What would happen if we organized a "good" botnet that would DDOS the machines on the Storm botnet, rendering them incapable? Obviously participation in the good net would be voluntary.
Many people are missing the point here. What this is about, or what it should be about, is the protection of the exploitation of Major League Baseball's statistical database as a whole. They have collated these statistics themselves and as I it see are under no obligation to make them completely open source. What they are entitled to prevent is other entities using their statistics to profit. However, if someone wants to collate their own database from independent research (which may or may not cite MLB's in places), and profit from that, then they should be allowed to do so also. Of course you can't copyright facts, and that's why I believe in a liberal amount of "fair use" in this matter. Sure, provide searchable statistics on the web site, but that doesn't mean that everyone has a right to a complete dump of the whole database.
American propaganda (and that of some other western democracies) is far more advanced and subtle to need to overtly supress free speech. Through complete corporate control of the mainstream media, only a very narrow band of the entire spectrum of views are presented. Thid leaves the less varacious (ie. most people) without the MEANS to form an alternative opinion, and often with no idea that they are not getting the full story. If you are yourself an American citizen, then by posing this very question you are highlighting my point.
It is interesting that you mention Cindy Sheehan - indeed she can express her views, but that does not stop her valid and logical opinions being demonized by the media. As the mainstream media is now nothing more than a governmental moutpiece, this provides a direct example of how the US government is moving to limit free speech. There are of course countless other examples. http://kurtnimmo.com/blog/?p=909
I take issue with your lumping together Derren Brown with common clairvoyant tricksters. In some ways, Derren is the antithesis of the clarivoyant as he is completely open about the methods he uses to accomplish his feats, claiming them rooted in science rather than the supernatural.
Experts exchange requires email registration but then its free to see the answers. It's actually very useful, despite the amount of crap they fill your screen with.
Indeed, and in the link you give, these supposed stuffed words make perfect sense where they are, providing clear and concise headings. What's wrong with that?
Slashdot Mirror
They're employing Mexicans now?
begthequestion.info
If people are that bothered, could they not just fork the kernel and have one for the home user and one for the server?
http://begthequestion.info/
To the consumer, the proportion is irrelevant. There are far more "good" websites than there are "good" TV shows.
What would happen if we organized a "good" botnet that would DDOS the machines on the Storm botnet, rendering them incapable? Obviously participation in the good net would be voluntary.
Use linux.
It's difficult to make a case that will stand up that the conditions are particularly onerous or truly cruel and unusual.
Forcing someone to use Windows might not be unusual, but it is certainly cruel.
Thubuntu.
First off, it is I.T. it's an acronym not a fucking word.
First off, when you start a new sentence, you use a capital letter, not a fucking small letter you pedantic cunt.
Many people are missing the point here. What this is about, or what it should be about, is the protection of the exploitation of Major League Baseball's statistical database as a whole. They have collated these statistics themselves and as I it see are under no obligation to make them completely open source. What they are entitled to prevent is other entities using their statistics to profit. However, if someone wants to collate their own database from independent research (which may or may not cite MLB's in places), and profit from that, then they should be allowed to do so also. Of course you can't copyright facts, and that's why I believe in a liberal amount of "fair use" in this matter. Sure, provide searchable statistics on the web site, but that doesn't mean that everyone has a right to a complete dump of the whole database.
The wise Alex Jones has been reporting on this for years: http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/toll_roads_tex as_set_to_supersize_highway.htm
Hurricanes are so two months ago.
American propaganda (and that of some other western democracies) is far more advanced and subtle to need to overtly supress free speech. Through complete corporate control of the mainstream media, only a very narrow band of the entire spectrum of views are presented. Thid leaves the less varacious (ie. most people) without the MEANS to form an alternative opinion, and often with no idea that they are not getting the full story. If you are yourself an American citizen, then by posing this very question you are highlighting my point.
It is interesting that you mention Cindy Sheehan - indeed she can express her views, but that does not stop her valid and logical opinions being demonized by the media. As the mainstream media is now nothing more than a governmental moutpiece, this provides a direct example of how the US government is moving to limit free speech. There are of course countless other examples.
http://kurtnimmo.com/blog/?p=909
As they are probably frequented by the same officials who make the laws, this shouldn't be a problem.
Perhaps because they didn't want to release an unfinished version that was still liable to change.
I take issue with your lumping together Derren Brown with common clairvoyant tricksters. In some ways, Derren is the antithesis of the clarivoyant as he is completely open about the methods he uses to accomplish his feats, claiming them rooted in science rather than the supernatural.
If it's cheaper then yes.
...a major problem happens and you have to spend four hours straight in there freezing your tits off.
Experts exchange requires email registration but then its free to see the answers. It's actually very useful, despite the amount of crap they fill your screen with.
... Start > Control Panel > Add or Remove Programs > Add/Remove Windows Components > uncheck Windows Media Player.
Since WMP is in effect a free application for all legal Windows users, I think the logical decision would be to offer both versions at the same price.
As a possessor of a big penis I can say it has its downsides.
Indeed, and in the link you give, these supposed stuffed words make perfect sense where they are, providing clear and concise headings. What's wrong with that?
Seeing as you can create a website in Word there really is no excuse for this any more.