Is killing himself the way by which he becomes uncranked, or do you want him to see the error of his ways (and perhaps shed a single tear) as he squeezes the trigger?
Government slaughter of civilians should be everyone's problem.
What do you suggest — that the United States MIC commit to another "humanitarian" invasion and occupation in order to "liberate" a sovereign nation engaged in a civil war? I suppose you could say we're good at it, as long "good" means a good number of dead foreigners who weren't bothering us, and a good chunk of taxpayers' dollars in the pockets of Halliburton, Blackwater/Xe/Academi/whatever-the-fuck they're calling themselves these days, etc.
My apologies if that's not what you had in mind; if you have a different idea — one that would realistically take place, given our track record for atrocities — please share it.
Here's my idea: Let's stay home, and maybe fix our crumbling infrastructure or something.
You remind me of the clerk in this "stolen" The Onion comic. If you don't want something "stolen" off the public web, don't publish it there.
That's ridiculously stupid. Stores don't lock their doors, does that mean that people are free to steal from them? Of course not. Simply being on the web doesn't magically make everything free, nor should it. The mental gymnastics you're doing to justify the crime is absurd.
Your shoplifting example is analogous to receiving priced merchandise from an online store without paying the amount requested by the seller. I agree that this is not done "freely," as even if an online store were so inept so as to allow this to occur, criminal law prohibits acquiring merchandise without paying the seller's the agreed upon price.
However, I thought we were discussing downloading data from a public-facing web server, that is offered just as freely as any of the comments I've contributed to this site, (as well as the photos, essays, code, and so on that I've contributed on other sites, Usenet, and BBSs) — data for which no price has been indicated, and no overt mechanism for providing payment has been presented. You call downloading these items a "crime" — under which U.S. law are these downloads criminalized?
Engineering time, designer time, bandwidth costs, server costs, etc...
YouTube.com didn't just magically appear and run itself completely free of charge.
Google makes money off the properties of others.
No shit sherlock. That's not justification for you to steal from Google nor the owners of said content. You seem oblivious to the fact that the content owners *GET PAID* when those ads are shown, not just Google.
You remind me of the clerk in this "stolen" The Onion comic. If you don't want something "stolen" off the public web, don't publish it there.
You don't have a Constitutional right to own a car.
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." — Ninth Amendment
To me, existing government regulations surrounding vehicle use and ownership don't offer a compelling argument for legitimizing restrictions of the Second Amendment — rather, it's an example of overreach that treads upon the human rights to travel and property, which can be particularly onerous in a nation where automobile-centric urban planning/suburban sprawl paired with deficient mass transit is so prevalent.
Additionally theres no such thing as a frictionless treadmill, and the treadmill they use is actually able to adjust its load to simulate real world resistances.
Perhaps nefus was referring to dynamometers, which would provide over-optimistic measurements of fuel efficiency and/or vehicle performance, since they don't account for the effects of aerodynamics on those figures. (I'm not claiming that any organization presents figures obtained this way, merely that that's what nefus may be referring to).
Re: Corn syrup (high fructose corn syrup specifically) - it is probably available to food industry manufacturers and others through specialized supply chains. It isn't really a store shelf product [...]
There is an economic analysis out there (sorry, don't have the URL at my fingertips) that compares book authorship/publishing/reading in strict-copyright 19th century England with no-copyright 19th century Germany.
[I]f you live in France, and you enjoy not speaking German, (or if you live anywhere in Europe, for that matter, and enjoy not being required to speak German...) you're welcome. If you live anywhere in Asia, and enjoy not having to speak Japanese, if only to ask your masters for water, or for them not to whip you so hard... you're welcome.
Now if you'll pardon me, I'm going to go read.
I suggest you read a history book, particularly one that covers the Soviet Union's role during World War II. I suspect that your grade-school history/social studies books were either similar to or identical to mine, which were published in the United States during the Cold War on the behalf of government, and were therefore appropriately biased.
