I'm not for markets, but I do know how they work. They require the consumer to have full knowledge of the products they might buy.
As such I think that in this present society, all modified organisms (genetically modified via the addition or removal of genes or whatever) should be clearly labelled. Treatments (such as irradiation) should be clearly labelled and so on.
Sure they can ring the company, but do you really think the company will tell the truth, or if they do say it such a manner that the consumer can understand?
This is (one) why capitalism needs government, because consumers cannot get information without government regulation.
Yes labelling might cause consumer backlash, but isn't that what the market is about? Providing what the consumer wants?
I'm not in the USA, so my comments are general. I'll get that out of the way first.
The linking of databases, such as required by Real ID has a large number of problems and few benefits (unless you are a totalitarian). There are inevitably going to be problems with control to the data (who has access?), it isn't going to stop fake ID's and it paves the way for people to give up more and more information to a central state.
The benefits are simple, the state gets a large access which it can then use (and most of the time misuse). It will be inevitably linked to other databases, and then the state can do what the East German state did.
It knows when you broke the law, and if you do something it doesn't like, it pulls you in and charges you with whatever it likes. After all, who hasn't broken some law or another?
This comment from the BillingsGazette, shows some other possible uses for the government.
"We also don't think that bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., ought to tell us that if we're going to get on a plane we have to carry their card, so when it's scanned through they know where you went, when you got there and when you came home," said Schweitzer, a Democrat. (And isn't Montana the state with the highest level of gun ownership or something? Someone should shoot the federal agents, that would teach the fuckers.)
In lots of places, even if you are denied a permit, you are still allowed to protest. And if you don't do anything besides not move on when told to... Well you can't be legally arrested. (I believe this is the case in all of Australia, but at least NSW and Tasmania.)
That doesn't stop you being arrested however. Charged. Forced to fly across the country to one court date. Forced to get a lawyer. Get charged with other charges because the cops are trying to blackmail you into pleading guilty to a "lesser" charge (traffic charge for example). Refuse to bow to blackmail. Fly across the country again the day before the court date. Get rung up by your lawyer and told that all charges have been dropper.
Can you guess that I'm bitter? The fact is, in more civilised countries, you are allowed to demonstrate and protest. And so long as you don't break other laws (such as smashing shit up), then you are not breaking any laws. And thus the police have no right to arrest you. But as I've mentioned before, there are shitloads of examples where they will. (In the case above, that was me. I was "being annoying" according to one police officer who told another couple to arrest me.)
but that doesn't excuse it. It was apparently about AUD50 (from the ABC.
Anyway, this is just another example of how legitimate protests are squashed by authorities. If Putin and Co continue to suppress the opposition, I wonder if Mr Berezovsky will carry out his threat to have a "Russian Revolution"?
Meh, and you wonder why some of the old people want the Soviet Union back.
And I wonder why Kevin Beares thinks it was a Richard who leaked this. If I was doing such a thing, especially when there are only a small group of testers, I would use a pseudonym. Richard is as good a one as any other.
Also, I wonder how he thinks he can work it out? Contacting the ISPs perhaps? (From the article it seems as if the webmaster for the site where the leak was posted will help.) I'm sure all the testers will deny being "Richard" of leaking fame.
My thoughts on this: Google simply took down the videos and sent out copyright infringement notices to the users who had put them up, without contacting the ABC to verify the claim. This kid claimed to be representing the ABC, so obviously if Google had contacted him to confirm the claim, they still would have problems, which is why they should have contact the ABC directly.
The copyright is owned by the ABC (or the Chaser crew), but they give permission to use it anywhere and everywhere.
Also, the fellow has a point, no matter that there are two or three levels of government taxing you, they are still taxing the same income. This is a flaw in federal systems. (In Australia, while both federal and state governments can raise taxes anyway they want (almost), the federal government is the only government that taxes income or has a sales tax on general items and services. The states have stamp taxes and the like, and the local councils rates. The federal government then provides most of the states their income (in fact the GST was intended to replace stamp duties, hasn't happened of course).
I recall the story of a brothel owner in the US who was only prosecuted for running a brothel. She paid her taxes, had a good working environment for the workers, health insurance and all the rest. (Of course, I can't find a link to the story.)
Moral of the story? Don't get cause for speeding when leaving a bank robbery.
Or in other words, break only the law that you intended to, and not any other.
On topic to the story, in Australia at least personal items are not taxed if sold, and don't have to be declared for either Centrelink (the government handout department, they pay my way!) or the taxation department. As far as I know, hobbies also don't have to be declared (or maybe they do, but just aren't taxed).
