I often go to the library and borrow copies of books, dvds and cds for free . I do the same off of bitorrent. I download files and watch/read/listen to them and then I throw them away instead of returning them.
Many times the library does not have the title that I am looking for and so I go to TPB or the like and usually they have it. Instead of maintaining an unreasonably collection at a large brick and mortar library, libraries could run torrent trackers and provide most of their collection online at very little cost to the public.
I have a large cd and dvd collection that is filled with things that I want to own but some things I do not want to own. I only want to enjoy them once. I suppose if it were up to the **AA, they would shut down public libraries as well.
I don't think anyone actively discourages thinking. I think it is the status quo because it has been. There are those who do think and are productive and there are those who don't think much and don't care to.
Now maybe you could argue that entertainment producers discourage thinking but even entertainment can spur thoughts. One of my favorite shows to watch is 24 and it is basically pure reality suspending entertainment. However, there are many things one can "philosophize" about. What are the legal/moral implications if someone behaved like this in real life. What kind of technology would need to exist to provide the tools that the agents/terrorists are using. etc.
Maybe you could argue that some religions discourage thinking. That may be the case but remember the religions were created by people and before you discount them, you must answer the question of why they were created in the first place or how they were hijacked to become what they are today.
Maybe you could argue that people running an entrenched political system discourage free thinking. *crickets chirping*
Granted, I could be taking that time spent watching TV to create something. The collective of former TV watchers would most likely create some sort of entertainment (like TV) to pass the time.
There have been not so distant times when people did not have television or other consuming forms of entertainment that did not result in a renaissance. I think people create because it is a part of some people's nature to understand and improve. (here is where I could start a rant against patents)
It is possible that one person in the collective of former television watchers would destroy the world with all his new found free time. Not everyone comes to the same conclusion at the end of a philosophical journey (e.g., The unabomber). One should always be careful what they wish for.
All that said, I certainly think society would improve if thinking were encouraged more. (here is where I could start my rant against the school system)
I think the status quo is maintained because people must reconcile the old with the new and that takes a long time. Give humanity some time, we will make it... or not.
I agree with your premise. Everything does apply to everything.
But any given subject provides a more than a lifetime's worth of study to understand and develop. Specialization is key in many fields. I don't want my neurosurgeon spending a lot of time philosophizing instead becoming a better brain surgeon. (Not to suggest that he shouldn't think of the moral/ethical dilemmas associated with the job)
Specialization can also be a handicap, because the solution to a problem may be readily available, but you don't know about it because of tunnelvision.
There is definitely some truth in the old saying, "A jack of all trades is a master of none."
I don't want a refund. I want my money to go toward funding the FBI teams that are going after Rep. Jefferson. I want them expanded by several hundred agents and to have what happened to Jefferson to happen to the entire Congress.
I like how congress gets all up in arms claiming the executive branch violated the constitution by searching a congressional office. I didn't see most of them raising a fuss when they found out that Americans were being wiretapped without warrants or collecting a database of every phone call. Now that there offices can be searched by the FBI they are scared and will have to find a new place to hide their skeletons.
What about Rep. Kennedy, who was caught by the capitol police after he ran into a barricade, while under the influence. He is admittedly addicted to prescription drugs. That was quietly swept under the rug.
The real shame is that most of what congress does is legal, albeit completely unethical.
The issue is that someone should be regulating it and determining what adverse or positive health effects are caused by it. Think of asbestos and what a debacle that was. A lot of litigation time can be saved if we get the facts beforehand (or at least concurrent with development). The effects of nanosize particles compared to microsize or macro chemicals is unknown and as of yet not to much effort has been put into studying the health effects. Nanoparticles can cross the blood brain barrier. This could be used for medicine delivery or it could cause brain damage if the wrong things are entered into the blood system.
It is important that one government organization (I don't know if the FDA is the right choice) be in charge otherwise you will get a large amount of cross regulation from different organizations making development a real nightmare.
Check out the http://cben.rice.edu/>Center for Biological and Environmental Technology for more details.
Also, check out the science friday podcast from April 28.
most small business either don't hire very many employees... If they did they wouldn't be small now would they.
