Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: It's always good to comment, but... (Score 1) 999

by Finsterwald P Ogleth (#31458984) Attached to: Texas Approves Conservative Curriculum

...sometimes it helps to know the issues on which you are commenting.

Granted, some of the points may have been distateful, but a majority of them had to do with watering down American history...to the point that history before 1900 was close to being irrelevant.

* Dropping out the "discovery" of America by Chris Columbus (I know, it's really the "West Indies" on which he landed)
* Removing references to "Christmas" as the celebration of Jesus' birth, BUT adding the Hindu holiday of "Diwali"
* Citizens of the US no longer...texts would talk of "global citizenry"
* Free Enterprise" = BAD ; "Capitalism" = BAD ; BAD = "Imperialism"
"Social Justice" = GOOD ; "Political Correctness" = GOOD

Yeah, many of us may not like all of the changes that were passed, but some of US history may have been salvaged.

Whatever you may think of the process or the results, our history, and that history of the founders of the US, is just as important as knowing how many provinces and territories make up Canada, or the complete lineage of Queen Elizabeth II, back to Harold himself. Every country has it's history, and that's important, but not any more important than retaining the history of the U.S.A.

Comment: Well now, this topic got everybody's ridge up... (Score 1) 1252

by Finsterwald P Ogleth (#31122226) Attached to: Texas Textbooks Battle Is Actually an American War

The parent lobs a grenade for one side of the issue; but doesn't pick up the rest of the story. 704 responses so far...a few actually make good points.

From what I understand, the "publishers" run these textbooks by these state Public Education committees to get feedback and "diurection" as to what should be included in the texts our kids will be reading and studying. At this point, I think it's Texas and California to whom these publishers sell the majority of their wares...and most states have abdicated to those two princiuples. To make matters worse (if it is California), budget problems are impacting sales there...leaving Texas as the long pole in the tent.

This is NOT a one-sided issue...and it's been creeping along like this for years...As one of the responses brought out, the CotUS is NOT a living document, rather it is stakes driven into our soil as guidance...its' clear intent was to define what role our Federal Government was to play. But, what has happened over the last 50 years or so, is our own diversity and political correctness have shot holes in our feet. The texts editors have been slowly "removing" what I thought (way back when) were important events and references - - Like Christopher Columbus - "it is not relevant now"...

We also have to remember that these publishers utilize writers and scholars, as well as Consultants (o-o-o-o-h, bad word) to determine what should be included in the texts...to the extent that references to major events get re-defined, based on their views of "what's important". Like Christmas Day as a Holiday (Holy Day is the root words of that one), being replaced by a "nonsense" day...to avoid making a religious reference. And some other instances of dropping words from the text of the Declaration of Independence...as in "We hold these truths to be self-evident...that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights...". And creator is NOT specific. Thomas Jefferson wrote that, a man who treasured religion, but didn't want a document favoring one over another for this new country that favored one religion over another. And the Constitutional Convention started from the Declaration of Independence when they began work on the CotUS.

And also recall that the very founding settlers of this country left everything behind them in England, to escape religious persecution...

So there is also all-out war within the Texas faction; and it is many-faceted...from an insistence of RE-ESTABLISHING our fundamental "stakes" in the ground, to over-embellishing the significance of Religion in our growth and evolution as a country, to encompassing our diversity and melting pot as a nation of INDIVIDUALS from many different cultures, societies and beliefs. Individuals being the key word...Everything in the BoR is about us as a society of INDIVIDUALS, not groups. And we are one of the few, if not the only, nation, who value the individual over the society.

As George Washington said,"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."

I would trust in those words, unbleached by Political Correctness, as opposed to any I have heard recently...

FPO

Comment: ...judges aren't allowed to use common sense... (Score 1) 392

by Finsterwald P Ogleth (#28606179) Attached to: Jammie Thomas Moves To Strike RIAA $1.92M Verdict
Common sense comes in through "Common Man" theory, I believe. The issue you state is a fundamental difference in what we would like the law to do, and what it does. On the SCOTUS is emblazoned the phrase "EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW". Equal has nothing to with what's FAIR. When one cuts a piece of pie exactly in half, that does does not take into account that one person getting a "cut" may be more hungry than the other person? Considering "hunger" in the splitting process falls into the realm of deciding "FAIR", not "EQUAL", outcomes. The pie analogy can be used to show the difference between "fair" and "equal" - Two selfish, pre-teen siblings argue over who will get the bigger piece. The father intervenes and says to the brother "you cut the pie" and, turning to the sister, says, "you choose first". My, that puts FAIR and EQUAL in perspective, doesn't it? Laws are meant to provide EQUAL protection, but not FAIR protection. FAIR is a MORAL issue...and it is up to each of us to decide what's fair, not the courts. But, base that decision of fairness from the "other side" of the issue, not your side.

Comment: Re:Laws are used as written, not intended (Score 1) 284

by Finsterwald P Ogleth (#27548289) Attached to: Paper Companies' Windfall of Unintended Consequences

So the real problem is $3.8 trillion of government spending. It attracts corruption, fraud, waste, opportunists, and everything else bad that people keep complaining about.

Okay, so that explains why 537 people behave the way they do. Now, what about the rest of us?

FPO

Comment: Re:Laws are used as written, not intended (Score 1) 284

by Finsterwald P Ogleth (#27548239) Attached to: Paper Companies' Windfall of Unintended Consequences

Most of what you say makes sense...

But this?

But the reality of the matter is ... these idiots will keep spending until the below average half of the population is only 10% of people.

So let's see...changing the "average" point of the population will result in a smaller number of members below that point. That probably works, if you "keep" the average point through all subsequent measurements...

But the "average" changes with the segment of population being measured. No matter how you try to bend, fold, or twist the statistics, average is always the "mean": the sum of observation values divided by the number of observations.

I'm sure you meant to say "median"...right? Very different statistic...and very different implications.

FPO

Software

An Open Source Legal Breakthrough 292

Posted by kdawson
from the gpl-means-what-it-says dept.
jammag writes "Open source advocate Bruce Perens writes in Datamation about a major court victory for open source: 'An appeals court has erased most of the doubt around Open Source licensing, permanently, in a decision that was extremely favorable toward projects like GNU, Creative Commons, Wikipedia, and Linux.' The case, Jacobsen v. Katzer, revolved around free software coded by Bob Jacobsen that Katzer used in a proprietary application and then patented. When Katzer started sending invoices to Jacobsen (for what was essentially Jacobsen's own work), Jacobsen took the case to court and scored a victory that — for the first time — lays down a legal foundation for the protection of open source developers. The case hasn't generated as many headlines as it should."

What the scientists have in their briefcases is terrifying. -- Nikita Khruschev

Working...