Holy crap, Bush was responsible for the Reichstag fire too? Man, that dude gets around. Oh, your doctor called and said to drop the Haldol and double the Thorazine
that police force of country that BOTH has capital punishment, AND maintains Guantanamo prison (with torture, and all associated niceities)
Here is one of the problems. We do have capital punishment, and I can see why some people are against it. HOWEVER, in the extradition treaty, it is specifically stated that if one country has capital punishment, and the other does not, an agreement can be made that the person being extradited will not be executed. That would be up to your government. In fact, we had the same thing with France. Ira Einhorn killed his girlfriend, and then moved to France. France would not extradite them without the assurance that he would not be executed. So the capital punishment thing will not matter in this case or any other.
As far as Guantamo, again, that has NOTHING to do with this argument. Do you think that the phishers are going to be put there? If not, it's not an issue, if you think they will, then you have the issue.
quoting directly from TFA "assisted in the arrests" (note: not in tracking down, finding, etc but in actual arrests!)
"Assisting in arrests" can be anything from giving the addresses to actually going in with handcuffs. However, I really, really doubt that your government would allow our FBI to arrest anyone in your country. Besides, the FBI has no jurisdiction there, so it can't anyway.
And what your government has been willing to do to it's OWN citizens to stop "bad" viewpoints from spreading? Free speech zones anyone?
You know, I hate hearing this kind of stuff, I really do. If you had *any* idea of the different viewpoints in this country, and how vociferously they are argued, you would never doubt that this is one of the most open places or political debate on earth. We have a professor at a college that wished for "A million Mogodishus". Still works at the college. Another that said "All the little Eichmans in the Twin Towers deserved it". He also still works at the college. We can say whatever we want with *very* little trouble. You are not allowed to say certain things, like yell "fire" in a crowded theater, due to public safety, but other than those kinds of examples, you are free to say whatever you want. Want proof? Look up "Loose Change". That guy is still alive, and not being tortured in some off-shore Gulag, and he's pretty vehement about Bush being behind 9/11.
...demanded (that's right, demanded) that we dismiss our Education Minister
A demand is not saying he expects to be obeyed, it's merely a strong show of displeasure. Like how Russia, France and Germany demanded that we not invade Iraq. Now, the invasion itself notwithstanding, we did not at all get pissed that they "demanded" something of us; we merely laughed and ignored it. Just like your country should when we demand something.
it's nigh impossible to have US citizen extradited to Poland for his crimes in Poland
Please give me some examples, as I was not aware of this at all.
And don't you think that "FBI is in my country, zomg!!!!" is a kind of proper reaction considering what they have been doing in the USA? You might be used to threat of being tortured, held indefinietly without charges, being paid "friendly visits" for having dissenting opinion, sentenced to death, but most of the civilized world isn't used to that and IS going to freak out when they learn that may no longer be the case. Would YOU like it if police force from North Korea showed up in your country and assisted in arrests of people allegedly commiting online crimes against North Korean citizens?
Absolutely not. Remember, North Korea is not an Ally of the US. However, if the British, French, Polish Russian or Canadian unit of international crime were allowed into my country to assist our officers, I would not have a problem with it. You are making it seem like the FBI came in and just flat out TOLD everyone there that they were going to do this. I mean, you do
Well excuse bloody me for having had the audacity to think that I was living in a sovereign country, and being pissed when I learn that that it's not exactly the case. Apparently that counts as "stuck-up" these days.
You don't even have the balls to respond to *any* of the comment to your ignorant rants, and yet you still whine about the FBI arresting people in your country? I mean, you may not be a native english speaker, do there may be a problem with the translation, but geez dude, answer some of the other comments.
You being stuck up shows when, even after you have been proven wrong in EVERY single thing you have written, you still go on about the same "FBI is in my country, zomg!!!!" garbage. Really, have you even RTFA? I mean really?
OMG, I just realized that I have been feeding a freaking troll. My bad, everyone.
But is' okay only when it's Amercans arresting other people isn't it? When american citizen comes to Poland, murders someone, and manages to escape to the USA he will not be extradited, but the other way - sure, any day.
Recalling the Extradition Treaty and accompanying Protocol between the United States of America and the [*16] Republic of Poland signed at Warsaw November 22, 1927 and the Supplementary Extradition Treaty signed at Warsaw April 5, 1935
Look at the dates, surely that can't be right... oh yeah, here's the update:
Important part of the letter from Bill Clinton to Congress:
With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Extradition Treaty between the United States of America and the Republic of Poland, signed at Washington on July 10, 1997.