...or do not pay for their health insurance... What is the obession with health insurance? Why should we subsidize the existence of health insurance companies? My family (my parents and my three siblings) never had health insurance and we survived all right. We just paid the hospital bills when they came in. Health insurance is just gambling on the safe bet.
Small businesses exist because of the advantages they have over large companies. They are agile and easy to deal with and do not have to maintain ridiculous profit margins because of overhead. All large businesses were small businesses once.
I understand they're "living the american dream" and all that, but how much is that worth us as a society?
Living the American dream is what promotes progress. People immigrate from all over the world to live the American dream. Some of whom, start small businesses that turn into large businesses.
It seems to me that people have just automatically assumed that larger businesses are bad (by associating them with some bad actors among the super-big actors) and that smaller business are somehow intrinsically "good," regardless of the costs to society a large number of small business vs. a smaller number of larger business incur.
The beauty of small businesses is accountability and responsibility. There is not a hundred people between you and getting the problem fixed. Also, when small businesses make mistakes it can put them out of business unlike in big businesses they just suck up a few losses and bribe a few politicians and walk on down the road(Sony rootkit anyone). There are situations when large businesses are better and when small businesses are better. It is about finding the right balance.
If they really want to kick Microsoft in the nuts and gain some love back from those who hate rootkits, they would ship Vaio's with Linux. With an open source solution at least someone could tell if they were spying on you.
Plus it could make them some money in the long run.
The Department of Defense uses the internet for a lot of communication. They shoud be interested in how the "backbone" of the internet was corrupted.
Not too mention, the actions of pharmamaster are borderline terrorism. (just in case the NSA is watching;) Not even freedom fighter terrorism, just good old fashioned fearmongering terrorism.
The entire reason why Windows XP was shipped one year after Windows 2000 is simple: Microsoft wanted to bundle Windows Messenger, and a new version of IE and Outlook Express with Windows 2000.
I thought it was because Win 2000 sucked. Silly me.
IF it is built into iTunes, then it may be available on Windows. They have built up quite a fanbase due to the iPod
So which one is the real NEC?
on
Faking a Company
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
This pirated company built existing and new products and business relationships. What if the fake company became more successful?
Just a thought. Seriously though, if I was NEC, I would try and by up the fake company and continue to operate it. you could probably get it for pennies on the dollar and you already have trained employees.
I would probably start with the simplest code schemes (like the mafia guy used) I could think of first. Not that I think the judge is stupid, but given his profession and age, he probably isn't deep into cryptography.
But the Titanic wasn't blown up. Merely sunk by a large glacier. So, I assume he had to have some education in mass power generation and physics to create and or move the glacier into a dangerous position. If it was a hobby, he would have just blown it up.
Slashdot Mirror
Many times the library does not have the title that I am looking for and so I go to TPB or the like and usually they have it. Instead of maintaining an unreasonably collection at a large brick and mortar library, libraries could run torrent trackers and provide most of their collection online at very little cost to the public.
I have a large cd and dvd collection that is filled with things that I want to own but some things I do not want to own. I only want to enjoy them once. I suppose if it were up to the **AA, they would shut down public libraries as well.
Although it sucks to watch.
Now maybe you could argue that entertainment producers discourage thinking but even entertainment can spur thoughts. One of my favorite shows to watch is 24 and it is basically pure reality suspending entertainment. However, there are many things one can "philosophize" about. What are the legal/moral implications if someone behaved like this in real life. What kind of technology would need to exist to provide the tools that the agents/terrorists are using. etc.
Maybe you could argue that some religions discourage thinking. That may be the case but remember the religions were created by people and before you discount them, you must answer the question of why they were created in the first place or how they were hijacked to become what they are today.
Maybe you could argue that people running an entrenched political system discourage free thinking. *crickets chirping*
Granted, I could be taking that time spent watching TV to create something. The collective of former TV watchers would most likely create some sort of entertainment (like TV) to pass the time.
There have been not so distant times when people did not have television or other consuming forms of entertainment that did not result in a renaissance. I think people create because it is a part of some people's nature to understand and improve. (here is where I could start a rant against patents)
It is possible that one person in the collective of former television watchers would destroy the world with all his new found free time. Not everyone comes to the same conclusion at the end of a philosophical journey (e.g., The unabomber). One should always be careful what they wish for.
