The FCC is also weighing whether to allow consumers to use their own cell phones on planes.
Golly gee, I sure hope the FCC will find it in their heart to allow us this one tidbit of freedom. If they would only let me talk on my phone in the plane, which I barely even use on the ground, it would make up for all their censorship and heavy handed regulation. I love you, FCC!
This means that the Bill of Rights INTENDED to allow the gov't to intrude in the live of innocent Americans
This is an interesting perspective which I haven't though about before. Yet another reason why the Bill of Rights and the Constitution are complete failures in protecting our liberty from tyrannical government.
The problem with this is, who determines what the limits on this probable cause are? This surely opens up a huge avenue for potential abuse, where the government can give any old reason for spying on their internal political enemies and justify it as probable cause. And don't tell me it's not happening in this case. Anyone who trusts the government to use this power judiciously is the one wearing "rose colored glasses".
Bullshit. And I don't care who said it. Would you have preferred the US sit out WW2?
Personally, yes, I would indeed have preferred this. Why should we have been forced to pay for the protection of foreign governments, especially considering that the rich big busineses interests of this country are the ones who really profited? This was Europe's problem. They had plenty of chances to stop Hitler before the problem became uncontrollable, but they didn't.
Aside from that, war is undeniably the health of the state. It is the way our government continually increases their power over us. The truth is that man has an inherent right to his justly acquired property, and the only probable cause for initiating violence on another person is in self defense if this property is invaded. This basically makes all governments nothing more than a glorified band of murderous robbers. The less power they have over me, the better. The less chance of them surviving, the better. How's that for moral high ground?
This was my thoughts exactly, this is just another government handout. Now they will be getting their dirty fingers into open source and mucking it up just like everything else they do.
These guys posted clips from their appearance on Fox News and CNN last August, and have had video Ipod feeds available since October. I'm glad to see such current news.
What you said is exactly the opposite of what actually happened. According to the article, the users protested and MySpace gave in. Corporations will always be subject to the consumer with their almighty dollar.
In contrast, when the government does something (like take over Iraq) and the citizens protest, the government violently breaks it with police forces and then gets re-elected and remains in office.
one of his previous jobs was a Computer Tech, which makes him over qualified for Politics
I'd say that holding just about any job would make one overqualified to be a politician, including most forms of unskilled labor. Tells you how much I respect most politicians, hehe.
Are you sure you hear equally well from both ears? I personally have slight hearing loss in my right ear (from birth). Maybe you should get yours checked if you haven't.
Are you saying that governments do care about human rights? Is it a human right not to get killed in war? How many humans would you say have been killed by governments vs. corporations? Call this a wild guess, but I'd say it's not even close. Governments are not a "check and balance". Their sole existance from their inception (including the U.S. gov.) has been to protect the assets of the rich. They wage war against other governments not to protect democracy or human rights, but to secure foreign markets for big business.
Oddly, the government suddenly cares a great deal when you track the guy down and deliver some 12-guage justice yourself.
I'm talking mostly about prevention here. Some people just ignorantly go about their business thinking that big brother will save them if they are frauded.
Oddly, I wonder how many of these people here who posted their personal stories got their money back through actions of government/law enforcement.
Serously though,
Whatever happened to consumer responsibility? I personally never buy anything unless the price is pretty low and the seller has lots of feedback. Our society has become so dependent on the government and law enforcement to take care of our problems that we have been totally ignorant of how to protect ourselves. If eBay gains enough of a reputation for fraud, people will stop shopping there and they will loose enough business that they will have to do something.
The ipod phone looks a little big. I just ditched a Treo 600 for a RAZR because it was too big. I would like to see an ipod phone the size of an ipod nano. Apple, please email me when you are done, nano@phone.com. Thanks.
IMHO, the purpose of copyright is to give the government another excuse to regulate us. It's a sneaky way for them to create monopolies and then turn around and say we need them to protect us from said monopoly.
If you didn't have an SS#, you'd have a bundle of other "unique" identifiers.
I'd say a bundle of unique IDs would be way better than having one for everything. If someone got ahold of one of them they wouldn't have access to everything else in your life as well.
You are right about the problem of everyone adopting it. And why did they do this? Because they knew everyone had a SSN, so it was the easy thing to do. Why did everyone have a SSN? Because the government requires it. The only solution is for the government to discontinue this practice. You can beef up database security to the high heavens but it will only be as good as the humans that are handling the SSNs.
