Even better, warp the visible light spectrum, but leave other electromagnetic spectrums un-affected. Mind you, if we had *that* level of control over the EM Spectrum, I think Invisibility would be one of the last things we would be worrying about.
As much as I'd like to disagree with you I can't =)
Humans are naturally paranoid creatures (a possible throwback to when we weren't the pinnacle of the food chain), and any hint of suspicion is usually enough to condemn someone - regardless of actual guilt or innocence. Unfortunately I can't see any way to stop this from happening, though I welcome any debate on how it might be achieved.
To get back to the topic at hand though, while the system of non-public discloseure is far from perfect, it at least avoids the possibility of colateral damage when our law enforcement people do make a mistake.
Personally, although *maybe* Habeas Corpus is for the prisoner's sake alone... I think it helps protect society from police being able to abuse their position.
What about if the defendant is mistakenly identified as a child sex offender, and then later released without charge. If the charges were already made public, then the individual would already have received a massive blow to their reputation. IMHO (and the oblig: IANAL) as long as they get their phonecall, their lawyer and are told the charges, then the issue is between them and the state, and has nothing to do with the general public at large.
To date, THEL has destroyed 28 Katyusha test rockets and five test artillery shells. On May 4, 2004, THEL's new transportable version, known as the Mobile Tactical High Energy Laser (MTHEL), tracked and destroyed a large-caliber test rocket at the U.S. Army's White Sands Missile Ranch in New Mexico. The rocket flew faster and higher than the Katyushas, and carried a live warhead. The U.S. and Israel expect MTHEL to be operational and ready for deployment by 2007.
Here in Darwin Australia, we had one once that reportedly landed at the airport, and the maintenance crews put eight thousand litres of aviation fuel in it before they realised it was a mosquito.
Which is, of course, completely and utterly anti-competitive in this case.
How so? I was under the impression that competition between companies in the same industry was all about product and price. AMD will most likely follow suit, and the end user (ie. us) benefit.
Its dificult to tell if you intended this as funny or not, but IMHO (and no offense to any Americanites on slashdot) but this is what you get when you have a country based largely on a puritan belief structure ends up with controlling interest in the worlds largest information tool.
I think Robin Williams said it best; "How anal do you have to be for the English to go: "Get the fuck out!""
The government doesn't need to charge license fees. They can just tax you. A patent would only be useful if it was applied to other countries' corporations.
In Australia, we have a government owned scientific group called the CSIRO. They apparantly own a number of lucrative patents that they have liscenced to corporate America. I believe the profits are used to fuel study on further possibly patentable devices. A previous slashdot article relating to the CSIRO's practices can be found here: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/18/01 4230
Its entirely possible that the US Government is using the same idea. Mind you, I'm not an American, so I'm only speculating:P
Would it change my opinion? not really, but before I get flamed out of existance, let me explain why.
I personally feel that people try too much to pass the buck in these situations. Noone wants to take responsibility for their own actions. A man driving a car hits a pedestrian? This should be dealt with on its own merits. If the driver feels his employer is to blame, then he needs to seek compensation separately.
If the driver of the vehicle was in no condition to be driving, be it due to fatigue, illness or drugs (prescription or other), or the vehicle is at all unsafe, then it should be the driver's right and responsibility to not drive in unsafe conditions.
To bring this back to the topic at hand, Unionism has its place in making it easier for people to get a basic level of benefits, but it is up to the individual to be responsible for their own working career. If you aren't happy in your job, its up to you to do something about it.
if they are convicted of some crime while acting as a representative of your company, then you get the same punishment they do, or maybe it's split between the two of you.
While I agree with the spirit of your argument, I see this particular sentence as a "slippery slope" issue. As an example, what if you own a pizza delivery company, and one of your staff takes out a child at a crossing, panics and runs. I know in Australia, and possibly in the US, this could lead to charges of manslaughter. Would it be fair to then charge you, as the business owner, with manslaughter?
I believe you didn't intend your statement to apply to this level, but it seemed unclear enough to warrant highlighting it.
And how did you get sent the login screen? Oh yes, that's right, you connected to the server you weren't authorised to connect to... As I said, there is no way to tell if you are authorised to connect to a machine before you actually try to connect.
