Linux might not be on the desktop, but the desktop is becoming more and more "That virus infested annoyance you're forced to deal with to get on the Internet", and the Internet is FOSS.
Well, I don't see it that way. The desktop is where I can do the really cool stuff. Of course, my OS is not virus ridden, nor an annoyance. The internet is somehwere I increasingly have to go to get stuff, and to make things work. Desktop applications are where the power is. Unfortunately, many applications increasingly require the internet for lame things like authentication.
I wouldn't want to run my flight simulators, video editing and music software from a web browser. Good integration with the OS makes these applications more useful. Good tools, APIs and libraries in the OS help the applications advance, and make it easier for developers to concentrate on what their application does, rather than re-inventing the wheel.
why on earth would he start screaming about the patriot act before he was tased?
Perhaps because he was asked for ID? I don't know, I'm not that guy.
police have the right and authority to uphold the law using force.
Using reasonable force. This use of force was clearly not reasonable.
And what law were they upholding? It's not illegal to not show an ID.
the legality of asking for an ID is not questionable. Especially not in the instance described at this stupid left wing hippie college.
Yes, the legality of asking for ID is questionable. Also, I did not see anybody who looked like a "hippie" in the video. And what makes the college "stupid and left wing"? I suspect you are trolling.
i mean honestly, did you expect the police to just stand there and not do anything when he refused? "Well guys, he says no, what should we do?
False dichotomy. They had many other options besides using a taser. What reason is there to use the taser at all? they weren't physically under threat, and tasers can be dangerous and cause fatalities in some people. So why use the taser?
Anyway, what would be the problem with doing nothing? The outcome would probably have been much better than what did happen with the use of force. There was no threat to safety in leaving him alone.
lol...hardly... homeboy is lucky im not a cop. as I stated earlier, i would have tased him between punches to the face.
Why? Because you're a sadist? please try to explain why you would commit such a horrible and illegal act. You talk about "enforcing the law" - but you seem more determined to break it and undermine it.
and to think, this whole thing could have been avoided if he just did what he was supposed to do.
The whole thing could have been avoided if the cops did their jobs professionally and took reasonable actions.
Disclaimer: I do think this whole 'patriot act' thing, as it were, is going a bit far into the reaches of our privacy etc etc. But in this particular instance, the guy got what he had coming to him.
Why? What did he do to deserve this?
question...did the guy ever once in the video say "i cant stand, sorry, you just tased me"? Or was it some portions of his prerehearsed speach in between screams?
Why does it matter? I don't think you'd be so polite in such circumstances. Do you think it would have made any difference? It is obvious the cops were on a power trip, nothing he said would have made any difference. The cops should have bloody well known the effects of tasing, they shouldn't have to be told. Their behaviour was clearly inappropriate. Do they have enough brain cells to rub together to understand that the whole purpose of tasing is to reduce mobility? They were either too stupid to be cops, or were knowingly inflicting torture.
No no, it's what I saw when I read the earth science books dogma my kids must read. Have you read any of it?
How can I know if I've read it, if you don't say what the books are? Would you care to cite a passage from these books where it says "the earth will be destroyed if you don't recycle"? You are the one who made the claim, it's your job to prove it and cite evidence.
Or are you just casting aspersions because you can't take someone disagreeing with your religion?
I don't have any religion, so it's hard for me to worry about aspersions against a religion. I don't see what your post had to do with religion.
Why is it necessary to have a "creator" to want to understand the world around us? Your statement doesn't really make sense. In fact, reality is probably the opposite. Sentient beings would naturally try to work out the mechanics of the world. Where they see stuff they can't explain, they use "god" to fill in the gaps, so they don't feel so ignorant or powerless.
The existence of God is something that, by definition, is outside of the scope of what we can measure.
Therefore, god has nothing to do with science, and they don't go "hand in hand" as the thread starter implied. Until you can come up with a scientifically testable definition of god, then god can stay the fuck out of science.