As I said above, no Google don't have a monopoly on online advertising. Not even text based pay-per view.
Yahoo have got into the business as well (when they bought Overture I think). There are also heaps of others, from my Adblock list, adsdk fastclick bluestreak adsfac mediaplex serving-sys tribalfusion And heaps more. Not to mention all the individual site advertising (http://ads.guardian.co.uk for example).
Hate them now. Use their products if you want, but hate them anyway.
Seriously though, Google doesn't have a monopoly on on-line text advertising (even pay per-click), Yahoo has got into that business (formally Overture)[http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com] and I'm sure other companies have as well. This [http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/columns/executiv e_tech/article.php/3395571] article has some interesting comments on the matter of fraud.
And there are still heaps of other advertisers out their, and you know what, I block almost all of them (Adblock and NoScript, 'tis great). (For most sites, it is seriously, if they can't cope without my viewing their ads (even if I'm never going to ever buy anything), then I guess I can do without them. For sites like this, I like to think that I am helping to contribute to more people coming here by having insightful and interesting comments. After all, that is what gets the people looking at the site, and thus the ads.)
No that isn't what I meant. Have you ever used Server Side Include? Or the PHP ?
What it does is make a seamless page, the object tag doesn't do that. The only way to get a seamless page with includes on the client side is a JavaScript hack (which you can research if you want).
If you have data that uses a table, use the "table" tag. If you don't, use CSS. HTML is not for describing presentation, that is what CSS is for. As such, your idea for a "grid" tag, is not really for HTML at all.
What happens when your page gets displayed on a phone? With CSS you can simply revert to a single column (or the phone can just drop the CSS), with "grid", you need two pages, one for desktops, and one for phones.
I think XHTML is fine, it works and does the job. The only thing I would like is a client side include. Apart from that, I think CSS needs updating, not (X)HTML (or perhaps just browser support for CSS?).
I for one always turn off the wireless on my laptop when flying. Three reasons, one I'm asked to, two there isn't wireless access anyway, three it sucks power.
When I was flying around Australia, and now flying around Europe, the airlines ask passengers to turn off all electronic equipment when taking off and landing, and all equipment that emits or receives radio waves. So, that for me means mobile and wireless on the laptop.
Of course, I don't know whether any of these actually interfere with the airline systems at all, but I'm sure it is regulated that such things have to be turned off.
I'm not denying that many Australians are racist. I am saying that not all Australians are. Which is what the person I was responding to (basically) said.
I can only speak form my personal experience, and that is limited I admit. But around the Uni I was going to, I rarely encountered openly racist people. But we all know that Uni's are full of left-wing radicals, I guess in the real world it is different.
Hey, I'm an Australian, and while I understand your point, I disagree.
There are lots of racist scumfuckers around, but there are also lots of people who hate the racist scumfuckers.
None of my friends are racist, and I only know a few people that are openly so.
The existence of FightDemBack also disproves what you are saying.
So the point, you shouldn't make generalised comments like what you did. That is just like say that all Aboriginal people steal. It is unjustified and bigoted. I always like to say, you shouldn't make generalisations, generally. And this is one of the majority of cases you shouldn't.
Well, as this is Slashdot and not an academic paper, I really can't be fucked doing such a study or finding evidence to support my position. However, I have read and been told of a number of cases where the police have used excessive force when arresting suspects or shooting people (black people who have wallets for example). The Rodney King case is an example, or numerous cases during the civil rights movement in the '60's.
The case where I did provide evidence to the contrary, I only found out that the cop was being charged after looking for information on the case. And it was only after an independent person examined the evidence.
Also, as a comment somewhere above points out, in Sweden you basically have no recourse when suing the government. The another comment in the same thread talks about the Steve Jackson games case.
As to your question about the police and prosecutors. I simply quoted that from the summary. But they work together. The police arrest you and attempt to find evidence to convict you, the prosecutor attempts to convict you. They both have an interest in having guilty verdicts.
"[P]olice and prosecutor being charged with official misconduct, but the judges dropped the cases"
And this is why the police and prosecutor will continue to break the law. This happens everywhere, unless the police are required to actually obey the law, there is no incentive to. Even when they are punished, it generally amounts to a slap on the wrist.
The police can and will arrest people who have done nothing wrong (I and a number of others at a protest during the Forbes conference in Sydney in 2005 for example, all the charges were either dropped or thrown out of court, except those people who pleaded guilty).