All that said, I certainly think society would improve if thinking were encouraged more. (here is where I could start my rant against the school system)
I think the status quo is maintained because people must reconcile the old with the new and that takes a long time. Give humanity some time, we will make it... or not.
But any given subject provides a more than a lifetime's worth of study to understand and develop. Specialization is key in many fields. I don't want my neurosurgeon spending a lot of time philosophizing instead becoming a better brain surgeon. (Not to suggest that he shouldn't think of the moral/ethical dilemmas associated with the job)
Specialization can also be a handicap, because the solution to a problem may be readily available, but you don't know about it because of tunnelvision.
There is definitely some truth in the old saying, "A jack of all trades is a master of none."
I like how congress gets all up in arms claiming the executive branch violated the constitution by searching a congressional office. I didn't see most of them raising a fuss when they found out that Americans were being wiretapped without warrants or collecting a database of every phone call. Now that there offices can be searched by the FBI they are scared and will have to find a new place to hide their skeletons.
What about Rep. Kennedy, who was caught by the capitol police after he ran into a barricade, while under the influence. He is admittedly addicted to prescription drugs. That was quietly swept under the rug.
The real shame is that most of what congress does is legal, albeit completely unethical.
I get +5 funny he gets +1 offtopic. c'est la vie.
I was getting tired of replacing the vacuum tubes in my current laptop.
...followed by a lawsuit of course.
My laptop doubles as a toaster and its pretty new. I freakin' better be able to run Vista.
Shouldve checked my preview better. Center for Biological and Environmental Technology
It is important that one government organization (I don't know if the FDA is the right choice) be in charge otherwise you will get a large amount of cross regulation from different organizations making development a real nightmare.
Check out the http://cben.rice.edu/>Center for Biological and Environmental Technology for more details.
Also, check out the science friday podcast from April 28.
No it wasn't, I just fixed the wikipedia. just kidding
Small businesses exist because of the advantages they have over large companies. They are agile and easy to deal with and do not have to maintain ridiculous profit margins because of overhead. All large businesses were small businesses once.
I understand they're "living the american dream" and all that, but how much is that worth us as a society?
Living the American dream is what promotes progress. People immigrate from all over the world to live the American dream. Some of whom, start small businesses that turn into large businesses.
It seems to me that people have just automatically assumed that larger businesses are bad (by associating them with some bad actors among the super-big actors) and that smaller business are somehow intrinsically "good," regardless of the costs to society a large number of small business vs. a smaller number of larger business incur.
The beauty of small businesses is accountability and responsibility. There is not a hundred people between you and getting the problem fixed. Also, when small businesses make mistakes it can put them out of business unlike in big businesses they just suck up a few losses and bribe a few politicians and walk on down the road(Sony rootkit anyone). There are situations when large businesses are better and when small businesses are better. It is about finding the right balance.
Plus it could make them some money in the long run.
'hore' ought to be 'whore'
I think you mean, Why isn't Chuck Norris the #1 search in every country?
Poland is just trying to be on the winning team before WW III
Free Gary McKinnon by tdougan
Or did you mean "free" Gary McKinnon T-shirt
Not too mention, the actions of pharmamaster are borderline terrorism. (just in case the NSA is watching ;) Not even freedom fighter terrorism, just good old fashioned fearmongering terrorism.
Maybe not everyone is willing to relinquish freedom for security.
I thought it was because Win 2000 sucked. Silly me.
IF it is built into iTunes, then it may be available on Windows. They have built up quite a fanbase due to the iPod
Just a thought. Seriously though, if I was NEC, I would try and by up the fake company and continue to operate it. you could probably get it for pennies on the dollar and you already have trained employees.
disclaimer = pure speculation/generalization
True, True.
But the Titanic wasn't blown up. Merely sunk by a large glacier. So, I assume he had to have some education in mass power generation and physics to create and or move the glacier into a dangerous position. If it was a hobby, he would have just blown it up.
The judge, who is 53 and lists some of his hobbies as reading military history and the sinking of the Titanic,...
I just can't respect a person who sinks cruise liners and kills thousands as a hobby.
That seems more like work to me:)