So exactly what part of bleeping out a word or phrase isn't "preventing others from speaking" that word or phrase?
I fail to see any argument where failing to censor all speech in anyway changes small selective censorship from being anything except for preventing the speech of that which was censored.
Or to put it in a more simplistic fashion...
In your given example the censorship begins exactly at the beginning of the beep. The censorship ends at the end of the beep. Anything that is outside of the duration of the beep has nothing to do with censorship.
By your argument if you had someone who was censored, you could argue that failing to stop them from speaking to the guy behind the counter at the 7-Eleven would mean that they hadn't been censored because you didn't stop all of their speech. It is a stupid argument.
That is what has been the driving force behind Microsoft and the development of Windows 8. They have been watching that 30% of every app sold, and they are salivating. Windows RT is the clue. The quantity of software sold for Windows computers is jaw dropping. If Microsoft can wrangle 30% of that whole market by forcing themselves in as the middleman it will be a HUGE tsunami of dollars.
As an observer to this my question is: Will enough people fall into the trap that they can convert the whole market? You have an OS that is only optimized as a handheld interface and it is being rammed down the throats of every person trying to buy the "updated version" of the most entrenched desktop OS in the world.
Maybe the revolt against the useless desktop interface will change the direction things appear to be heading but the direction of the majority of people makes no sense to me anyway.
And maybe the unbelievably lame and irritating commercial of stupid dancing kids pretending to do business will go away. They aren't selling a single unit to business with a commercial like that. They are just making them change the channel.
The ruling is also quite hilarious, peppered with ridicule, Star Trek references, and such. Not what one would expect from the typical judge.
The best one is from Page 2, Line 16: "As evidence materialized, it turned out that Gibbs was just a redshirt."
Someone needs to buy the judge a beer or bake him a cake. Outstanding!
Here is a very important detail that just doesn't get noticed:
The US Constitution and Bill Of Rights DOES NOT GRANT ANY RIGHTS to the people. The people already had those rights. Those documents recognize those rights and protect those rights from intrusion by the government.
You might remember another document that said, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. "
Yup, it is "self-evident" that these rights do not come from any gooberment proclamation. That fact that people seem to think that the government has rights over PEOPLE is one of the major problems that we have nowadays.
A government is a hierarchy, an organization chart. People who exist in a hierarchy naturally wish to move upward in that organization chart. A key part of this attitude that is necessary for someone live in a hierarchy is they need to constantly be aware of influence: both their own and the people around them.
In other words: Power
(Everyone really needs to get a copy of the book, "The Peter Principle" and read the whole book. It is funny because it is undeniably true.)
So you have an organization that is completely populated at all levels (except some at the bottom rung) by people with a focus on power. They tend to hold a belief that people outside the organization are their source of income, and they believe that they NEED and are justified in applying their influence/power on those that are outside the organization. (Starting to see any issues?)
Now lets add cheap affordable automated technology that will effortlessly allow micromanagement of the poor fools outside the organization... At A Profit!!!
You have camera's at a major percentage of intersections in modern urban areas now. It is small potatoes to add software that would allow biometric identification of people and automated identification of every single possible infraction possible. (The UK has gone a lot farther down this road then the US has...) Impossible? Uhhh... Half of the stupid fear based changes since 9/11 were "Impossible" to any adult in the 1970s.
So you say, "But I don't break any laws!" You are deluded.
- So you step out of a store fumbling with your wallet and drop a dollar. Camera sees you drop a piece of paper and issues your fine for littering.
- You are crossing the street in a crosswalk and step outside the white lines to pick up a dollar. Camera sees your infraction and sends you your fine for jaywalking.
- One thousand other little things happen in EVERYONE'S daily life...
The quantity of people that persist in a Pollyanna belief that the government will take care of them and that the government should remove all risk from their lives are a danger to responsible adults everywhere. They help governments take greater and greater control of their daily lives. They say silly things like, "The government has a right to
If you had a teenage daughter that danced around and played with the truth like a government, and spent money with the same reckless disregard as a government you would ground them for life! Governments are amazingly irresponsible and reckless.
Do not give them the opportunity to digitally micromanage every ones life. That "Liberty" thing that you might have heard of demands you keep government power in check.
The UK scenario is people accessing a machine designed to give them their own money from their own bank accounts. Doubling the money as you remove it in no way resembles any intended purpose for the machine.
The video poker machine is a situation where the machine is intended to supply an opportunity for the users to extract as much money from the machine as possible. While they are doing this they are supposed to try to accomplish this by spending the least quantity of cash possible. The coding of the machine is supposed to try to counter the user's intent to acquire as much money as possible.
I find it hard for them to cry foul when someone is overly successful at accomplishing the intended purpose unless the user was directly altering or interfering with the operation of the machine. That doesn't appear to be the case here. The machine was simply following its program as supplied by the manufacturer.
The point were Windows targets a path to oblivion is when they take the world's most predominant desktop OS and optimize it ONLY for hand held use. They have directly spit in the eye of their intrenched desktop users by supplying an unusable desktop OS for simple greed.
What has happened is MS has been watching Apple rake in 30% of every sale in the Apple Store and they are salivating to get a piece of every sale of PC software. Win 8 RT is their intended destination. So what if they piss off half their customers? Taking half of their "buy it once" customers and turning them into "tithe 30% like a good automaton" will pay much better.
Of course it ignores that basic rule of business that making it so a customer wants to do business with you guarantees success, and in five years it won't be paying "much better"...
