I believe there should be no law regulating private matters. Such as the matters between MS and me. Or you and me. You must believe that the government should regulate all human activites. Is this correct?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAH
1. I'm a European. You have wasted half of your post.
2. I know what MS has done better than you. IT DOES NOT MATTER IN THE SLIGHTEST. NO government should interfere with MS, or any other company or individual, for that matter. You have wasted the remaining half of your post.
The fact that you assumed I'm from the USA speaks volume about your usage of projection. You don't care what MS has done or is doing or how it hurts competition, you only care that it's an American company and as such is some kind of enemy. So, I hate to break the news to you, but YOU are the idiot here.
Now please resume with your high and mighty EU-is-the-bastion-of-freedom-against-American-fasc ism drivel. Call me back when we have some freedom of speech. Prick.
The entire continent would simply keep working on XP, while the black market for the now-illegal goods would be thriving in the span of a few months. THAT's what would happen. Prohibitionism, anyone? Besides, the day a gov't chooses what software I run is the day I become a MS fanboi.
Hey, HEY! Not *everyone* around here wanted this pathetic mess that is the European government. Some of us were very happy with the simple free trade agreements and a unified currency.
I will only try to address a few of your points because you raise a lot of good ones but this isn't the perfect place to discuss them.
First of all you seem to be fixated on this whole bodyguard thing. I don't see people going around with bodyguards today; you seem to imply that this is because of the police keeping thugs at bay. Bad news: thugs are free to do whatever they like, the police only care about the easy targets - like me - and laws most certainly do not stop criminals. So why is it that nobody uses bodyguards? Doing away with public police services will not make the criminals crawl out of the woodwork, in fact they're walking around unmolested already. Besides, why do you keep implying that private security would cost more? Everything the public sector does costs more than private by definition, so why would the police specifically be more expensive?
Secondly, why on earth should all industries start using poisoned fish? Look around and you'll see a Mercedes, a BMW and some crappy car out there. Why is that so, even though *nobody* forces the automobile industry to differentiate its offer? And while we are at it, why is it that everyone with half a crappy job can afford a car, but at the same time the rich can buy very nice models? That's because private industries look at the market, segment their offer and then customers choose what to buy. I don't see why it should be any different for every other industry. By your reasoning, there should exists no good cars, only crappy ones.
As for free markets not working, well, you buy most things in reasonably free markets and they seem to work quite well.
Finally: how can you agree on *that*, and not on the rest? o.O
In sum: mine is a very standard anarchocapitalist position. You can read up on that on the web easily. Thanks for the civil confrontation!
There are ways to protect yourself from financial ruin, and I don't think you'd need to be any sort of tycoon to enjoy such society. Think about this: the gov't forces you to buy lots of services that you don't need, don't want, or are forbidden to use. If all such services were provided by private industries, you'd only buy the ones you want, of the quality you choose. You'd save a lot because there'd be no corruption in the system, only a free market where people would be free to buy and sell as they like. No subsidies for industries whose business model is failing. No taking responsibility for other people's mistakes. Very much taking responsibility for *your* mistakes:). Heck, it might be possible to actually respect people in such society.
I'm not saying it wasn't loud enough. And obviously I am not an expert in revolutions. However you cannot deny (and in fact you don't) that the political unrest in the 80s in China *was* indeed stopped. The hundreds of thousands of people protesting are still a small fraction, compared to the whole of China: every 100K is 0.01% of the population. My country is 60M strong and I can assure you that a 6000-strong march would be noticed and considered cute but not really interesting. Heck, there'll be *way more* people in Rome for the concerts on the 1st of May.
And again obvioulsy I don't have a tank at home but history shows that when a country is really torn by political dissent, the usual consequences range from civil war to mass strikes to mass emigration (...wait a second! the Chinese *do* migrate a lot). I just don't see that happening. If the reason why this happens is that the Party controls information so well, then I've been fooled and they are indeed masters of propaganda techniques. This is, of course, possible.
A small fraction of the student population puts up some resistance 18 years ago (and is promptly squashed) and you call that being keen? Face it, most people are satisfied with the way things are in China. First, I've actually heard that a lot from Chinese people. Second, a 1 billion strong population who is keen on changing cannot be stopped. Or maybe it could, but then I believe we'd witness a more, how to say, notable reaction from the gov't.