It isn't just illegal raids or arrests either. In Queensland an Aboriginal man was killed while in police custody. It was latter shown that he shouldn't have even been arrested, and that he was beaten to death. The police officer responsible continues in his duties (though he has been transferred from Palm Island). Actually, apparently he has now been charged, with manslaughter, after a former NSW chief judge examined the evidence. (See this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_Island,_Queensla nd#2004_death_in_custody_controversy_and_riot or do a search.)
So, it is obvious that the police need to be held accountable for their actions. While it is possible in most places to sue them (in the civil court), and this is what the various owners and users of these seized servers should do, the judge often finds that the police "were just doing their duty". No they fucking weren't! They were going beyond their duty.
I was going to make a comment about the date and how other people got modded up, therefore you could mod me up. But then I realised that the mods are probably sick of it by now. So, I'm instead simply asking that you don't mod me down.
OpenOffice.org has had PDF exporting for ages. I know a few people who use it, simply because it is so much easier to use the one click PDF export, then it is to buy Adobe software and install it and so on. I personally don't use PDF (I use (X)HTML when publishing stuff), but I can understand why people who print stuff do.
On a slightly different topic, I used to use OOo all the time for my word processing needs, but I've taken to using Abiword. It is a lot less fully featured (almost to being an annoyance at times, especially when working with footnotes or endnotes), but it has two features that I really like. It is a shitload faster to load. And the files that it saves are human readable. The main reason, it is a shitload faster to load up.
There is no way that I would use Abiword for a document more then 5 or 6 pages (~2500 words) though.
As a comparison to MS Office, I haven't used it in years (except on a Mac and that doesn't count (and it was still more then a year ago)). But I remember that I much preferred Writer to Word, and I thought that Impress was easier to use then PowerPoint.
I was reading the Unix Haters Handbook the other day. Funny how something (about computers) written at the start of the 90s is still relevant today. This is one of the stupid things they were commenting on.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not for markets, but I do know how they work. They require the consumer to have full knowledge of the products they might buy.
As such I think that in this present society, all modified organisms (genetically modified via the addition or removal of genes or whatever) should be clearly labelled. Treatments (such as irradiation) should be clearly labelled and so on.
Sure they can ring the company, but do you really think the company will tell the truth, or if they do say it such a manner that the consumer can understand?
This is (one) why capitalism needs government, because consumers cannot get information without government regulation.
Yes labelling might cause consumer backlash, but isn't that what the market is about? Providing what the consumer wants?
The linking of databases, such as required by Real ID has a large number of problems and few benefits (unless you are a totalitarian). There are inevitably going to be problems with control to the data (who has access?), it isn't going to stop fake ID's and it paves the way for people to give up more and more information to a central state.
The benefits are simple, the state gets a large access which it can then use (and most of the time misuse). It will be inevitably linked to other databases, and then the state can do what the East German state did.
It knows when you broke the law, and if you do something it doesn't like, it pulls you in and charges you with whatever it likes. After all, who hasn't broken some law or another?
This comment from the BillingsGazette, shows some other possible uses for the government. "We also don't think that bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., ought to tell us that if we're going to get on a plane we have to carry their card, so when it's scanned through they know where you went, when you got there and when you came home," said Schweitzer, a Democrat. (And isn't Montana the state with the highest level of gun ownership or something? Someone should shoot the federal agents, that would teach the fuckers.)
The solution? Anarchy. Overthrow the whole fucking lot of corrupt fuckers and replace them with self rule.
I know that I can be trusted not to misuse freedom, and I'm sure that the majority of other people can be trusted too.
In lots of places, even if you are denied a permit, you are still allowed to protest. And if you don't do anything besides not move on when told to ... Well you can't be legally arrested. (I believe this is the case in all of Australia, but at least NSW and Tasmania.)
That doesn't stop you being arrested however. Charged. Forced to fly across the country to one court date. Forced to get a lawyer. Get charged with other charges because the cops are trying to blackmail you into pleading guilty to a "lesser" charge (traffic charge for example). Refuse to bow to blackmail. Fly across the country again the day before the court date. Get rung up by your lawyer and told that all charges have been dropper.
Can you guess that I'm bitter? The fact is, in more civilised countries, you are allowed to demonstrate and protest. And so long as you don't break other laws (such as smashing shit up), then you are not breaking any laws. And thus the police have no right to arrest you. But as I've mentioned before, there are shitloads of examples where they will. (In the case above, that was me. I was "being annoying" according to one police officer who told another couple to arrest me.)
but that doesn't excuse it. It was apparently about AUD50 (from the ABC.
Anyway, this is just another example of how legitimate protests are squashed by authorities. If Putin and Co continue to suppress the opposition, I wonder if Mr Berezovsky will carry out his threat to have a "Russian Revolution"?
