Oh, the novel would be written but nobody could read it because I wouldn't let it out if I thought some asshole would make tons of money from it and I'd get jack shit. Now, if you had a moneyless Star Trek utopia there would be no reason for copyrights or patents.
I'm beginning to think that we live under rule of corruption
Mankind is sinful. The optimal thing to minimize the sin is to term limit everything. Absolute power corrupts absolutely; limited power just takes longer, to tweak Acton.
I went out and cleaned the snow off of the lights and windows and drove off. It was really slick. I cashed a check, drove home and called the cleaning lady. "I'm not making you go out in that," I said. "You get a paid vacation today, I'll give you thirty next week." She works an hour on Saturday mornings. She's been here to clean once and the house is a lot better.
Everything you say is true, including that pot isn't a gateway drug. At least, it isn't in Washington and Oregon, because of the laws against it make it a "gateway drug" because the folks who sell cocaine also sell pot. Back when Reagan started his version of Nixon's "war on drugs" the war was really on marijuana only. It got pretty dry, was hard to find for a while. Everywhere I went looking for pot the response was "sorry, man, it's really dry. I have some coke, though."
When was the last time the liquor store guy said "we're all out of beer, want some cigarettes instead?"
And then there's drug testing. I know several people who ultimately became crack addicts because their employers tested for drugs. Pot is easily detected for a month, while the cheap tests the employers use can only detect cocaine 3 days later. So folks stopped smoking pot and started smoking crack... and ruined their lives.
The government demonizes pot, one of the least harmful drugs (legal or not) in existence, so a young person starts smoking pot, discovers that the government is full of lying sacks of shit, why would he then believe the government propaganda about heroin when it's been proven they lied about pot?
So you are correct, pot doesn't lead to harder drugs. The laws against it, however, do.
No, they're not spreading FUD. What causes it is that disease symptoms are often the result of the immune system fighting the disease. Fever kills viruses, so you get a fever with the flu. Coughing and your nose running are your body trying to wash the nasties out of your body. When you get that flu shot, it won't work if the immune system doesn't see it as a threat, and when it sees a threat, you get the disease symptoms.
Google, i dare you, i really dare you, make android by default, whitelist countries IP addresses. So that I can choose, EU only, or Asia only, except china/korea. Or USA only ip addresses. Yeah its drastic, but 99% of users wont access websites outside usa, or their home country or two.
Do you have citations or experience to back that claim up? I live in Illinois, my web site is in Canada. I had a pretty popular Quake site from 1998 to 2003 that used the same host as I'm using now. My traffic came from all over the world, and actually less than half of the traffic I got was from the US.
So you're Canadian and you want to block US sites? Mine still shows up because it's hosted in Canada.
What I'd like to have is the ability to search by root domain, e.g. "semiconductors site:*.edu" or "health site:*.gov". I often want results only from an edu domain, but there's no way I know of to do that.
Yes, and it's born of ignorance. Listen to a Led Zeppelin LP, then the CD, the LP will sound better. Listen to a Cars LP and a Cars CD and the CD will sound better. Why? Because the Zep was recorded in analog and the Cars were recorded digitally. Each format has its own benefits and detriments, and when you mix the two you get the worst of both worlds.
Yeah, your computer mouse is broken, so just throw out the whole new computer because obviously it's not needed since it's broken. Just like copyright.
The MAFIAA isn't the only entity who relies on copyright. Programmers, even GPL programmers, depend on copyright.
I depend on copyright. I just released a sci-fi novel, and since I don't have a kings ransom for marketing it isn't selling many copies. Without copyright I would sell none at all, because anyone with a publishing company could sell as many as they wanted, and they have the marketing muscle to completely bury me.
Don't "throw the baby out with the bathwater", to use an old overused cliche. The system is broken, and was broken deliberately by monied interests. Copyright lengths are way too long and things that used to be copyrightable now aren't -- for an example, the JD Sallinger's heirs successfully sued a guy for writing a sequel to Catcher in teh Rye. That just simply should not be. George Harrison should not have been successfully sued for "My Sweet Lord" and ZZ Top should certainly not have been sued for "La Grange", that was the fucktardedest one of all; what was copied was "ah how how how".