Christians (and other religious folk) has set back science much more than they have advanced it with any token efforts. The main mechanism for this is keeping the majority of people in a state of ignorant bliss (or ignorant fear). This has given rise to a culture where scientists are rare, and many scientists have to fight against society to be heard. Imagine if the majority of people in history believed in rational thought and science, instead of a select few. Humanity would be far more advanced than it is today, and it's also likely we wouldn't have had so many terrible wars, or as much racism, terrorism, etc.
Such people are as much Christians as are scientists who believe the world is flat.
Sorry, he is a Christian. All that is required to be a Christian is to believe in a Christian god. Clearly this guy does. What makes him not a Christian?
Play with me a while: both have apocolyptic badness at the end, if all the people don't accept and behave a certain way. Pretty similar ideas, aren't they?
Not really. It depends on what you mean by "apocalyptic," I guess. The vast majority of environmentalism is not about apocalypse. It says things will get worse if we don't take care. But the key point is that if we do make an effort, things won't be so bad. This is based on evidence. It's not like Christian apocalypse, which is about belief. Environmentalism doesn't care if you "believe" - it matters what you do in physical reality, not in belief-space.
Umm, what's so crazy about recycling? People used to recycle simply because it is common sense - materials were scarce, and it makes economic sense not to waste resources. That being said, I doubt anyone has actually told you that the earth would be destroyed if you didn't recycle. Maybe that's how your paranoid brain interpreted it, though. Or perhaps that was a stereotype you picked up from propagandists.
because Dawkins has made that seemingly benign group of people the target of many of his criticisms.
They're not really so benign, because they give religion its power. Without them, fundamentalists would have a much more difficult time with their trash-talking and hatred.
I just said how. If I make the social comment "bitches ain't shit", how is that, in any way, political?
Because everything social is political. the above comment is making a statement about attitudes toward women, which has implications of feminism, women's right to vote, domestic violence, etc.
I never mentioned a law banning bitches or a political action committee to determine the best course of action toward curbing this trend through legislative means.
But politics is not just about laws and politicians. The personal is political. People tend to express their politics based on their personal and social beliefs.
Just because there are aspects of society you may find distasteful, guess what? It's not the government's fucking job to regulate society unless it meets some pretty basic criteria.
So what? Even without any governments, politics would still exist. Never heard of office politics? The personal politic?
Are the social actions in question impacting the lives of others in society in a direct, meaningful, detrimental way, e.g. theft of life or property? If not, back the fuck off. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you can make a law to halt it. That's ludicrous.
There you go. You just made a political statement.
I dont buy the 'he just got tased so he couldnt stand up' argument because he had plenty of strength to go on his pre-rehearsed patriot act speech.
Well, firstly, the patriot act was mentioned before the tasing, I believe. Secondly, being able to talk and being able to stand are very different things, involving different muscles. Also, after he was repeatedly tased, all he could do was basically scream in pain.
Regardless - the legality of being asked for an ID is questionable. It's not a law, it's a campus code. the legality of trepeatedly tasing someone who is not a physical threat is not in question. It is an illegal assault. So, the student might have done something against university policy. But the police violated US law and human rights.
There's nothing illegal about "being a dumbass" or screaming about the patriot act.
It's much clearer that the police were breaking the law here, and much less evidence that the student was breaking any laws. Should the police be executed for non-compliance with the law? Or do police get immunity from laws?
After seven minutes, you still hear the police saying, "stand up" over and over and many screams of bloody murder.
Well, there you go. A pretty clear indication of police brutality. They tasered the guy, and he is screaming in pain - and they expect him to stand up? What the fuck is that all about?
You clearly hear they guy screaming "DON'T TOUCH ME". Then you hear him screaming "HERE IS YOUR PATRIOT ACT! HERE IS YOUR FUCKING ABUSE OF POWER! I SAID I WOULD FUCKING LEAVE!"
So what? Screaming isn't against the law. neither is expressing your political opinion. I thought Freedom of Speech was supposed to be an important American value. You don't arrest people just because they say something you don't agree with. You certainly don't assault them. Assualt (what the police did) is illegal. Screaming your political opinions is not.
