Comment Re:100 percent bullshit (Score 1) 200
No matter what happens, there are going to be some who don't like it. That's life.
No matter what happens, there are going to be some who don't like it. That's life.
In other words, there has to be a bug on the client that lets the web page run arbitrary code
Yep, that's called a browser. Arbitrary code is exactly what a webpage or video is. This is the exact reason driveby malware via ad networks still happens. If you have ISP level access and can inject malicious code in unencrypted pages, you win. The solution to this, from a web hosts view, is to encrypt everything.
They can question all they want, but if they want to disprove it, they'll have to provide some evidence to counteract the evidence that's already there.
No, you used the term "slippery slope" correctly. The very premise of your slope is flawed. As a society, we've had mind altering drugs that directly stimulate our reward centers for as long as we've been a society. Nearly everyone takes some kind, but we still have an incredibly small percentage of people looking to use the harder stuff (antidepressants, ADHD drugs, street drugs). Given this history, it seems highly unlikely that we're heading toward a future of "mechanized work/play" any time soon.
You know typical ADHD drugs would actually make neurotypical children worse, right? ADHD drugs tend to be stimulants, care to guess what that would do to normal children? Give a five year old some coffee and find out. It's a far cry from "drug them into zimbified submission."
ADHD meds are no more a slippery slope than Antidepressants before them. And they were no more a slippery slope than the Tobacco/Pot/Alcohol/Coffee before them. Arguments like yours are why Slippery Slope is considered a logical fallacy.
Nice try. Not quite right though. It's more like:
1. We observer some people having concentration issues across the board.
2. We hypothesize disorder X with prediction Y
3. We run brain scans and find out prediction Y is right
4. We hypothesize that stimulants may work differently on these people
5. We run tests and find out that stimulants work differently on these people
6. We conclude disorder X exists and stimulants can treat it
So, back to scientific method 101 for you.
Once you have IPV6, with no (supposed) need for firewalls.
Why does somebody always have to trot this out? IPV6 does not mean no need for firewalls. It means no need for NAT. These are not the same thing. Please, please stop spewing this crap.
Thus spake the master programmer: "After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"