Besides that, Obama's policies on the internet will likely affect the rest of the world. From ICANN to Amazon.com, the US has the most influence in cyberspace. To put it quite simply, if the US had adopted IPv6 swiftly and completely, the rest of the world would've followed immediately, and IPv4 would've been history within a year.
So what Obama says and doesn't say, does and doesn't do regarding the internet is of notable importance to the rest of the developed world. And by extension, his stances on technology give indication of where he might lean with regards to matters such as net neutrality.
The same is with regards to copyrights and even patents. The rest of the world, through international treaties and such, will follow what major players like the US or the UK does. Just look at copyright; the US and the UK have been bouncing copyright extension acts off each other.
Don't knock the US political stories. Besides, there's plenty of stories on the front page about the politics of other nations. I see one about Australia right this minute.
So I guess the tradition of reading the summary only and not reading TFA now extends to reading the subject only and not reading the contents of the post.
Didn't you know, it was a subtle reference to idiocracy that nobody got. They were forced to switch to text-only consoles, or have people really trying to punch the monkey, simultaneously breaking the screen and their hands. And a movie about people punching computer monitors isn't nearly as interesting as a movie about aliens killing them.
Better yet, I have $10 million in an offshore bank account that I'm trying to transfer to the US. But I can't get to it because I currently have no money to pay for the processing fees. If you can advance me $10K so that I can pay those processing fees, I will give you 5% of the money I'm able to bring out.
P.S. This isn't a scam, or an April Fools joke. I'm serious.
If a 2 year old hands you a photo of themselves posing naked on a bear skin rug, should said 2 year be arrested for distribution of child porn and forced to register as a sex offender for the rest of their life?
Yeah, and then on top of that, you charge 'em with cruelty to animals, and hope their lawyer will settle for the lesser charge. Still gotta register as a sex offender though.
Just aside, in most parts of the world, people see things as they are, as opposed to as they "ought" to be. Which is to say, people accept that programming languages will be in English. It isn't a matter of imposition. That's how the industry is, and so people who want to enter the industry adapt to this fact. Learning the rest of the language, beyond that of the programming keywords and terminology, naturally follows, as it does not take too much work beyond the initial effort, and its benefits are enormous.
People don't stop to ask "is it right?" or "should it be this way?" as those are academic questions more suited to others with more time on their hands. For most people, it is how it is, and that's how it's going to be.
The fact that it draws two bodies close together under most observable circumstances is irrefutable. Only the specific details of how it happens remains unknown.
What happens when school classrooms start teaching the "holes" in the theory of gravity? You'd get a bunch of completely confused kids.
It won't be good marketing at all if the audience can't figure out if it's a guy or a girl speaking. Or gets confused when the voice doesn't match the person saying it.
Science looks for the best theory at hand, not the perfect one that explains every little detail since such a perfect theory is hard to come by.
It's neigh impossible, I would say. The perfect theory can only exist if our knowledge is complete. It'll take us an infinite amount of time with an infinite amount of resources to get there. We can get pretty close though.
To be fair, the Windows version of Firefox has great startup times. It's not half a second, but it's pretty good as far as Windows apps in general go. But only a cold install. Once you start downloading add-ons, Firefox slows down significantly. In particular, if you have a lot of Adblock filters, or several subscriptions, your startup time jumps quite a bit.
If you were a sniper, and your neighbors were competent snipers as well, you wouldn't snipe your neighbor for no good reason. If you started sniping your neighbors, your neighbors wouldn't just sit there. The threat of retribution is a huge factor. It keeps people civil and in line. People can't be bullied around anymore. And it makes people realize that the small, petty things are pretty inconsequential in the long run. It is the basis of the constitution, that the government fear the people, and the people fear the government. That's what keeps the government in line.