No, I distinctly remember that offering internet access even in a small cafe means you have to comply with the directive; also, I know of a case when a person was asked for ID before he was given access, as required by said laws. But maybe you can point me to better documentation, seeing as you're involved? Thanks
Erm, you're only stopping support for Chinese manufacturers, I'm afraid. Their gov't is totally unintersted in your actions. If what you're thinking about goes along the lines of stopping support for their industries so that the people will rebel against a gov't that, by alienating foreigners, takes their livelihood away: remember that China will shortly be a self-substaining market. I believe there is no way to make the Chinese gov't change their mind. Only the peoples of China can choose to get rid of it, and apparently they're not really that keen on doing so.
I know it's not really what the TFB is about, but does anyone have any tech details about the Great Firewall of China? How does it work, is it some kind of giant NAT? Are there blacklist-based IP filtering, real-time content filtering? Are ISPs routes set up so that foreign IPs can only be reached via a few select routers that do the censoring?
I hope you were not being sarcastic. That's EXACTLY the society I'd want to live in. It stands to reason that if one stops paying taxes, one would also stop benefitting from the so-called services that the gov't pretends to provide. I would count that as a gain, oviously.
every fricking Starbucks got one around here, every McDonalds Private citizens?! Ok, your APs might be 100% legal (actually I believe they are not but I am not sure), now what about every business out there who has to track this huge amount of data for no reason? You know, the people who actually matter. Your APs are of no interest, thousands of SMEs, on the other hand...
Yeah I know them, and in fact I was curious as to how they are getting around the data retention laws. I guess Spain has not harmonized its legislation with the EU directives yet.
Sure thing. Check out the recently-approved Data Retention Laws. Link 1Link 2. They are cursory introductions, you can dig further if you wish. The articles don't talk about wifi spots but they are regulated too: they have to keep a copy of ID for each customer and be able to track them individually, as I said. Anyway you are perfectly right in not just believing me, so check it out. You'll be appalled.
Will you be *REQUIRED* to get a permit for an open WAP That's exactly how it is over here in supposedly so-much-more-free-than-the-US Europe. Also you have to keep ID for every user of the system and be able to track them individually. Needless to say, this doesn't exactly spur adoption of wifi spots and the likes.
taxes really aren't anything at all like armed robbery The gov't pays people to kill me if I don't pay my taxes. In what way exactly is that different than armed robbery, exactly? Somehow I suspect you're a parasite.
unlimited downloads from iTunes for a flat fee I hope they know what they're getting themselves into. And I bet that pretty soon we'll see some restrictions and limits on how much you can actually download.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe there should be no law regulating private matters. Such as the matters between MS and me. Or you and me. You must believe that the government should regulate all human activites. Is this correct?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHc ism drivel. Call me back when we have some freedom of speech. Prick.
1. I'm a European. You have wasted half of your post.
2. I know what MS has done better than you. IT DOES NOT MATTER IN THE SLIGHTEST. NO government should interfere with MS, or any other company or individual, for that matter. You have wasted the remaining half of your post.
The fact that you assumed I'm from the USA speaks volume about your usage of projection. You don't care what MS has done or is doing or how it hurts competition, you only care that it's an American company and as such is some kind of enemy. So, I hate to break the news to you, but YOU are the idiot here.
Now please resume with your high and mighty EU-is-the-bastion-of-freedom-against-American-fas
The entire continent would simply keep working on XP, while the black market for the now-illegal goods would be thriving in the span of a few months. THAT's what would happen. Prohibitionism, anyone? Besides, the day a gov't chooses what software I run is the day I become a MS fanboi.
Hey, HEY! Not *everyone* around here wanted this pathetic mess that is the European government. Some of us were very happy with the simple free trade agreements and a unified currency.
Yeah, in fact my right to exist is granted by the government and I should be grateful that they let me breathe.
Stalin would be so proud of you.
I will only try to address a few of your points because you raise a lot of good ones but this isn't the perfect place to discuss them.
First of all you seem to be fixated on this whole bodyguard thing. I don't see people going around with bodyguards today; you seem to imply that this is because of the police keeping thugs at bay. Bad news: thugs are free to do whatever they like, the police only care about the easy targets - like me - and laws most certainly do not stop criminals. So why is it that nobody uses bodyguards? Doing away with public police services will not make the criminals crawl out of the woodwork, in fact they're walking around unmolested already. Besides, why do you keep implying that private security would cost more? Everything the public sector does costs more than private by definition, so why would the police specifically be more expensive?