The arts are like technology and science in that everything new springs from the old. Like Newton, Van Gogh and Mark Twain stood on the shoulders of giants. Imagine how technology would suffer if patents lasted as long as copyrights? Nothing written or painted before 1990 should still be covered. "To promote the progress of science and the useful arts", how are you going to convince Jimi Hendrix to write and sing any more songs?
But completely revoking it is childish madness. You are out of your mind for suggesting it. Get a clue, dude. I wrote that book so it would be read (I'm posting it on my web site for free, only physical copies cost) but if someone else is making money on work I did, I want my share.
I think you jest, but they've been calling computers "electronic brains" since they were brand new in the late forties and had less processing power than a musical Hallmark card. People understand neither computers nor brains, and the ones who understand computers don't understand brains or you wouldn't have really intelligent idiots talking about uploading your brain to a computer.
But there's this this called anthropomorphism that makes it incredibly easy to fool a human into thinking an inanimate object has sentience; look at the carved gods the ancients had. How often do you talk to your computer or car or other machinery when it acts up (heh, "acts up", more anthropomorphism; machines don't act up, they get out of spec)?
And it's dirt simple to make a computer seem sentient. I did it in 1983 on a 1 mz Z-80 with 16k of memory. Ironically, I wrote it to show that machines could NOT think, that it was smoke and mirrors, but people thought that primitive computer and my program could think.
In the future you surely will have people believing that computers and robots are sentient, and morons will certainly call for them to have rights.
Remember, people are easily fooled. Ask James Randi or David Copperfield.
Now lets be really generous and suppose that they will create 1000 new positions, thats at a cost of $10 billion in taxpayer money or about $10,000,000 per position.
Most of that $10b is equipment, all of which has to be manufactured, meaning a lot more than 1000 jobs. And look at all the jobs in related sectors that would have been lost if Obushma had simply let GM die. Do you have any idea how many parts and plant equipment would have gone out of business had GM collapsed?
You are not a smart person, nor a creative thinker.
My IQ has been tested at 150 in the educational system and I have a novel for sale. So yeah, I'm as dumb and uncreative as you are civil.
Since you seem to be incapable of civility, this conversation is over. Fuck off.
Until November of 2006 XP, Linux, and Mac were their only choices. So no, it isn't on them, many of whom rely on software that won't run on anything later than XP. Nine years is a ridiculously short time to support an OS; again, computers last a lot longer than nine years. So no, it isn't on the guy who bought a brand new computer in 2006 and expected it to work seven years later. Hell, my car and TV are both 2002 models manufactured in 2001. Both work just fine and I can replace any part on it with one manufactured by the auto or TV manufacturer. Why should computers be any different?
Planned obsolescence is irresponsible and sociopathic. Those old XP computers that work just fine won't run W7 (and nobody wants W8), the owners should just landfill them? THAT would be irresponsible of them. They aren't responsible for Windows bugs and design defects, Microsoft is.
But I forgot, this is the 21st century where corporations aren't expected to act responsibly or in society's interest.
Baby, check it out, I've got something to say
Man it's so loud in here
When they stop the drum machine and I can think again, I'll remember what it was.
I've long said that the only real difference between a libertarian and a crony capitalist is a bank account large enough to buy politicians. With the combination of Staffergate and Pope Francis's Apostolic Exhortation, I'm beginning to think that we live under rule of corruption, not rule of law. It's hard to tell the difference between the two- since the very people writing the law are the ones taking the bribes.
This is why the magical overflowing glass of Argentinian's version of the trickle down theory never overflowed and kept growing larger. This is why a rising tide floats some boats and sinks others. This is what is wrong with von Mises' theories about government in general- a free market means that government is for sale to the highest bidder.
Eliza. Turing Test is easy, because the majority of the general public is stupid and narcissistic. Not so much artificial intelligence, as exploiting the security holes in the human brain.