How would you decide who gets a pass on having to work?
Some people like working; give them a pass and let 'em. There are also situations where society can benefit from people pursuing their own interests rather than their employers. For example, Bush II seemed more interested in — and better suited at — pulling up his namesake in Crawford, TX, than presiding. I think we were better off when he was playing in the yard where we could keep an eye on him, especially when old man Cheney was prowling around.
[T]he issue is taxes dont need to go up, as a new yorker, i already spend over 60% of my income on taxes.... spending needs to go down. as such fuck anyone who wants more of my money when i can barely pay for my food[.]
If you're in NYC, you can save a shitload of money by living on the sidewalk with the many people who can't afford ganja, food, or shelter.
As a metro-area New Yorker, I'm more concerned that my taxes are being used to curtail civil liberties, instead of (for example) giving those aforementioned people a place to live, than I am about the rate that I'm taxed.
Slashdot Mirror
[...] autoplay videos [...]
Your computer is broken.
I just have ABP with all of Fanboy's filters enabled and the site works fine for me.
Same here, but I figured NoScript would solve justthinkit's problem, as it displayed a blocked-redirect notification to me on that site.
It sounds like you accidentally failed to install NoScript.
This is completely legal under the Patriot Act.
That strikes me as a meaningless statement, tantamount to saying that an action is "completely legal within the confines of despotism."
Not only do you eat McDonald's for lunch, you bring your family there?
Do you want your children to be obese and have health problems?
Do poor people simply dislike money?
Fascists have always been of the left. Leftest continue to deny it.
Apparently some leftist has vandalized this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Position_in_the_political_spectrum
Stop being a crank or just kill yourself.
Is killing himself the way by which he becomes uncranked, or do you want him to see the error of his ways (and perhaps shed a single tear) as he squeezes the trigger?
Government slaughter of civilians should be everyone's problem.
What do you suggest — that the United States MIC commit to another "humanitarian" invasion and occupation in order to "liberate" a sovereign nation engaged in a civil war? I suppose you could say we're good at it, as long "good" means a good number of dead foreigners who weren't bothering us, and a good chunk of taxpayers' dollars in the pockets of Halliburton, Blackwater/Xe/Academi/whatever-the-fuck they're calling themselves these days, etc.
My apologies if that's not what you had in mind; if you have a different idea — one that would realistically take place, given our track record for atrocities — please share it.
Here's my idea: Let's stay home, and maybe fix our crumbling infrastructure or something.
You remind me of the clerk in this "stolen" The Onion comic. If you don't want something "stolen" off the public web, don't publish it there.
That's ridiculously stupid. Stores don't lock their doors, does that mean that people are free to steal from them? Of course not. Simply being on the web doesn't magically make everything free, nor should it. The mental gymnastics you're doing to justify the crime is absurd.
Your shoplifting example is analogous to receiving priced merchandise from an online store without paying the amount requested by the seller. I agree that this is not done "freely," as even if an online store were so inept so as to allow this to occur, criminal law prohibits acquiring merchandise without paying the seller's the agreed upon price.
However, I thought we were discussing downloading data from a public-facing web server, that is offered just as freely as any of the comments I've contributed to this site, (as well as the photos, essays, code, and so on that I've contributed on other sites, Usenet, and BBSs) — data for which no price has been indicated, and no overt mechanism for providing payment has been presented. You call downloading these items a "crime" — under which U.S. law are these downloads criminalized?
You must have a mechanism for dealing with claimed copyright infringement.
*flexes middle finger*
My mechanism is working just fine.
What exactly is being stolen from Google?
Engineering time, designer time, bandwidth costs, server costs, etc...
YouTube.com didn't just magically appear and run itself completely free of charge.
Google makes money off the properties of others.
No shit sherlock. That's not justification for you to steal from Google nor the owners of said content. You seem oblivious to the fact that the content owners *GET PAID* when those ads are shown, not just Google.
