In a perfect world every criminal would 3d print their guns. Think how much safer we would all be after their plastic weapons blow up in their faces!
The rest of us would build them from metal using lathes. Imagine a world were everyone (well everyone now that the criminals have removed themselves) has that kind of DIY skills!
Why the hell would anyone want to stop the criminals from offing themsleves?
No. The internet was fine when it was regulated. After regulation was dropped large providers such as Verizon and Comcast have been caught time and time again slowing down or completely blocking traffic that they did not like.
All the "new" regulations do is put things back to where they were a decade ago when the internet really was fine.
I assume this means a higher percentage survive. It wouldn't be very interesting to note that a higher overall number of people in a group survive when that group had more people to start with!
Anyway.. if a higher percentage really do survive then I find that much more interesting than the fact that taller men have more children.
I'm not sure I would even call taller men having more children "natural" selection. Modern society and technology means that women have a wider variety of men to chose from. They don't have to chose one of the few unrelated males in their village. They probably live in a big city and even if not travel is relatively easy today. Also.. as for preference. We have TV now to tell us all what to prefer and that it is important. Maybe tall men are what's "cool" on their TV.
I'd call that unatural selection.
However.. if a higher percentage of tall men's children survive.. What's killing the short ones? Do the short genes come with predispositions towards ilness? Does society somehow make being short more dangerous? (ex, difficult to see over obstacles before crossing the road or something) What is going on?!?
And that will be the year of the Linux desktop... And the year of the first human explorers on Mars... It will be the year that we get a submersible robot into one of the ice covered ocean moons
I think we may even figure out how life started that year And cure all cancers plus Alzheimers Prevent and reverse aging
We will finally get our damn flying cars
I can't wait!!!
Maybe I can take all this stuff in my time machine that will no doubt exist at that time and bring it back to myself now so that I don't have to wait!
In most of those cases the victim can not be at fault. Although.. if the video was taken because the girl went to a frat with a reputation for victimizing women and got drunk there it would be hard to argue that she didn't do a very stupid thing to herself.
"Even if it was, consent to take a picture shouldn't automatically imply consent to broadcast it to the world."
No, but we live in a real world not a perfect one. There are bad people out there who will do bad things. Everyone needs to consider that when they make decisions. If you don' t have ample reason to trust someone but you let them take the video anyway... that IS your fault.
It is still 100% the fault of the person uploading the video too. That person probably should be prosecuted. But you still did a very bad thing to yourself by getting into the situation and should have known better.
Would you hand your wallet to a stranger in a crowd to hold for you? "Hold this.. I'll be back in a few minutes..."
Fault != law. It would be completely unreasonable to try the victim in court and to put them in jail. It would also be unreasonable to let the victimizer off because the victim did something stupid.
You shouldn't get passed-out drunk with people you can't trust. You shouldn't let someone you don't know and trust really well take videos of you in bed. There IS such a thing as a compromising situation. You should avoid them.
There are mean, bad people in the world. We all have to know this and make our decisions based on that fact. If we don't then bad things are going to happen to us. To make decisions as though every person around us is going to always do the right thing.. that is a fault. It is not a legal fault where one should be prosecuted. It very well could be a fatal one though.
To get into these situations.. you must either have a very naive outlook on the world where you think everyone is nice. Or.. you make decisions without considering the consequences. To do either... that IS your fault.
1) There are plenty of cases of people having pictures put up by long-term partners with whom they're in a loving relationship
Most relationsips fail. Even the long ones. If you are considering giving your partner nudies you would do well to keep that in mind. Breakups are an emotional time and you never know what someone might do with the "ammo" you gave them.
Personally I think that in a better world when that happens anyone who saw the nudie would think the uploader was an imature jerk and not think any worse of the victim. So they like sex. Congradulations, you discovered that humans are mamals.
But we all know that here in the real world there are still a lot of over-conservative types and things happen like people losing jobs over what gets posted online. So... you should consider this before giving out photos and weigh the risk/benefit. If you don't... well... that aspect of the situation IS your fault.