Having weapons is power, and power is freedom. If you love freedom, you will love power. Not power over others, which are only for oppressive cowards, but over oneself. Freedom is a responsibility. It is a burden. Use it right, use it well, or despite what the Declaraton of Independence says, it can be taken away (this already exists in the form of prison). Granted, not everybody wants it; most people probably want to be spoon-fed what to think and do. But that's more an indication that democracy is eventually doomed to failure. Those in government have power over others. And it is agreed that they work for the benefit of all, in exchange for society giving them this power. But if society has no power, no ability to fight back, then the government power is disproportionate to the power of the people. And then the government doesn't need to fear the people anymore, and can run them over at will. That is what has happened.
Generally, the more powerful a weapons is, the more control needs to be exercised, and more training needs to happen before it should be used. That is, the more powerful a weapon, the fewer situations it is appropriate for. A knife is a weapon. Anybody can use a knife with a few hours of instruction. As a tool weapon, it is probably the most versatile. A gun is a more powerful weapon. It requires hours of training to be able to be used. As anything else, it requires years of training to be able to be used well.
People say, "I don't want to spend all my time training to defend myself. I want to do other things with my time." That is their right. But it is not their right to say, "I don't want others to train, because I'm afraid of them." And it is not their right to impose this upon others. But that is what people do when they are afraid. They level the playing field, to the lowest common denominator. You see it with education, and everybody complains about how the "smarter" kids are held back by the "dumber" ones.
Society is so afraid of weapons, that even punching somebody is assault with a deadly weapon. The police charges that person for the assault at their discretion, but it doesn't mean that the law is written otherwise. If the person you punched was someone in the government or sufficiently connected to the government, you certainly would be charged with assault with a deadly weapon, regardless of the circumstances. That's what happens when the playing field isn't level. That's what happens when society no longer has power.
But in truth, what I speak of is an ideal world. It's not just about training. Part of weapons training is to learn the appropriate response to any given situation. The word "appropriate" automatically implies a degree of subjectivity. For such a world to exist properly, the entire culture must change. And that's never going to happen, certainly not overnight.
So there's no ideal. But it's not like shootings aren't happening even where guns are banned. It's not like there are no school shootings or murders in DC or NYC. So the current situation is ineffective as is. I'd rather live in a world knowing that my neighbor could shoot me a whim, than live in a world not knowing so, and eventually being shot by my neighbor on the same whim anyway. And I'd rather be able to defend myself, than leave it up to other people who might or might not, depending on their whims. Because looking at history, and speaking from personal experience, no matter how "good" or "right" I might be, I'll only reap the benefits of their protection when their goals coincide with mine.
Come to think of it, the Second Amendment states the right to bear arms, it never mentions firearms.
But what does it say about monkey arms?
If I had a SAM, and my neighbor had a SAM, I'm not sure I'd be terribly afraid of my neighbor. I might be frightened enough to get a SAM if my neighbor suddenly got one. But, considering that it'd be a surface-to-air missile, I wouldn't be terribly scared of my neighbor, but of what he knows is coming.
All kidding aside, if I was competent in firearms, and my neighbor was competent in firearms, I wouldn't even blink twice about him getting firearms. If I was competent, but my neighbor wasn't, I would be pretty scared if my neighbor suddenly bought a gun and started showing it off. But I don't have a gun, and my neighbor has one, I'd be terrified.
And the popular mentality as been, and always has been the latter. This is the same kind of mentality that xenophobia comes from, but instead of guns, it's usually wealth. When somebody acquires an advantage or a perceived advantage, this type of fear causes everybody else to surpress that person. The correct course of action is to figure out how to acquire the advantage for themselves, to level the playing field. But nobody thinks that way.
Slashdot Mirror
Use Peerguardian 2 if you're that worried. It's like a condom for P2P.
Besides that, Obama's policies on the internet will likely affect the rest of the world. From ICANN to Amazon.com, the US has the most influence in cyberspace. To put it quite simply, if the US had adopted IPv6 swiftly and completely, the rest of the world would've followed immediately, and IPv4 would've been history within a year.
So what Obama says and doesn't say, does and doesn't do regarding the internet is of notable importance to the rest of the developed world. And by extension, his stances on technology give indication of where he might lean with regards to matters such as net neutrality.
The same is with regards to copyrights and even patents. The rest of the world, through international treaties and such, will follow what major players like the US or the UK does. Just look at copyright; the US and the UK have been bouncing copyright extension acts off each other.
Don't knock the US political stories. Besides, there's plenty of stories on the front page about the politics of other nations. I see one about Australia right this minute.
So really, where does that leave the story?
Front page of slashdot of course.
There are plenty of reasons for why you wouldn't be able to say anything when somebody tries to take away your alcohol.
So I guess the tradition of reading the summary only and not reading TFA now extends to reading the subject only and not reading the contents of the post.
I'm still waiting on their English -> LOLcats translation option.
Googlers, take note for next year!
Didn't you know, it was a subtle reference to idiocracy that nobody got. They were forced to switch to text-only consoles, or have people really trying to punch the monkey, simultaneously breaking the screen and their hands. And a movie about people punching computer monitors isn't nearly as interesting as a movie about aliens killing them.
Better yet, I have $10 million in an offshore bank account that I'm trying to transfer to the US. But I can't get to it because I currently have no money to pay for the processing fees. If you can advance me $10K so that I can pay those processing fees, I will give you 5% of the money I'm able to bring out.
P.S. This isn't a scam, or an April Fools joke. I'm serious.
Actually, you need critical mass to achieve the singularity that is 4chan.
Astronomical analogy FTW!
Well, it is April 1st...
If a 2 year old hands you a photo of themselves posing naked on a bear skin rug, should said 2 year be arrested for distribution of child porn and forced to register as a sex offender for the rest of their life?
Yeah, and then on top of that, you charge 'em with cruelty to animals, and hope their lawyer will settle for the lesser charge. Still gotta register as a sex offender though.
Neither is the submitter or the editors, apparently.
After seeing the pictures, I'm sure some head of his was getting beat.
Just aside, in most parts of the world, people see things as they are, as opposed to as they "ought" to be. Which is to say, people accept that programming languages will be in English. It isn't a matter of imposition. That's how the industry is, and so people who want to enter the industry adapt to this fact. Learning the rest of the language, beyond that of the programming keywords and terminology, naturally follows, as it does not take too much work beyond the initial effort, and its benefits are enormous.
People don't stop to ask "is it right?" or "should it be this way?" as those are academic questions more suited to others with more time on their hands. For most people, it is how it is, and that's how it's going to be.
There is no speech that is illegal in the US, except child porn, and speech that infringes some form of IP.
To regulate speech means to regulate thought.
At best, you can charge people for the results of their speech. But taking responsibility is as much a part of free speech as anonymity.
The fact that it draws two bodies close together under most observable circumstances is irrefutable. Only the specific details of how it happens remains unknown.
What happens when school classrooms start teaching the "holes" in the theory of gravity? You'd get a bunch of completely confused kids.
That's a nice house you got there, sir. It'd be a shame if a judge had to take it away just 'cause your kid couldn't keep his files to himself.
It won't be good marketing at all if the audience can't figure out if it's a guy or a girl speaking. Or gets confused when the voice doesn't match the person saying it.
You should start enforcing royalties.
Science looks for the best theory at hand, not the perfect one that explains every little detail since such a perfect theory is hard to come by.
It's neigh impossible, I would say. The perfect theory can only exist if our knowledge is complete. It'll take us an infinite amount of time with an infinite amount of resources to get there. We can get pretty close though.
To be fair, the Windows version of Firefox has great startup times. It's not half a second, but it's pretty good as far as Windows apps in general go. But only a cold install. Once you start downloading add-ons, Firefox slows down significantly. In particular, if you have a lot of Adblock filters, or several subscriptions, your startup time jumps quite a bit.
Playing mahjong, for one.
There are also benefits that can be had from a healthy, balanced diet and physical exercise as well.
But even so, you can't ever stop or prevent the decline, just slow it down and lessen the effects.
And it's not like you can create detail from nothing.