The Treaty marks a significant step in bilateral cooperation between the United States and Poland. Upon entry into force, it will replace the Extradition Treaty and [*3] Accompanying Protocol between the United States and Poland that was signed at Warsaw on November 22, 1927, and entered into force on July 6, 1929, and the Supplementary Extradition Treaty signed at Warsaw on April 5, 1935, and entered into force on June 5, 1936. Those treaties have become outmoded, and the new Treaty will provide significant improvements. The Treaty does not require implementing legislation.
Article 1 obligates each Contracting State to extradite to the other, pursuant to the provisions of the Treaty, any person whom the Authorities in the Requesting State seek for prosecution or have found guilty of an extraditable offense.
Do some research before you show how stupid and ignorant you really are.
This is like shooting fish in a frickin' barrel already.
No, we sure as bloody hell don't. So the real question is - what the **** is YOUR police force doing in MY country?! Who gave them the authority to arrest anyone on Polish soil?!
I guess you missed the part of the article that stated:
Working with international authorities, the FBI also assisted in the arrests of 11 people in Poland believed to be connected to a network of online fraud forums. The FBI said it had traced a series of phishing attacks from late 2004 back to members of the Polish ring. (emphasis is obviously mine)
And after doing things like that you still wonder WHY OH WHY you're not very liked in Europe?!
I already know the answer to that. You people (and by you people, I don't mean all Europeans, just you asshole haters) are simply hateful, jealous, mean spirited, and look for *any* opportunity to bash America. You didn't even Read The Fine Article, you just read FBI - Poland - Arrest, and assumed that the FBI was there trouncing on you like the Wermacht after the Reichstag fire.
FWIW: I lived in West Germany from 82-85, when the Baader-Meinhoff gang was kidnapping and killing Americans. Oh yeah, and car bombs that blew up the American Air Force Base and the Civilian Airport near it in 1985. Remember, that was 20 years ago. The attitude there has not changed much; we were hated then, and we are hated now. I will say, however, that as bad (IMO) as the reasoning for the Red Army Faction and the Baader-Meinhoff gang was (communist), at least they had an ideology behind them, not just a compete hate of everything based on feeling.
Like I've said in the past, if an American scientist discovered something that cured all illnesses, and no one *ever* died prematurely, you asshats would whine about overpopulation.
Typical of the America hating group that loves to tout "tolerance".
Okay, the OP stated that (paraphrasing out of laziness here) "We can't find Christians to stick up for non-Christians".
My reply was (paraphrasing out of habit) that I'm happy to, as long as I don't have to spend all my time defending my faith.
Any your point is that what they think doesn't matter?
Well, you are partly correct, it *doesn't* matter what other people think of my invisible friend. What does matter is being ridiculed for it. That's it. The whole thing. Not many people I know like having intelligent conversations with, or defending other people that ridicule them.
Just as it wouldn't matter what your opinion on other races is. However, if you start out a conversation ridiculing blacks, most black folks will not want to talk to you, and certainly would not want to defend you.
By the way, no need to speak slowly and carefully, I'm more than smart enough to understand normal conversation. Even though I'm a Christian, I actually have the ability to understand english.
Another by the way here: What the hell does the -- "If you're a real Christian" thing mean? That Christians are some kind of homogenous entity? I'll say this slowly so that you can read it slowly; "There are many, many different sects of Christians. Some have different beliefs than others." For example, I'm a Christian that thinks the theory of evolution is about the best way to explain things. Tons 'o folks would brand me a heretic for that.
I'm be happy to stick up for any non-Christian, as long as he isn't ridiculing me for my "invisible friend". I have no problems with any group aside from those militant anti-Cristians that think you must be a retard to believe in a higher power.
If the Foo Fighters have a great song that everyone wants, they should have the right to make the money from the song.
They should have this right, of course, but then so should everyone else. Unless Foo Fighters are completely inept at distribution, chances are they will be among the people who make the most profit from it since they are the ones in the public eye. Most music fans would prefer to get their stuff from their idols rather than from some third party.
Okay, I have to ask this, because I really just don't understand. I don't mean this as a troll at all, I just don't understand the idea that someone else has the right to profit from my invention/idea/song/poem or whatever else. I really don't understand this philosophy. I gotta get back to work now, but please let me know what it is that I don't get. And seriously, I'm not trolling here.