2) And there are some cases where the pictures have been taking without the victim's knowledge.
So.. because of that in every case everywhere everytime there is no fault to be found in the victim?
Someone plants a camera in a bathroom or changeroom... probably no fault for the victim. (unless that bathroom was at a drunken frat party or something like that)
Someone gets a picture of you outside somewhere where you thought nobody was around... well.. you took a risk and this is what happened. Sucks to be you.
"1. You're creating a hierarchy of sexual behaviour that reinforces conservative notions of what is morally "worthy", as though we're still in the 50s"
Not at all. I'm not saying someone shouldn't go to a party because it's immoral. If you don't care about people seeing your body then great, go have fun! But I will say that if you do care about seeing you naked and you go get drunk with a bunch of people with a reputation for doing such things then you are an idiot.
Oh.. and you probably should care because society cares and it could effect your opportunities in life later. Not because sex is bad and you should be a 1950s virgin but because the reality of our conservative society is an unavoidable fact of life.
"2. You're deliberately ignoring that even people who are "blameless" within the rules of such a hierarchy are victims."
I am having a hard time following this sentence. Are you saying that I am implying that EVERY victim is also guilty? If so then no... I didn't mean to make any such blanket statement. To me that is just as bad as saying that every victim is blameless. Situations are unique and should be evaluated that way!
Note... in none of these situations am I saying that the victimizer is not 100% at fault and worthy nor worthy of prosecution. Nor am I saying that the victim is deserving of further punishment beyond maybe a big lecture from a parent.
I ran Linux on one in my dorm room. At the same time we had several at work running Windows 95 and later Windows 98.
I think maybe we did have one that ran Dos + Win3.1 but it was the exception.
Ahh... those were good days. PCs were still very expensive but I had access to cheap parts and coud undercut just about anybody's price. There is nothing like a thick steel "built like a tank" AT era-case with an only slightly out of date motherboard and hard drives just big enough to hold what you really need inside at a time when an up to date PC would have set you back a couple of grand. You could use those things for target practice and still get your homework done on them.
Why are there so many people out there who can't comprehend that fault can lie with more than one person? This includes BOTH victim and victimizer.
If I run around a bad neighborhood at night with clothes made out of taped together money and get mugged... It is my fault! That doesn't mean what the mugger did was ok. He should go to jail just like any other mugger and I should not! Although.. if I were so stupid then maybe I should go into some sort of custody for my own protection.
Likewise if I were an atractive female and I passed out nudies of myself to any and every short-term fling. Yeah... come on, use your brain.. it's going to end up on the internet. That's the logical outcome of an illogical action. That doesn't mean the uploader is any less guilty or that the victim should be punished.
But.. I do think that lack of self-preservation common sense does reduce ones entitlement to sympathy.
Also that also doesn't mean it makes any sense to kill oneself after suffering the results of such a stupid decision. Yeah.. having everyone see your privates is going to suck. Sorry. You were a moron.
At least you can respond to anyone who claims to have seen you with "and you were surfing that site". "is your hand sore?"
Hopefully you are smarter now. I'm sure there will still be some enjoyment left to come in the many years of life ahead if you don't kill yourself. Don't do that!
What would it cost to buy? How much maintenance would it require? Special fuels? Kind of oil? Required additives? Suspension and handling? Comfort? What would potholes do to it?
Now compare all of that to an older but still decent condition used modern car that is way easier to find and obtain.
Now why is the model T still useful?
Note.. I'm not arguing that it might not provide the owner with some form of enjoyment. I like all sorts of things that I do not consider ot be 'useful'.
Sure... once you install an additional application to access what is basically a knockoff of the Windows registry (Why the F anybody would want to copy that shitty design...)
Then you go in and change pretty much every default setting because the defaults all suck...
You get something that meets a minimum definition of usable.
Why bother. Gnome developers have been on the path of removing, not adding functionality since they started version 2. Why would you expect them to accept a patch that adds a good feature?
