Monsanto should not have been granted the patent until they could *prove* that their crops can only pollinate with themselves. Then if you are caught using their product, they could have a case.
However, I think the ability to patent any genetic modification, lifeform etc, should be eliminated. Life or modified life should not be patentable, period.
How long until someone is prevented from leaving the country because some patented modification to their DNA, blood, etc, is at threat should they do so? How long until someone is kidnapped so they can be "sampled" by a rival company?
Its funny to see a company screw itself so badly with regards to PR. Sadly, only the technical will see this, the vast majority of people will still say "Oh Shiny" and sign up for a smart phone they barely utilize, thus encouraging AT&T to rape as many customers as possible for the short term profits. Whoever is running the company is probably looking forward to the fat bonus they get at the end of the y year, why chance reducing that by investing in infrastructure BEFORE they have to. I want a phone carrier that offers me a phone service that costs me $20 per month but includes CallerID, Answering services, SMS, some Data usage, and Unlimited local calling after 5pm. That would mean I spent $20 a month (btw I use my phone a maximum of say 30mins per day). Up here in Canada thats impossible, even the "companies" created to offer "competition" (but actually owned by one of the big carriers) don't offer that. The above probably costs around $45 per month or more when you sign up with Koodo (owned by Telus). There is zero incentive for real competition up here because the market is controlled by a few carriers who would rather collaborate to suck the customers dry while they can.
Those 2 quotes, along with pictures of Toewes and Hitler side by side should be emailed to every politician in Canada. This Conservative government has been trying its best to curtail all of our rights to privacy at every turn. Thankfully the system has mostly worked to prevent this so far, but then they had a minority government, now they have the majority. I think Harper honestly wants a police state, not an overt one, a subtle one that gives his party complete access to everything they need to remain in power. I would sound like more of a loon for saying that, were it not for the evidence of the various legislative attempts they have made in the past few years to remove our rights, the police state tactics utilized in the G8/G20 conference, and the attitudes of the conservatives themselves. Time to start referring to the "Harper Regime" I suspect:(
And those same people that voted against the Liberals and the NDP and for Harper's Conservatives evidently found it was okay for Harper to avoid difficult or embarrassing questions by proroguing Parliament not just once but twice? I think the main reasons Harper is in power right now are threefold: * We have an aging population - the older people get the more conservative they tend to be. Young people tend to seek change, older people tend to avoid it. * The economy sucks, when that happens people prefer minimal change in the hopes that it won't get worse. * The Liberals had a leader who exhibited virtually no personality, and was seen by many as being too "American" since he had spent a lot of time down south of the border.
Now that's all my personal opinion and its painting things with a very broad brush I realize, but I think demographics are the main reason Harper got into power. Most Canadians ignore politics I think. A lot do not vote. I also suspect that while the NDP gained substantially from the election, gaining official opposition status, more of the exploded Liberal party voted Conservative than NDP, preferring right-wing politics to the risk that the NDP would want to make major changes. I supported the NDP of course in this last election. I have voted both Conservative and Liberal in the past, based on my assessment of who best represented my interests. In the last few elections I have voted against Harper though, not really in favour of anyone else. I think Harper is very bad for Canada. I wouldn't buy a used car from that smarmy bastard:P
To be fair, the high cost of the G8/G20 conferences was due in part to the massive amount of police anti-riot and riot-supression gear that was purchased for police all across the country, plus the expenses of bringing all those police to Toronto then staging the violent parts of the riot (using Police undercover agents to incite the violence) so that they get a chance to try out the new equipment. Really all Harper did was try to hide the cost of equipping and training the enforcers for the Police State using the conference. But then he didn't have the majority then did he? I suspect now he can afford to be more obvious about things, once the new prisons are up and running. Until then he will just keep putting more legislation in place to aid his corporate owners and make the task of turning the country into more of a police state easier down the road.