BTW: I appreciate the conversation, very eloquent arguments, and I look forward to conversing with you in the future. Much better than the standard/. AC's and their ilk.
I expect the poster meant "Screw you" in the pejorative sense, not meaning "I desire intercourse with you". Or do you say "no thanks" to everyone who says "fuck you" to you too? If so, then you're either borderline autistic or just a complete ass.
I expect that I understood what the OP meant, but was thinking that since he didn't know me, he could not possibly actually mean it that way. I mean he's posting anonymously on the internet where "manners matter", so I was certainly hoping he meant it as an invitation, rather than a rude obnoxious gesture to someone he doesn't know.
I also expect that you understood that I knew what he meant, but again, you are anonymous, so I'm sure you are just having a bad day, and would never talk like that normally. If that's incorrect, then you are the complete ass.
As far as someone saying "fuck you" to me, the only people that have said that to me (to my face at least) in probably at least 10 years have been my friends, and have said it in a joking manner. I really don't hang out with assholes that would be like that in person.
Also, I'm really not sure what being autistic has to do with it, but I can tell you without reservation that I am actually a complete ass. But I'm sure that the original AC appreciates that you have his back. clown-hat-curly-hair-smiley-face
First: if, as you claim, there would be no incentive for you to create the good, then clearly you shouldn't. If people are not interested in spending money on it (thereby creating the incentive) then your good is useless and we're all better off if you spend your time doing something useful instead.
That's the problem as I see it. If people are interested in spending money on something that I produce, I should be the one getting the money, not some no-talent dork who can only copy my cd's and sell them a little cheaper than me. That's just theft, and that's what copyrights are for.
Second: Since there is in fact (or so I assume) a demand for entertainment products, you _will_ most likely find a market for your goods (if you're any good) and so there _will_ be incentive for creating them.
But that's exactly why we need the protections offered by copyright. If the Foo Fighters have a great song that everyone wants, they should have the right to make the money from the song. Assuming that they are a great band, and make great music, lots of people will want the music. However, if anyone can copy and give away or sell the song on any media, then the band loses money, and will lose the incentive. By owning the copyright to their own work, they are guaranteed to be able to deal with the transmission, copying, or duplication of their own stuff.
That being said, the only incentive I mentioned was profit, but of course that's not the only reason people do things. I write code at work because I'm paid to do it, but I also write it at home, not to make money, but because it's what I love to do.
The fact that you won't be the only one earning money from marketing these products is neither here nor there. While I can understand that people have a pathological desire to "control" that which they "create", there is no need to legislate this urge.
Just a nit-pick here, but copyright is not just a "legislated" thing, it's a constitutional thing. Copyrights and patents are in the Constitution. Article I Section 8 Clause 8 reads
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
That's the basis. Now patent trolls suck, so I know there's work to be done, but IP has always been protected, and I think it needs to stay that way.
Um, I don't even know you. I mean, really, thanks for the offer, but I prefer someone of the female persuasion. If you like men, that's okay with me, I'm just not interested. But really thanks.
Copyright laws institute monopolies on cultural goods and as such represent the antithesis of capitalism.
I don't quite understand why you think that giving a creator of some service/invention/song/poem or anything else is the antithesis of Capitalism. If I can't be guarenteed that I would be the sole owner of something that I create, I would have little profit incentive to create it.
BTW: I think that you being modded troll for that comment is unfair; I wish the mods would understand that a differing opinion doesn't make a person a troll.
The United Kingdom has been doing an overall good job of running things in Hong Kong. I do not mind the UK being in control and I do not see major advantages to handing over control to China. I also disagree with some of the things that the British Governor has proposed in the past.
How about the fact that HK is part of China, and was leased by the UK? The lease ran out, and it was turned over to the owner. FFS people, please use analogies that make sense.
First of all, if I misinterpreted what you said, I apologize. Now, on to the rebuttal!
/* Who ever said anything about Democrats or Republicans? Both are Conservative. */
Uh. You did. Not only that, but in my reply, I specifically quoted
<previouspost> /* The republicans have become very good at presenting "evidence" that anyone who already believes a point and wants to continue, can do so. */
/* Liberals however tend to be more ready to challenge their preconceived ideals, so aren't as open to fluff pieces aimed at allowing someone to retain a "Faith" in the face of significant evidence against it. */
</previouspost>
I mean, feel free to change what you said, or try to get around what you meant in the first place, but really, you mention 'republicans have become very good [blah blah]' and then a few sentences later, you contrast it with 'Liberals however [more blah]'
That's a compare and contrast type of statement, and implies that republicans (conservative) are closed minded, and liberals (in contrast) are more open. Besides, the article that I cited there talks about how pretty much *everyone* is affected by their pre-conceived notions, and it takes a lot of evidence to convince a person otherwise.
