Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Fucking Lawyers (Score 2) 159 159

My position on copyrights and patents was always the same: abolish all patents and copyrights and prevent government from providing monopolies with these laws.

Basically this is nearly the ultimate absurd result that we are seeing here and it probably can even get worse. You want to build a road somewhere? Well, you are violating a copyright on other people building horizontal surfaces to allow circular wheels (and legs I suppose) to run on them. You want to build a house? Are you going to have a roof? Foundation? Walls? Windows? Doors? Fucking copyright violator. Absurd, isn't it? Or is it really absurd to expect that ruling like that can actually be passed given the fact that it is a government entity that can pass that ruling and given that governments are already given authority to rule on these issues?

No, the real solution is not even about money exchanging hands (though I wouldn't be surprised in case of Oracle), it is about the power that governments have over our heads, and this power is as insane as it is absurd.

No company or person should be given government protected monopoly on anything, including any invention, copyright, whatever. That's not how evolution works, that's not how cultures worked and still keep working. That type of power is destructive, not constructive in any way. Let the people and companies decide how to provide their services and products in a world that does not automatically protect them from any type of competition. At the very least this cannot be a power granted to government, deal with these issues on contract basis and using trade secrets if you must.

Anyway, I can only leave 1 or 2 comments here now given that 24 hours passed since my account's 'karma' was obliterated again by moderators who want to make sure I cannot reply to comments made to me, so don't expect many comments here either.

Comment: Re:Fucking Lawyers (Score 1) 159 159

You mean in the same way that a manufacturer of a spoon "illegally copied" information about a human mouth?

In the same way that a road construction crew "illegally copied" information about wheels being round?

In the same way that a manufacturer of a catheter "illegally copied" information about urethra?

This is API, API is information about CONNECTING pieces together, it is a contract information, definition of connectivity, not implementation details.

This is not a problem that is just related to Java somehow either, this concerns everything, every language, nearly every field and industry.

Comment: Re:"Are" or "could be"? (Score 0) 103 103

1. Who says 'my business' is causing a disturbance? Do you generally know which hotel somebody stays in if they are running around drunk on the street?

2. I don't believe for a moment that there is an actual problem of that type, most people sleep at night and I am almost completely sure this entire fucking article is a gigantic exaggeration like pretty much everything else that pops into the media.

3. Hotels being in so called 'commercial districts' does not change the hotel customers being drunk 1 block away from the hotel, beside which hotels are mostly located near private housing anyway, not in factory or warehouse zones.

4. By my standards there is no question at all, I am completely against all government involvement into any business and money, so no, by my standards this is a cut and dry case of government oppression. You are the one full of shit, hotels are located near other houses and buildings all the time and their clients can get drunk and noisy anywhere at all, be it a city or a beach or transit or whatever.

Comment: Re:"Are" or "could be"? (Score 0) 103 103

A bunch of nonsense. Somebody got drunk and noisy, so what? People living in those houses never drink? Never get noisy? People don't leave hotels and don't get noisy and drunk? Are hotels covering tourist behaviour outside of hotel premises? You are full of shit, just like this entire case.

Comment: Re:Require licenses for commercial driving or not? (Score 1) 176 176

I don't need Somalia for any so called examples, my own country of birth has a deep history of freedom fighters, anarchists of various kinds who managed for years to stave off much larger forces from East and West. Of course lately another fight started and we will see how this goes. I am an anarcho capitalist, objectivist, and your childish leaning towards limited government is of no interest to me. How I deal with the reality around me is not for most people either.

Comment: Re:"Are" or "could be"? (Score 2) 103 103

First: it is false to assume people don't have insurance just because they did not pay for a government license.
Second it is false to assume that a flat owner is unaware of the risks.
Third not buying insurance does not in any way imply inability to pay for damages should that be necessary.

It is you, who lives in a black and white world, where absence of a government seal means some kind of a problem and presence of a government seal means some type of a guarantee of quality or whatever.

Individuals must be free to make individual decisions and live with any consequences.

Comment: Re: "Are" or "could be"? (Score 0) 103 103

Rethink your assumptions. Anybody not buying insurance is taking a risk but it is a known risk with their own savings, just like anybody choosing airbnb to a hotel. People are taking a risk to minimize their expenses and the establishment fights it via government oppression.

Comment: Re:Require licenses for commercial driving or not? (Score 1) 176 176

You are an ignorant little ass, you have no clue even about your own government system. The USA Constitution talks about the consent of the governed and there is no consent. Beside that, as QN anarcho capitalist, objectivist I reject any notion of limited government power over an individual in the first place.

Comment: Re:Zero respect for SCOTUS (Score 1) 1065 1065

The only shithole in existence is your broken mind, so everything else is truly irrelevant in this so called 'conversation'. Ukraine saw its share of anarchists, who were fighting against various establishments and governments and they died in that fight, people see freedom exactly for what it is - 'live free or die' is not just a sentence. Were people fighting wars against governments in search of actual freedom immature? I think not, I think the reality is the opposite, you are what is immature, a termite looking for a colony.

Comment: Re:Zero respect for SCOTUS (Score 1) 1065 1065

I know perfectly well what freedom is and I come from the land where at least some people understood what freedom was for them even though it was taken away from them by collectivists, just like you. Eventually by hook or crook they off killed enough people there to paralyse the future generations enough so they would go with the garbage collectivist propaganda. Of-course lately some people decided that they want their own version of freedom, which obviously led to another attack by yet more collectivist government forces.

In any case the only people that are truly immature and ignorant are those, who use government violence as a proxy for their own gain and you are included.

Comment: Re:Zero respect for SCOTUS (Score 1) 1065 1065

You are the fucking moron, there shouldn't be such a concept as a 'public road' in the first place. Government doesn't belong in any property or business or money and should not be allowed to force people to buy into or participate in any programs whatsoever. As I said: you can't understand what an individual is, you are a termite.

No skis take rocks like rental skis!