I still buy CDs, but I won't buy anything that I can't rip into file format so that I can listen to it on my computer, with whatever program I like. If you have the files, you can share it. Personally, I just don't want to keep shuffling CDs around, I'm fine with buying my music, although I do download stuff "illegally" for samplers.
Lack of human rights somewhere is not lack of human rights everywhere, as that would destroy your point that we should be fighting for China's rights because we have the freedom to. By your logic, China's lack of free speech would mean that we don't have free speech either, which is obviously false (or, were you to argue the point that it's true, that validates the point that we should be fighting for our rights here). In case you didn't mean that literally, but instead meant that China's lack of free speech is in imminent danger of spreading to the US, then we also should be fighting for our rights here, as that would then be the point.
It is not technically my problem if people in China don't have free speech, the support for which is found in the fact that I am not in China. Your ad hominem does not actually prove your point.
I do in fact reject the notion that I have a responsibility to people that do not directly affect my life. That notion is responsible for more than a few evils in the world today, and it just doesn't hold up to logic. If you want to make the point that those people indirectly affect my life, I would respond that the key feature in an indirect relationship is that it is too complex to be analyzed, and therefore the consequences of our actions with respect to that relationship cannot be predicted (as it would then become a direct relationship), and that we would do better to concentrate our energies where they can be used more effectively (i.e. here).
As to the point of screaming the magic words 9/11, don't do it just to make an emotional point (as you didn't actually give any facts with it), but if you have something to say about it, go ahead.
There isn't actually space to worry about everything, there is far too much injustice in the world to be solved at once, but I won't obsess over that. As far as concerns being proportionate to the scale of the problem, I addressed that above when I explained direct and indirect relationships, and scale of the problem dramatically changes when we consider that we can't look at it from a completely objective point of view (which doesn't exist), but only insofar as it affects us, in which case keeping our freedom here is a much more pressing concern (in light of recent legislation) than liberating people across the globe.
Didn't say anything...
Random jab at druggies who aren't hurting you... (something about scale of the problem...?)
Not true... addressed above.
Addressed above, and don't talk about acting like an adult, it has no relationship to acting intelligently.
Overall, trace your ideas a little bit farther logically and see where they take you, and if they contradict, before you post them. Also, please try and use capitalization and puncuation; it makes it much easier to read, as well as making you sound a bit older, which I assume you would want if you're trying to convince other people of your ideas.
On the subject of my last post, I forgot to mention that they could already do that, because they're already lying about the warrant, so they could lie about showing the warrant to you before searching your house, but now any claims of "they didn't have a warrant" are nullified.
I don't see how delaying the notification of the execution of a warrant takes away from its grounding in probable cause or specificity of scope as defined in Ammendment IV.
Probably cause (before the warrant is actually issued) can be as simple as "we think you're hiding something" or "you look suspicious". Once they search your house, one of three things can happen:
1) They find nothing, and lie about the probable cause.
2) They find nothing substantial, confiscate something harmless and misinterpret how you intended to use it.
3) They find something incriminating, whether or not it was what they were looking for.
In any case, they can backdate the warrant with whatever they found in the house, and we're in a guilty-until-proven-innocent state.
Slashdot Mirror
What's this crap about Office? I use notepad, and every once in a while I bust out Excel, but I don't remember ever paying for it.
I still buy CDs, but I won't buy anything that I can't rip into file format so that I can listen to it on my computer, with whatever program I like. If you have the files, you can share it. Personally, I just don't want to keep shuffling CDs around, I'm fine with buying my music, although I do download stuff "illegally" for samplers.
I have to disagree with the "uglier" point
That's pre-Patriot Act and sequel.
But see it actually makes sense, unless you think it originally showed up in hitchhiker's guide.
Now why would he do that? He gets 10 times the money otherwise.
Lack of human rights somewhere is not lack of human rights everywhere, as that would destroy your point that we should be fighting for China's rights because we have the freedom to. By your logic, China's lack of free speech would mean that we don't have free speech either, which is obviously false (or, were you to argue the point that it's true, that validates the point that we should be fighting for our rights here). In case you didn't mean that literally, but instead meant that China's lack of free speech is in imminent danger of spreading to the US, then we also should be fighting for our rights here, as that would then be the point.
It is not technically my problem if people in China don't have free speech, the support for which is found in the fact that I am not in China. Your ad hominem does not actually prove your point.
I do in fact reject the notion that I have a responsibility to people that do not directly affect my life. That notion is responsible for more than a few evils in the world today, and it just doesn't hold up to logic. If you want to make the point that those people indirectly affect my life, I would respond that the key feature in an indirect relationship is that it is too complex to be analyzed, and therefore the consequences of our actions with respect to that relationship cannot be predicted (as it would then become a direct relationship), and that we would do better to concentrate our energies where they can be used more effectively (i.e. here).
As to the point of screaming the magic words 9/11, don't do it just to make an emotional point (as you didn't actually give any facts with it), but if you have something to say about it, go ahead.
There isn't actually space to worry about everything, there is far too much injustice in the world to be solved at once, but I won't obsess over that. As far as concerns being proportionate to the scale of the problem, I addressed that above when I explained direct and indirect relationships, and scale of the problem dramatically changes when we consider that we can't look at it from a completely objective point of view (which doesn't exist), but only insofar as it affects us, in which case keeping our freedom here is a much more pressing concern (in light of recent legislation) than liberating people across the globe.
Didn't say anything...
Random jab at druggies who aren't hurting you... (something about scale of the problem...?)
Not true... addressed above.
Addressed above, and don't talk about acting like an adult, it has no relationship to acting intelligently.
Overall, trace your ideas a little bit farther logically and see where they take you, and if they contradict, before you post them. Also, please try and use capitalization and puncuation; it makes it much easier to read, as well as making you sound a bit older, which I assume you would want if you're trying to convince other people of your ideas.
On the subject of my last post, I forgot to mention that they could already do that, because they're already lying about the warrant, so they could lie about showing the warrant to you before searching your house, but now any claims of "they didn't have a warrant" are nullified.
Probably cause (before the warrant is actually issued) can be as simple as "we think you're hiding something" or "you look suspicious". Once they search your house, one of three things can happen:
1) They find nothing, and lie about the probable cause.
2) They find nothing substantial, confiscate something harmless and misinterpret how you intended to use it.
3) They find something incriminating, whether or not it was what they were looking for.
In any case, they can backdate the warrant with whatever they found in the house, and we're in a guilty-until-proven-innocent state.