Yes, the election gave our Supreme Leader Stephen Harper license to build his police state (practiced during the G20), once he has legislation like this in place - and all the new prisons have been completed, and that might be seen as a "shot myself in the ass" moment I admit. Harper now has free reign to remake the country according to his own plan - and its all Right-Wing, all the time for him. I am ashamed of my fellow Canadians for electing this charlatan to office repeatedly. However, from the point of view of the political Left (i.e. the New Democratic part, since even our old Liberals were very conservative much of the time, and sliding more so), it raised them from an also-ran with only a few seats in the house to being the official opposition for the first time in history. It also exploded the Liberal party which is all but dead at the moment. The election polarized Canada politically. Now what remains to be seen is if Canadians can find the wits to throw Harper out on his fucking ass in the next election and elect an NDP prime minister. Sadly, Jack Layton died after the election and I think only he might have pulled that off. Personally I think its probably too late for Canada now. Harper is in and he is going to stay in, using/abusing all the powers of his office to stay in power. I am quite prepared to believe that the Conservatives will find some manner to abuse this legislation once it passes to help stiffle the opposition or find dirt to spew out in attack ads.
If you want old civilizations with long histories, try Ancient Egypt: 5500 BCE (until arguably 30 BCE) according to Wikipedia. Yes I know Sumer and all that are old too, but they didn't last quite as long...
Oh no, I am equally intolerant towards all Monotheistic religions. I think they all have fairly benign teachings and are generally fairly acceptable. However, the teaching that each is "The One True Way(tm)" leads to intolerance, murder, warfare, massacres, ethnic cleansing, hatred, abuse, bigotry etc. Monotheism is easily turned into a tool for the control of people and the abuse of others. This is of course true of anything where one group believes they have the one true answer.
Real Science no, of course not. Using boiled willow bark as a remedy for various ailments based on praxis, very very likely.
As for the killing of witches - its worth noting that the word translated as "witch" is in Hebrew the word for "poisoner" - but that to ignorant Europeans the two meant the same thing.
All of the Abrahamic religions are in essence illogical and violent at their core. Despite the surface message of peace and love etc, most have been the inspiration for massive amounts of human suffering, torture, murder, abuse, rape and depravity.
the effort to bring better and more convenient communications to people everywhere, particularly in obscure languages that might otherwise die off - although we are losing languages on a regular basis.
I am saddened to hear that all this effort is being directed merely to bring a monotheistic religion like Christianity - likely the cause of more human misery than any other individual concept in history - to an ever widening audience. Its like building a tool to spread ignorance...
So many drivers should not be on the roads already, so yes, I cannot see flying cars ever become a viable option until such time as we can automate the whole process, including the ability for a ground based system to override the vehicle controls if necessary.
That's because they had recognized that some of us out there had *perfect* heads, and thus were bald, while the rest of you had to cover up your imperfect heads with a layer of fur. Some of us just haven't recognized the truth of this yet, and thus still view MPB as a problem:)
People people, corporation people are the cause of the disappearing amendments after all, and corporation people who don't like a law buy a better law. Not an option for most people people.
You are trying to use logic and reason, supported with a reasonable link to a source, when discussing an issue with an audience that is universally unwilling to accept that they are wrong. Its like trying to deal with Creationists. Its not going to work, period. The other side has their opinion and is going to stick to it. Now, to be fair they have that right. Everyone has a right to their own faith. I just wish people wouldn't try to use that as a basis for logical discussion. If I believe Wombats secretly control the world's politicians with their psychic abilities (arguably no less believable than Creationism since neither is based on a whit of scientific evidence), I can share my discussions with other Wombatists, but its pointless to try to explain my position to those who have not "seen the light":P The Anti-GW crowd will still be posting their denials when the first 100 million people have died from flooding, when major coastal cities are under water, when the poles are completely melted, and when most of the equatorial region has been in a drought for 20 years. Sadly in the US they will probably be in the majority position in Government as well:(
I think the only reason we are so aware of privacy in the modern world is because so many organizations are actively trying to exploit it. 100 years ago it simply wasn't practical to try to maintain large card catalogues of everyone in a country unless you really needed to, due to the expense. Now its trivial, and there are plenty of businesses and government organizations that are quite happy to have greater profitability/control over our lives.
I have a FB account I admit. I should delete my account (if that's actually possible, I am sure FB will keep the data anyways). I access it a few times a year mostly when my wife tells me there is something posted on my wall that I should read. I detest the centralization of personal information and even more so the active data mining of it.