Meh, and you wonder why some of the old people want the Soviet Union back.
And I wonder why Kevin Beares thinks it was a Richard who leaked this. If I was doing such a thing, especially when there are only a small group of testers, I would use a pseudonym. Richard is as good a one as any other.
Also, I wonder how he thinks he can work it out? Contacting the ISPs perhaps? (From the article it seems as if the webmaster for the site where the leak was posted will help.) I'm sure all the testers will deny being "Richard" of leaking fame.
This whole thing seems like a big beat up.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=230785&cid=187 29299
The teenager has since apologised.
My thoughts on this: Google simply took down the videos and sent out copyright infringement notices to the users who had put them up, without contacting the ABC to verify the claim. This kid claimed to be representing the ABC, so obviously if Google had contacted him to confirm the claim, they still would have problems, which is why they should have contact the ABC directly.
The copyright is owned by the ABC (or the Chaser crew), but they give permission to use it anywhere and everywhere.
Apples and oranges can be compared, and to try and claim that they are significantly different is flawed. Here are two studies that back me up.m e1/v1i3/air-1-3-apples.htmll obtype=html&artid=27565
http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volu
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/botrender.fcgi?b
Also, the fellow has a point, no matter that there are two or three levels of government taxing you, they are still taxing the same income. This is a flaw in federal systems. (In Australia, while both federal and state governments can raise taxes anyway they want (almost), the federal government is the only government that taxes income or has a sales tax on general items and services. The states have stamp taxes and the like, and the local councils rates. The federal government then provides most of the states their income (in fact the GST was intended to replace stamp duties, hasn't happened of course).
I recall the story of a brothel owner in the US who was only prosecuted for running a brothel. She paid her taxes, had a good working environment for the workers, health insurance and all the rest. (Of course, I can't find a link to the story.)
Moral of the story? Don't get cause for speeding when leaving a bank robbery.
Or in other words, break only the law that you intended to, and not any other.
On topic to the story, in Australia at least personal items are not taxed if sold, and don't have to be declared for either Centrelink (the government handout department, they pay my way!) or the taxation department. As far as I know, hobbies also don't have to be declared (or maybe they do, but just aren't taxed).
As I said above, no Google don't have a monopoly on online advertising. Not even text based pay-per view.
Yahoo have got into the business as well (when they bought Overture I think). There are also heaps of others, from my Adblock list,
adsdk
fastclick
bluestreak
adsfac
mediaplex
serving-sys
tribalfusion
And heaps more. Not to mention all the individual site advertising (http://ads.guardian.co.uk for example).
Hate them now. Use their products if you want, but hate them anyway.
v e_tech/article.php/3395571] article has some interesting comments on the matter of fraud.
Seriously though, Google doesn't have a monopoly on on-line text advertising (even pay per-click), Yahoo has got into that business (formally Overture)[http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com] and I'm sure other companies have as well. This [http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/columns/executi
And there are still heaps of other advertisers out their, and you know what, I block almost all of them (Adblock and NoScript, 'tis great). (For most sites, it is seriously, if they can't cope without my viewing their ads (even if I'm never going to ever buy anything), then I guess I can do without them. For sites like this, I like to think that I am helping to contribute to more people coming here by having insightful and interesting comments. After all, that is what gets the people looking at the site, and thus the ads.)
No that isn't what I meant. Have you ever used Server Side Include? Or the PHP ?
What it does is make a seamless page, the object tag doesn't do that. The only way to get a seamless page with includes on the client side is a JavaScript hack (which you can research if you want).
Don't be LAME.
Personally I use Ogg Vorbis, but I understand that you can get quite high sound quality using MP3.
FUCK!
u lar_culture and http://schroedingers.cat.woot.cc/
"not" should either be blinking or have tags around it like at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blink_tag#Use_in_pop
"Schrödinger's cat is not dead"
(Yes I stole this, in fact it is on the Wikipedia page (though I had seen it before hand). I don't care.)
If you have data that uses a table, use the "table" tag. If you don't, use CSS. HTML is not for describing presentation, that is what CSS is for. As such, your idea for a "grid" tag, is not really for HTML at all.
What happens when your page gets displayed on a phone? With CSS you can simply revert to a single column (or the phone can just drop the CSS), with "grid", you need two pages, one for desktops, and one for phones.
I think XHTML is fine, it works and does the job. The only thing I would like is a client side include. Apart from that, I think CSS needs updating, not (X)HTML (or perhaps just browser support for CSS?).