How about this: why doesn't the Government allow us to opt out of the Social Security program? I'd like to see those identity theft bastards try to steal mine when I don't even have a SS number. Of course, the way things are now that would never happen in a million years, because the powers that be don't give two shits about what their citizens really want.
Just how long till someone does this on a large scale, by overselling the dedicated lines, and starts selling true unlimited cell plans?"
I think the real question is, "Once somebody does this on a large scale, how long will it take for the cell phone companies to ditch free mobile to mobile?"
People need to realize that the government is the entity to blame for this whole DMCA fiasco. They are the ones who are in power, with the ability to enforce these laws. It is the government that creates huge corporate monopolies through patent enforcement. The government is bowing down to special interests that abuse consumers just so they can keep the cash flow going in corporate donations.
They sure have pulled a fast one on us. All they really care about is staying in power. They know they can do this because people will continue to vote for them, thinking that they will be protected against those evil terrorists. The only chance we will ever have is to strip the government of the power to make these stupid laws and get them out of our private lives.
This definitely prooves beyond a reasonable doubt that MS sucks and Linux is the best. We can now finally rest in our ongoing struggle against this giant, evil monopoly that has plagued us for so long Way to go guys!
the FCC was downplaying the threat of the interference BPL creates, the FCC's very own test results were showing just the opposite."
Wonderful... There you have it, folks! Your government in action.
Seems like yet another reason to get the government out of technology. I've been seeing a LOT of reasons like this in the news lately. How many more reasons do we need until people get really fed up?
I just don't understand how some slashdotters will line up behind the government when they legislate such things as technology spending (like WiFi) in cities. Then, in their next breath, they get all upset when the Gov tries to regulate broadcasting, downloads, or anything else. So, basically these types of people only want government intervention when it suits them, just like the organizations that are trying to pass these laws. Really they are no better than the RIAA they are always railing against. Of course, I am speaking about my perception of slashdot as a whole, not really individual people.
Bribing politicians to continously extend this period on materials that have reached the limit of their copyright is stealing from the public.
The problem is that the government even has the power to make these laws in the first place. A strong state will likely be persuaded by any amount of cash that someone will give it. If we would just take away their power to legislate such malarky it would handily solve this problem.
Slashdot Mirror
The FCC is also weighing whether to allow consumers to use their own cell phones on planes.
Golly gee, I sure hope the FCC will find it in their heart to allow us this one tidbit of freedom. If they would only let me talk on my phone in the plane, which I barely even use on the ground, it would make up for all their censorship and heavy handed regulation. I love you, FCC!
This is an interesting perspective which I haven't though about before. Yet another reason why the Bill of Rights and the Constitution are complete failures in protecting our liberty from tyrannical government.
The problem with this is, who determines what the limits on this probable cause are? This surely opens up a huge avenue for potential abuse, where the government can give any old reason for spying on their internal political enemies and justify it as probable cause. And don't tell me it's not happening in this case. Anyone who trusts the government to use this power judiciously is the one wearing "rose colored glasses".
Bullshit. And I don't care who said it. Would you have preferred the US sit out WW2?
Personally, yes, I would indeed have preferred this. Why should we have been forced to pay for the protection of foreign governments, especially considering that the rich big busineses interests of this country are the ones who really profited? This was Europe's problem. They had plenty of chances to stop Hitler before the problem became uncontrollable, but they didn't.
Aside from that, war is undeniably the health of the state. It is the way our government continually increases their power over us. The truth is that man has an inherent right to his justly acquired property, and the only probable cause for initiating violence on another person is in self defense if this property is invaded. This basically makes all governments nothing more than a glorified band of murderous robbers. The less power they have over me, the better. The less chance of them surviving, the better. How's that for moral high ground?
This was my thoughts exactly, this is just another government handout. Now they will be getting their dirty fingers into open source and mucking it up just like everything else they do.
These guys posted clips from their appearance on Fox News and CNN last August, and have had video Ipod feeds available since October. I'm glad to see such current news.
In contrast, when the government does something (like take over Iraq) and the citizens protest, the government violently breaks it with police forces and then gets re-elected and remains in office.
If you really wanted to, you can record it analogue style. I'd love to see the copy protection prevent that!
I'd say that holding just about any job would make one overqualified to be a politician, including most forms of unskilled labor. Tells you how much I respect most politicians, hehe.
