You've got an overly optimistic view on the power of democracy. Even in NZ where we get a semi-representative government, crap like this is not really a voting issue. There isn't the option to vote for anyone who would disband these agencies.
The agencies made stupid mistakes. So who do I vote for? The guy who says "under me government agencies won't make mistakes"? Because if he says that, he's bullshitting.
The root cause is lobbying by media companies and other interest groups who want to restrict what the public can do on the internet. Unfortunately all parties (especially the Labour Party in opposition who wants to levy the internet and give the money to media companies) are swayed by this. You can't win.
We don't have one. The so called opposition is the "Labour" Party, who advertise as far-left, and act left, actually are responsible for our 3 strikes mp3-downloading law. It means you're guilty upon accusation of downloading some Rihanna. The National Party (current government) watered it down slightly, but all the fuckers (Labour and National, and the other parties) voted for it.
Except the Green Party, they're the only ones who opposed it. They are filled with anti-American lunatics, vegans, hippies and maybe once had a guy who sexually assaulted a teen. Unfortunately they don't actually do much for the environment, but like to control what lightbulbs we use, and believe they know what is best for your money, much more than you do. They also hate mining, business, and dihydrogen monoxide.
But if you were voting solely on the view regarding copyright, you'd vote Green.
We don't vote for the GCSB or the Police, or our judges for that matter. Those agencies (especially the spy agencies and judges) are very powerful and can do whatever they want without requiring public scrutiny.
Clare Curran started all this shit. She's the one who introduced S92a. The Labour Party are constantly trying to cuddle up to the media. Clare Curran wants to introduce a levy on our internet use to give to media companies!!
Don't you realise that John Key is Prime Minister. He doesn't micromanage every trial going on in the country.
The GCSB was left to its own devices and fucked up. The police fucked up. It's not the Prime Minister's fault. But he stands up, and apologises to NZ for having such a fucked up service. You have to respect someone who does that.
Unless you're jealous of how he's richer than you.
The thing is, it is neither the US or the NZ taxpayer who deserves to be punished. It is the corrupt politicians who suck up to the media companies (in NZ this was initially Clare Curran who brought in our "three-strikes" downloading law). They should be made to pay.
How to make the media companies pay? Make non-commercial sharing of copyrighted material legal. It's fair for the citizens, and stops the government having to monitor whether or not we download the odd MP3.
but importantly it's made the EU's member states richer as a whole
Yeah, see those Spanish, see those Greeks, doing well. Keep it up Ireland.
an authority who does a better job of looking after my rights than even my own government would by itself because it's more easily influenced by vested interests and lobbyists.
This article is about the decision whether the EU will make it illegal to copy things. That doesn't protect your rights. It has been strongly swayed by lobbyists.
So some losers who are ideologically opposed to corporations do a study showing the results they want, and drawing the conclusion they intended to make at the start.
Obviously a kid is going recognise McDonalds over FedEx! WTF?! How is this research? I know autism can be difficult to diagnose, but if your child goes wild over the FedEx logo - they have autism.
Kids enjoy eating certain foods, kids enjoy playing, kids often like being around mum or dad. Is it such a crime that kids enjoy going to McDonalds? As long as you only take them there for a special occasion, what's the problem? It's the parents who feed them that shit every day with the issue.
He tried to use one of the copious rounded $30-to-manufacture phones lying around that he'd seen heavily marketed on TV, but the voice recognition couldn't find a place to send the photo, the browser had problems rendering a site to upload them, then he couldn't get reception because of the incorrect way he held the phone. The battery proceeded to overheat, burning his hand which caused him to drop the phone from chest height, it landed on some soft ground and the screen shattered, fortunately the display was usable under the cracked glass. A replacement battery would have saved the day, but unfortunately there was no easy way to do this despite access to specialised tools.
He has since committed suicide by jumping off the building. Unfortunately the safety nets actually sliced him into pieces and he died a slow painful death - they were designed to be trendy, stylish and minimalistic - okay for a phone, apparently not good for a suicide net. You live and learn.
Yep, SuperKendall, BasilBrush, and a few others are there to try to eliminate adverse talk about Apple Corp.
I don't know why, but I assume they work for them. I can't really see why they'd die in a ditch defending Apple's relentless unethical and stupid decisions if they were only fans.
I guess there's more to Apple marketing than black turtle necks, rounded corners and misleading ads.
I don't understand the point of the oxygen in balloons (other than it's cheaper)
Are people inhaling from balloons, exhaling into the air, inhaling from the balloon, exhaling to air for multiple minutes in a row? And would the amount of oxygen mixed in with the gas actually mitigate the damage from this?
I can potentially imaging someone breathing into and out of one balloon for a while, but then CO2 will build up causing increased respiratory drive.
Or is this mainly in case a tank's released into an enclosed small sealed space (e.g. car) or something?
Slashdot Mirror
I do think it's cool that we're still discovering things like this though.
An animal which has been known about for ages, that does such a remarkable thing.
You've got an overly optimistic view on the power of democracy. Even in NZ where we get a semi-representative government, crap like this is not really a voting issue. There isn't the option to vote for anyone who would disband these agencies.
The agencies made stupid mistakes. So who do I vote for? The guy who says "under me government agencies won't make mistakes"? Because if he says that, he's bullshitting.
The root cause is lobbying by media companies and other interest groups who want to restrict what the public can do on the internet. Unfortunately all parties (especially the Labour Party in opposition who wants to levy the internet and give the money to media companies) are swayed by this. You can't win.
Megaupload was not a criminal enterprise. It was a website you could upload things to.
We don't have one. The so called opposition is the "Labour" Party, who advertise as far-left, and act left, actually are responsible for our 3 strikes mp3-downloading law. It means you're guilty upon accusation of downloading some Rihanna. The National Party (current government) watered it down slightly, but all the fuckers (Labour and National, and the other parties) voted for it.
Except the Green Party, they're the only ones who opposed it. They are filled with anti-American lunatics, vegans, hippies and maybe once had a guy who sexually assaulted a teen. Unfortunately they don't actually do much for the environment, but like to control what lightbulbs we use, and believe they know what is best for your money, much more than you do. They also hate mining, business, and dihydrogen monoxide.
But if you were voting solely on the view regarding copyright, you'd vote Green.
He's done nothing wrong. Except for being rich - but I bet you think that's a crime too.
Criminal enterprise? What for? For having a site you can upload things to?
We don't vote for the GCSB or the Police, or our judges for that matter. Those agencies (especially the spy agencies and judges) are very powerful and can do whatever they want without requiring public scrutiny.
Clare Curran started all this shit. She's the one who introduced S92a. The Labour Party are constantly trying to cuddle up to the media. Clare Curran wants to introduce a levy on our internet use to give to media companies!!
Don't you realise that John Key is Prime Minister. He doesn't micromanage every trial going on in the country.
The GCSB was left to its own devices and fucked up. The police fucked up. It's not the Prime Minister's fault. But he stands up, and apologises to NZ for having such a fucked up service. You have to respect someone who does that.
Unless you're jealous of how he's richer than you.
The thing is, it is neither the US or the NZ taxpayer who deserves to be punished. It is the corrupt politicians who suck up to the media companies (in NZ this was initially Clare Curran who brought in our "three-strikes" downloading law). They should be made to pay.
How to make the media companies pay? Make non-commercial sharing of copyrighted material legal. It's fair for the citizens, and stops the government having to monitor whether or not we download the odd MP3.
Get over what?
No. You would not want to eat their food daily, but that doesn't mean they're bad.
They provide a product and a service, nothing wrong with that. I'll have it occasionally, but I know it's not particularly healthy.
I don't see what the problem with this point of view is.
but importantly it's made the EU's member states richer as a whole
Yeah, see those Spanish, see those Greeks, doing well. Keep it up Ireland.
an authority who does a better job of looking after my rights than even my own government would by itself because it's more easily influenced by vested interests and lobbyists.
This article is about the decision whether the EU will make it illegal to copy things. That doesn't protect your rights. It has been strongly swayed by lobbyists.
I don't live in the US. You live in the EU. Doesn't make it right that you both do it.
So some losers who are ideologically opposed to corporations do a study showing the results they want, and drawing the conclusion they intended to make at the start.
Obviously a kid is going recognise McDonalds over FedEx! WTF?! How is this research? I know autism can be difficult to diagnose, but if your child goes wild over the FedEx logo - they have autism.
Kids enjoy eating certain foods, kids enjoy playing, kids often like being around mum or dad. Is it such a crime that kids enjoy going to McDonalds? As long as you only take them there for a special occasion, what's the problem? It's the parents who feed them that shit every day with the issue.
Really? What the have you Europeans got yourself into? (More accurately, what have your governments got you into?)
Some unelected pan-government gets to write the laws, and you just have to sit there and take it up the arse?
The EU has made some people very rich, but all this ability to legislate multiple countries is scary.
"Throwing about" - you mean using the word appropriately?
Thanks, but I'm wondering why it's funny!
He tried to use one of the copious rounded $30-to-manufacture phones lying around that he'd seen heavily marketed on TV, but the voice recognition couldn't find a place to send the photo, the browser had problems rendering a site to upload them, then he couldn't get reception because of the incorrect way he held the phone. The battery proceeded to overheat, burning his hand which caused him to drop the phone from chest height, it landed on some soft ground and the screen shattered, fortunately the display was usable under the cracked glass. A replacement battery would have saved the day, but unfortunately there was no easy way to do this despite access to specialised tools.
He has since committed suicide by jumping off the building. Unfortunately the safety nets actually sliced him into pieces and he died a slow painful death - they were designed to be trendy, stylish and minimalistic - okay for a phone, apparently not good for a suicide net. You live and learn.
Yep, SuperKendall, BasilBrush, and a few others are there to try to eliminate adverse talk about Apple Corp.
I don't know why, but I assume they work for them. I can't really see why they'd die in a ditch defending Apple's relentless unethical and stupid decisions if they were only fans.
I guess there's more to Apple marketing than black turtle necks, rounded corners and misleading ads.
Thanks for your insight. I'm sure it's not as arrogant as it sounds.
We bow to your improved definition of "free market" which as yet remains undefined.
Yes, government intervention has certainly saved the day when it comes to He.
Why do you want government intervention in this pretty much market driven problem?
Helium gets scarce, it gets expensive, people use helium less.
Who?
I don't understand the point of the oxygen in balloons (other than it's cheaper)
Are people inhaling from balloons, exhaling into the air, inhaling from the balloon, exhaling to air for multiple minutes in a row? And would the amount of oxygen mixed in with the gas actually mitigate the damage from this?
I can potentially imaging someone breathing into and out of one balloon for a while, but then CO2 will build up causing increased respiratory drive.
Or is this mainly in case a tank's released into an enclosed small sealed space (e.g. car) or something?
What to do?
Panic, panic, panic, panic, panic!?
"Don't worry about a thing
'Cause every little thing gonna be all right"