Secondly, why on earth should all industries start using poisoned fish? Look around and you'll see a Mercedes, a BMW and some crappy car out there. Why is that so, even though *nobody* forces the automobile industry to differentiate its offer? And while we are at it, why is it that everyone with half a crappy job can afford a car, but at the same time the rich can buy very nice models? That's because private industries look at the market, segment their offer and then customers choose what to buy. I don't see why it should be any different for every other industry. By your reasoning, there should exists no good cars, only crappy ones.
As for free markets not working, well, you buy most things in reasonably free markets and they seem to work quite well.
Finally: how can you agree on *that*, and not on the rest? o.O
In sum: mine is a very standard anarchocapitalist position. You can read up on that on the web easily. Thanks for the civil confrontation!
It was Italy. It is very possible that the gov't here passed more draconian laws than necessary. According to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_da ta_retention, it did.
There are ways to protect yourself from financial ruin, and I don't think you'd need to be any sort of tycoon to enjoy such society. :). Heck, it might be possible to actually respect people in such society.
Think about this: the gov't forces you to buy lots of services that you don't need, don't want, or are forbidden to use. If all such services were provided by private industries, you'd only buy the ones you want, of the quality you choose. You'd save a lot because there'd be no corruption in the system, only a free market where people would be free to buy and sell as they like. No subsidies for industries whose business model is failing. No taking responsibility for other people's mistakes. Very much taking responsibility for *your* mistakes
Thanks, very interesting. Indeed, as you point out, it seems very crude.
I'm not saying it wasn't loud enough. And obviously I am not an expert in revolutions. However you cannot deny (and in fact you don't) that the political unrest in the 80s in China *was* indeed stopped. The hundreds of thousands of people protesting are still a small fraction, compared to the whole of China: every 100K is 0.01% of the population. My country is 60M strong and I can assure you that a 6000-strong march would be noticed and considered cute but not really interesting. Heck, there'll be *way more* people in Rome for the concerts on the 1st of May.
And again obvioulsy I don't have a tank at home but history shows that when a country is really torn by political dissent, the usual consequences range from civil war to mass strikes to mass emigration (...wait a second! the Chinese *do* migrate a lot). I just don't see that happening.
If the reason why this happens is that the Party controls information so well, then I've been fooled and they are indeed masters of propaganda techniques. This is, of course, possible.
A small fraction of the student population puts up some resistance 18 years ago (and is promptly squashed) and you call that being keen? Face it, most people are satisfied with the way things are in China. First, I've actually heard that a lot from Chinese people. Second, a 1 billion strong population who is keen on changing cannot be stopped. Or maybe it could, but then I believe we'd witness a more, how to say, notable reaction from the gov't.
No, I distinctly remember that offering internet access even in a small cafe means you have to comply with the directive; also, I know of a case when a person was asked for ID before he was given access, as required by said laws. But maybe you can point me to better documentation, seeing as you're involved? Thanks
Erm, you're only stopping support for Chinese manufacturers, I'm afraid. Their gov't is totally unintersted in your actions. If what you're thinking about goes along the lines of stopping support for their industries so that the people will rebel against a gov't that, by alienating foreigners, takes their livelihood away: remember that China will shortly be a self-substaining market.
I believe there is no way to make the Chinese gov't change their mind. Only the peoples of China can choose to get rid of it, and apparently they're not really that keen on doing so.
I know it's not really what the TFB is about, but does anyone have any tech details about the Great Firewall of China? How does it work, is it some kind of giant NAT? Are there blacklist-based IP filtering, real-time content filtering? Are ISPs routes set up so that foreign IPs can only be reached via a few select routers that do the censoring?
I hope you were not being sarcastic. That's EXACTLY the society I'd want to live in. It stands to reason that if one stops paying taxes, one would also stop benefitting from the so-called services that the gov't pretends to provide. I would count that as a gain, oviously.
Well, taking your frustration out on me isn't going to make the data retention laws go away. Google them a bit, they aren't hard to find.
Yeah I know them, and in fact I was curious as to how they are getting around the data retention laws. I guess Spain has not harmonized its legislation with the EU directives yet.
Uhm, read any page on the internet where topics related to politics are discussed? Such as /.?
Sorry man but the EU has spoken. Your country WILL obey. You wanted this idiotic mess of an EU, now deal with the consequences.
Sure thing. Check out the recently-approved Data Retention Laws. Link 1 Link 2. They are cursory introductions, you can dig further if you wish. The articles don't talk about wifi spots but they are regulated too: they have to keep a copy of ID for each customer and be able to track them individually, as I said. Anyway you are perfectly right in not just believing me, so check it out. You'll be appalled.
This is blasphemy! This is MADNESS!
Somehow I suspect you're a parasite.