Removing things you dislike from YOUR OWN website is moderation. You don't have the right to push your beliefs using my property!
Preventing you from pushing your own beliefs in your own space.. that's censorship. Who has the power to do that? governments for sure. I suppose ISPs could do it too. So.. yeah.. I guess you are right, you don't need government to have censorship.
GP was talking about a website though. It's their own business what they do/don't allow there.
Hey, everybody, look! It's Richard Stallman! Why the stealthy username buddy? We all like GNU here! Well all of us except the Mac fanbois but they don't really count as people do they?
They have to keep the things in sight? So.. they can deliver books to their neighbors that live on the same block? Maybe they can have a guy follow the drone in a truck. You know, the truck that would have just delivered the package previously?
Is it time? Can we replace the FAA fossils with an organization of people that were at least still alive in the same millenia we are now living in?
Have you seen the third parties on the US ballots?
Who are they going to vote for? The even farther right than republican religious parties? Or the plain, un-watered down communists?
I think the world thinks US voters are uninteligent for voting in the two shitty parties over and over but have you seen the alternatives we are presented with?
When we talk about the lesser of evils we really do mean it!
Obama has continued plus expanded those practices. While he spoke against them in his first campaign one of the first things he did was to grant immunity to all the telecoms that had just handed over citizen's private information to the NSA without a warant.
I for one do blame your favorite "Idiot Cowboy" AND Obama. Both parties are corrupt. It doesn't matter if you support the Republicans or the Democrats. Both parties are the two arms of the police state. If you think supporting one while blaming the other helps anything then you are a fool.
Slashdot Mirror
In a perfect world every criminal would 3d print their guns. Think how much safer we would all be after their plastic weapons blow up in their faces!
The rest of us would build them from metal using lathes. Imagine a world were everyone (well everyone now that the criminals have removed themselves) has that kind of DIY skills!
Why the hell would anyone want to stop the criminals from offing themsleves?
No. The internet was fine when it was regulated. After regulation was dropped large providers such as Verizon and Comcast have been caught time and time again slowing down or completely blocking traffic that they did not like.
All the "new" regulations do is put things back to where they were a decade ago when the internet really was fine.
I assume this means a higher percentage survive. It wouldn't be very interesting to note that a higher overall number of people in a group survive when that group had more people to start with!
Anyway.. if a higher percentage really do survive then I find that much more interesting than the fact that taller men have more children.
I'm not sure I would even call taller men having more children "natural" selection. Modern society and technology means that women have a wider variety of men to chose from. They don't have to chose one of the few unrelated males in their village. They probably live in a big city and even if not travel is relatively easy today. Also.. as for preference. We have TV now to tell us all what to prefer and that it is important. Maybe tall men are what's "cool" on their TV.
I'd call that unatural selection.
However.. if a higher percentage of tall men's children survive.. What's killing the short ones? Do the short genes come with predispositions towards ilness? Does society somehow make being short more dangerous? (ex, difficult to see over obstacles before crossing the road or something) What is going on?!?
ESA = Entertainment Software Association
Some of us might not be gamers and yet due to the wide applications of the DMCA still thought this article looked worth clicking on.
The ESA I knew was the European Space Agency!
And that will be the year of the Linux desktop...
And the year of the first human explorers on Mars...
It will be the year that we get a submersible robot into one of the ice covered ocean moons
I think we may even figure out how life started that year
And cure all cancers
plus Alzheimers
Prevent and reverse aging
We will finally get our damn flying cars
I can't wait!!!
Maybe I can take all this stuff in my time machine that will no doubt exist at that time and bring it back to myself now so that I don't have to wait!
"In many cases, no consent was given."
In most of those cases the victim can not be at fault.
Although.. if the video was taken because the girl went to a frat with a reputation for victimizing women and got drunk there it would be hard to argue that she didn't do a very stupid thing to herself.
"Even if it was, consent to take a picture shouldn't automatically imply consent to broadcast it to the world."