Now, way off topic, that can be a really, really, good thing, as well as an evolutionary advantage. Paraphrasing from Bob Park's Voodoo Science book here.. "That way, only one person has to get sick after eating this plant before everyone stays away from it". It's not a bad thing to require strong evidence to make a person change their mind, and can have great benefits.
BTW: If they had a viable party, I'd be libertarian.
/* Fundamentalists have armageddon and leftist shills have global warming and the masses of both sides generally fail in doing anything. Christians ignore Christ and the leftists drive their cars and buy from the corporations */
Best. Sentence. Ever.
Kudos for a very competent, well thought out reply. One of the best I've seen in a long time, seriously. I must say that I think the discalimer on the bottom won't help, cause you've gored (excuse the pun) a few sacred cows.
/* The republicans have become very good at presenting "evidence" that anyone who already believes a point and wants to continue, can do so. */
/* Liberals however tend to be more ready to challenge their preconceived ideals, so aren't as open to fluff pieces aimed at allowing someone to retain a "Faith" in the face of significant evidence against it. */
Yeah, I know exactly what you mean. Like when I watched "Bowling for Columbine", and then found out that it was full of half-truths, distortions, and outright lies, I went to some of my "liberal" friends to discuss it. After seeing the evidence and point-by-point dissections of Moore's movie, they all agreed that it was just propaganda. Oh wait, no they didn't, they put their fingers in their ears and screeched loudly to drown out the common sense.
Here's a link for those liberals that will believe it, and even for those rascally republicans that will just ignore it. http://www.livescience.com/othernews/060124_politi cal_decisions.htmlDemocrats and Republicans Both Adept at Ignoring Facts, Study Finds
Here's the thing. We all do it. Now that you are aware of it, you can stop acting like some snarky pious better-than-you-because-I-am-open-minded snob.
/** Even if we don't destroy ourselves, the Earth is doomed. It will not last forever. Mars and moon will not be the answer either. At some point, we will have to leave the solar system if we want to survive.**/
Actually, nowhere in the universe is safe from the eventual heat death. All existence is doomed, and moving out of our solar system only delays the inevitable. So drink up now!
/** Prosecutor: Your honor, these records from the NSA show that the defendant was sharing music files on his website in 2006. But in People v. Culture in 2008, it was determined that sharing music of any kind, independant of record companies other otherwise, is a criminal offense. Later that year, in People v. Common Sense, precendent was set that taking down the website doesn't absolve someone of criminal liability, and they can still be prosecuted after the fact. **/
Ex post facto laws are prohibited by Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution
Slashdot Mirror
Holy crap, Bush was responsible for the Reichstag fire too? Man, that dude gets around. Oh, your doctor called and said to drop the Haldol and double the Thorazine
Here is one of the problems. We do have capital punishment, and I can see why some people are against it. HOWEVER, in the extradition treaty, it is specifically stated that if one country has capital punishment, and the other does not, an agreement can be made that the person being extradited will not be executed. That would be up to your government. In fact, we had the same thing with France. Ira Einhorn killed his girlfriend, and then moved to France. France would not extradite them without the assurance that he would not be executed. So the capital punishment thing will not matter in this case or any other.
As far as Guantamo, again, that has NOTHING to do with this argument. Do you think that the phishers are going to be put there? If not, it's not an issue, if you think they will, then you have the issue.
quoting directly from TFA "assisted in the arrests" (note: not in tracking down, finding, etc but in actual arrests!)
"Assisting in arrests" can be anything from giving the addresses to actually going in with handcuffs. However, I really, really doubt that your government would allow our FBI to arrest anyone in your country. Besides, the FBI has no jurisdiction there, so it can't anyway.
And what your government has been willing to do to it's OWN citizens to stop "bad" viewpoints from spreading? Free speech zones anyone?