I agree with TFA, its an elaborate man in the middle attack designed to do as much as it can to reduce our privacy and exploit it for the purpose of making money.
Of course we should not use a single axis. However the point I was making is that many people - almost all of whom see politics as a spectrum - seem to thoroughly be confused about what falls where. Trying to add further axises into my comment would only have made it more confusing and difficult to explain. I know politics is more complex than that.
Yes, our "leaders" think only short term. Of course the voters that elect them, and the corporations that pay for their elections also think only short term because few people seem capable of thinking beyond when they retire, or the next election etc. This is why I am thoroughly convinced that we will NOT ever deal with climate change even if we get everyone on earth to agree that its happening and we are the cause. No one will want to make the sacrifices necessary, they will all want someone else to make those sacrifices. This is only made worse by the fact that most of our policy decisions are being made by corporations (through their lobbyists), and as I said above there are no morals in an effective corporation. The desire for the all-holy Profit will eventually kill most of us unless something changes rather dramatically.
Battle of Allia - 387 B.C.
Battle of Gergovia - 52 B.C.
Battle of Soissons - 486 A.D.
Battle of Tolbaic - 496
Battle of Vouille - 507
Battle of Tours / Battle of Poitiers - 732
Battle of Pavia - 773
Battle for Paris - 885-886
Battle of Val-es-Dunes - 1047
Battle of Hastings - October 14, 1066
Battle of Dorylaeum - July 1, 1097
Battle of Ascalon - August 12, 1099
Battle of Montgisard (1177)
Battle of Bouvines - July 27, 1214
Battle of Morlaix - 1342
Battle of Ardres - 1351
Battle of Cocherel - May 16, 1364
Battle of Montiel - 1369
Battle of La Rochelle - June 22, 1372
Battle of Chiset - 1373
Battle of Roosebeke - November 27, 1382
Battle of Bauge - March 21, 1421
Siege of Orleans - October 12, 1428-May 8, 1429
Battle of Jargeau - June 11-12, 1429
Battle of Beaugency - June 16-17, 1429
Battle of Patay - June 18, 1429
Siege of Compiegne - June 18, 1429
Battle of Gerbevoy - 1435
Battle of Formigny - April 15, 1450
Battle of Castillon - July 17, 1453
Battle of Agnadello - 1509
Battle of Marignano - 1515
Battle of Ceresole - 1544
Battle of Rocroi - 1643
Battle of Nordlingen - 1645
Battle of Lens - 1648
Battle of Dunes - 1658
Battle of Fleurus - 1690
Battle of Beachy Head - 1690
Battle of Landen - 1693
Battle of Denain - 1712
Battle of Fontenoy - May 11th, 1745
Battle of Roucoux - 1746
Battle of Lauffeld - 1747
Battle of Hastenbeck - 1757
Battle of Carillon - 1758
Battle of Yorktown - 1781
Battle of the Chesapeake - September 5, 1781
Battle of Valmy - September 20, 1792
Battle of Fleurus - 1794
Battle of the Vosges - July 13, 1794
Battle of Castiglione - 1796
Battle of the Bridge of Arcole - November 17, 1796
Battle of Diersheim, April 20th, 1797
Battle of Rivoli - 1797
Battle of the Pyramids - 1798
Battle of Mount Tabor - 1799
Battle of Abukir - 1799
Second Battle of Zurich - 1799
Battle of Marengo - 1800
Battle of Hohenlinden - December 3, 1800
Battle of Austerlitz - December 2, 1805
Battle of Jena-Auerstedt - October 14, 1806
Battle of Friedland - June 14, 180
Battle of Tudela - November 23, 1808
Battle of Ucles - January 13, 1809
Battle of Ciudad-Real - March 27, 1809
Battle of Eckmuhl - April 21st, 1809
Battle of Wagram - July 5-6, 1809
Battle of Medellin - 1809
Battle of Ocana - 1809
Battle of Smolensk - August 17, 1812
Battle of Borodino - September 7, 1812
Battle of Dresden - 1813
Battle of Lutzen - May 2, 1813
Battle of Vauchamps - February 14, 1814
Battle of Ligny - 1815
Battle of Trocadero - 1823
Battle of Navarino - October 20, 1827
Invasion of Algeria - 1830
Battle of Balaclava - October 25, 1854
Battle of Malakoff - 1855
Battle of Solferino - 1859
Battle of Foochow - 1884
First Battle of the Marne - 1914
Togoland - August 26, 1914
Battle of Ypres - October 19-November 22, 1914
Battle of Verdun - 1916
Second Battle of the Aisne - April 16-May 9, 1917
Second Battle of the Marne - 1918
Second Battle of the Marne - 1918
Battle of Belleau Wood - June 1-26, 1918
Battle of Chateau-Thierry - July 18, 1918
Battle of Amiens - August 8-11, 1918
Battle of Maysalun - 1922
Battle of Koufra - 1941
Operation Dragoon - 1944
There are a few entries I didn't include because they gave only dates and not names, making it harder to look them up.