No, but we live in a real world not a perfect one. There are bad people out there who will do bad things. Everyone needs to consider that when they make decisions. If you don' t have ample reason to trust someone but you let them take the video anyway... that IS your fault.
It is still 100% the fault of the person uploading the video too. That person probably should be prosecuted. But you still did a very bad thing to yourself by getting into the situation and should have known better.
Would you hand your wallet to a stranger in a crowd to hold for you? "Hold this.. I'll be back in a few minutes..."
Fault != law. It would be completely unreasonable to try the victim in court and to put them in jail. It would also be unreasonable to let the victimizer off because the victim did something stupid.
You shouldn't get passed-out drunk with people you can't trust. You shouldn't let someone you don't know and trust really well take videos of you in bed. There IS such a thing as a compromising situation. You should avoid them.
There are mean, bad people in the world. We all have to know this and make our decisions based on that fact. If we don't then bad things are going to happen to us. To make decisions as though every person around us is going to always do the right thing.. that is a fault. It is not a legal fault where one should be prosecuted. It very well could be a fatal one though.
To get into these situations.. you must either have a very naive outlook on the world where you think everyone is nice. Or.. you make decisions without considering the consequences. To do either... that IS your fault.
1) There are plenty of cases of people having pictures put up by long-term partners with whom they're in a loving relationship
Most relationsips fail. Even the long ones. If you are considering giving your partner nudies you would do well to keep that in mind. Breakups are an emotional time and you never know what someone might do with the "ammo" you gave them.
Personally I think that in a better world when that happens anyone who saw the nudie would think the uploader was an imature jerk and not think any worse of the victim. So they like sex. Congradulations, you discovered that humans are mamals.
But we all know that here in the real world there are still a lot of over-conservative types and things happen like people losing jobs over what gets posted online. So... you should consider this before giving out photos and weigh the risk/benefit. If you don't... well... that aspect of the situation IS your fault.
2) And there are some cases where the pictures have been taking without the victim's knowledge.
So.. because of that in every case everywhere everytime there is no fault to be found in the victim?
Someone plants a camera in a bathroom or changeroom... probably no fault for the victim. (unless that bathroom was at a drunken frat party or something like that)
Someone gets a picture of you outside somewhere where you thought nobody was around... well.. you took a risk and this is what happened. Sucks to be you.
"1. You're creating a hierarchy of sexual behaviour that reinforces conservative notions of what is morally "worthy", as though we're still in the 50s"
Not at all. I'm not saying someone shouldn't go to a party because it's immoral. If you don't care about people seeing your body then great, go have fun! But I will say that if you do care about seeing you naked and you go get drunk with a bunch of people with a reputation for doing such things then you are an idiot.
Oh.. and you probably should care because society cares and it could effect your opportunities in life later. Not because sex is bad and you should be a 1950s virgin but because the reality of our conservative society is an unavoidable fact of life.
"2. You're deliberately ignoring that even people who are "blameless" within the rules of such a hierarchy are victims."
I am having a hard time following this sentence. Are you saying that I am implying that EVERY victim is also guilty? If so then no... I didn't mean to make any such blanket statement. To me that is just as bad as saying that every victim is blameless. Situations are unique and should be evaluated that way!
Note... in none of these situations am I saying that the victimizer is not 100% at fault and worthy nor worthy of prosecution. Nor am I saying that the victim is deserving of further punishment beyond maybe a big lecture from a parent.
I ran Linux on one in my dorm room. At the same time we had several at work running Windows 95 and later Windows 98.
I think maybe we did have one that ran Dos + Win3.1 but it was the exception.
Ahh... those were good days. PCs were still very expensive but I had access to cheap parts and coud undercut just about anybody's price. There is nothing like a thick steel "built like a tank" AT era-case with an only slightly out of date motherboard and hard drives just big enough to hold what you really need inside at a time when an up to date PC would have set you back a couple of grand. You could use those things for target practice and still get your homework done on them.
"...the insight which is still proprietary..."
Yup.. there's a failure of the patent system right there.
