The internet in general is p2p, that's what makes it the internet.
Like it or not, the internet subsists on copyright infringement. The only reason user contribution and participation (in other words "the internet") exists today is because 99% of copyrights go unenforced on the internet, whether by choice or by the infringers' careful choice of host nation.
So long as critical thinking courses are conspicuously absent from public school curricula, people will not understand the concept of logical fallacy.
I recently had the "file-sharing is theft" discussion with a manager i'm on otherwise good terms with, and the guy doesn't understand how fallacious it is to compare this activity to shoplifting.
Trying to convey small but consequential logical differences to the common man is like trying to explain to a creationist why science is not diametrically opposed to their beliefs.
If they worked in the industry it's even harder. The idea that the crusade against file-sharing can conflict with the international declaration of human rights simply doesn't register with them.
If their defense is true, their "evidence" should be inadmissible, since publicly available information cannot be used to trace it to an actual person.
My mother has been telecommuting for about 8 years now, and has gone into the local office perhaps 100 times in that time (for immediate physical hardware difficulties). Has also made 10 trips total to the region to which she was transferred about 5 years ago.
The biggest barrier to telecommuting is bringing on entry level people who don't understand their job yet. Management and entry level people work best and most efficiently when seeing each other face to face.
which is why I like a middle of the road idea of "office cells".
Rather than one huge central office for a city, you have smaller offices in the 'burbs.
In each you can (depending on the size and workflow of the firm) have a single department or "just large enough" subsets of each department represented.
Connect the offices via telepresence and VPN and you have much shorter drives, cheaper real estate/property tax costs, but without the downsides of isolated workers.
Used to keep the populace in line and fearful. We've always been at war with EastAsia.
If you want to see a real energy crisis (not the one that western environmentalists have manufactured as part of their plan to be able to tell everyone else how to live while feeling morally superior) visit someplace like Albania, where the power is on for limited periods during the day, even in Tirana, and randomly intermittent throughout the rest of the country. Or someplace in Africa, where electric lights are a far-off dream for most.
The "energy crisis" is FUD stirred up by the very people who won't allow us to build nuclear power plants, who shut down wind power sites because of danger to spotted owls, and who seem to believe that 6 billion people should return to an agrarian lifestyle characterized by hard physical labor, malnourishment, and a short lifespan. All while they, the appointed guardians of the new order, are the only ones allowed to drive their SUVs around "public" parks like Yosemite.
The hyperbole is a bit thick, but I agree with this somewhat.
Environmentalist extremism as about as bad for us as environmental apathy.
Environmentalism, believe it or not, has been around much much longer than 60 years, and has been about incremental achievement
Cars were better for the environment than horses, which not only produced methane, but littered the streets with dung and pathogens, for instance.
Nuclear seems to be the next step from this, because its waste product is more centralized and manageable, all be it deadly, and, if it escapes, only alters a fixed region (which is under human direction) rather than the global temperature.
Then there's the breeder reactors.
Etc. Etc.
Environmental extremists have this nasty habit of smearing anything which is not completely and utterly innocuous to the environment, which is about as impossible as finding a food which is completely innocuous to the human body.
This is because they are not faced with a varied enough environment.
If a bacteria were lab engineered with the capacity to function between near absolute zero and upwards of 5k f, then it would be able to replicate continuously and be virtually impervious to the environment.
Something may begin to prey on it, but that would simply replace its dominance with the new species.. the earth would still be eaten, all be it more slowly.
I'd like to add that most think tanks doing these "studies" you lay claim to are conservative ones.
There are a myriad of reasons for this, but two major contributors jump out at me..
First and foremost, the republican party primarily services the wishes of the upper 2% of the US income spectrum, with particular attention given to the upper fraction of a percent who run the nation's corporate enterprises. Their wealth is considerably greater and infinitely more disposable than the lower 98%, meaning much more funding is available to organizations to push their agenda. **
second, because of the history of both parties since the civil rights eras, the republican party has become a central clearinghouse for intolerant authoritarians who can't (couldn't, since fox news has corrupted the media at large) tolerate equal time and even footing given to both sides of an issue. The rest of america doesn't see the need for these "studies" because they don't feel indignant when the media fails to stereotype and ridicule those who disagree with them.
**Disclaimer: I do think the perspective of this sect is indeed important in the crafting of laws, but these people still represent the extreme minority in national and global society and, given their interests are diametrically opposed to that majority, they should be providing corrective guidance rather than active steering of public policy.
One study claimed that 88% of the members of media viewed themselves as "liberal" while this number is only in the mid teens for all Americans.
this is misleading.
