You're taking the word of a renowned paranoid schizophrenic. In the Elder Ages of the Internet, Daniel would have been considered a netkook and would sit to such kookish illuminaries as Ed Conrad and Archimedes Plutonium.
So what you're trying to claim here is that until the advent of copyright, the peasants just ate dirt? Give me a break. There are very ancient folk traditions still alive today in every culture, story-telling, music, art. Except now some assfucker can come along, do a minor twist on an ancient theme and call it his own. Some guy who does some new version of the Odyssey gets to copyright it, even though the actual author has been dead somewhere around 2,700 years.
In the olden days, musicians used to travel around and make their bread and butter by public performance. The notion of a band that just sat in one place and made music was utterly foreign.
But the underlying claim that you make, that only the wealthy had art, is a pure falsehood, either from your ignorance or deliberately told.
Darth Vader: Obi-wan never told you what happened to your father.
Luke: He told me enough. He told me you betrayed and called him!
Darth Vader: No Luke. I AM YOUR FATHER!!!
Luke: Yeah, um, okay. Just hold on, I'm gonna get my notebook here and DNA sequencer. Crap! Forgot the cable. Listen, you're a cyborg, you wouldn't happen to have a USB-A cable on you, would you? Oh yeah, and I think you've got one actual arm left, so could you take the glove off and give me a blood sample?
With current level of technologies; "launch contents of bilge at high velocity" becomes a pretty whiz bang weapon. Death by shit pellets. 'elluva way to go.
This idea that only one side of the political spectrum takes part in dirty tricks is either a sign of some sort of mental disorder or in and of itself a dirty trick.
I can't sort out what part of the legal system they plan on using. If you can find the leak, then certainly you can persue them criminally and civilly. Perhaps if it's being reproduced word for word on websites, then you can probably go for copyright infringement, though by now the document has spread to the four corners of the planet and it's far past the point when that's really a meaningful option. As to suing people that comment on the document, that's patently absurd. In most Western countries there are protections on that sort of speech. I guess you could try to claim libellous conduct, but by now tens of thousands of people have likely commented on it, and the idea that you can actually bring any fraction of them into court is highly unlikely, and that's not even talking about the odds of conviction (pretty low in the US, that's for sure).
I've seen some pretty pathetic legal threats, but this more resembles the kind of nonsense I used to see on some Internet forums where some nasty little prick, when cornered, would make some vague legal threat. Might as well threaten that Jesus will come down and stomp on your balls.
That came after the moderation. And if you look, someone modded the parent I was replying to Troll as well. Mod my outburst as Troll but my original post was pertinent, on-topic, and certainly not trollish. Maybe it was wrong, in which case Overrated might apply, but Troll? Read the bloody post. Nothing trollish about it at all.
Why in the fuck was I modded troll? I guess the repugnant little asshats pushing this book must have some points. Fucking worthless pathetic immoral assfuckers.
I think once your kids hit their late teens, they're close enough to being adults (if not outright adults) that the time when you're close personal involvement could have changed anything is long past. You're basically stuck with "I told you so..."
Indeed. These sorts of options are so version dependent (not even going to alternative implementations) that I think the overwhelming majority of developers would want to stay far away from this sort of book.
I'm the father of the house, and I came to the conclusion that I don't want to know what's going on in the house. Both kids are in their late teens now, and mutual ignorance seems to be the best way to get along.
I'm not arguing for lots of state intrusion into our lives. What I'm saying is that a pure Libertarian society would be as horrific as a purely Communistic or Anarchist society. There's this whole notion, put forward by Ron Paul's supporters in particular, that the baby needs to be thrown out with the bathwater. Look at notions like getting rid of NOAA or the USGS. Do you think being an adult means you can predict when the next hurricane is coming, or gives you some ability to monitor fault lines or volcanic activity?
As to the topic at hand, we know that a Libertarian court system is going to be as vulnerable as any other court system (would it in fact be the least bit different than what exists now?) to well-funded legal attacks. Since the average landowner is likely to have resources far far less than a company doing fracking, thinking that the civil courts alone will have the capacity to deliver justice, while cutting the legislative and executive branches off at the knees means you're basically delivering things even moreso into the hands of the wealthier interests.
Regulation isn't all bad, even if it often enters the realm of unintended consequences.
Slashdot Mirror
You're taking the word of a renowned paranoid schizophrenic. In the Elder Ages of the Internet, Daniel would have been considered a netkook and would sit to such kookish illuminaries as Ed Conrad and Archimedes Plutonium.
That started happening the minute your router fetched an IP address.
And who said the old Internet Flameware/Shit-a-thon was dead.
