TheVoiceOfReason writes: "My main worry about "ask slashdot", is that we would put the earth in danger by accellerating the descent of human evolution by opening the forum to morons and their silly questions, since the readers would have to expend more energy in generating filters, and thus lose their will to live. How serious a problem is this? What are the solutions? Could we send a rocket up to give the editors a 'kick' once in a while?"
Hey dumbass, try this definition out if you're so fond of 'em.
Constitutional Monarchy--A Definition. In a modern constitutional monarchy, or limited monarchy, the government is carried on in the name of one person who inherits his or her title and office but whose political authority is limited by law. The government, though carried on in the name of an hereditary chief of state, is genuinely constitutional, representative, and democratic in character. The authority of the Monarch is strictly limited by the Constitution. The real powers of government are solely or primarily in the hands of the people's elected representatives, especially those who are members of the majority party or coalition in the lower house of the legislature. The Monarch either shares political authority with the elected representatives and their leadership or, as is the case in Great Britain, has virtually no real authority and is a mere figurehead ruler, a purely symbolic and ceremonial sovereign.
(this was lifted from the same document you quoted BTW---just a link away.
My $0.02: Go stick your head back in the sand before you embarass yourself further.
First off, I agree with almost everything Nicholas has to say, but I must stress something that may have been said before and should be said again
Napster has helped expose one ugly wound of corporate exploitation that has persisted for a long time under cozy blankets of pop culture and marketing propaganda. If money, and the explotation of people to aquire money, is evil (ie less-than minimum-wage Nike sweatshops), then by god, wake up and smell the fuckin' ripoff. Please.
If Napster is so harmful to the creative spirit of the artists, then why are we hearing so much screetching and concern from the keepers of said musicians and comparatively little from the artists themselves? (if you're thinking it's a lack of money on the artist's part then you've just answered the question)
Does information want to be free? Fuck no. Do I want it to be free? Of course, dammit. I'm guessing that most people would agree...
If I like an artist's music then I should be able to compensate them for that directly. The argument that this scenario isn't feasible is no longer valid.
Wake up.
The issue is not whether information should be free, but whether corporations should be allowed to tell you when it is or isn't free.
You know, I would feel a lot less vehement about this if the artists (all of them) were actually losing the shitloads of money the record companies are claiming for compensation. Odds are, they never would've seen it anyway.
Mark as flamebait. At least someone might read the damn thing for pure amusement.
From my personal experience, people who dropped out of university tend to be independent thinkers and typically need to learn things on their own terms. IMHO their success "on the outside" can be attributed to their self-sufficency, and a strong (hopefully well-founded) confidence in their abilities....traits that probably granted them the courage to drop out in the first place.
Consequently, I'm inclined to believe that anyone who decides to drop out of college/university based on the responses in this forum probably shouldn't.
>Serioulsy... what the heck else would you use "insta rust" for?::chuckles:: Man, I guess you can buy just about anything if you look hard enough...
********warning****digression****warning******** * Actually, back in my messenger days I knew a guy who got himself a beautiful track-bike frame and applied a similar "instant rust" finish. Ultimately it allowed him the luxury of having a unique looking ride, along with the comforting thought that only a discriminating bike thief (if such an animal exists) would look twice at his "cloaked" bike. As far as I know he still has it....
Slashdot Mirror
TheVoiceOfReason writes: "My main worry about "ask slashdot", is that we would put the earth in danger by accellerating the descent of human evolution by opening the forum to morons and their silly questions, since the readers would have to expend more energy in generating filters, and thus lose their will to live. How serious a problem is this? What are the solutions? Could we send a rocket up to give the editors a 'kick' once in a while?"
Happy April 1, kids.
moderate this down
My first suggestion (and it's great beacuse it applies to so many "what if we had to redo _____ from scratch?" type questions.)....
First we kill all the lawyers.
Hey dumbass, try this definition out if you're so fond of 'em.
Constitutional Monarchy--A Definition. In a modern constitutional monarchy, or limited monarchy, the government is carried on in the name of one person who inherits his or her title and office but whose political authority is limited by law. The government, though carried on in the name of an hereditary chief of state, is genuinely constitutional, representative, and democratic in character. The authority of the Monarch is strictly limited by the Constitution. The real powers of government are solely or primarily in the hands of the people's elected representatives, especially those who are members of the majority party or coalition in the lower house of the legislature. The Monarch either shares political authority with the elected representatives and their leadership or, as is the case in Great Britain, has virtually no real authority and is a mere figurehead ruler, a purely symbolic and ceremonial sovereign.
(this was lifted from the same document you quoted BTW---just a link away.
My $0.02: Go stick your head back in the sand before you embarass yourself further.
It's not about romantic BS.
It's about having some skill, interest and integrity. Don't let the hype cloud your judgement
First off, I agree with almost everything Nicholas has to say, but I must stress something that may have been said before and should be said again
Napster has helped expose one ugly wound of corporate exploitation that has persisted for a long time under cozy blankets of pop culture and marketing propaganda. If money, and the explotation of people to aquire money, is evil (ie less-than minimum-wage Nike sweatshops), then by god, wake up and smell the fuckin' ripoff. Please.
If Napster is so harmful to the creative spirit of the artists, then why are we hearing so much screetching and concern from the keepers of said musicians and comparatively little from the artists themselves? (if you're thinking it's a lack of money on the artist's part then you've just answered the question)
Does information want to be free? Fuck no. Do I want it to be free? Of course, dammit. I'm guessing that most people would agree...
If I like an artist's music then I should be able to compensate them for that directly. The argument that this scenario isn't feasible is no longer valid.
Wake up.
The issue is not whether information should be free, but whether corporations should be allowed to tell you when it is or isn't free.
You know, I would feel a lot less vehement about this if the artists (all of them) were actually losing the shitloads of money the record companies are claiming for compensation. Odds are, they never would've seen it anyway.
Mark as flamebait. At least someone might read the damn thing for pure amusement.
From my personal experience, people who dropped out of university tend to be independent thinkers and typically need to learn things on their own terms. IMHO their success "on the outside" can be attributed to their self-sufficency, and a strong (hopefully well-founded) confidence in their abilities....traits that probably granted them the courage to drop out in the first place.
Consequently, I'm inclined to believe that anyone who decides to drop out of college/university based on the responses in this forum probably shouldn't.
hf
This space for rent.
>Serioulsy... what the heck else would you use "insta rust" for? ::chuckles:: Man, I guess you can buy just about anything if you look hard enough...
* *
********warning****digression****warning*******
Actually, back in my messenger days I knew a guy who got himself a beautiful track-bike frame and applied a similar "instant rust" finish.
Ultimately it allowed him the luxury of having a unique looking ride, along with the comforting thought that only a discriminating bike thief (if such an animal exists) would look twice at his "cloaked" bike. As far as I know he still has it....