"how to lie, with statistics" politics 101.
A more accurate breakdown would be that newscasters are more liberal on social issues, but as soon as it shifts to the economy they become the biggest right-wing reaganite nutcases you've ever set your eyes on.
The reality is the news was neutral-to-moderate-right. If you think fox news is not propaganda you need to get your head on straight.
Registrant: Mackinac Center for Public Policy
140 West Main Street
P.O. Box 568
Midland, MI 48640
US
Domain Name: MACKINAC.ORG
Here is the wikipedia entry for this "accurate and unbiased source"
The Mackinac Center for Policy Research is the largest conservative state-level policy think tank in the nation. It was established by the state's leading conservative activists to promote conservative free market, pro-business policies. Reflected by its board of directors and those funding its operations, the Center works to advance its policy objectives primarily though its publications, but has an increasing physical presence throughout the state. The Mackinac Center has moved beyond Michigan by hosting think tank schools that have lead to the franchising of its operations in nearly every state and 37 other countries
Congrats, you just linked to the central hub from which places like fox news and hannity glean their ever so accurate "information".
I'll believe the KKK's history on race relations before I believe a word they say.
actually I thought my analogy was quite a bit more accurate, though i failed to clarify exactly why.
My analogy represents the kind of oppression which would have to exist period before parasites like the MAFIAA stopped trying to litigate nascent industries out of business (along with a substantial chunk of fundamental human liberty).
Indeed, case law, thanks to bribery and corruption, are quickly approaching that way-point.
The only thing which is not fully in place (but is slowly being rolled out across various universities and websites) is the ubiquitous, overzealous filtering.
Fox news was founded on and operates with the express purpose of misinforming the american public and keeping the shrill, corrupt, and incompetent ultra-right in power.
The easy solution would be to give everybody welfare checks, but then we'd become the Romans, and everybody knows how that worked out for them...
the romans didn't have welfare, and it didn't fall because of welfare.
It fell because they didn't have their own citizens serving in their military, because they expanded beyond the capacities of their social structure and economy to govern their territory, and because of internal corruption resulting from too much consolidated power at the top.
as for the "spread of american ideals and values", I don't know what starry-eyed landscape you're looking at, but i'm here on planet earth where the spread of "american ideals and values", especially in terms of copyright, has plunged the entire western world into an economic tail-spin.
(Although I hate reading any post preceded by this acronym...) IANAL, but I was speaking from my understanding of Australian copyright law (since that's where I live). I forgot that "fair use" is much more liberal in most other countries. In Australia, fair use almost predates the record player (I know, I exaggerate a little...). Our copyright law is so antiquated as to probably be completely inapplicable today.
no, it's quite "modern", go read the fine print in AUSFTA
Another example: You are a state. You build roads and freeways. Someone is transporting illegal drugs around in a vehicle, using your roads and freeways to do so. Is it your fault or theirs? Theirs!
How about this? You build a road. You brag about how convenient your road is for transporting illegal drugs. You take steps to make it so the police will have trouble catching drug transporters on your road. Shouldn't you bear some of the responsibility for drug transport on your road?
how about a counterexample to your heavily loaded example:
you build a road, you place a checkpoint every 5 paces at which a dea agent takes the car apart piece by piece searching for drugs, strip searches all occupants regardless of age in full public view, and reserve the right to take your car to the crusher on the mere accusations of anyone on the road (good luck getting away with that obama bumper sticker if it's in georgia).
Slashdot Mirror
Their definition of p2p is flawed as well.
The internet in general is p2p, that's what makes it the internet.
Like it or not, the internet subsists on copyright infringement. The only reason user contribution and participation (in other words "the internet") exists today is because 99% of copyrights go unenforced on the internet, whether by choice or by the infringers' careful choice of host nation.
Hardly anyone seems to get this at all.
Let's consider an alternate story: hardscrabble open-source advocate uncovers evidence that Microsoft misappropriated his GPL'd code, files lawsuit
This is a fallacious comparison of the two situations.
First and foremost, the developer himself found the evidence.
Second, he retains a lawyer and sues the company specifically, rather than a john doe in order to gain his identity and go on a fishing expedition.
The WoW forum scientific method
Define the question
Gather information and resources (observe)
Form hypothesis
Perform experiment and collect dat.... Post to the forum with junk data (personal anecdotes)
Analyze dat.... get flamed by trolls incessantly to 5 pages
Interpret data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothe.... Blizzard buffs rogues (no matter what the subject was).
Publish resu.... You have wasted your time, just like when you play the game.
Rinse and repeat.
So long as critical thinking courses are conspicuously absent from public school curricula, people will not understand the concept of logical fallacy.