I for one always turn off the wireless on my laptop when flying. Three reasons, one I'm asked to, two there isn't wireless access anyway, three it sucks power.
When I was flying around Australia, and now flying around Europe, the airlines ask passengers to turn off all electronic equipment when taking off and landing, and all equipment that emits or receives radio waves. So, that for me means mobile and wireless on the laptop.
Of course, I don't know whether any of these actually interfere with the airline systems at all, but I'm sure it is regulated that such things have to be turned off.
I'm not denying that many Australians are racist. I am saying that not all Australians are. Which is what the person I was responding to (basically) said.
I can only speak form my personal experience, and that is limited I admit. But around the Uni I was going to, I rarely encountered openly racist people. But we all know that Uni's are full of left-wing radicals, I guess in the real world it is different.
Hey, I'm an Australian, and while I understand your point, I disagree.
There are lots of racist scumfuckers around, but there are also lots of people who hate the racist scumfuckers.
None of my friends are racist, and I only know a few people that are openly so.
The existence of FightDemBack also disproves what you are saying.
So the point, you shouldn't make generalised comments like what you did. That is just like say that all Aboriginal people steal. It is unjustified and bigoted. I always like to say, you shouldn't make generalisations, generally. And this is one of the majority of cases you shouldn't.
Well, as this is Slashdot and not an academic paper, I really can't be fucked doing such a study or finding evidence to support my position. However, I have read and been told of a number of cases where the police have used excessive force when arresting suspects or shooting people (black people who have wallets for example). The Rodney King case is an example, or numerous cases during the civil rights movement in the '60's.
The case where I did provide evidence to the contrary, I only found out that the cop was being charged after looking for information on the case. And it was only after an independent person examined the evidence.
Also, as a comment somewhere above points out, in Sweden you basically have no recourse when suing the government. The another comment in the same thread talks about the Steve Jackson games case.
As to your question about the police and prosecutors. I simply quoted that from the summary. But they work together. The police arrest you and attempt to find evidence to convict you, the prosecutor attempts to convict you. They both have an interest in having guilty verdicts.
"[P]olice and prosecutor being charged with official misconduct, but the judges dropped the cases"
a nd#2004_death_in_custody_controversy_and_riot or do a search.)
And this is why the police and prosecutor will continue to break the law. This happens everywhere, unless the police are required to actually obey the law, there is no incentive to. Even when they are punished, it generally amounts to a slap on the wrist.
The police can and will arrest people who have done nothing wrong (I and a number of others at a protest during the Forbes conference in Sydney in 2005 for example, all the charges were either dropped or thrown out of court, except those people who pleaded guilty).
It isn't just illegal raids or arrests either. In Queensland an Aboriginal man was killed while in police custody. It was latter shown that he shouldn't have even been arrested, and that he was beaten to death. The police officer responsible continues in his duties (though he has been transferred from Palm Island). Actually, apparently he has now been charged, with manslaughter, after a former NSW chief judge examined the evidence.
(See this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_Island,_Queensl
So, it is obvious that the police need to be held accountable for their actions. While it is possible in most places to sue them (in the civil court), and this is what the various owners and users of these seized servers should do, the judge often finds that the police "were just doing their duty". No they fucking weren't! They were going beyond their duty.
I was going to make a comment about the date and how other people got modded up, therefore you could mod me up. But then I realised that the mods are probably sick of it by now. So, I'm instead simply asking that you don't mod me down.
APRIL FOOLS! Mod me up please.
OpenOffice.org has had PDF exporting for ages. I know a few people who use it, simply because it is so much easier to use the one click PDF export, then it is to buy Adobe software and install it and so on. I personally don't use PDF (I use (X)HTML when publishing stuff), but I can understand why people who print stuff do.
On a slightly different topic, I used to use OOo all the time for my word processing needs, but I've taken to using Abiword. It is a lot less fully featured (almost to being an annoyance at times, especially when working with footnotes or endnotes), but it has two features that I really like. It is a shitload faster to load. And the files that it saves are human readable. The main reason, it is a shitload faster to load up.
There is no way that I would use Abiword for a document more then 5 or 6 pages (~2500 words) though.
As a comparison to MS Office, I haven't used it in years (except on a Mac and that doesn't count (and it was still more then a year ago)). But I remember that I much preferred Writer to Word, and I thought that Impress was easier to use then PowerPoint.
I was reading the Unix Haters Handbook the other day. Funny how something (about computers) written at the start of the 90s is still relevant today. This is one of the stupid things they were commenting on.
. html
http://research.microsoft.com/~daniel/unix-haters