Oh, was your point to perpetuate the fucking tiresome meme (always repeated at every mention of France witnessed by any American it seems, certainly here on/. at any rate) that the French are all cowards and retreat at the drop of a hat etc. I will say it slowly for those of you who love this meme: "They lost in a war against a superior enemy. That is all".
In fact it took Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Russia (helped eventually by the USA of course, although years late to the party) to defeat that selfsame enemy. Should we be surprised that the French lost too? They got attacked right at the start and so faced the Germans pretty much on their own.
Caveat: I am English Canadian, not French. In fact I don't particularly like the French or France, but I am tired of this constantly repeated idiocy. All it does is scream "I am a fucking ignorant American" every time it gets repeated.
I guess none of you have ever heard of Napoleon either?
Slashdot Mirror
Monsanto should not have been granted the patent until they could *prove* that their crops can only pollinate with themselves. Then if you are caught using their product, they could have a case.
However, I think the ability to patent any genetic modification, lifeform etc, should be eliminated. Life or modified life should not be patentable, period.
How long until someone is prevented from leaving the country because some patented modification to their DNA, blood, etc, is at threat should they do so? How long until someone is kidnapped so they can be "sampled" by a rival company?
Its funny to see a company screw itself so badly with regards to PR. Sadly, only the technical will see this, the vast majority of people will still say "Oh Shiny" and sign up for a smart phone they barely utilize, thus encouraging AT&T to rape as many customers as possible for the short term profits. Whoever is running the company is probably looking forward to the fat bonus they get at the end of the y year, why chance reducing that by investing in infrastructure BEFORE they have to.
I want a phone carrier that offers me a phone service that costs me $20 per month but includes CallerID, Answering services, SMS, some Data usage, and Unlimited local calling after 5pm. That would mean I spent $20 a month (btw I use my phone a maximum of say 30mins per day). Up here in Canada thats impossible, even the "companies" created to offer "competition" (but actually owned by one of the big carriers) don't offer that. The above probably costs around $45 per month or more when you sign up with Koodo (owned by Telus).
There is zero incentive for real competition up here because the market is controlled by a few carriers who would rather collaborate to suck the customers dry while they can.
You are quite welcome, I had fun doing it. I apologize for the awful photoshopping though :P
Maybe they need a new logo for the party:
http://www.victors.ca/images/newcclogo.jpg
Those 2 quotes, along with pictures of Toewes and Hitler side by side should be emailed to every politician in Canada. This Conservative government has been trying its best to curtail all of our rights to privacy at every turn. Thankfully the system has mostly worked to prevent this so far, but then they had a minority government, now they have the majority. I think Harper honestly wants a police state, not an overt one, a subtle one that gives his party complete access to everything they need to remain in power. :(
I would sound like more of a loon for saying that, were it not for the evidence of the various legislative attempts they have made in the past few years to remove our rights, the police state tactics utilized in the G8/G20 conference, and the attitudes of the conservatives themselves.
Time to start referring to the "Harper Regime" I suspect
We had a massive civil anti-stupidity campaign last election but the Conservatives got elected anyways...
And those same people that voted against the Liberals and the NDP and for Harper's Conservatives evidently found it was okay for Harper to avoid difficult or embarrassing questions by proroguing Parliament not just once but twice?