You remind me of the clerk in this "stolen" The Onion comic. If you don't want something "stolen" off the public web, don't publish it there.
You don't have a Constitutional right to own a car.
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." — Ninth Amendment
To me, existing government regulations surrounding vehicle use and ownership don't offer a compelling argument for legitimizing restrictions of the Second Amendment — rather, it's an example of overreach that treads upon the human rights to travel and property, which can be particularly onerous in a nation where automobile-centric urban planning/suburban sprawl paired with deficient mass transit is so prevalent.
Additionally theres no such thing as a frictionless treadmill, and the treadmill they use is actually able to adjust its load to simulate real world resistances.
Perhaps nefus was referring to dynamometers, which would provide over-optimistic measurements of fuel efficiency and/or vehicle performance, since they don't account for the effects of aerodynamics on those figures. (I'm not claiming that any organization presents figures obtained this way, merely that that's what nefus may be referring to).
What's the point in detecting something that is perfectly legal?
Much like police dogs that "alert" based of the whims of their handlers, this technology will likely be useful for creating "probable cause" against anyone who's been in direct or indirect contact with some sulfur-containing materials.
It's a search engine to torrent sites.
It's not, you're describing a torrent meta-search site (e.g., Torrentz). Sites like Torrentz index sites like TPB and KAT.
You set the barrier at the object who`se primary design is to shoot metal at, and kill, living things.
What about these?
Oh, Obama. You're no President Bartlet, that's for sure.
Pear-shaped national policy's gotta count for something.
Re: Corn syrup (high fructose corn syrup specifically) - it is probably available to food industry manufacturers and others through specialized supply chains. It isn't really a store shelf product [...]
Yes, it really is: http://karosyrup.com/products.html
If a kid finds that gun on the piano, they should pay the price...
Exactly the kind of situation I want to avoid, which is why I don't have any pianos in my house.
There is an economic analysis out there (sorry, don't have the URL at my fingertips) that compares book authorship/publishing/reading in strict-copyright 19th century England with no-copyright 19th century Germany.
I've only started reading it, but perhaps this is the source you're referring to: No Copyright Law: The Real Reason for Germany's Industrial Expansion?
Troy Rising?
No, "Liquid Sky," he said.
Here.
[I]f you live in France, and you enjoy not speaking German, (or if you live anywhere in Europe, for that matter, and enjoy not being required to speak German...) you're welcome. If you live anywhere in Asia, and enjoy not having to speak Japanese, if only to ask your masters for water, or for them not to whip you so hard... you're welcome.
Now if you'll pardon me, I'm going to go read.
I suggest you read a history book, particularly one that covers the Soviet Union's role during World War II. I suspect that your grade-school history/social studies books were either similar to or identical to mine, which were published in the United States during the Cold War on the behalf of government, and were therefore appropriately biased.
How would you decide who gets a pass on having to work?
Some people like working; give them a pass and let 'em. There are also situations where society can benefit from people pursuing their own interests rather than their employers. For example, Bush II seemed more interested in — and better suited at — pulling up his namesake in Crawford, TX, than presiding. I think we were better off when he was playing in the yard where we could keep an eye on him, especially when old man Cheney was prowling around.
[T]he issue is taxes dont need to go up, as a new yorker, i already spend over 60% of my income on taxes.... spending needs to go down. as such fuck anyone who wants more of my money when i can barely pay for my food[.]
If you're in NYC, you can save a shitload of money by living on the sidewalk with the many people who can't afford ganja, food, or shelter.
As a metro-area New Yorker, I'm more concerned that my taxes are being used to curtail civil liberties, instead of (for example) giving those aforementioned people a place to live, than I am about the rate that I'm taxed.
So you're saying that the money should be spent on making higher education free instead? How's that not a social program?
I don't think you'll get a reply from GP, unless he or she has a gift for quickly reconciling cognitive dissonance.