Why would people lead fake lives? Because they can't get what they want out of real life. Take for example the NeoVictorian/Steampunk SecondLife town of Babbage. The people who have the interest and put in the work to make the place doubtfully have the resources (read $$$) to make a sustainable real life town with a Victorian asthetic both in architecture and social etiquette. So they made their fanatasy in a video game. Why would they stand for having that fantasy marred by the very aspects of real life they are seeking to escape from? Sure you might view them as lame, but why does that excuse the disruption of a fantasy they go to such lengths to pursue?
I want to see, in the words of FTC Commissioner Orson Swindle (great name!), "a few public hangings" for bogus DMCA takedowns.
I think part of the problem is that the organization issuing the takedowns might actually think they own them, because they own things that use them. Thus a "public hanging" would be out of place.
If I scan and post a picture of the Mona Lisa out of an art history book, am I making an illegal reproduction of part of that book? The IP rights get cloudy when you consider: If I download an unliscensed/illegal MP3 of a song, but I own a CD with that same song on it, the downloaded copy is still illegal. If the source is considered for MP3s why wouldn't it be considered for the Mona Lisa?
At one time in human history it was common place for people to know how to live off the land, making their own tools and hunting/gathering their own food. That could still be a very useful skill set in certain circumstances, but technology and societial progress have made it mostly obselete. 100 years from now, writing by hand will probably be as rare/obselete a skill set. Yes, something is being lost, but the "preciousness" of that skill is waning as typeing has become the dominant recording method of the written word.
This idea by itself isn't a bad idea. However, when you combine it with the Music Industry wanting Internet Radio to play per listener, it suddenly points towards a very possible and unfriendly future. Pay per Play, on your personal collection. Sure the CDs you already own can't do this, but it's a very small step between: free for the first 3 plays then pay (BG's idea) and pay a small fee every 3 plays in perpetuity. I'm not trying to be all doom and gloom, but with CD sales seriously down, the music giants are getting desperate.
It might be lying or it might be delusion, it's probably both. The music giants are falling, but they don't understand why. They got rich running things a certain way, and they are still running things that way, but now they are losing money. They are desperate to find a reason for this that still allows for their huge paychecks. If they could charge $25 for a CD in 1997 why are people saying that's overpriced in 2007? It must be the pirates. if they aren't stealing the music why do they care if it's copy protected? They must be pirates.
From the parents link:NASA is seeking public opinion on ways to detect possible biohazards from Mars samples returned to the Earth.
Wouldn't any biohazard, bacteria or virius, culture fairly easily in a petri dish? If it could survive and breed in us, it could survive and breed in a lab. It's not like we don't already have experience with weaponized viriuses, what's another few grams of potential mass extinction added to the collection?
Destroying habitats on the ocean floor and having birds fly into it won't go over well for the environmentalists I imagine.
The whole "floating" thing is trying to solve that. By floating they can be located farther offshore, outside of migation patterns and coastal wildlife habitats. Sure they might need to make some sort of passive sonar reflectors to keep whales from hitting them, but being able to be in 500m water will also put them well out of sight of land, another NIMBY adoption problem.
The cables are there to keep generators stationary. The waves aren't much of a problem when you center of floatation is 60m below the waters surface. You don't see oil platforms bobbing up and down or blowing away for these reasons. Rubber coated copper is very good at getting the power to shore.
I have no idea what the lease terms are, but I'm very suprised there isn't either a guaranteed renewal or option to buy for the leasee. How could you build a business on something that could be yanked out from under you without recourse?
Like saying relativity wouldn't have been discovered without Einstein.
I think it's not so much an "if" as a "when". Maybe without Eistein e=mc2 wouldn't have been know for another 20 years. Imagine how drastically that would have changed the 20th Century. Now if Jobs didn't have this artistic side to him, and that offset GUIs by 10 years, then things like the internet and the adoption of PCs might well be at about the 1997 level right now. And that's assuming that the current Federal administration would have pushed for the internet in the same way that Gore did.
what power does a state legislation have against a federal one?
