sense that you think an equal number of different looking people should be convicted of different things - whatever is necessary - in order to make the outcome statistically similar, regardless, and based solely on skin pigment?
The US has huge institutionalized race problems.
Please list the institutions (and their defined rules/structures) that take race into account. Other, I mean, than quota-based admission/hiring/testing policies that favor particular skin colors, heritage, or gender. Is that what you're referring to?
You can simply compare punishments for the same crime meted out by our justice system
Such as? Or are you confusing things like murder rates within a particular group with murder convictions? Rampant violence and the attending legal consequences vary from place to place as a function of culture. Or are you saying that there is some institutional structure in Chicago that creates wildly more gang violence than is found in, say, ethnically (demographically) similar areas around Washington DC? Which institution are you referring to? Please be specific.
You must be really bad at understanding things. A bit of hyperbole is sometimes used to emphasize the surprise one might experience at discovering how much better something is than might be expected.
Agreed. I think I'd rather listen to music in my Suburban (which is Bose-ified) than pretty much any environment I've managed to create indoors at home.