The ATCA simply requires corporations with US operations to follow very basic standards of human decency. If you want to assist a foreign government with genocide or running prison labor camps for dissidents don't expect to do it from U.S. soil.
Do you think Halliburton/Blackwater/CACI can be sued under the same law? Or does it have to be a foreign government they're assisting?
For me, it all comes down to this - the scientific method works only when accompanied by free and open communication of the results. A person involved in research (however funded) where the results are kept secret is not a scientist and makes no contribution to the scientific community or the sum of human knowledge. Really, it has nothing to do with funding, but with access to results.
1. Mandate installing a V-Chip in everything, but leave it parent-modifyable and call it 'parental controls' so nobody argues.
2. Pass a law saying all V-Chips must be factory-set and hardwired to filter everything Big Bro doesn't like (the DMCA already covers bypassing the chip).
3. ???
4. Profit!
You can't equate freedom to marry a (same-sex) loved one to hate speech.
All freedom must be limited by the effect it has on the environment, society and other people. Hate-speech hurts other people. Whatever gay people wish to do between themselves is nobody else's business, and hurts no-one.
Saying 'they're both shit because they want to limit your freedom' is kinda like saying the gestapo were the same as kindergarten teachers whereever you live (assuming you don't have Nazi kindergarten teachers, in which case, find your own examples). They both limit your freedom, but one does it in order to subdue and subject you, and the other in order to maintain peace and control bad behaviour (OMG Godwinned!).
Now that I think of it, burn all kindergarten teachers!!!one!
Why must there be a contradiction between being influenced by all these (internal & external) factors, and being responsible for your choices under these circumstances and influences? Or between 'free will' and 'determinism'*?
It is my own free choice to do as the circumstances (and my nature) dictate, and I take full responsibility for that. If someone threw a banana peal on the ground, and I slipped on it, I'm responsible for my pain and humiliation and for not looking where I step. If I'm the one throwing banana peals around, I'm responsible for your pain just as much as you (or the banana) are.
Like they say, accidents don't happen, they're caused.
*) I put 'free will' and 'determinism' in quotes because either of them can be argued for or against, defined in a thousand and one ways, contradicted with each other or made to support each other depending on what your purpose is. I really dislike using either in discussion - either we define what we mean by each or drop both.
Blame it on the sunshine. Blame it on the moonlight. Blame it on the Boogie man.
Every musician depends on everything that came before for inspiration and to learn what works, how and why. No one can write oringinal music without ever playing/analyzing familiar or important existing tunes. No instrument-player can ever play anything oringinal without ever playing somebody else's music first.
Outlawing cover performances is a death sentence for oringinal music.
One problem is that it doesn't dampen existing memories, but makes it harder to create new short-term memories - That's one problem. The other is that it doesn't dampen existing memories, but makes it harder to... where was I... hmm... I'm so thirsty... I wonder if there're any cookies left. brb.
I voluntarily restrict my options to DRM-free ones, but even if I compromise and try to rent a DVD over the net (not sure if this is applicable at all where I live), do you really think it would beat BT simplicity-wise? How about time-wise?
I would gladly pay quite a bit to make my life simpler. I wouldn't pay any for making it any more complicated/time consuming.
Umm... I beg to differ. Laziness is a very fine excuse. For me to watch a movie at home I need to either:
1. Get out of my couch.
2. Go down 4 flights of stairs.
3. Get into my car.
4. Burn some gas, navigate across the traffic hellhole that is my city.
5. Pay for parking.
6. Go to some hellishly bright, flickering, noisy, over-crowded mall.
7. Find where they sell DVDs (honestly I don't even know which stores do that anymore).
8. Try to choose something reasonable because the movie I was thinking of going in is of course unavailable.
9. Deal with some annoying store clerk.
10. Pay.
11. Do 1-4 in reverse.
12. Break the law anyhow 'cause I've got Linux, so I need libdvdcss to play the DVD I just bought.
or:
1. Fire up firefox.
2. Type thepiratebay.org
3. type keyword, click, click, click.