Assault Weapons are not fully automatic. An "Assault Weapon" is any rifle that is semi automatic and has a forward handle and/or bayonet mount mounted on it.
Fear comes from being confronted with your lack of knowledge. Making decisions based on lack of knowledge (fear) is stupid. There is no other description.
"Assault weapons" look scary to people who watch TV and have no real idea about fire arms. That means that if you take the single most popular 22 plinking rifle (Ruger 10/22: Great first gun for a boy) and add a front handle to it you have a "dangerous assault weapon"...
Don't advertise your stupidity.
The real head shaker in this is in this "Land of Liberty" people with no clue want to tell good responsible what they should have to use for their safe and fun hobby. And you don't need more then four clubs to play golf. Besides, golf courses in general helps create elevated pollen counts in areas that naturally had low pollen counts creating a danger for people with severe asthma. I don't play golf so outlaw it!
You don't need an automatic transmission in a car unless you can prove you have a severe disability. Automatic transmissions breed an amazing number of incredibly dangerous driving habits and seriously limit controllability in marginal traction conditions. (The whole "I'm aiming my couch" mentality scares me every day.) Let's outlaw automatics and save some lives. (It would save some lives...)
The willingness of "Americans" to hand away their rights for window dressing drops my jaw. Getting rid of the rights as you gain a false "head in the sand" feeling of safety is foolhardy. If you read the founding fathers it is pretty clear that Liberty is a risk! They never imagined that the risk of liberty would ever be as low as it is in our current over sanitized era so they were thinking it was worth paying a MUCH higher price to have. If the unbelievably low price/risk of Liberty is too much for you to risk then you need to consider moving out of the "Land of the Free and the home of the Brave".
It is amazing that in this world of selection of lawmakers by popularity contest that we can get "winners" that are so willing to open there mouths and make decision's about things that they know nothing about.
For the "scared of guns" crowd out there: "What percentage of gun related crimes involve rifles?"
"What makes something an "assault" rifle?"
"If it is correct to ban something that is used more then 99% of the time for legal purposes then why are you allowed to use and own a car?"
"Oh, the poor, poor helpless victims. Our hearts go out to the helpless victims! We must do something to protect the helpless victims!!!"
WAKE UP. "Victim" is a symptom of being "Helpless". Forcing people to be helpless by force of law is insane!
After all the hype it didn't deliver any more than Virtualbox and all the others.
Except for the part where it can be setup by non techy types by installing three "updates" from a single simple download page.
Plus it comes with a pre-installed, licensed and activated copy of virtualized XP for 0$ that is legal for free use even in enterprise environments.
So if they want to install an add on VM system like VMware they can:
- Acquire and install the virtual host software
- Figure out how to install the virtual OS inside the host
- Figure out how to activate and/or license the virtualized OS
Or if the OP has Win 7 (pretty good odds)
- They can follow the prompts on the download page for XP Mode and get a legally licensed, preloaded, and activated copy of Win XP in a virtual environment that 95% of adults will be able to navigate with no learning curve. I was mistaken earlier when I thought XP Mode required the Pro version of Windows. (Pretty uncharacteristic of them to make something like that available for free across the whole product range.)
The download link is: Microsoft Download Center - XP Mode. Just follow the page instructions and download and install the pieces and you are golden. I would create them a separate Win 7 user and remove all the obvious icons for anything local to keep them from mucking things up.
Once it is in it runs as if it is an RDP session to a remote computer. Very simple.
But yeah, if you want to buy or stealware a more difficult solution, then yeah, that is possible.
With Win 7 Pro you can install XP Mode which is an XP virtual machine. Set up a guest user and set that to autorun the XP Mode VM in full screen. Once it is setup make a copy of the VHD as a backup. They can hose it up all they want and when they are done just delete the VHD and copy in the fresh copy from the backup.
This works out to the "Ostridge head in the sand" theory which works out to "Wish it away" and ignores most of what is going on. People have become so disconnected from realities of life that they don't recognize that we live in the safest time in human history and they are now OBSESSED with the feeling of safety. They fail to come to grips with the idea that they are 100% mortal and that hiding from that will not solve anything real except you can hang on to your false feeling longer.
Lets look at the big fear that has attacked the media that a huge number of people are gobbling up:
Oh no, the "Helpless Victims". Our hearts go out to the "Helpless Victims". We have a new interview with one of the "Helpless Victims".
Let's look at the key part of this-> "Helpless Victims", "Helpless" "Victims". The phrase "Helpless Victims" is telling you something.
You don't get "Victims" without having the "Helpless" part there with it. The problem wasn't that they were victims. That is the symptom. The problem is the "Helpless" part. Having the government declare that you must be helpless by law is insane. The "government" won't be there to save you when bad things happen. They probably won't even be able to punish (of real questionable value) whoever victimized you.
The ostridge crowd we cry but we want to stop violence. News flash: Violence works. Ask the lions and gazelles on the Serengeti. Ask governments:
When push comes to shove: violence ends up being the last answer.
In everyday life if you don't want to be subjected to unwanted violence you need to prepare yourself because you can't stop someone/something else from inflicting harm on you by wishing it away.
As a MORTAL person of some capability and self control you have some responsibility to protect those less capable then you from harm. This is what we have lost in our modern world world. (Along with an adult conscience decision to accept a minute increase in risk in exchange for the responsibility of liberty.)