Are you sure you hear equally well from both ears? I personally have slight hearing loss in my right ear (from birth). Maybe you should get yours checked if you haven't.
I just hope they actually come to to a consensus before the HD format becomes obsolete.
Are you saying that governments do care about human rights? Is it a human right not to get killed in war? How many humans would you say have been killed by governments vs. corporations? Call this a wild guess, but I'd say it's not even close. Governments are not a "check and balance". Their sole existance from their inception (including the U.S. gov.) has been to protect the assets of the rich. They wage war against other governments not to protect democracy or human rights, but to secure foreign markets for big business.
I'm talking mostly about prevention here. Some people just ignorantly go about their business thinking that big brother will save them if they are frauded.
Oddly, I wonder how many of these people here who posted their personal stories got their money back through actions of government/law enforcement.
Serously though,
Whatever happened to consumer responsibility? I personally never buy anything unless the price is pretty low and the seller has lots of feedback. Our society has become so dependent on the government and law enforcement to take care of our problems that we have been totally ignorant of how to protect ourselves. If eBay gains enough of a reputation for fraud, people will stop shopping there and they will loose enough business that they will have to do something.
The ipod phone looks a little big. I just ditched a Treo 600 for a RAZR because it was too big. I would like to see an ipod phone the size of an ipod nano. Apple, please email me when you are done, nano@phone.com. Thanks.
IMHO, the purpose of copyright is to give the government another excuse to regulate us. It's a sneaky way for them to create monopolies and then turn around and say we need them to protect us from said monopoly.
If you didn't have an SS#, you'd have a bundle of other "unique" identifiers.
I'd say a bundle of unique IDs would be way better than having one for everything. If someone got ahold of one of them they wouldn't have access to everything else in your life as well.
You are right about the problem of everyone adopting it. And why did they do this? Because they knew everyone had a SSN, so it was the easy thing to do. Why did everyone have a SSN? Because the government requires it. The only solution is for the government to discontinue this practice. You can beef up database security to the high heavens but it will only be as good as the humans that are handling the SSNs.
How about this: why doesn't the Government allow us to opt out of the Social Security program? I'd like to see those identity theft bastards try to steal mine when I don't even have a SS number. Of course, the way things are now that would never happen in a million years, because the powers that be don't give two shits about what their citizens really want.
Just how long till someone does this on a large scale, by overselling the dedicated lines, and starts selling true unlimited cell plans?"
I think the real question is, "Once somebody does this on a large scale, how long will it take for the cell phone companies to ditch free mobile to mobile?"
People need to realize that the government is the entity to blame for this whole DMCA fiasco. They are the ones who are in power, with the ability to enforce these laws. It is the government that creates huge corporate monopolies through patent enforcement. The government is bowing down to special interests that abuse consumers just so they can keep the cash flow going in corporate donations.
They sure have pulled a fast one on us. All they really care about is staying in power. They know they can do this because people will continue to vote for them, thinking that they will be protected against those evil terrorists. The only chance we will ever have is to strip the government of the power to make these stupid laws and get them out of our private lives.
This definitely prooves beyond a reasonable doubt that MS sucks and Linux is the best. We can now finally rest in our ongoing struggle against this giant, evil monopoly that has plagued us for so long Way to go guys!
the FCC was downplaying the threat of the interference BPL creates, the FCC's very own test results were showing just the opposite."
Wonderful... There you have it, folks! Your government in action.
Seems like yet another reason to get the government out of technology. I've been seeing a LOT of reasons like this in the news lately. How many more reasons do we need until people get really fed up?
I just don't understand how some slashdotters will line up behind the government when they legislate such things as technology spending (like WiFi) in cities. Then, in their next breath, they get all upset when the Gov tries to regulate broadcasting, downloads, or anything else. So, basically these types of people only want government intervention when it suits them, just like the organizations that are trying to pass these laws. Really they are no better than the RIAA they are always railing against. Of course, I am speaking about my perception of slashdot as a whole, not really individual people.
I agree, it's about as useful as a humvee in the city.
Apparently you haven't driven on some of Cleveland's roads.
Bribing politicians to continously extend this period on materials that have reached the limit of their copyright is stealing from the public.
The problem is that the government even has the power to make these laws in the first place. A strong state will likely be persuaded by any amount of cash that someone will give it. If we would just take away their power to legislate such malarky it would handily solve this problem.