You know, I hate hearing this kind of stuff, I really do. If you had *any* idea of the different viewpoints in this country, and how vociferously they are argued, you would never doubt that this is one of the most open places or political debate on earth. We have a professor at a college that wished for "A million Mogodishus". Still works at the college. Another that said "All the little Eichmans in the Twin Towers deserved it". He also still works at the college. We can say whatever we want with *very* little trouble. You are not allowed to say certain things, like yell "fire" in a crowded theater, due to public safety, but other than those kinds of examples, you are free to say whatever you want. Want proof? Look up "Loose Change". That guy is still alive, and not being tortured in some off-shore Gulag, and he's pretty vehement about Bush being behind 9/11.
A demand is not saying he expects to be obeyed, it's merely a strong show of displeasure. Like how Russia, France and Germany demanded that we not invade Iraq. Now, the invasion itself notwithstanding, we did not at all get pissed that they "demanded" something of us; we merely laughed and ignored it. Just like your country should when we demand something.
it's nigh impossible to have US citizen extradited to Poland for his crimes in Poland
Please give me some examples, as I was not aware of this at all.
And don't you think that "FBI is in my country, zomg!!!!" is a kind of proper reaction considering what they have been doing in the USA? You might be used to threat of being tortured, held indefinietly without charges, being paid "friendly visits" for having dissenting opinion, sentenced to death, but most of the civilized world isn't used to that and IS going to freak out when they learn that may no longer be the case. Would YOU like it if police force from North Korea showed up in your country and assisted in arrests of people allegedly commiting online crimes against North Korean citizens?
Absolutely not. Remember, North Korea is not an Ally of the US. However, if the British, French, Polish Russian or Canadian unit of international crime were allowed into my country to assist our officers, I would not have a problem with it. You are making it seem like the FBI came in and just flat out TOLD everyone there that they were going to do this. I mean, you do
You don't even have the balls to respond to *any* of the comment to your ignorant rants, and yet you still whine about the FBI arresting people in your country? I mean, you may not be a native english speaker, do there may be a problem with the translation, but geez dude, answer some of the other comments.
You being stuck up shows when, even after you have been proven wrong in EVERY single thing you have written, you still go on about the same "FBI is in my country, zomg!!!!" garbage. Really, have you even RTFA? I mean really?
OMG, I just realized that I have been feeding a freaking troll. My bad, everyone.
Recalling the Extradition Treaty and accompanying Protocol between the United States of America and the [*16] Republic of Poland signed at Warsaw November 22, 1927 and the Supplementary Extradition Treaty signed at Warsaw April 5, 1935
Look at the dates, surely that can't be right... oh yeah, here's the update:
Important part of the letter from Bill Clinton to Congress:
With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Extradition Treaty between the United States of America and the Republic of Poland, signed at Washington on July 10, 1997.
The Treaty marks a significant step in bilateral cooperation between the United States and Poland. Upon entry into force, it will replace the Extradition Treaty and [*3] Accompanying Protocol between the United States and Poland that was signed at Warsaw on November 22, 1927, and entered into force on July 6, 1929, and the Supplementary Extradition Treaty signed at Warsaw on April 5, 1935, and entered into force on June 5, 1936. Those treaties have become outmoded, and the new Treaty will provide significant improvements. The Treaty does not require implementing legislation.
Article 1 obligates each Contracting State to extradite to the other, pursuant to the provisions of the Treaty, any person whom the Authorities in the Requesting State seek for prosecution or have found guilty of an extraditable offense.
Do some research before you show how stupid and ignorant you really are. This is like shooting fish in a frickin' barrel already.
No, we sure as bloody hell don't. So the real question is - what the **** is YOUR police force doing in MY country?! Who gave them the authority to arrest anyone on Polish soil?!
I guess you missed the part of the article that stated:
Working with international authorities, the FBI also assisted in the arrests of 11 people in Poland believed to be connected to a network of online fraud forums. The FBI said it had traced a series of phishing attacks from late 2004 back to members of the Polish ring. (emphasis is obviously mine)
And after doing things like that you still wonder WHY OH WHY you're not very liked in Europe?!
I already know the answer to that. You people (and by you people, I don't mean all Europeans, just you asshole haters) are simply hateful, jealous, mean spirited, and look for *any* opportunity to bash America. You didn't even Read The Fine Article, you just read FBI - Poland - Arrest, and assumed that the FBI was there trouncing on you like the Wermacht after the Reichstag fire.