I've never heard of a "light beating" or "mild flogging" by the police.
You must lead a pretty sheltered life. They happen all the time. Unfortunately, the victims rarely get justice. Such "light beatings" are usually called "resisting arrest" and get the victim charged, not the police who perpetrate it.
The taser was invented so police could use brutality, without leaving as many permanent marks, so they could avoid brutality charges, while being brutal more often. If the taser was not an option, these police would not have beaten the man. This is a University campus. They never would have kept their jobs if they beat him. But they can tase him, and cause just as much pain, and probably keep their jobs too.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I don't see it that way. The desktop is where I can do the really cool stuff. Of course, my OS is not virus ridden, nor an annoyance. The internet is somehwere I increasingly have to go to get stuff, and to make things work. Desktop applications are where the power is. Unfortunately, many applications increasingly require the internet for lame things like authentication.
I wouldn't want to run my flight simulators, video editing and music software from a web browser. Good integration with the OS makes these applications more useful. Good tools, APIs and libraries in the OS help the applications advance, and make it easier for developers to concentrate on what their application does, rather than re-inventing the wheel.
Perhaps because he was asked for ID? I don't know, I'm not that guy.
police have the right and authority to uphold the law using force.
Using reasonable force. This use of force was clearly not reasonable.
And what law were they upholding? It's not illegal to not show an ID.
the legality of asking for an ID is not questionable. Especially not in the instance described at this stupid left wing hippie college.
Yes, the legality of asking for ID is questionable. Also, I did not see anybody who looked like a "hippie" in the video. And what makes the college "stupid and left wing"? I suspect you are trolling.
i mean honestly, did you expect the police to just stand there and not do anything when he refused? "Well guys, he says no, what should we do?
False dichotomy. They had many other options besides using a taser. What reason is there to use the taser at all? they weren't physically under threat, and tasers can be dangerous and cause fatalities in some people. So why use the taser?
Anyway, what would be the problem with doing nothing? The outcome would probably have been much better than what did happen with the use of force. There was no threat to safety in leaving him alone.
lol...hardly... homeboy is lucky im not a cop. as I stated earlier, i would have tased him between punches to the face.
Why? Because you're a sadist? please try to explain why you would commit such a horrible and illegal act. You talk about "enforcing the law" - but you seem more determined to break it and undermine it.
and to think, this whole thing could have been avoided if he just did what he was supposed to do.
The whole thing could have been avoided if the cops did their jobs professionally and took reasonable actions.
Disclaimer: I do think this whole 'patriot act' thing, as it were, is going a bit far into the reaches of our privacy etc etc. But in this particular instance, the guy got what he had coming to him.
Why? What did he do to deserve this?
question...did the guy ever once in the video say "i cant stand, sorry, you just tased me"? Or was it some portions of his prerehearsed speach in between screams?
Why does it matter? I don't think you'd be so polite in such circumstances. Do you think it would have made any difference? It is obvious the cops were on a power trip, nothing he said would have made any difference. The cops should have bloody well known the effects of tasing, they shouldn't have to be told. Their behaviour was clearly inappropriate. Do they have enough brain cells to rub together to understand that the whole purpose of tasing is to reduce mobility? They were either too stupid to be cops, or were knowingly inflicting torture.
How can I know if I've read it, if you don't say what the books are? Would you care to cite a passage from these books where it says "the earth will be destroyed if you don't recycle"? You are the one who made the claim, it's your job to prove it and cite evidence.
Or are you just casting aspersions because you can't take someone disagreeing with your religion?
I don't have any religion, so it's hard for me to worry about aspersions against a religion. I don't see what your post had to do with religion.
Why is it necessary to have a "creator" to want to understand the world around us? Your statement doesn't really make sense. In fact, reality is probably the opposite. Sentient beings would naturally try to work out the mechanics of the world. Where they see stuff they can't explain, they use "god" to fill in the gaps, so they don't feel so ignorant or powerless.