4. Press 'OK'.
5. Wait.
6. Double-click the file.
Now, if I'm a criminal either way, which is easier? I believe most people pirate because it's the comfortable option.
PS. Don't talk to me about iTunes and the like - I don't use Apple or anyone else who uses DRM, however fervently they may tell me it's forced upon them. I've yet to see a decent, free (as in speech) and financially valid online media distribution channel that rewards the artists.
PPS. I don't have any problem with paying for music, and I regularly do that (though I only pay directly to the musicians - I hate the middle men) - but I hate going to CD stores - does that make me a bad man?
PPPS. As a musician, I would prefer someone listening to my music and not paying me a dime than that someone never have heard of my music.
I don't know what sort of percentage this represents, but I'm sure you'd agree that it's a significant amount of taxpayer money involved, regardless.
[rant]
It's not the taxpayers money, it's the ISP's money, given to it no strings attached from the gov'mint, which in turn robbed it at the point of a gun (in broad daylight) from it's unsuspecting, uninformed and non-objecting 'free' citizens. Any complaint about what is done with 'your' money should keep in mind it's not your money any more. Once you've been taxed (read - mugged), any control you think you might have/could have/should have over it's use is null and void. Remember - money freely given to a government is money lost for people.
[/rant]
Just to make it clear - I'm a citizen of a democracy (well, they call it a democracy), and I do pay taxes. I just have no illusion that I'm somehow 'buying' something with that cash. Once it's out of my bank account, it's out of my hands. Nobody is forced to give me anything in return, and nobody asks me what to do with it. And if you think that my use of the word 'rob' is hyperbolic, look it up.
Britney is not a musician, she is a product/brand name. When I say musician I mean someone who works in music, not merchandizing or advertizing:p. And possibly someone who can either compose, play an instrument, or sing godammit.
"...best-known is the protection racket, in which criminals demand money from businesses in exchange for the service of "protection" against crimes that the racketeers themselves instigate if unpaid..." [emphasis mine]
Crimes. Suing over patent agreement is not a crime, so no. I don't think racketeering fits (if I read the definition correctly).
I don't think this is legal, but nevermind that. This isn't Right(tm).
How does new music come to be? Do you think a good (and creative) musician got to be that good all by himself? The way I learned music is (1) by listening to good music, (2) by trying to figure out how the piece worked and what made it satisfying and (3) trying to recreate the same effect on my own. Most of the times, on at least one of those steps, I needed somebody else's help. Either in getting to know new music, in figuring out the chords or in learning to play in new ways.
I couldn't have played the way I do without this help, and I have OLGA to thank for a large piece of that. Of course, I got a lot of help from my friends and teachers, but the sort of collaboration that is possible on the net is, I believe, a real boon for every musician, of every level, from beginner to professional. Then again, who's to say if my friend telling me (or writing down for me to play) the chords to a copyrighted song is legal!?
My point being, this kind of litigation has only one effect, and that is to suffocate creativity and the growth of our culture.
I traveled for a year in India, and being the geek that I am, I had many conversations about computers with the indian people I met. In many of these talks I got the powerful sentiment from the people I talked to that Bill is quite the hero in India. There's a peculiar mindset there - I wouldn't exactly call it rabid capitalism or money-worship, but more like a strong emphasis on the significance of being rich/poor. The feeling is that rich/expensive==good, poor/cheap==bad, disregarding all else. That means that it doesn't matter if Billy acts like an ass, he must be a good person since he's rich. Windows must be a better OS than Linux simply because it costs more.
Trying to talk them out of this mindset was futile. They couldn't grok the possibility of a pricey yet crappy piece of software or a rich bad man.
Oblig. disclaimer: I can't speak of Indians in general, just the people I met and talked to, but this mindset seemed to be common there.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you think Halliburton/Blackwater/CACI can be sued under the same law? Or does it have to be a foreign government they're assisting?
It's called POLITICS.
For me, it all comes down to this - the scientific method works only when accompanied by free and open communication of the results. A person involved in research (however funded) where the results are kept secret is not a scientist and makes no contribution to the scientific community or the sum of human knowledge. Really, it has nothing to do with funding, but with access to results.