So what you're trying to claim here is that until the advent of copyright, the peasants just ate dirt? Give me a break. There are very ancient folk traditions still alive today in every culture, story-telling, music, art. Except now some assfucker can come along, do a minor twist on an ancient theme and call it his own. Some guy who does some new version of the Odyssey gets to copyright it, even though the actual author has been dead somewhere around 2,700 years.
In the olden days, musicians used to travel around and make their bread and butter by public performance. The notion of a band that just sat in one place and made music was utterly foreign.
But the underlying claim that you make, that only the wealthy had art, is a pure falsehood, either from your ignorance or deliberately told.
Because, of course, culture didn't exist prior to the development of copyright...
Imagine it going on for about a quarter of the book, and the rapist being named Angus Thermopyle.
Darth Vader: Obi-wan never told you what happened to your father.
Luke: He told me enough. He told me you betrayed and called him!
Darth Vader: No Luke. I AM YOUR FATHER!!!
Luke: Yeah, um, okay. Just hold on, I'm gonna get my notebook here and DNA sequencer. Crap! Forgot the cable. Listen, you're a cyborg, you wouldn't happen to have a USB-A cable on you, would you? Oh yeah, and I think you've got one actual arm left, so could you take the glove off and give me a blood sample?
With current level of technologies; "launch contents of bilge at high velocity" becomes a pretty whiz bang weapon. Death by shit pellets. 'elluva way to go.
Mainly because by the time you got to the end of the series, you began to suspect there was something very wrong with Stephen R. Donaldson.
But yes, he did take inertia into account.
Two words.. Karl Rove.
This idea that only one side of the political spectrum takes part in dirty tricks is either a sign of some sort of mental disorder or in and of itself a dirty trick.
State it's a forgery. What else can you do? Do you think threatening every person who comments on the document is a rational response?
I can't sort out what part of the legal system they plan on using. If you can find the leak, then certainly you can persue them criminally and civilly. Perhaps if it's being reproduced word for word on websites, then you can probably go for copyright infringement, though by now the document has spread to the four corners of the planet and it's far past the point when that's really a meaningful option. As to suing people that comment on the document, that's patently absurd. In most Western countries there are protections on that sort of speech. I guess you could try to claim libellous conduct, but by now tens of thousands of people have likely commented on it, and the idea that you can actually bring any fraction of them into court is highly unlikely, and that's not even talking about the odds of conviction (pretty low in the US, that's for sure).
I've seen some pretty pathetic legal threats, but this more resembles the kind of nonsense I used to see on some Internet forums where some nasty little prick, when cornered, would make some vague legal threat. Might as well threaten that Jesus will come down and stomp on your balls.
I guess they're hoping that their opponents are as gullible as their supporters.
Don't blame me because you're filthy repugnant occupation has right-minded people wishing every last one of you was dead.
In the immortal words of Frank Zappa, keep it greasy so it goes down easy.
I doubt there are any lack of geeks who wouldn't love to get behind the wheel of a backhoe.
That came after the moderation. And if you look, someone modded the parent I was replying to Troll as well. Mod my outburst as Troll but my original post was pertinent, on-topic, and certainly not trollish. Maybe it was wrong, in which case Overrated might apply, but Troll? Read the bloody post. Nothing trollish about it at all.
Are you kidding? I feel like I need to wear a hazmat suit when I go into their rooms.
Why in the fuck was I modded troll? I guess the repugnant little asshats pushing this book must have some points. Fucking worthless pathetic immoral assfuckers.
I think once your kids hit their late teens, they're close enough to being adults (if not outright adults) that the time when you're close personal involvement could have changed anything is long past. You're basically stuck with "I told you so..."
Indeed. These sorts of options are so version dependent (not even going to alternative implementations) that I think the overwhelming majority of developers would want to stay far away from this sort of book.
It's more like retail stalking.
I'm the father of the house, and I came to the conclusion that I don't want to know what's going on in the house. Both kids are in their late teens now, and mutual ignorance seems to be the best way to get along.
I'm not arguing for lots of state intrusion into our lives. What I'm saying is that a pure Libertarian society would be as horrific as a purely Communistic or Anarchist society. There's this whole notion, put forward by Ron Paul's supporters in particular, that the baby needs to be thrown out with the bathwater. Look at notions like getting rid of NOAA or the USGS. Do you think being an adult means you can predict when the next hurricane is coming, or gives you some ability to monitor fault lines or volcanic activity?
As to the topic at hand, we know that a Libertarian court system is going to be as vulnerable as any other court system (would it in fact be the least bit different than what exists now?) to well-funded legal attacks. Since the average landowner is likely to have resources far far less than a company doing fracking, thinking that the civil courts alone will have the capacity to deliver justice, while cutting the legislative and executive branches off at the knees means you're basically delivering things even moreso into the hands of the wealthier interests.
Regulation isn't all bad, even if it often enters the realm of unintended consequences.
The slaves certainly enjoyed the benefits of states rights.