FWIW: I lived in West Germany from 82-85, when the Baader-Meinhoff gang was kidnapping and killing Americans. Oh yeah, and car bombs that blew up the American Air Force Base and the Civilian Airport near it in 1985. Remember, that was 20 years ago. The attitude there has not changed much; we were hated then, and we are hated now. I will say, however, that as bad (IMO) as the reasoning for the Red Army Faction and the Baader-Meinhoff gang was (communist), at least they had an ideology behind them, not just a compete hate of everything based on feeling.
Like I've said in the past, if an American scientist discovered something that cured all illnesses, and no one *ever* died prematurely, you asshats would whine about overpopulation.
Typical of the America hating group that loves to tout "tolerance".
Okay, the OP stated that (paraphrasing out of laziness here) "We can't find Christians to stick up for non-Christians".
My reply was (paraphrasing out of habit) that I'm happy to, as long as I don't have to spend all my time defending my faith.
Any your point is that what they think doesn't matter?
Well, you are partly correct, it *doesn't* matter what other people think of my invisible friend. What does matter is being ridiculed for it. That's it. The whole thing. Not many people I know like having intelligent conversations with, or defending other people that ridicule them.
Just as it wouldn't matter what your opinion on other races is. However, if you start out a conversation ridiculing blacks, most black folks will not want to talk to you, and certainly would not want to defend you.
By the way, no need to speak slowly and carefully, I'm more than smart enough to understand normal conversation. Even though I'm a Christian, I actually have the ability to understand english.
Another by the way here: What the hell does the -- "If you're a real Christian" thing mean? That Christians are some kind of homogenous entity? I'll say this slowly so that you can read it slowly; "There are many, many different sects of Christians. Some have different beliefs than others." For example, I'm a Christian that thinks the theory of evolution is about the best way to explain things. Tons 'o folks would brand me a heretic for that.
A little generalization goes a long way.
I'm be happy to stick up for any non-Christian, as long as he isn't ridiculing me for my "invisible friend". I have no problems with any group aside from those militant anti-Cristians that think you must be a retard to believe in a higher power.
Okay, I have to ask this, because I really just don't understand. I don't mean this as a troll at all, I just don't understand the idea that someone else has the right to profit from my invention/idea/song/poem or whatever else. I really don't understand this philosophy. I gotta get back to work now, but please let me know what it is that I don't get. And seriously, I'm not trolling here.
BTW: I appreciate the conversation, very eloquent arguments, and I look forward to conversing with you in the future. Much better than the standard /. AC's and their ilk.
PS: And you are correct, it's the 10th amendment.
I also expect that you understood that I knew what he meant, but again, you are anonymous, so I'm sure you are just having a bad day, and would never talk like that normally. If that's incorrect, then you are the complete ass.
As far as someone saying "fuck you" to me, the only people that have said that to me (to my face at least) in probably at least 10 years have been my friends, and have said it in a joking manner. I really don't hang out with assholes that would be like that in person.
Also, I'm really not sure what being autistic has to do with it, but I can tell you without reservation that I am actually a complete ass. But I'm sure that the original AC appreciates that you have his back. clown-hat-curly-hair-smiley-face
But that's exactly why we need the protections offered by copyright. If the Foo Fighters have a great song that everyone wants, they should have the right to make the money from the song. Assuming that they are a great band, and make great music, lots of people will want the music. However, if anyone can copy and give away or sell the song on any media, then the band loses money, and will lose the incentive. By owning the copyright to their own work, they are guaranteed to be able to deal with the transmission, copying, or duplication of their own stuff.
That being said, the only incentive I mentioned was profit, but of course that's not the only reason people do things. I write code at work because I'm paid to do it, but I also write it at home, not to make money, but because it's what I love to do.
Just a nit-pick here, but copyright is not just a "legislated" thing, it's a constitutional thing. Copyrights and patents are in the Constitution. Article I Section 8 Clause 8 reads
That's the basis. Now patent trolls suck, so I know there's work to be done, but IP has always been protected, and I think it needs to stay that way.
Um, I don't even know you. I mean, really, thanks for the offer, but I prefer someone of the female persuasion. If you like men, that's okay with me, I'm just not interested. But really thanks.
Sweden has IKEA!! http://www.jonathancoulton.com/lyrics/ikea... And that's enough for me.
Thanks Jonathan for a great song.
BTW: I think that you being modded troll for that comment is unfair; I wish the mods would understand that a differing opinion doesn't make a person a troll.