In theory the State power should be at least equal within the State, we have a Federal system.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism In reality our States have lost alot of autonomy to the Federal Government because of abuses of the Interstate commerce clause.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_com merce_clause I hope that New Hampshire sticks it out, other States follow, and States Rights gains back some ground. But it didn't work when the Fed wanted a drinking age of 21, and forced States to adopt it, even though it is supposed to be outside the realm of the Federal government. Withholding funding for highways and such is an all too powerful lever the Feds have over the States. New Hampshire might hold out because they are small enough to get away with no Fed support of their highways and they have alot of "Free Staters" who want to secede from the US completely over things like shrinking liberties, and global policing. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1 555119,00.html
I found it to be kinda short sighted in the article that they would seperate the "sex" perspective from the "youth" and "identity" perspectives. Of course teens are going to have all sorts of pictures of themselves tring to be sexy, they are learning what being sexy means. That's why younger teens often have such crazy fashion sense, trying to find what their own sex appeal. Which is one of major newly emerging parts of their identity. I think the only big difference between online social networking and the halls of a junior high just after the end of school, is that a online network is archieved and publically accessible.
Try to live here without buying anything from China. It's gonna be tough, especially if you want to buy shoes or electronics without parts or assembly in the PRC. Here's an interesting article about it.http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1220/p09s01-coop. html
I am generally on the libertarian, deregulate-everything side of the ocean. But in this case - going back to the original topic - I'm actually excited about what Massachusetts is doing. I'm a big fan of the States-as-laboratories-for-the-nation idea. If Mass. does this and makes it work, other States will follow suit. They will learn from each others' mistakes and successes and we'll end up with something better as a result. Eventually, the Feds can do some mild regulation to bring the States' offerings into alignment where it makes sense (so that it's not a huge burden to live in one State but work in another, for example). Or maybe, if enough States get on board - like, three quarters of them - the Feds can take over the whole thing and impose it on the entire country.
I have to say i prefer the more Federalist approach. Let each State make it's own. The more successful implimentaions will be copied, or be a reason to relocate for both individuals and companies. Perhaps some States will have radically different plans that appeal to different people. I would like it to stay that way, for this and many other issues. We have 50 different States, let's have 50 different approaches to the ideal America. There should be very few things that must be standardized nationally.
disassociate the memories from the intense anguish/pain that they cause.
If we remove the association of pain with the memories that caused them will we begin to find those causes less abhorrent? Would torture or child abuse that doesn't do permenant physical damage become acceptable, because we can "make it all better"? If all the damage is psychological, and that can be fixed, where is the crime in the currently heinous crime of sexual abuse of minors? I'm not advocating any of this, quite the opposite, I'm trying to show the possible downside of disassociate the memories from the intense anguish/pain that they cause.
Given the sheer size of the insurance companies, costs can be kept low through competition.
The big problem with that is the "competition" only applies to insurance companies. Insurance companies only pay pennies on th dollar of the hospital bill, but if you don't have insurance, you pay full price. I had the joy of once paying $400 for an ace bandage and 30 sec visual inspection of a sprained ankle. That's a problem.
The ecosystem is an amazing system, but only because we're here to be amazed by it. Without a human observer, beauty doesn't exist, just eating, shitting, and fucking.
By that logic, anything that isn't amazing and beautiful is a waste of space. You may want to consider how amazing and beautiful you are as compared to most of the rest of nature. Hmm, not stacking up so well are you? Add to that just how far from unique you are. Yeah, it's time to get over your sense of entitlement. This may come as a bit of a shock, but the animals enjoy fucking and eating and possibly even shitting. You dog humps you leg because he enjoys it. You dog overeats because he enjoys it. There are plenty of things to enjoy the island after humans leave.
Let's apply the law of supply and demand, and see just how valuable a person is vs a rare bird. Supply of people 6,602,224,175 , demand for people (this is a tough one. How many people's lives do effect positively, let's say 10,000 people through out your life are significantly, positively effected by your existence) 10,000. That gives most of us a value of 0.0000015151. Number of Galapagos Hawks 1000. Number of people who want to save the Galapagos Hawk: at least 2,500,000 (the number of members of Birdlife International which is only one of multiple groups trying to save the Galapagos) So the Galapagos Hawk has a value of around 2,500. So according to the Law of Supply and Demand a Galapagos Hawk is worth 1,650,056,101 people. Face it, despite what all of our mothers told us, we just aren't all that special.
I almost have to wonder if Jobs really "misspoke" or if this was a beautiful way to declare early on that "you get your iPhone from Apple". Hey while you're in the Apple store get some extra iPod stuff or go look at a new laptop.
Why the fuck are fishermen and roads and a cruiseship dock there in the first place? Here's a real easy way to save it. GO AWAY. Not just the tourists and fishermen either, everyone including the scientists. Just leave it alone. Maybe shoot all the stray dogs first. Put a patrol boat a mile out and sink anyone that gets close to the island. And don't whine about the displaced fishermen, build some fish farms. There isn't anywhere on earth with an ocean fishing industry where overfishing doesn't happen and the fishermen all wonder why there are so fewer fish. It's the clear cutting of the sea.
Yeah/. is especially fond of anything to do with evil MegaCorps or internet censorship, but don't fret. The "MI5 threat level Critical" is nice and high up on the Firehose. For whatever reason it didn't get submitted until 6:30, so the surf at work crowd has missed it until tomorrow. Perhaps there is little to say except, "Wow, that sucks. Glad the two didn't explode." Nothing to debate or solve.
The War on Terrorism is a bumpersticker, not because of a lack of very real terrorists, but because the war being fought is only going to generate more terrorists, and many of the Homeland Security measures are doing more damage than the terrorists.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would people lead fake lives? Because they can't get what they want out of real life. Take for example the NeoVictorian/Steampunk SecondLife town of Babbage. The people who have the interest and put in the work to make the place doubtfully have the resources (read $$$) to make a sustainable real life town with a Victorian asthetic both in architecture and social etiquette. So they made their fanatasy in a video game. Why would they stand for having that fantasy marred by the very aspects of real life they are seeking to escape from? Sure you might view them as lame, but why does that excuse the disruption of a fantasy they go to such lengths to pursue?
I want to see, in the words of FTC Commissioner Orson Swindle (great name!), "a few public hangings" for bogus DMCA takedowns.
I think part of the problem is that the organization issuing the takedowns might actually think they own them, because they own things that use them. Thus a "public hanging" would be out of place.
If I scan and post a picture of the Mona Lisa out of an art history book, am I making an illegal reproduction of part of that book? The IP rights get cloudy when you consider: If I download an unliscensed/illegal MP3 of a song, but I own a CD with that same song on it, the downloaded copy is still illegal. If the source is considered for MP3s why wouldn't it be considered for the Mona Lisa?
At one time in human history it was common place for people to know how to live off the land, making their own tools and hunting/gathering their own food. That could still be a very useful skill set in certain circumstances, but technology and societial progress have made it mostly obselete. 100 years from now, writing by hand will probably be as rare/obselete a skill set. Yes, something is being lost, but the "preciousness" of that skill is waning as typeing has become the dominant recording method of the written word.
I don't think it's that bad of an idea.
This idea by itself isn't a bad idea. However, when you combine it with the Music Industry wanting Internet Radio to play per listener, it suddenly points towards a very possible and unfriendly future. Pay per Play, on your personal collection. Sure the CDs you already own can't do this, but it's a very small step between: free for the first 3 plays then pay (BG's idea) and pay a small fee every 3 plays in perpetuity. I'm not trying to be all doom and gloom, but with CD sales seriously down, the music giants are getting desperate.
It might be lying or it might be delusion, it's probably both. The music giants are falling, but they don't understand why. They got rich running things a certain way, and they are still running things that way, but now they are losing money. They are desperate to find a reason for this that still allows for their huge paychecks. If they could charge $25 for a CD in 1997 why are people saying that's overpriced in 2007? It must be the pirates. if they aren't stealing the music why do they care if it's copy protected? They must be pirates.
From the parents link:NASA is seeking public opinion on ways to detect possible biohazards from Mars samples returned to the Earth.
6 ,00.html
Wouldn't any biohazard, bacteria or virius, culture fairly easily in a petri dish? If it could survive and breed in us, it could survive and breed in a lab. It's not like we don't already have experience with weaponized viriuses, what's another few grams of potential mass extinction added to the collection?
And for every who thinks we stopped biological weapons research in 1972, look at this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,82130
Well, congrats to GW for taking my general disinterest for their products and elevating it to actual dislike of their organization.
Maybe they've been hanging out with Sony Execs.
Destroying habitats on the ocean floor and having birds fly into it won't go over well for the environmentalists I imagine.
The whole "floating" thing is trying to solve that. By floating they can be located farther offshore, outside of migation patterns and coastal wildlife habitats. Sure they might need to make some sort of passive sonar reflectors to keep whales from hitting them, but being able to be in 500m water will also put them well out of sight of land, another NIMBY adoption problem.
The cables are there to keep generators stationary. The waves aren't much of a problem when you center of floatation is 60m below the waters surface. You don't see oil platforms bobbing up and down or blowing away for these reasons. Rubber coated copper is very good at getting the power to shore.
I have no idea what the lease terms are, but I'm very suprised there isn't either a guaranteed renewal or option to buy for the leasee. How could you build a business on something that could be yanked out from under you without recourse?
Like saying relativity wouldn't have been discovered without Einstein.
I think it's not so much an "if" as a "when". Maybe without Eistein e=mc2 wouldn't have been know for another 20 years. Imagine how drastically that would have changed the 20th Century. Now if Jobs didn't have this artistic side to him, and that offset GUIs by 10 years, then things like the internet and the adoption of PCs might well be at about the 1997 level right now. And that's assuming that the current Federal administration would have pushed for the internet in the same way that Gore did.
what power does a state legislation have against a federal one?
m merce_clause I hope that New Hampshire sticks it out, other States follow, and States Rights gains back some ground. But it didn't work when the Fed wanted a drinking age of 21, and forced States to adopt it, even though it is supposed to be outside the realm of the Federal government. Withholding funding for highways and such is an all too powerful lever the Feds have over the States. New Hampshire might hold out because they are small enough to get away with no Fed support of their highways and they have alot of "Free Staters" who want to secede from the US completely over things like shrinking liberties, and global policing. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1 555119,00.html
In theory the State power should be at least equal within the State, we have a Federal system.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism In reality our States have lost alot of autonomy to the Federal Government because of abuses of the Interstate commerce clause.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_co
Because after the Simpson's game is done he will start making more episodes of Futurama.
hopefully.
Dash it, All I can come up with is but one: Sex.
I found it to be kinda short sighted in the article that they would seperate the "sex" perspective from the "youth" and "identity" perspectives. Of course teens are going to have all sorts of pictures of themselves tring to be sexy, they are learning what being sexy means. That's why younger teens often have such crazy fashion sense, trying to find what their own sex appeal. Which is one of major newly emerging parts of their identity. I think the only big difference between online social networking and the halls of a junior high just after the end of school, is that a online network is archieved and publically accessible.
But who gets to define what is ethical or not?
2 51244
The guy with his name and e-mail written into the music file. http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/27/1
Try to live here without buying anything from China. It's gonna be tough, especially if you want to buy shoes or electronics without parts or assembly in the PRC. Here's an interesting article about it.http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1220/p09s01-coop. html
I am generally on the libertarian, deregulate-everything side of the ocean. But in this case - going back to the original topic - I'm actually excited about what Massachusetts is doing. I'm a big fan of the States-as-laboratories-for-the-nation idea. If Mass. does this and makes it work, other States will follow suit. They will learn from each others' mistakes and successes and we'll end up with something better as a result. Eventually, the Feds can do some mild regulation to bring the States' offerings into alignment where it makes sense (so that it's not a huge burden to live in one State but work in another, for example). Or maybe, if enough States get on board - like, three quarters of them - the Feds can take over the whole thing and impose it on the entire country.
I have to say i prefer the more Federalist approach. Let each State make it's own. The more successful implimentaions will be copied, or be a reason to relocate for both individuals and companies. Perhaps some States will have radically different plans that appeal to different people. I would like it to stay that way, for this and many other issues. We have 50 different States, let's have 50 different approaches to the ideal America. There should be very few things that must be standardized nationally.
disassociate the memories from the intense anguish/pain that they cause.
If we remove the association of pain with the memories that caused them will we begin to find those causes less abhorrent? Would torture or child abuse that doesn't do permenant physical damage become acceptable, because we can "make it all better"? If all the damage is psychological, and that can be fixed, where is the crime in the currently heinous crime of sexual abuse of minors? I'm not advocating any of this, quite the opposite, I'm trying to show the possible downside of disassociate the memories from the intense anguish/pain that they cause.
Given the sheer size of the insurance companies, costs can be kept low through competition.
The big problem with that is the "competition" only applies to insurance companies. Insurance companies only pay pennies on th dollar of the hospital bill, but if you don't have insurance, you pay full price. I had the joy of once paying $400 for an ace bandage and 30 sec visual inspection of a sprained ankle. That's a problem.
Done. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2007/06/27 /mpi-law.html
The ecosystem is an amazing system, but only because we're here to be amazed by it. Without a human observer, beauty doesn't exist, just eating, shitting, and fucking.
By that logic, anything that isn't amazing and beautiful is a waste of space. You may want to consider how amazing and beautiful you are as compared to most of the rest of nature. Hmm, not stacking up so well are you? Add to that just how far from unique you are. Yeah, it's time to get over your sense of entitlement. This may come as a bit of a shock, but the animals enjoy fucking and eating and possibly even shitting. You dog humps you leg because he enjoys it. You dog overeats because he enjoys it. There are plenty of things to enjoy the island after humans leave.
yes i am better then both
Let's apply the law of supply and demand, and see just how valuable a person is vs a rare bird. Supply of people 6,602,224,175 , demand for people (this is a tough one. How many people's lives do effect positively, let's say 10,000 people through out your life are significantly, positively effected by your existence) 10,000. That gives most of us a value of 0.0000015151. Number of Galapagos Hawks 1000. Number of people who want to save the Galapagos Hawk: at least 2,500,000 (the number of members of Birdlife International which is only one of multiple groups trying to save the Galapagos) So the Galapagos Hawk has a value of around 2,500. So according to the Law of Supply and Demand a Galapagos Hawk is worth 1,650,056,101 people. Face it, despite what all of our mothers told us, we just aren't all that special.
I almost have to wonder if Jobs really "misspoke" or if this was a beautiful way to declare early on that "you get your iPhone from Apple". Hey while you're in the Apple store get some extra iPod stuff or go look at a new laptop.
Why the fuck are fishermen and roads and a cruiseship dock there in the first place? Here's a real easy way to save it. GO AWAY. Not just the tourists and fishermen either, everyone including the scientists. Just leave it alone. Maybe shoot all the stray dogs first. Put a patrol boat a mile out and sink anyone that gets close to the island. And don't whine about the displaced fishermen, build some fish farms. There isn't anywhere on earth with an ocean fishing industry where overfishing doesn't happen and the fishermen all wonder why there are so fewer fish. It's the clear cutting of the sea.
Yeah /. is especially fond of anything to do with evil MegaCorps or internet censorship, but don't fret. The "MI5 threat level Critical" is nice and high up on the Firehose. For whatever reason it didn't get submitted until 6:30, so the surf at work crowd has missed it until tomorrow. Perhaps there is little to say except, "Wow, that sucks. Glad the two didn't explode." Nothing to debate or solve.
The War on Terrorism is a bumpersticker, not because of a lack of very real terrorists, but because the war being fought is only going to generate more terrorists, and many of the Homeland Security measures are doing more damage than the terrorists.