Therefore, god has nothing to do with science, and they don't go "hand in hand" as the thread starter implied. Until you can come up with a scientifically testable definition of god, then god can stay the fuck out of science.
Imagine a world without religion...
Sorry, he is a Christian. All that is required to be a Christian is to believe in a Christian god. Clearly this guy does. What makes him not a Christian?
Not really. It depends on what you mean by "apocalyptic," I guess. The vast majority of environmentalism is not about apocalypse. It says things will get worse if we don't take care. But the key point is that if we do make an effort, things won't be so bad. This is based on evidence. It's not like Christian apocalypse, which is about belief. Environmentalism doesn't care if you "believe" - it matters what you do in physical reality, not in belief-space.
Umm, what's so crazy about recycling? People used to recycle simply because it is common sense - materials were scarce, and it makes economic sense not to waste resources. That being said, I doubt anyone has actually told you that the earth would be destroyed if you didn't recycle. Maybe that's how your paranoid brain interpreted it, though. Or perhaps that was a stereotype you picked up from propagandists.
Are you from a communist country? Because that would be very hard to believe in America.
They're not really so benign, because they give religion its power. Without them, fundamentalists would have a much more difficult time with their trash-talking and hatred.
Or not.
It's nutritionally enhanced custard, with added iron.
Yeah, they eat tea and crumpets with their politics. They even raise their pinky finger.
I am the one who owns the English language. I get the final word on how it is used. Why do you ask?
Because everything social is political. the above comment is making a statement about attitudes toward women, which has implications of feminism, women's right to vote, domestic violence, etc.
I never mentioned a law banning bitches or a political action committee to determine the best course of action toward curbing this trend through legislative means.
But politics is not just about laws and politicians. The personal is political. People tend to express their politics based on their personal and social beliefs.
Just because there are aspects of society you may find distasteful, guess what? It's not the government's fucking job to regulate society unless it meets some pretty basic criteria.
So what? Even without any governments, politics would still exist. Never heard of office politics? The personal politic?
Are the social actions in question impacting the lives of others in society in a direct, meaningful, detrimental way, e.g. theft of life or property? If not, back the fuck off. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you can make a law to halt it. That's ludicrous.
There you go. You just made a political statement.
Of course "geek" is a pejorative term. There's little that's cool or respectable about being a carny who bites the heads off of chickens.
Well, firstly, the patriot act was mentioned before the tasing, I believe. Secondly, being able to talk and being able to stand are very different things, involving different muscles. Also, after he was repeatedly tased, all he could do was basically scream in pain.
Regardless - the legality of being asked for an ID is questionable. It's not a law, it's a campus code. the legality of trepeatedly tasing someone who is not a physical threat is not in question. It is an illegal assault. So, the student might have done something against university policy. But the police violated US law and human rights.
There's nothing illegal about "being a dumbass" or screaming about the patriot act.
The police are there to be served donuts and protect their income.
It's much clearer that the police were breaking the law here, and much less evidence that the student was breaking any laws. Should the police be executed for non-compliance with the law? Or do police get immunity from laws?
Well, there you go. A pretty clear indication of police brutality. They tasered the guy, and he is screaming in pain - and they expect him to stand up? What the fuck is that all about?
No, he was trying to leave it. Then the police delayed/prevented his leaving.
So what? Screaming isn't against the law. neither is expressing your political opinion. I thought Freedom of Speech was supposed to be an important American value. You don't arrest people just because they say something you don't agree with. You certainly don't assault them. Assualt (what the police did) is illegal. Screaming your political opinions is not.
You must lead a pretty sheltered life. They happen all the time. Unfortunately, the victims rarely get justice. Such "light beatings" are usually called "resisting arrest" and get the victim charged, not the police who perpetrate it.
The taser was invented so police could use brutality, without leaving as many permanent marks, so they could avoid brutality charges, while being brutal more often. If the taser was not an option, these police would not have beaten the man. This is a University campus. They never would have kept their jobs if they beat him. But they can tase him, and cause just as much pain, and probably keep their jobs too.