If you were a sniper, and your neighbors were competent snipers as well, you wouldn't snipe your neighbor for no good reason. If you started sniping your neighbors, your neighbors wouldn't just sit there. The threat of retribution is a huge factor. It keeps people civil and in line. People can't be bullied around anymore. And it makes people realize that the small, petty things are pretty inconsequential in the long run. It is the basis of the constitution, that the government fear the people, and the people fear the government. That's what keeps the government in line.
Having weapons is power, and power is freedom. If you love freedom, you will love power. Not power over others, which are only for oppressive cowards, but over oneself. Freedom is a responsibility. It is a burden. Use it right, use it well, or despite what the Declaraton of Independence says, it can be taken away (this already exists in the form of prison). Granted, not everybody wants it; most people probably want to be spoon-fed what to think and do. But that's more an indication that democracy is eventually doomed to failure. Those in government have power over others. And it is agreed that they work for the benefit of all, in exchange for society giving them this power. But if society has no power, no ability to fight back, then the government power is disproportionate to the power of the people. And then the government doesn't need to fear the people anymore, and can run them over at will. That is what has happened.
Generally, the more powerful a weapons is, the more control needs to be exercised, and more training needs to happen before it should be used. That is, the more powerful a weapon, the fewer situations it is appropriate for. A knife is a weapon. Anybody can use a knife with a few hours of instruction. As a tool weapon, it is probably the most versatile. A gun is a more powerful weapon. It requires hours of training to be able to be used. As anything else, it requires years of training to be able to be used well.
People say, "I don't want to spend all my time training to defend myself. I want to do other things with my time." That is their right. But it is not their right to say, "I don't want others to train, because I'm afraid of them." And it is not their right to impose this upon others. But that is what people do when they are afraid. They level the playing field, to the lowest common denominator. You see it with education, and everybody complains about how the "smarter" kids are held back by the "dumber" ones.
Society is so afraid of weapons, that even punching somebody is assault with a deadly weapon. The police charges that person for the assault at their discretion, but it doesn't mean that the law is written otherwise. If the person you punched was someone in the government or sufficiently connected to the government, you certainly would be charged with assault with a deadly weapon, regardless of the circumstances. That's what happens when the playing field isn't level. That's what happens when society no longer has power.
But in truth, what I speak of is an ideal world. It's not just about training. Part of weapons training is to learn the appropriate response to any given situation. The word "appropriate" automatically implies a degree of subjectivity. For such a world to exist properly, the entire culture must change. And that's never going to happen, certainly not overnight.
So there's no ideal. But it's not like shootings aren't happening even where guns are banned. It's not like there are no school shootings or murders in DC or NYC. So the current situation is ineffective as is. I'd rather live in a world knowing that my neighbor could shoot me a whim, than live in a world not knowing so, and eventually being shot by my neighbor on the same whim anyway. And I'd rather be able to defend myself, than leave it up to other people who might or might not, depending on their whims. Because looking at history, and speaking from personal experience, no matter how "good" or "right" I might be, I'll only reap the benefits of their protection when their goals coincide with mine.
Come to think of it, the Second Amendment states the right to bear arms, it never mentions firearms.
But what does it say about monkey arms?
If I had a SAM, and my neighbor had a SAM, I'm not sure I'd be terribly afraid of my neighbor. I might be frightened enough to get a SAM if my neighbor suddenly got one. But, considering that it'd be a surface-to-air missile, I wouldn't be terribly scared of my neighbor, but of what he knows is coming.
All kidding aside, if I was competent in firearms, and my neighbor was competent in firearms, I wouldn't even blink twice about him getting firearms. If I was competent, but my neighbor wasn't, I would be pretty scared if my neighbor suddenly bought a gun and started showing it off. But I don't have a gun, and my neighbor has one, I'd be terrified.
And the popular mentality as been, and always has been the latter. This is the same kind of mentality that xenophobia comes from, but instead of guns, it's usually wealth. When somebody acquires an advantage or a perceived advantage, this type of fear causes everybody else to surpress that person. The correct course of action is to figure out how to acquire the advantage for themselves, to level the playing field. But nobody thinks that way.