that's a rather absolutist perspective. isn't it possible that whistleblowing on a super sensitive program is both necessary and treasonous?

and that if found treasonous, a due process trial should happen?

and that the president could pardon the convict once the impact if that revelation is clear?

not saying that will apply, but it is far closer to reality than "all whistleblowing automatically erases harm from completely unrelated organizations and people", which is how your comment reads.

we are getting summarized information. keep in mind that the actual documents that the guardian and now Der Spiegel have likely contain a lot more detail. I'm betting It's well past treason already

Or perhaps they comprehend it just fine, but they make a choice you disagree with

No, and that's the entire point of the article linked at the top of this page. They are not making a choice. A thought pops into their head and they go with it, rather than thinking about other options. Or if they do consider other options they don't make the choice that would be most helpful to them.

The 3 sodas a day example was not meant to be a tuition fund on its own - it is illustrating the lack of connection people make. The hypothetical person involved is not going to pay full tuition out of pocket, so you can add grants into your math as well.

It provides no guidance on a viable strategy for emerging from that environment, and your flippant advice about simply not drinking soda is symptomatic of another, perhaps larger problem, that poor people face: Prejudice

There is absolutely no basis for your conclusion. People can't think their way out of poverty because of the baggage that comes along with poverty. I don't see how the failure to connect immediate spending with future spending falls outside of that inability.

The people I have known who earned $10/hr or less buy stupid things and complain about having no money. They don't understand the difference between principal and interest, and don't seek lower interest rates on things like car loans. They are not stupid people, they just can't think about money. Getting out of poverty is not simple math. But we aren't talking about getting out of poverty. This is simple money management.

When I say "stupid things" up there, am I judging their purchases according to my own prejudices? Of course. Because I have good money management skills and they don't. Like buying an expensive car that has to be returned because they can't afford the payments. They lost money that could have gone towards owning a car, and have to start over. Stupid.

The far-reaching conclusions in the article seem to be the author's opinion and have nothing to do with the research at hand.

The finding further undercuts the theory that poor people, through inherent weakness, are responsible for their own poverty â" or that they ought to be able to lift themselves out of it with enough effort

That is opinion, outside the scope of the study. The disconnect between immediate and future spending is supported by the research presented.

Consider that, and consider than soda is not the only extra people can do without if they really want to be financially better off. Consider the role of grants and scholarships, and do your math again. I'm sure you will realize it's not so flippant of a comment.

crazy people believing what turns out to be evidentially supported does not invalidate the evidence.

crazy people stumble on truth frequently, but the signal to noise ratio is abysmal. best to ignore them, but no need to discount them unless you impartially evaluate each claim.

so the Noah flood story means animals traveled through space, and the end of "war of the worlds " was "great grandpa is that you?" which means Palin is automatically president, retroactively, and gays are illegal and fartbongo has to move back to Kenya.

those guys at fox "news" make it trivial to follow this science stuf.

if you haven't paid attention to the many other threads, your computer has to be wiped. as a programmer I keep notes and snippets and URLs and all kinds of helpful stuff handy. not to mention the installation and config.

if I worked on a controlled pc and clicked an interesting link while researching why Md5 is harmful so u can explain why a Microsoft patch disables cert checimg for md5 signatures, I have to start over.

a controlled computer, without being able to set options like disabling scripts, and likely ie8, on potentially underpowered hardware is a recipe for browser unresponsiveness. I constantly mis- click on android browsers, and dad's ie8 is slower than sloth crap.

a warning would be helpful, and if you still disagree, you should do all of your computing from a livecd with a 3.5" floppy for storage, to remind yourself what starting over entails.

assuming that source is controlled, mails are on the server, and your home drive is not local, most people would be down at least a day, best case, and slower than normal for weeks.

The BSA if you are a member. Simple, no?

Also, straw man. Laws are not enforced the same in different cities due to different priorities. Barney Fife might chase a stolen tractor to the end of the earth, but cops in a large city with piles of murders are going to wait it out unless there's a pretty white girl inside.

SWAT team should not be involved for copyright/patent issues, so you shouldn't be able to call anyone. but it happens (yes that is an old article, but feel free to search for bsa raid 2013 on your own)

we are used to unreliable and useless here, you might get more helpful answers if you asked /b/ where they get their tech news.

I just looked up the word in order to harangue recent usage, and found out I was wrong. we teach contextual language acquisition, because that is how people normally learn. and when it goes horribly wrong we have a completely tangential conversation about whether this is good.

I think I will return to correcting people again. except for begging the question, because we lost that one years ago

flow is even more important now, with screen sizes between 4 inches and 60 plus inches.

if you want precise control, there is a portable document format that does a great job.

quit whining.

why aren't they exploring x instead of y?

people who explore math instead of global warming are a drain on the global economy.

anthropologists are a net drain on intracranial induction, preventing me from experiencing life as gorillas know it.

all scientists researching something other than my interest waste my time.

done here?

risk communication is a real field that covers the same ground as this submission, regardless of the source. you can't dismiss out of hand any source. you might not bother corroborating, but someone should.

Pj got dragged through the mud and personally attacked just covering a minor intellectual property skirmish. Reporting the mundane briefs and filings of copyright proceedings.

Sure it was big news here, but in mainstream msm media it was a mousefart.

After that, in a real showdown with the actual government on one side, would you stick around? I wouldn't.

What the fuck are you on about, and why should anyone give enough of a shit to even look it up?

First amendment of which document? I don't know of any British Congress. USA, which does have a congress and bill of rights, threw out the brits, making a separate legal system.

The typical Slashdot thread, where a bunch of semi-related facts get thrown in a blender and nothing good comes out.

Indeed, hasn't music *always* been open source?

In the sense of one composer re-using parts of someone else's work, yes until recently. Imitation was flattery, and it has always been clever to quote something. Open source in the sense of "take this and do stuff with it"? No.

Composers have not been publishing their sheet music for everyone to see.

Composers have been publishing their music, but not for everyone to see. For everyone to buy, yes, but not see freely.

Actually historically many (most) composers did publish sheet music - it was one of the few ways they could make money from their art, conducting and taking commissions being the others.

It sounds like you are making a correction, but you aren't, unless you misread the "for everyone to see" part.

And anyway why would they need to publish their sheet music for others to build upon their work? Sheet music is not the source code, it's the note-cards you take to the podium.

Apparently you can memorize every note by hearing it once or twice - please go to the nearest university psychology department. They will want to scan your brain and see what makes you extremely rare, like one in hundreds of million rare. Or maybe you can remember the key and general shape of a complete work by hearing it once or twice - still on the order of one in 10,000 at the most generous.

any decent composer can listen to a piece only once or twice before creating their own composition clearly inspired by it

Oh, that's all you meant? That's not open source, that's art. You're talking about downloading a tarball of Quake 3 and making a completely new game, art and all. A mostly new work with foundations in the original. "Variations on a theme of" is one of the most popular ways to start a title for work like this, and no music is needed.

If you just need to patch two measures of Beethoven because there's just no way he was *that* dissonant, and you're pretty sure the original manuscript was just mis-read, good luck doing that without music. That is what open source implies.