Well, I have to say that I've never seen any of what you mentioned...at least any that lasted. I had a comment recently with a relatively conservative slant get modded +5 relatively quickly and it's now at zero. Given enough time, conservative comments get weeded out on/. because of the overwhelming liberal readership of this site. The sad thing is that it become an echo-chamber and most slashdotters end up thinking that the rest of the world thinks the same way that they do. Problem is, as the recent Presidential election proved, most of the country is much more center/right than it is left or even left/center.
So the U.S. "does pollution" and other countries don't? Or are you reffering to the ridiculously offensive and restrictive Kyoto Treaty that is designed to do nothing more than hurt the U.S. economy?
My point was that you are simply regurgitating the typical thinking of the America-hating segment of this country. I'll grant you that simply doing that may or may not lump you in with that crowd, but the rhetoric would imply that you agree with them.
And you have just shown the whole world how truly intelligent and articulate YOU can be. If I'm stupid I'm apparently keeping good company on here. Thanks.
Okay, so you deal with the monopoly, you don't turn around and infringe on Microsoft's right to bundle software with it's operating system. Bust up the monopoloy or whatever, but it's fundamentally wrong for the government to infringe on ANY company's rights to do what they feel allows them to best compete and gain market share. Again, I realize that Microsoft has practically ALL of the market share as it relates to desktop operating sytems. So deal with the monopoly. This whole thing seems like a non-sequitur.
Agreed. However, as a consumer you can choose not to purchase that movie. If enough consumers go this route because DRM is too restrictive or doesn't meet their needs then DRM attempts such as this will fail. That's the way a free-market works. You don't HAVE to buy that move, you know...
Yeah, this is a great ruling. Now if we can just get someone to sue Redhat for packaging up2date with Linux and preventing other package managers such as yum and apt-get from becoming widely used. And someone should sue Gentoo over Portage for the same reason. Oh wait, that would be ridiculous, wouldn't it?
I find the entire issue of Microsoft packaging Media Player with Windows to be utterly ridiculous. It's their product. If they want to make it only work with other products of theirs, that's their right. Why isn't anyone suing Apple over Quicktime? (Side note: The Apple/Quicktime analogy is probably a much better one than those above)
How is this ironic? Granted, in this case it was not, but in most cases "trading porn" consists of trading copyrighted material over the Internet. That is illegal based on most country's copyright laws, without even bringing decency statutes into it. I fail to see the irony here.
The school has in fact never educated any of its students on the do's and dont's of sex which gives it no right to judge the girl.
Are you actually saying that if the school HAD educated the kids on the do's and dont's of sex that the school would THEN have the right to judge her (read: expel her)? I'm not sure I follow your logic here...
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I have to say that I've never seen any of what you mentioned...at least any that lasted. I had a comment recently with a relatively conservative slant get modded +5 relatively quickly and it's now at zero. Given enough time, conservative comments get weeded out on /. because of the overwhelming liberal readership of this site. The sad thing is that it become an echo-chamber and most slashdotters end up thinking that the rest of the world thinks the same way that they do. Problem is, as the recent Presidential election proved, most of the country is much more center/right than it is left or even left/center.
It's the same reason that anytime you express a conservative opinion you're modded Troll.
So the U.S. "does pollution" and other countries don't? Or are you reffering to the ridiculously offensive and restrictive Kyoto Treaty that is designed to do nothing more than hurt the U.S. economy?
My point was that you are simply regurgitating the typical thinking of the America-hating segment of this country. I'll grant you that simply doing that may or may not lump you in with that crowd, but the rhetoric would imply that you agree with them.
And you have just shown the whole world how truly intelligent and articulate YOU can be. If I'm stupid I'm apparently keeping good company on here. Thanks.
There it is. I knew the goose-stepping America-haters would come out somewhere in this thread...
Okay, so you deal with the monopoly, you don't turn around and infringe on Microsoft's right to bundle software with it's operating system. Bust up the monopoloy or whatever, but it's fundamentally wrong for the government to infringe on ANY company's rights to do what they feel allows them to best compete and gain market share. Again, I realize that Microsoft has practically ALL of the market share as it relates to desktop operating sytems. So deal with the monopoly. This whole thing seems like a non-sequitur.
Agreed. However, as a consumer you can choose not to purchase that movie. If enough consumers go this route because DRM is too restrictive or doesn't meet their needs then DRM attempts such as this will fail. That's the way a free-market works. You don't HAVE to buy that move, you know...
Yeah, this is a great ruling. Now if we can just get someone to sue Redhat for packaging up2date with Linux and preventing other package managers such as yum and apt-get from becoming widely used. And someone should sue Gentoo over Portage for the same reason. Oh wait, that would be ridiculous, wouldn't it?
I find the entire issue of Microsoft packaging Media Player with Windows to be utterly ridiculous. It's their product. If they want to make it only work with other products of theirs, that's their right. Why isn't anyone suing Apple over Quicktime? (Side note: The Apple/Quicktime analogy is probably a much better one than those above)
it is not legal to trade porn (irony)
How is this ironic? Granted, in this case it was not, but in most cases "trading porn" consists of trading copyrighted material over the Internet. That is illegal based on most country's copyright laws, without even bringing decency statutes into it. I fail to see the irony here.
The school has in fact never educated any of its students on the do's and dont's of sex which gives it no right to judge the girl.
Are you actually saying that if the school HAD educated the kids on the do's and dont's of sex that the school would THEN have the right to judge her (read: expel her)? I'm not sure I follow your logic here...