As usual this thing will evolve in stages:
1. Mandate installing a V-Chip in everything, but leave it parent-modifyable and call it 'parental controls' so nobody argues.
2. Pass a law saying all V-Chips must be factory-set and hardwired to filter everything Big Bro doesn't like (the DMCA already covers bypassing the chip).
3. ???
4. Profit!
Mod parent troll.
Everybody knows zero is pink.
Ever been to the Most-a-Far system? Talk about backwards!
You can't equate freedom to marry a (same-sex) loved one to hate speech.
All freedom must be limited by the effect it has on the environment, society and other people. Hate-speech hurts other people. Whatever gay people wish to do between themselves is nobody else's business, and hurts no-one.
Saying 'they're both shit because they want to limit your freedom' is kinda like saying the gestapo were the same as kindergarten teachers whereever you live (assuming you don't have Nazi kindergarten teachers, in which case, find your own examples). They both limit your freedom, but one does it in order to subdue and subject you, and the other in order to maintain peace and control bad behaviour (OMG Godwinned!).
Now that I think of it, burn all kindergarten teachers!!!one!
Why must there be a contradiction between being influenced by all these (internal & external) factors, and being responsible for your choices under these circumstances and influences? Or between 'free will' and 'determinism'*?
It is my own free choice to do as the circumstances (and my nature) dictate, and I take full responsibility for that. If someone threw a banana peal on the ground, and I slipped on it, I'm responsible for my pain and humiliation and for not looking where I step. If I'm the one throwing banana peals around, I'm responsible for your pain just as much as you (or the banana) are.
Like they say, accidents don't happen, they're caused.
*) I put 'free will' and 'determinism' in quotes because either of them can be argued for or against, defined in a thousand and one ways, contradicted with each other or made to support each other depending on what your purpose is. I really dislike using either in discussion - either we define what we mean by each or drop both.
Blame it on the sunshine. Blame it on the moonlight. Blame it on the Boogie man.
Every musician depends on everything that came before for inspiration and to learn what works, how and why. No one can write oringinal music without ever playing/analyzing familiar or important existing tunes. No instrument-player can ever play anything oringinal without ever playing somebody else's music first.
Outlawing cover performances is a death sentence for oringinal music.
One problem is that it doesn't dampen existing memories, but makes it harder to create new short-term memories - That's one problem. The other is that it doesn't dampen existing memories, but makes it harder to... where was I... hmm... I'm so thirsty... I wonder if there're any cookies left. brb.
One flaw in your argument is that you assume all forms of governance have already been tried.
Another is that you assume governance is necessary at all (putting on flame-retardant jockstrap).
I always thought it was nice of my overlords to give me a choice of which of them I want to fuck me in the ass.
Or less and less 'industrialized' music.
In other words, if a sustainable large-scale music industry (in it's current incarnation) is impossible, maybe there shouldn't be one.
I voluntarily restrict my options to DRM-free ones, but even if I compromise and try to rent a DVD over the net (not sure if this is applicable at all where I live), do you really think it would beat BT simplicity-wise? How about time-wise?
I would gladly pay quite a bit to make my life simpler. I wouldn't pay any for making it any more complicated/time consuming.
1. Get out of my couch.
2. Go down 4 flights of stairs.
3. Get into my car.
4. Burn some gas, navigate across the traffic hellhole that is my city.
5. Pay for parking.
6. Go to some hellishly bright, flickering, noisy, over-crowded mall.
7. Find where they sell DVDs (honestly I don't even know which stores do that anymore).
8. Try to choose something reasonable because the movie I was thinking of going in is of course unavailable.
9. Deal with some annoying store clerk.
10. Pay.
11. Do 1-4 in reverse.
12. Break the law anyhow 'cause I've got Linux, so I need libdvdcss to play the DVD I just bought.
or:
1. Fire up firefox.
2. Type thepiratebay.org
3. type keyword, click, click, click.
4. Press 'OK'.
5. Wait.
6. Double-click the file.
Now, if I'm a criminal either way, which is easier? I believe most people pirate because it's the comfortable option.
PS. Don't talk to me about iTunes and the like - I don't use Apple or anyone else who uses DRM, however fervently they may tell me it's forced upon them. I've yet to see a decent, free (as in speech) and financially valid online media distribution channel that rewards the artists.
PPS. I don't have any problem with paying for music, and I regularly do that (though I only pay directly to the musicians - I hate the middle men) - but I hate going to CD stores - does that make me a bad man?
PPPS. As a musician, I would prefer someone listening to my music and not paying me a dime than that someone never have heard of my music.
It's not the taxpayers money, it's the ISP's money, given to it no strings attached from the gov'mint, which in turn robbed it at the point of a gun (in broad daylight) from it's unsuspecting, uninformed and non-objecting 'free' citizens. Any complaint about what is done with 'your' money should keep in mind it's not your money any more. Once you've been taxed (read - mugged), any control you think you might have/could have/should have over it's use is null and void. Remember - money freely given to a government is money lost for people.
[/rant]
Just to make it clear - I'm a citizen of a democracy (well, they call it a democracy), and I do pay taxes. I just have no illusion that I'm somehow 'buying' something with that cash. Once it's out of my bank account, it's out of my hands. Nobody is forced to give me anything in return, and nobody asks me what to do with it. And if you think that my use of the word 'rob' is hyperbolic, look it up.
I, for one, welcome our cheese-cake RTFMing overlord.
Britney is not a musician, she is a product/brand name. When I say musician I mean someone who works in music, not merchandizing or advertizing :p. And possibly someone who can either compose, play an instrument, or sing godammit.
Crimes. Suing over patent agreement is not a crime, so no. I don't think racketeering fits (if I read the definition correctly).
I don't think this is legal, but nevermind that. This isn't Right(tm).
How does new music come to be? Do you think a good (and creative) musician got to be that good all by himself? The way I learned music is (1) by listening to good music, (2) by trying to figure out how the piece worked and what made it satisfying and (3) trying to recreate the same effect on my own. Most of the times, on at least one of those steps, I needed somebody else's help. Either in getting to know new music, in figuring out the chords or in learning to play in new ways.
I couldn't have played the way I do without this help, and I have OLGA to thank for a large piece of that. Of course, I got a lot of help from my friends and teachers, but the sort of collaboration that is possible on the net is, I believe, a real boon for every musician, of every level, from beginner to professional. Then again, who's to say if my friend telling me (or writing down for me to play) the chords to a copyrighted song is legal!?
My point being, this kind of litigation has only one effect, and that is to suffocate creativity and the growth of our culture.
What is natural?
Is crude oil natural? Is plastic? Is jet-fuel?
Is salt natural? Is Chlorine? Is CFC?
Is CO2 natural? Is Amonia?
Most of what is called 'chemicals' can be found in nature, so where do we draw the line?
how bout beating off a dead horse?
Mu
I traveled for a year in India, and being the geek that I am, I had many conversations about computers with the indian people I met. In many of these talks I got the powerful sentiment from the people I talked to that Bill is quite the hero in India. There's a peculiar mindset there - I wouldn't exactly call it rabid capitalism or money-worship, but more like a strong emphasis on the significance of being rich/poor. The feeling is that rich/expensive==good, poor/cheap==bad, disregarding all else. That means that it doesn't matter if Billy acts like an ass, he must be a good person since he's rich. Windows must be a better OS than Linux simply because it costs more.
Trying to talk them out of this mindset was futile. They couldn't grok the possibility of a pricey yet crappy piece of software or a rich bad man.
Oblig. disclaimer: I can't speak of Indians in general, just the people I met and talked to, but this mindset seemed to be common there.
Yes. All you need is a flash player. See here.
:).
If you're using Ubuntu, check out Automatix for lots of goodies, including flash.
Flash and Linux don't generally get along too well, so YMMV, but I've been enjoying tv-links.co.uk for quite a while now