I think the main reasons Harper is in power right now are threefold:
* We have an aging population - the older people get the more conservative they tend to be. Young people tend to seek change, older people tend to avoid it.
* The economy sucks, when that happens people prefer minimal change in the hopes that it won't get worse.
* The Liberals had a leader who exhibited virtually no personality, and was seen by many as being too "American" since he had spent a lot of time down south of the border.
Now that's all my personal opinion and its painting things with a very broad brush I realize, but I think demographics are the main reason Harper got into power. Most Canadians ignore politics I think. A lot do not vote. I also suspect that while the NDP gained substantially from the election, gaining official opposition status, more of the exploded Liberal party voted Conservative than NDP, preferring right-wing politics to the risk that the NDP would want to make major changes. :P
I supported the NDP of course in this last election. I have voted both Conservative and Liberal in the past, based on my assessment of who best represented my interests. In the last few elections I have voted against Harper though, not really in favour of anyone else. I think Harper is very bad for Canada. I wouldn't buy a used car from that smarmy bastard
Falling off is a feature, not a bug :)
To be fair, the high cost of the G8/G20 conferences was due in part to the massive amount of police anti-riot and riot-supression gear that was purchased for police all across the country, plus the expenses of bringing all those police to Toronto then staging the violent parts of the riot (using Police undercover agents to incite the violence) so that they get a chance to try out the new equipment. Really all Harper did was try to hide the cost of equipping and training the enforcers for the Police State using the conference. But then he didn't have the majority then did he?
I suspect now he can afford to be more obvious about things, once the new prisons are up and running. Until then he will just keep putting more legislation in place to aid his corporate owners and make the task of turning the country into more of a police state easier down the road.
Yes, the election gave our Supreme Leader Stephen Harper license to build his police state (practiced during the G20), once he has legislation like this in place - and all the new prisons have been completed, and that might be seen as a "shot myself in the ass" moment I admit. Harper now has free reign to remake the country according to his own plan - and its all Right-Wing, all the time for him. I am ashamed of my fellow Canadians for electing this charlatan to office repeatedly.
However, from the point of view of the political Left (i.e. the New Democratic part, since even our old Liberals were very conservative much of the time, and sliding more so), it raised them from an also-ran with only a few seats in the house to being the official opposition for the first time in history. It also exploded the Liberal party which is all but dead at the moment.
The election polarized Canada politically. Now what remains to be seen is if Canadians can find the wits to throw Harper out on his fucking ass in the next election and elect an NDP prime minister. Sadly, Jack Layton died after the election and I think only he might have pulled that off.
Personally I think its probably too late for Canada now. Harper is in and he is going to stay in, using/abusing all the powers of his office to stay in power. I am quite prepared to believe that the Conservatives will find some manner to abuse this legislation once it passes to help stiffle the opposition or find dirt to spew out in attack ads.
Sadly, its very close to the truth, or at least we are heading that way.
If you want old civilizations with long histories, try Ancient Egypt: 5500 BCE (until arguably 30 BCE) according to Wikipedia. Yes I know Sumer and all that are old too, but they didn't last quite as long...
Oh no, I am equally intolerant towards all Monotheistic religions. I think they all have fairly benign teachings and are generally fairly acceptable. However, the teaching that each is "The One True Way(tm)" leads to intolerance, murder, warfare, massacres, ethnic cleansing, hatred, abuse, bigotry etc. Monotheism is easily turned into a tool for the control of people and the abuse of others. This is of course true of anything where one group believes they have the one true answer.
Real Science no, of course not. Using boiled willow bark as a remedy for various ailments based on praxis, very very likely.
As for the killing of witches - its worth noting that the word translated as "witch" is in Hebrew the word for "poisoner" - but that to ignorant Europeans the two meant the same thing.
All of the Abrahamic religions are in essence illogical and violent at their core. Despite the surface message of peace and love etc, most have been the inspiration for massive amounts of human suffering, torture, murder, abuse, rape and depravity.
Monotheism is Evil, wearing a friendly smile.
the effort to bring better and more convenient communications to people everywhere, particularly in obscure languages that might otherwise die off - although we are losing languages on a regular basis.