Why are there so many people out there who can't comprehend that fault can lie with more than one person? This includes BOTH victim and victimizer.
If I run around a bad neighborhood at night with clothes made out of taped together money and get mugged... It is my fault! That doesn't mean what the mugger did was ok. He should go to jail just like any other mugger and I should not! Although.. if I were so stupid then maybe I should go into some sort of custody for my own protection.
Likewise if I were an atractive female and I passed out nudies of myself to any and every short-term fling. Yeah... come on, use your brain.. it's going to end up on the internet. That's the logical outcome of an illogical action. That doesn't mean the uploader is any less guilty or that the victim should be punished.
But.. I do think that lack of self-preservation common sense does reduce ones entitlement to sympathy.
Also that also doesn't mean it makes any sense to kill oneself after suffering the results of such a stupid decision. Yeah.. having everyone see your privates is going to suck. Sorry. You were a moron.
At least you can respond to anyone who claims to have seen you with "and you were surfing that site". "is your hand sore?"
Hopefully you are smarter now. I'm sure there will still be some enjoyment left to come in the many years of life ahead if you don't kill yourself. Don't do that!
What would it cost to buy?
How much maintenance would it require?
Special fuels? Kind of oil? Required additives?
Suspension and handling? Comfort?
What would potholes do to it?
Now compare all of that to an older but still decent condition used modern car that is way easier to find and obtain.
Now why is the model T still useful?
Note.. I'm not arguing that it might not provide the owner with some form of enjoyment. I like all sorts of things that I do not consider ot be 'useful'.
You mean one who would please all of the people all of the time?
Yeah... good luck with that!
No, antique cars really aren't. If you don't believe me then I challenge you to drive a model-T on an expressway.
Sure... once you install an additional application to access what is basically a knockoff of the Windows registry (Why the F anybody would want to copy that shitty design...)
Then you go in and change pretty much every default setting because the defaults all suck...
You get something that meets a minimum definition of usable.
Why bother. Gnome developers have been on the path of removing, not adding functionality since they started version 2. Why would you expect them to accept a patch that adds a good feature?
Of course it did. It was built on Gnome 2. Garbage in, Garbage out!
Awwww, is somebody jealous that nobody wants to communicate with him?
His real fear is that Steve Jobs may have left a copy of himself. What if he gets copied to powerfull enough computer that it can wake up?
Well, who in the company calculated that replacing accountants with machines would save the company money?
Removing things you dislike from YOUR OWN website is moderation. You don't have the right to push your beliefs using my property!
Preventing you from pushing your own beliefs in your own space.. that's censorship. Who has the power to do that? governments for sure. I suppose ISPs could do it too. So.. yeah.. I guess you are right, you don't need government to have censorship.
GP was talking about a website though. It's their own business what they do/don't allow there.
Hey, everybody, look! It's Richard Stallman! Why the stealthy username buddy? We all like GNU here! Well all of us except the Mac fanbois but they don't really count as people do they?
With rules like that what's the point?
They have to keep the things in sight? So.. they can deliver books to their neighbors that live on the same block? Maybe they can have a guy follow the drone in a truck. You know, the truck that would have just delivered the package previously?
Is it time? Can we replace the FAA fossils with an organization of people that were at least still alive in the same millenia we are now living in?
Have you seen the third parties on the US ballots?
Who are they going to vote for? The even farther right than republican religious parties? Or the plain, un-watered down communists?
I think the world thinks US voters are uninteligent for voting in the two shitty parties over and over but have you seen the alternatives we are presented with?
When we talk about the lesser of evils we really do mean it!
Obama has continued plus expanded those practices. While he spoke against them in his first campaign one of the first things he did was to grant immunity to all the telecoms that had just handed over citizen's private information to the NSA without a warant.
I for one do blame your favorite "Idiot Cowboy" AND Obama. Both parties are corrupt. It doesn't matter if you support the Republicans or the Democrats. Both parties are the two arms of the police state. If you think supporting one while blaming the other helps anything then you are a fool.