What most people seem to be overlooking is that this individual kept this up for 2 years
Ok fine, he accesses it for a couple of hours before realizing he shouldn't be there, thats fine, slap on the wrist - don't do it again etc. Keep coming back for 2 freaking years? yeah right...
Well in a business sense, you'd loose the worlds most powerful communications tool. You'd loose the ability to trade shares on anything but your own stock exchange (short of using a third party at any rate). eBay day traders would loose bigtime. Corporate multinationals (Sony, Microsoft etc etc.) would experience a blowout in costs in terms of VPN tunneling equipment (assuming this is even possible under the model you describe).
This is not even taking into account things such as online MMO's, entertainment websites and software, game patch releases from the developers, gambling, porn, news, government communications to embassies etc.
IMHO it would cost billions to completely restructure the internet in this way, including the costs involved in hardware and software to allow organisations that span the globe to circumvent or tunnel through any of the restrictions.
Its not the fans that dictate what shows are shown and when their timeslots are, its the advertising dollars.
If a sponsor wants to advertise in a particular show, then the more money they spend, the more desirable the timeslot they will get. Coroborating evidence for this is the recent (within the last 5 years) influx of "this show brought to you by.." advertisements before and after many shows.
This suggests that, rather than lobbying the producers, it would be more beneficial to lobby the shows (or alternatively try and market the show to additional) sponsors.
Mind you, perhaps I'm just imagining things.. (Obligatory quote:) They say madness runs in our family. Some people even call me crazy! And why? Because I dared to dream... of my own race of atomic monsters! Atomic supermen with octagonal-shaped bodies that suck blood out of... [walks out of room]
You're arguing that labor creats property rights? That's a quite socialist argument, and I'm sympathetic to it. If we assume that labor creates ownership, and we say your family did help you perform the labor, then the chickens aren't yours, but jointly owned.
To a point, I'm also arguing that any child (or children) of mine will be contributing directly to my family unit from at least some point in their development. As a responsible human being, I feel that I should at least attempt to provide for their future after I am mere ashes or worm food, rather than just turning them loose into the world without a penny.
I pay tax for every dollar I earn. I also pay tax on interest earned on my savings. No doubt any of my children will also pay tax on any interest they earn from money I give them. I don't feel that the government should be able to take a chunk of that money before I give it to them, and then skim yet more from the interest earned from the remainder.
I would like the right to choose where my wealth (if any) gets spent. If I have enough money to ensure the survivability of a few generations in my family tree, then I will. Others may not take this path, and should be free to donate their millions to charities, medical research or even to burn it on the funeral pire with them should they choose.
This is my own personal opinion however, so I guess this makes me "pro choice" =)
The funny green peices of paper are government creations true, but if you do a little research into why they were created it may change your view somewhat.
All currency is a convenience so that we don't have to carry around thirty chickens to buy a side of beef. Back in the dim dark past, a government decided to arbitrarily say that because a chicken is worth one thirtieth of a side of beef, then let a chicken be worth 'Y' and a side of beef be worth 30x'Y'. Thus instead of carrying a cart load of chickens, you could carry a pocket full of 'Y'.
If at this point money had never been created, would the government have a right to take four of my chickens just because I was dead? IMO no freaking way. The government didn't really help me grow, feed or maintain my chickens, my family did, so if the government wants a chicken dinner they can go grow their own.
Apologies for the slightly dodgy examples (and lack of references), and the numbers are examples only =).
Dare I risk my karma and mention Wing Commander the movie?:P
Space combat in it for capital class ships was somewhere between a US Navy battleship and submarine warfare. Basically you had no accurate control over what your targeting computer would lock onto, and anything but a guided missile was relatively inaccurate. This style of gameplay could also still be enjoyable - I remember a couple of submarine games back in the early 90's that were like this.
Mind you, IMHO the physics engine for full 3d vectoring in basically zero gravity (this is assuming a total avoidance of combat within a gravity well) would be a nightmare to build and streamline.
I dunno, IMHO cartoons stopped being "apparantly" less violent in the days of "Sam & Max Hit the Road". Its funny violent, but when the cute little rabbit picks up a kitten, rams his fist down its throat, rummages around for a while, rips out a letter and then throws the kitten into a trash can, its hard to justify the diference between the two. I understand your meaning, and to a certain extent agree with it, but to the uninitiated, the diferences are small enough to be considered trivial.
Slashdot Mirror
Even better, warp the visible light spectrum, but leave other electromagnetic spectrums un-affected. Mind you, if we had *that* level of control over the EM Spectrum, I think Invisibility would be one of the last things we would be worrying about.
someone requisition me a nice heavy guitar track and a nice slow beat.
so who here knows the lyrics to Pink Floyd's "Another Brick in the Wall"?
As much as I'd like to disagree with you I can't =)
Humans are naturally paranoid creatures (a possible throwback to when we weren't the pinnacle of the food chain), and any hint of suspicion is usually enough to condemn someone - regardless of actual guilt or innocence. Unfortunately I can't see any way to stop this from happening, though I welcome any debate on how it might be achieved.
To get back to the topic at hand though, while the system of non-public discloseure is far from perfect, it at least avoids the possibility of colateral damage when our law enforcement people do make a mistake.
What about if the defendant is mistakenly identified as a child sex offender, and then later released without charge. If the charges were already made public, then the individual would already have received a massive blow to their reputation. IMHO (and the oblig: IANAL) as long as they get their phonecall, their lawyer and are told the charges, then the issue is between them and the state, and has nothing to do with the general public at large.
Also, the following site (it has a picture of a supposed prototype) http://ishitech.co.il/0604ar3.htm
Here in Darwin Australia, we had one once that reportedly landed at the airport, and the maintenance crews put eight thousand litres of aviation fuel in it before they realised it was a mosquito.
How so? I was under the impression that competition between companies in the same industry was all about product and price. AMD will most likely follow suit, and the end user (ie. us) benefit.
Its dificult to tell if you intended this as funny or not, but IMHO (and no offense to any Americanites on slashdot) but this is what you get when you have a country based largely on a puritan belief structure ends up with controlling interest in the worlds largest information tool.
I think Robin Williams said it best; "How anal do you have to be for the English to go: "Get the fuck out!""
In Australia, we have a government owned scientific group called the CSIRO. They apparantly own a number of lucrative patents that they have liscenced to corporate America. I believe the profits are used to fuel study on further possibly patentable devices. A previous slashdot article relating to the CSIRO's practices can be found here: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/18/0
Its entirely possible that the US Government is using the same idea. Mind you, I'm not an American, so I'm only speculating
Any technology that is indistingushable from magic is just another tool of the conspiracy?
Would it change my opinion? not really, but before I get flamed out of existance, let me explain why.
I personally feel that people try too much to pass the buck in these situations. Noone wants to take responsibility for their own actions. A man driving a car hits a pedestrian? This should be dealt with on its own merits. If the driver feels his employer is to blame, then he needs to seek compensation separately.
If the driver of the vehicle was in no condition to be driving, be it due to fatigue, illness or drugs (prescription or other), or the vehicle is at all unsafe, then it should be the driver's right and responsibility to not drive in unsafe conditions.
To bring this back to the topic at hand, Unionism has its place in making it easier for people to get a basic level of benefits, but it is up to the individual to be responsible for their own working career. If you aren't happy in your job, its up to you to do something about it.
While I agree with the spirit of your argument, I see this particular sentence as a "slippery slope" issue. As an example, what if you own a pizza delivery company, and one of your staff takes out a child at a crossing, panics and runs. I know in Australia, and possibly in the US, this could lead to charges of manslaughter. Would it be fair to then charge you, as the business owner, with manslaughter?
I believe you didn't intend your statement to apply to this level, but it seemed unclear enough to warrant highlighting it.
What most people seem to be overlooking is that this individual kept this up for 2 years
Ok fine, he accesses it for a couple of hours before realizing he shouldn't be there, thats fine, slap on the wrist - don't do it again etc. Keep coming back for 2 freaking years? yeah right...
thought up a day full of pranks needs to be summarily shot, drawn and quartered and..... Pain! Lots and lots of pain!!! *shudder*
I don't think they got that
Well in a business sense, you'd loose the worlds most powerful communications tool. You'd loose the ability to trade shares on anything but your own stock exchange (short of using a third party at any rate). eBay day traders would loose bigtime. Corporate multinationals (Sony, Microsoft etc etc.) would experience a blowout in costs in terms of VPN tunneling equipment (assuming this is even possible under the model you describe).