I recently had the "file-sharing is theft" discussion with a manager i'm on otherwise good terms with, and the guy doesn't understand how fallacious it is to compare this activity to shoplifting.
Trying to convey small but consequential logical differences to the common man is like trying to explain to a creationist why science is not diametrically opposed to their beliefs.
If they worked in the industry it's even harder. The idea that the crusade against file-sharing can conflict with the international declaration of human rights simply doesn't register with them.
If their defense is true, their "evidence" should be inadmissible, since publicly available information cannot be used to trace it to an actual person.
that's badly managed telecommuting then.
My mother has been telecommuting for about 8 years now, and has gone into the local office perhaps 100 times in that time (for immediate physical hardware difficulties). Has also made 10 trips total to the region to which she was transferred about 5 years ago.
what is your business, i'm quite interested.
The biggest barrier to telecommuting is bringing on entry level people who don't understand their job yet. Management and entry level people work best and most efficiently when seeing each other face to face.
which is why I like a middle of the road idea of "office cells".
Rather than one huge central office for a city, you have smaller offices in the 'burbs.
In each you can (depending on the size and workflow of the firm) have a single department or "just large enough" subsets of each department represented.
Connect the offices via telepresence and VPN and you have much shorter drives, cheaper real estate/property tax costs, but without the downsides of isolated workers.
Used to keep the populace in line and fearful. We've always been at war with EastAsia.
If you want to see a real energy crisis (not the one that western environmentalists have manufactured as part of their plan to be able to tell everyone else how to live while feeling morally superior) visit someplace like Albania, where the power is on for limited periods during the day, even in Tirana, and randomly intermittent throughout the rest of the country. Or someplace in Africa, where electric lights are a far-off dream for most.
The "energy crisis" is FUD stirred up by the very people who won't allow us to build nuclear power plants, who shut down wind power sites because of danger to spotted owls, and who seem to believe that 6 billion people should return to an agrarian lifestyle characterized by hard physical labor, malnourishment, and a short lifespan. All while they, the appointed guardians of the new order, are the only ones allowed to drive their SUVs around "public" parks like Yosemite.
The hyperbole is a bit thick, but I agree with this somewhat.
Environmentalist extremism as about as bad for us as environmental apathy.
Environmentalism, believe it or not, has been around much much longer than 60 years, and has been about incremental achievement
Cars were better for the environment than horses, which not only produced methane, but littered the streets with dung and pathogens, for instance.
Nuclear seems to be the next step from this, because its waste product is more centralized and manageable, all be it deadly, and, if it escapes, only alters a fixed region (which is under human direction) rather than the global temperature.
Then there's the breeder reactors.
Etc. Etc.
Environmental extremists have this nasty habit of smearing anything which is not completely and utterly innocuous to the environment, which is about as impossible as finding a food which is completely innocuous to the human body.
Telecommuting can't be a 100% solution though, otherwise you will not be able to train new entrants..
oh wait, i'm a new entrant and nobody wants to train me...
I guess i'll have to wait about 25 years until they realize their trained staff are retiring and their actual labor pool is dwindling.
If god is omnipotent, then god should be able to make something he cannot understand.
If god can, than god is not omniscient, because he would be able to understand it.
The same can be said in reverse.
Omnipotence and omniscience are mutually exclusive, thus a truly unlimited being is not possible.
whoops, not presented properly..
omnipotence means being able to make something you can't understand.
Being able to make something you can't understand nullifies omniscience.
Therefore, a truly unlimited being is logically impossible
This is because they are not faced with a varied enough environment.
If a bacteria were lab engineered with the capacity to function between near absolute zero and upwards of 5k f, then it would be able to replicate continuously and be virtually impervious to the environment.
Something may begin to prey on it, but that would simply replace its dominance with the new species.. the earth would still be eaten, all be it more slowly.
If god is omnipotent, then god should be able to make something he cannot understand.
If god can, than god is not omniscient, because he would be able to understand it.
The same can be said in reverse.
Omnipotence and omniscience are mutually exclusive, thus a truly unlimited being is not possible.
Warrants have been required in case law for GPS admissibility for some time now.
I'd like to add that most think tanks doing these "studies" you lay claim to are conservative ones.
There are a myriad of reasons for this, but two major contributors jump out at me..
First and foremost, the republican party primarily services the wishes of the upper 2% of the US income spectrum, with particular attention given to the upper fraction of a percent who run the nation's corporate enterprises. Their wealth is considerably greater and infinitely more disposable than the lower 98%, meaning much more funding is available to organizations to push their agenda. **
second, because of the history of both parties since the civil rights eras, the republican party has become a central clearinghouse for intolerant authoritarians who can't (couldn't, since fox news has corrupted the media at large) tolerate equal time and even footing given to both sides of an issue.
