Ah. I think I threw away a few of those as well. But there must be more scum playing that game, as I got several of these via email.

Well, yes. The prison operator gets a small profit in exchange for huge damage to society and individuals. The very definition of fundamentally evil.

I was not aware of that functionality. I will give it a try. Thanks!

Hehe, no. I only do that for ads in videos. For normal ads I have almost everything blocked, and the web looks clean and clear.

I just repeat "fuck you, fuck you, fuck you", while the ad plays. If it is especially annoying, I make a note to never buy from the cretins responsible.

I think freedom of control is hugely valuable to artists. However are they going to experiment and evolve their craft without it?

That is how I published my PhD. The "publisher" took a small cut to get it an ISBN and to have it added to some catalogs, but proposed a very reasonably priced printer that he has a deal with for it. (Physical copies were mandatory.) All rights for electronic publishing remain with me. The book itself is LaTeX, and for proofreading, I paid $1000 to a lady that offers this as a service and did a pretty good job of it. A fiction author could possibly get away with having some loyal fans do the proofreading for free in exchange for early access. And these days, a fiction author does not need to produce physical copies, those that want one could easily be served by book-on-demand systems.

The only people that will suffer under this system is those that produce trash (not the genre) and the publishers that have become superfluous. Of course, editors still have value, and some authors will want to retain the services of one. But there is absolutely no reason to not hire them directly, either for a cut or for a fixed or per-effort fee.

It only takes something like 1000-2000 regular donors to keep a writer in reasonable comfort. In the age of the Internet, that is really not a lot. As good writers want to write and are typically not motivated by money unlike the publishers that just try to get rich on their backs, this is all it takes. Of course, publishers will fight this tooth and nail, as it threatens their existence. An existence that benefits absolutely nobody but themselves though, so their demise will be something eminently welcome. I predict this will not kill all publishers though. There are those that actually respect their authors and customers, are not primarily motivated by money, and have a positive effect on the overall process. These will remain. I doubt however that any of the large publishers will be among the survivors.

The primary value of currency is universal exchangeability. Remove that and it is worthless. Apparently Mr. Anderson is really, really stupid.

Unfortunately, these are not facts, but pure fantasy. First, outlawing drugs does not reduce their usage. The alcohol prohibition indicates that the converse is true. Hence this prohibition increases harm. Second, the harm done is massively increased by outlawing drugs. Most drugs are actually relatively cheap to produce in medical-grade quality, with clear instructions and standardized quality, yet the dangerous low-quality stuff on the market fetches premium prices that then go to criminal enterprises. This situation is purely crated by illegality. Finally, people that are in prison for no good reason are unproductive and cost money as well.

The whole thing is nothing but a massively misanthropic effort by religious and other authoritarians to prevent people from deciding about their own lives and to punish those that have other ideas as heavily as possible. It has zero intention to reduce negative effects and zero effect in that direction. It does increase negative effects massively though.

This is not "pop psychology", but hard science. The original article costs money though: http://www.sciencedirect.com/s...

You are trolling, and you continue to troll. A 15 second google("systemd sucks") would gives you a good overview. And stop fishing for something necessarily abbreviated from me the that you can then attack.

We got good exposure to Djikstra at university (CS course). His problem is that he was ahead of his time. His other problems that even CS folks struggle to understand what he said (not because it is to terribly difficult, but because many CS folks are so terribly dumb). The think is that the formation of a new field of academic and engineering study and practice takes a long time. CS is not there yet. May take another half century or longer.

While the ideas of mathematics are (usually) precise, the language is fuzzy, informal and requires a lot of context. Everyone who ever has compared a fully formal proof and one done in the typical style mathematicians use can immediately see that. On the programming side, there is no room for fuzzyness. Or rather, whenever it is found, it typically is a bug and often a security vulnerability.

As to trolls being sadists, are you living under a rock?
http://www.independent.co.uk/l...

As to your obvious trolling, go away. A 15 second Google search on systemd and 2 minutes of reading are enough to find out.

This is peering. No money flows on peering, just data. Maybe read up on things before spouting such nonsense?