This is not even taking into account things such as online MMO's, entertainment websites and software, game patch releases from the developers, gambling, porn, news, government communications to embassies etc.
IMHO it would cost billions to completely restructure the internet in this way, including the costs involved in hardware and software to allow organisations that span the globe to circumvent or tunnel through any of the restrictions.
Its not the fans that dictate what shows are shown and when their timeslots are, its the advertising dollars.
... of my own race of atomic monsters! Atomic supermen with octagonal-shaped bodies that suck blood out of ... [walks out of room]
If a sponsor wants to advertise in a particular show, then the more money they spend, the more desirable the timeslot they will get. Coroborating evidence for this is the recent (within the last 5 years) influx of "this show brought to you by.." advertisements before and after many shows.
This suggests that, rather than lobbying the producers, it would be more beneficial to lobby the shows (or alternatively try and market the show to additional) sponsors.
Mind you, perhaps I'm just imagining things.. (Obligatory quote:) They say madness runs in our family. Some people even call me crazy! And why? Because I dared to dream
so you wouldn't support changing the name of a flying potion to "Red Bull"? :P
You're arguing that labor creats property rights? That's a quite socialist argument, and I'm sympathetic to it. If we assume that labor creates ownership, and we say your family did help you perform the labor, then the chickens aren't yours, but jointly owned.
To a point, I'm also arguing that any child (or children) of mine will be contributing directly to my family unit from at least some point in their development. As a responsible human being, I feel that I should at least attempt to provide for their future after I am mere ashes or worm food, rather than just turning them loose into the world without a penny.
I pay tax for every dollar I earn. I also pay tax on interest earned on my savings. No doubt any of my children will also pay tax on any interest they earn from money I give them. I don't feel that the government should be able to take a chunk of that money before I give it to them, and then skim yet more from the interest earned from the remainder.
I would like the right to choose where my wealth (if any) gets spent. If I have enough money to ensure the survivability of a few generations in my family tree, then I will. Others may not take this path, and should be free to donate their millions to charities, medical research or even to burn it on the funeral pire with them should they choose.
This is my own personal opinion however, so I guess this makes me "pro choice" =)
The funny green peices of paper are government creations true, but if you do a little research into why they were created it may change your view somewhat.
All currency is a convenience so that we don't have to carry around thirty chickens to buy a side of beef. Back in the dim dark past, a government decided to arbitrarily say that because a chicken is worth one thirtieth of a side of beef, then let a chicken be worth 'Y' and a side of beef be worth 30x'Y'. Thus instead of carrying a cart load of chickens, you could carry a pocket full of 'Y'.
If at this point money had never been created, would the government have a right to take four of my chickens just because I was dead? IMO no freaking way. The government didn't really help me grow, feed or maintain my chickens, my family did, so if the government wants a chicken dinner they can go grow their own.
Apologies for the slightly dodgy examples (and lack of references), and the numbers are examples only =).
funniest slashdot comment _EVER_ =)
Dare I risk my karma and mention Wing Commander the movie? :P
Space combat in it for capital class ships was somewhere between a US Navy battleship and submarine warfare. Basically you had no accurate control over what your targeting computer would lock onto, and anything but a guided missile was relatively inaccurate. This style of gameplay could also still be enjoyable - I remember a couple of submarine games back in the early 90's that were like this.
Mind you, IMHO the physics engine for full 3d vectoring in basically zero gravity (this is assuming a total avoidance of combat within a gravity well) would be a nightmare to build and streamline.
I dunno, IMHO cartoons stopped being "apparantly" less violent in the days of "Sam & Max Hit the Road". Its funny violent, but when the cute little rabbit picks up a kitten, rams his fist down its throat, rummages around for a while, rips out a letter and then throws the kitten into a trash can, its hard to justify the diference between the two. I understand your meaning, and to a certain extent agree with it, but to the uninitiated, the diferences are small enough to be considered trivial.
This just leads to an arms race amongst men and eagles - eventually American hunters will be using exocet missiles instead of shotguns.
(for the obtuse, this is a poor attempt at humor)
I for one welcome our new laser wielding stealthy shark overlords