I am saddened to hear that all this effort is being directed merely to bring a monotheistic religion like Christianity - likely the cause of more human misery than any other individual concept in history - to an ever widening audience. Its like building a tool to spread ignorance...
Yeah there are how many facebook users now? People don't worry about their privacy until suddenly they need it really badly. Then its far too late.
Pretending you are a Jedi/Sith in real life, ensures that celibacy don't worry...
So many drivers should not be on the roads already, so yes, I cannot see flying cars ever become a viable option until such time as we can automate the whole process, including the ability for a ground based system to override the vehicle controls if necessary.
That's because they had recognized that some of us out there had *perfect* heads, and thus were bald, while the rest of you had to cover up your imperfect heads with a layer of fur. Some of us just haven't recognized the truth of this yet, and thus still view MPB as a problem :)
Or so I keep telling myself :P
People people, corporation people are the cause of the disappearing amendments after all, and corporation people who don't like a law buy a better law. Not an option for most people people.
You are trying to use logic and reason, supported with a reasonable link to a source, when discussing an issue with an audience that is universally unwilling to accept that they are wrong. :P :(
Its like trying to deal with Creationists. Its not going to work, period. The other side has their opinion and is going to stick to it.
Now, to be fair they have that right. Everyone has a right to their own faith. I just wish people wouldn't try to use that as a basis for logical discussion. If I believe Wombats secretly control the world's politicians with their psychic abilities (arguably no less believable than Creationism since neither is based on a whit of scientific evidence), I can share my discussions with other Wombatists, but its pointless to try to explain my position to those who have not "seen the light"
The Anti-GW crowd will still be posting their denials when the first 100 million people have died from flooding, when major coastal cities are under water, when the poles are completely melted, and when most of the equatorial region has been in a drought for 20 years.
Sadly in the US they will probably be in the majority position in Government as well
I think the only reason we are so aware of privacy in the modern world is because so many organizations are actively trying to exploit it. 100 years ago it simply wasn't practical to try to maintain large card catalogues of everyone in a country unless you really needed to, due to the expense. Now its trivial, and there are plenty of businesses and government organizations that are quite happy to have greater profitability/control over our lives.
I have a FB account I admit. I should delete my account (if that's actually possible, I am sure FB will keep the data anyways). I access it a few times a year mostly when my wife tells me there is something posted on my wall that I should read. I detest the centralization of personal information and even more so the active data mining of it.
I agree with TFA, its an elaborate man in the middle attack designed to do as much as it can to reduce our privacy and exploit it for the purpose of making money.
Of course we should not use a single axis. However the point I was making is that many people - almost all of whom see politics as a spectrum - seem to thoroughly be confused about what falls where.
Trying to add further axises into my comment would only have made it more confusing and difficult to explain. I know politics is more complex than that.
Yes, our "leaders" think only short term. Of course the voters that elect them, and the corporations that pay for their elections also think only short term because few people seem capable of thinking beyond when they retire, or the next election etc.
This is why I am thoroughly convinced that we will NOT ever deal with climate change even if we get everyone on earth to agree that its happening and we are the cause. No one will want to make the sacrifices necessary, they will all want someone else to make those sacrifices.
This is only made worse by the fact that most of our policy decisions are being made by corporations (through their lobbyists), and as I said above there are no morals in an effective corporation.
The desire for the all-holy Profit will eventually kill most of us unless something changes rather dramatically.
First result returned by Google gives this list:
There are a few entries I didn't include because they gave only dates and not names, making it harder to look them up.
Oh, was your point to perpetuate the fucking tiresome meme (always repeated at every mention of France witnessed by any American it seems, certainly here on /. at any rate) that the French are all cowards and retreat at the drop of a hat etc. I will say it slowly for those of you who love this meme: "They lost in a war against a superior enemy. That is all".
In fact it took Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Russia (helped eventually by the USA of course, although years late to the party) to defeat that selfsame enemy. Should we be surprised that the French lost too? They got attacked right at the start and so faced the Germans pretty much on their own.
Caveat: I am English Canadian, not French. In fact I don't particularly like the French or France, but I am tired of this constantly repeated idiocy. All it does is scream "I am a fucking ignorant American" every time it gets repeated.
I guess none of you have ever heard of Napoleon either?
Sigh.