The United Kingdom has been doing an overall good job of running things in Hong Kong. I do not mind the UK being in control and I do not see major advantages to handing over control to China. I also disagree with some of the things that the British Governor has proposed in the past.
How about the fact that HK is part of China, and was leased by the UK? The lease ran out, and it was turned over to the owner. FFS people, please use analogies that make sense.
Oh for the motherfucking love of God please stop making every single conversation regarding science a political diatribe you loony leftist asshat
Only when the damn scourge aren't attacking
dammit, and here I am with no mod points
I sincerely apogize. I misunderstood your point, and I think I need more coffee or something.
First of all, if I misinterpreted what you said, I apologize. Now, on to the rebuttal!
/* Who ever said anything about Democrats or Republicans? Both are Conservative. */
/* The republicans have become very good at presenting "evidence" that anyone who already believes a point and wants to continue, can do so. */
/* Liberals however tend to be more ready to challenge their preconceived ideals, so aren't as open to fluff pieces aimed at allowing someone to retain a "Faith" in the face of significant evidence against it. */
Uh. You did. Not only that, but in my reply, I specifically quoted
<previouspost>
</previouspost>
I mean, feel free to change what you said, or try to get around what you meant in the first place, but really, you mention 'republicans have become very good [blah blah]' and then a few sentences later, you contrast it with 'Liberals however [more blah]'
That's a compare and contrast type of statement, and implies that republicans (conservative) are closed minded, and liberals (in contrast) are more open. Besides, the article that I cited there talks about how pretty much *everyone* is affected by their pre-conceived notions, and it takes a lot of evidence to convince a person otherwise.
Now, way off topic, that can be a really, really, good thing, as well as an evolutionary advantage. Paraphrasing from Bob Park's Voodoo Science book here.. "That way, only one person has to get sick after eating this plant before everyone stays away from it". It's not a bad thing to require strong evidence to make a person change their mind, and can have great benefits.
BTW: If they had a viable party, I'd be libertarian.
/* Anyone who voted for George Bush should be sterilized */
Awesome! I bet you and Adolph would have a great time talking about eugenics!!
/* But then again debate and discussion and facts have never been the province of your ilk.*/
wow... GP has an ILK? I've never even had a minion, and I'm f'n jealous.
/* Fundamentalists have armageddon and leftist shills have global warming and the masses of both sides generally fail in doing anything. Christians ignore Christ and the leftists drive their cars and buy from the corporations */
Best. Sentence. Ever.
Kudos for a very competent, well thought out reply. One of the best I've seen in a long time, seriously. I must say that I think the discalimer on the bottom won't help, cause you've gored (excuse the pun) a few sacred cows.
/* The republicans have become very good at presenting "evidence" that anyone who already believes a point and wants to continue, can do so. */
/* Liberals however tend to be more ready to challenge their preconceived ideals, so aren't as open to fluff pieces aimed at allowing someone to retain a "Faith" in the face of significant evidence against it. */
i cal_decisions.htmlDemocrats and Republicans Both Adept at Ignoring Facts, Study Finds
Yeah, I know exactly what you mean. Like when I watched "Bowling for Columbine", and then found out that it was full of half-truths, distortions, and outright lies, I went to some of my "liberal" friends to discuss it. After seeing the evidence and point-by-point dissections of Moore's movie, they all agreed that it was just propaganda. Oh wait, no they didn't, they put their fingers in their ears and screeched loudly to drown out the common sense. Here's a link for those liberals that will believe it, and even for those rascally republicans that will just ignore it. http://www.livescience.com/othernews/060124_polit
Here's the thing. We all do it. Now that you are aware of it, you can stop acting like some snarky pious better-than-you-because-I-am-open-minded snob.
/** Even if we don't destroy ourselves, the Earth is doomed. It will not last forever. Mars and moon will not be the answer either. At some point, we will have to leave the solar system if we want to survive.**/
Actually, nowhere in the universe is safe from the eventual heat death. All existence is doomed, and moving out of our solar system only delays the inevitable. So drink up now!
/** Prosecutor: Your honor, these records from the NSA show that the defendant was sharing music files on his website in 2006. But in People v. Culture in 2008, it was determined that sharing music of any kind, independant of record companies other otherwise, is a criminal offense. Later that year, in People v. Common Sense, precendent was set that taking down the website doesn't absolve someone of criminal liability, and they can still be prosecuted after the fact. **/
Ex post facto laws are prohibited by Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution