Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

+ - Ask Slashdot. If I haven't read 1984 then should I read it now?

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "I have a first edition of 1984 sitting on my shelf that I have yet to read. Should I read it or would it be too much like watching the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings at the movies and then picking up the books? I do plan to read it, eventually, but there's a good queue in front of it and based on what I've read about the book I get the impression that I'm already living in the prelude. Do I run the risk of ruining a perfectly unbelievable reality with that particular work of fiction? Or will it just make me madder? Is 1984 worth reading right now?"

Comment: Re:only partially agree (Score 2) 157

by ranpel (#43530485) Attached to: Hands-Free Or Voice-Activated Texting Not Safer
Dock it in the pirate bay and ask people to pay if they like it, preferably before it saves their life. Safety first I'd say.

It sounds like a requisite function for those that might communicate as if they needn't pay attention to driving and very helpful for those that may know driving requires a good degree of concentration but need and want to communicate anyway. Good luck with your app.

Comment: Re:Rapists! (Score 1) 212

OK. No hurries. I can't help but think, given the laws, rulings, nations and people in play here that the possibility of actually discovering whether or not those girls were harmed (apart from "because, money. secrets") that that would, above all, be the paramount question to answer and fuck all in between if those that have questions could have, should have, can but won't ask these questions, in any setting. And, if the accusations turn out to be more than sufficient to arrest him for real crimes committed, the host nation would, I should think, give more credence to the possibility that they're sheltering a potentially (to other women) dangerous person and that person should be tried.

From a "wow, those law books sure are thick" perspective I perceive a thread of aggression in these events that, on the level of nations, doesn't seem justified. There seems the very real and sufficient threat of extradition to yet a fourth country that is seen as unjust by the third country and the objective here must be to have either the fourth country admit as much and deal with the third country directly or for the second country to regress or seek redress from a world court respective of all four countries, should one exist. Or, more likely, the pieces will simply remain on the board as placed.

Comment: Re:Rapists! (Score 1) 212

Thanks. I'll look for the answer to the fabled question when I can dig for it as the answer wasn't in my top 10 results. But what does an extradition ruling from one nation have to do with facts sought from another nation? Admittedly I'm sort of looking at it rather simply - have questions / seek answers. You know, the center of the onion sort of thing. That and being that he is the guest of yet another country I can't quite see how the first country rulings matter in the slightest. All said and done that is.

Comment: Re:Rapists! (Score 1) 212

I'm not quite sure that I'd call it hiding out like a common criminal. They can, after all, interview him, can they not? They want their terms met more than they seem to want to investigate and piece together truth in order to properly evaluate the accusations. As such I would definitely think that somebody is not on the level. There seems to be a lot of aggressive persecution and prosecution going on in general so why not this? And, for the record, I firmly believe that he had every right to publish everything. He even tried to have it vetted. So what, exactly, is the actual fucking problem?

Comment: Re:Intractably horrible. (Score 1) 354

by ranpel (#43096917) Attached to: In Defense of Six Strikes
By offering a purchase agreement for the goods noted. If they buy it then the strike is stricken if they don't then when they get six they have a mandatory fee of 60.00 (or 10$ per strike) that is then distributed to the ISPs who in turn give it to those middle-men to keep them off their backs (or off their knees so they can stop biting our dicks). And the customer (media leecher) strike record is set to zero. If the customer does not pay it then the ISP can choose to implement customer behavior corrective actions. Or the customer can simply say "wasn't me." and pay anyway because *proof*.

Comment: Re:Monsanto takes .. (Score 5, Informative) 419

by ranpel (#42891155) Attached to: Monsanto Takes Home $23m From Small Farmers According To Report
Actually I believe that you're wrong. Monsanto authorizes their seed progeny to the elevators. The farmer that sold his seed to the grain elevator was allowed to do so contractually. Another farmer subsequently purchased seed from the grain elevator, with the Monsanto seed mixed in, and planted it. http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/feb/09/soybean-farmer-monsanto-supreme-court

Comment: miss you or i, i i i (Score 1) 813

by ranpel (#42878847) Attached to: Missouri Legislation Redefines Science, Pushes Intelligent Design
For fucks sake. How about "Welcome class. I am Mr. Smith. This class is Science 101. If you're in the wrong class it was fate, stay seated. What I'm going to try to teach you this year is how to learn about science. Some posit that what you're going to learn and read about and experiment with in this class is by design. Not my design but that of a omnipotent being. A god, the GOD. You may have heard of him before today. Many believe that some one or some thing planned it. All of it. They may be correct or they may not. What you're going to learn here is what human kind has deduced and discovered throughout its recorded history and I trust that some of you will add to those discoveries along your paths through life. As for Intelligent Design we can only wonder and search or wait faithfully by until someone or something tells us what we already knew to begin with. To which I'm sure a few just want nothing more than the ability so say "I told you so.". The same can be said about some of the puzzles that science leaves us with today. So, before you begin the journey that is your life in earnest let me try to teach you some of the things we do know and some of the puzzles you could someday help solve. Please open your textbooks to chapter 42."

"Class, for homework please try to find a frog or a stray cat or dog, preferably dead, so that we can explore with them during our studies for the rest of the week. Leave the family pets alone children. Until tomorrow. Be prompt. Dismissed."

Comment: Re:Nazi America (Score 1) 364

by ranpel (#42496269) Attached to: TSA 'Secured' Metrodome During Recent Football Game
What? No. Well not directly anyway. I was referring to my perception of a free society collapsing from within and, the distressing part, those directly responsible for ensuring it endures seem to be saying our safety and security is about two notches more important than our liberty. Combine that with politically influential corporate engines and you're not exactly brewing tea.

Since you seem a little bent on spanking me because you read revolution and firmly seem to believe that the power of the vote can .. secure our free people their freedoms forever than so be it. Bullet or ballot - I don't really give a fuck as long as mine are not made to succumb to another or bend to an ill formed authority.

What I was talking about was an accelerated path moving faster by doing little or, worse, nothing. A path that I believe the initial founders both foresaw and tried to prevent. We can either vote our way out of it, somehow, continue to vote our way onto it or not vote and watch. To the point of what you're saying, sure, I don't disagree, necessarily. "The voters" however can only vote until they cannot vote or the effect has been compromised or, en masse, they rebel and attempt change via different means, a different vote. Just because there is a certain path that you would prefer, voting, as would many, it does not mean that that path is secure or effective or will remain to be so indefinitely.

And to this: "If you disagree you can vote differently, but it doesn't mean your voice should be louder than theirs." - nor does it mean I should be silent. One vote is a whisper. A government seemingly bent on working around many votes and working for and with financially backed whisperers, all seemingly in a direction that is diametrically opposed to some founding principals, then you might be on a path towards trouble. Do not hide behind the concept of a false peace when the security of your person, freedoms and liberties reach a point that demands that its defense be made by blood and life.

Vote!! By all means. And encourage others to do so because, yes, for now, it is the best and most reasonable means of preventing an armed and direct defense. Run, hide or stand but know that standing on a vote is precarious at best. There are always options. Ensuring that you continue to have them is a good direction. We'll all know when and if the time for voting has run its course in this country. That would be dreadful, indeed. Nonetheless, it can happen and under certain circumstance probably should. Let's try and ensure those circumstances are not realized because if they are then you'll likely be voting with the screams of a collective people that can no longer protect freedom with a pen - results be damned.

Mr. Cole's Axiom: The sum of the intelligence on the planet is a constant; the population is growing.

Working...