The rest of america doesn't see the need for these "studies" because they don't feel indignant when the media fails to stereotype and ridicule those who disagree with them.
**Disclaimer: I do think the perspective of this sect is indeed important in the crafting of laws, but these people still represent the extreme minority in national and global society and, given their interests are diametrically opposed to that majority, they should be providing corrective guidance rather than active steering of public policy.
One study claimed that 88% of the members of media viewed themselves as "liberal" while this number is only in the mid teens for all Americans.
this is misleading.
"how to lie, with statistics" politics 101.
A more accurate breakdown would be that newscasters are more liberal on social issues, but as soon as it shifts to the economy they become the biggest right-wing reaganite nutcases you've ever set your eyes on.
The reality is the news was neutral-to-moderate-right. If you think fox news is not propaganda you need to get your head on straight.
WOW are you an astroturfer!
Registrant:
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
140 West Main Street
P.O. Box 568
Midland, MI 48640
US
Domain Name: MACKINAC.ORG
Here is the wikipedia entry for this "accurate and unbiased source"
The Mackinac Center for Policy Research is the largest conservative state-level policy think tank in the nation. It was established by the state's leading conservative activists to promote conservative free market, pro-business policies. Reflected by its board of directors and those funding its operations, the Center works to advance its policy objectives primarily though its publications, but has an increasing physical presence throughout the state. The Mackinac Center has moved beyond Michigan by hosting think tank schools that have lead to the franchising of its operations in nearly every state and 37 other countries
Congrats, you just linked to the central hub from which places like fox news and hannity glean their ever so accurate "information".
I'll believe the KKK's history on race relations before I believe a word they say.
of course, you ignore the fact that a more accurate analogy would be a map showing places to get all drugs regardless of legality.
in which case, every eckerd, rite-aid, walgreens, cvs, kroger, publix, wal-mart, and meijer would also be listed.
Damn all those horrible addicts trying to find the nearest place to get their heart/crohns/depression/cancer medication!
actually I thought my analogy was quite a bit more accurate, though i failed to clarify exactly why.
My analogy represents the kind of oppression which would have to exist period before parasites like the MAFIAA stopped trying to litigate nascent industries out of business (along with a substantial chunk of fundamental human liberty).
Indeed, case law, thanks to bribery and corruption, are quickly approaching that way-point.
The only thing which is not fully in place (but is slowly being rolled out across various universities and websites) is the ubiquitous, overzealous filtering.
They treat a motorcycle carrying 1 person the same as a transport truck carrying 50+ tons of goods.
someone's never seen the diamond lanes
I never said that. I did, in fact, educate them.
ah, I stand corrected then.
CNN is no different then Fox News
in all fairness this isn't quite true.
CNN is merely amoral.
Fox news was founded on and operates with the express purpose of misinforming the american public and keeping the shrill, corrupt, and incompetent ultra-right in power.
The easy solution would be to give everybody welfare checks, but then we'd become the Romans, and everybody knows how that worked out for them...
the romans didn't have welfare, and it didn't fall because of welfare.
It fell because they didn't have their own citizens serving in their military, because they expanded beyond the capacities of their social structure and economy to govern their territory, and because of internal corruption resulting from too much consolidated power at the top.
as for the "spread of american ideals and values", I don't know what starry-eyed landscape you're looking at, but i'm here on planet earth where the spread of "american ideals and values", especially in terms of copyright, has plunged the entire western world into an economic tail-spin.
(Although I hate reading any post preceded by this acronym...) IANAL, but I was speaking from my understanding of Australian copyright law (since that's where I live). I forgot that "fair use" is much more liberal in most other countries. In Australia, fair use almost predates the record player (I know, I exaggerate a little...). Our copyright law is so antiquated as to probably be completely inapplicable today.
no, it's quite "modern", go read the fine print in AUSFTA
How about this? You build a road. You brag about how convenient your road is for transporting illegal drugs. You take steps to make it so the police will have trouble catching drug transporters on your road. Shouldn't you bear some of the responsibility for drug transport on your road?
how about a counterexample to your heavily loaded example:
you build a road, you place a checkpoint every 5 paces at which a dea agent takes the car apart piece by piece searching for drugs, strip searches all occupants regardless of age in full public view, and reserve the right to take your car to the crusher on the mere accusations of anyone on the road (good luck getting away with that obama bumper sticker if it's in georgia).
oh yeah.. that's how the law is today.