Something that everybody seems to be missing here is that we're not talking about the rights of *creators* to their intellectual property, but to the *owners* of those rights. (I have no doubt that this little confusion is being pushed relentlessly by the music business.) Those owners are generally the big entertainment companies -- and their contracts with musicians are the business equivalent of armed robbery.
Compare the terms of contracts in the music business with the contracts in the book business.
Coupla items:
* Matt Yglasias is correct, given his viewpoint (I suspect he didn't grow up Baptist). "Good works" have always been a big item with the churches. Sometimes it's direct, but most often it's money to save the heathen children. Now, one Fundie cultural attitude is that one must never question the motives of another Fundie. How much of that money actually goes to starving children is simply not a question that can be legitimately asked.
Right now, we have an utterly poisionous combination of this don't- ask- questions religion and don't- ask- questions politics.
* Along with this, the Republican way of doing business has been bait- and- switch. In general, the actual results of Republican policies have been the exact opposite of what was advertised. This never gets reported; you have to dig to find out about the real results of, say, "No ChildLeft Behind".
* I see the coming divide (and the eventual downfall of either the Neocons or the Republican Party) as being between the reality- based folks and the faith- based folks. At some point, "reality" is going to get up and bite us in the arse. Reality is nasty that way.
* Never compromise with a fanatic. You can move your position all you want; the fanatic will never move his. This is what we've seen in politics since 1980 or so; the hard right hasn't moved an inch and the Left has turned into Goldwater conservatives from trying to "compromise".
If it were me (I was pretty damn obnoxious in high school), I'd probably wear something like "Kill all the Democrat commie traitors" or "Nuke Mecca". Has Bush ever expressed any disapproval of his more, um, enthusiastic supporters?
"Turn the handle the way it's supposed to go, only further." -- Eric Frank Russel, "A Study in Still Life"
I'm with Larry. If OBL is in custody, he's in a freezer somewhere, waiting for the proper time to get thawed. He could say *a lot* of things that a lot of people don't want to hear. (My own personal wish is to see him in an orange jumpsuit and leg irons getting interviewed by Geraldo Rivera. Ain't gonna happen.)
Also, the implication is that OBL is in a village somewhere, waiting for Chuck Norris and Sylvester Stallone to swoop in and grab him. Given the way this part of the world works, this is a seriously low percentage shot.
My own feeling is that he's a DNA smear on some rocks in Tora Bora, but we'll see.
Larry --
No, handguns aren't good for dispatching "giant radioactive spiders of doom", or anything else. They're Magical Talismans (Talismen?) of Protection from Evil. If you have a handgun, the spiders and other nasties won't come anywhere near you. They'll go eat your liberal neighbors.
What I want to know is how he gets to accept responsibility without suffering any consequences.
It's called "doing a Janet Reno" -- take all of the responsibility onto yourself so that nobody below you in the organization has to take any, and then ignore it. Usable only by those in high places. (I've seen it done in the corporate world, too.)
Patrick, it looks like you're not alone in being irritated by challenge- response software.
In general, spam is starting to look less like underground advertising and more like a denial of service attack. Solutions are going to have to be a combination of political and technical; I don't see either Congress or ICANN having the nerve to do anything effective. Too many advertisers have visions of "legitimizing" spam and too many computer programs depend on the "brokenness" of current e-mail software.
So for now, it's filters or nothing. Personally, I use a combination of SpamAssassin (courtesy of my ISP) and the built-in filters in Mozilla. On average, I get one "sneak-thru" a day, plus about two "look at 'em anyway" (ie, a subject or author that might not be spam).
Something that "activists" tend to forget is that the Supreme Court can only rule on the constitutionality of a law, not its sensibility. Was the Fugitive Slave Act a horror that has no place in a modern society? Yes. Was it constitutional? Also yes.
The "anti-activists" (inactivists?) tend to forget that what the courts are doing in many cases is simply pointing out the implications of the laws. "The law says to do this. You're not doing it. Fix it!"
Feh! I say again, feh! Sounds like it's efinately Tome For A Change.
Before you sign up with anybody, be sure to read the fine print. Yah, you'll probably have to cut 'n paste it into a word processor so you can read it. I'm in Maryland, so all those nasty little user agreements are legal and enforcable, including the clause that lets them change it at will without notice.
When I decided to get broadband, I read the agreements for both Verizon and Comcast. Both were unacceptable. Both basically say that if you do anything that they don't like, they'll cut off your service and send you a bill for the complete year's service.
I eventually signed up with a small local ISP who resells Verizon DSL. Costs $5/month extra, and in return I get a user agreement that translates as "don't be a jerk". Worth it for the peace of mind.
I've had one problem that took several days to fix, but I'm outside of the official range of DSL -- Verizon spent some serious time making it work, because it would let them expand their coverage area.
Anyway, you might also investigate low-end "business DSL". My understanding is that the ISPs are a lot more laid back with business customers. 2 - 3 times the price, though.
Again, best of luck!
The right to deadly force in self defense is not particularly eroded as a principle
Would that it were so! This page gives a brief discussion of "self defense law", as it applies to martial artists. Basic summary -- it's a nightmare. Not only do you have to deal with questions of "excessive force" (is it "excessive" to shoot somebody who's threatening you with a hammer?), you have to deal with the fact that the guy you shoot (or his heirs) can sue you for every dime you'll ever see.
The right to have a gun is not the same as the right to use it. Some jurisdictions have some very odd notions of "self defense". Is your area one of them? Best check. (Note -- don't just check the laws. Check how the courts interpret them.)
Both the extreme pro-gun and anti-gun factions see guns as Magical Talismans. Pro-gun types think that guns will magically keep Evil away, while anti-gun types think that guns are Pure Evil and force people to shoot each other. Neither side is, IMHO, at all rational.
Both sides have reams of statistics, but the only thing that stands out is how very small the relationship really is between gun laws and crime. It's swamped by other things, like economic status (rich people don't shoot each other).
As far as I'm concerned, Powell is just another dull gray apprarachnik, doing what he's told, whether it makes sense or not. The fact that he doesn't come across as a raving lunatic puts him in a positive light in this administration.
The reason he's in the administration at all is that he's a black Republican with name recognition. There's a serious shortage of them.
I'd say what people like that were called back during the Civil Rights days, but it would get moderated out.
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2005 | 2 |
| 2004 | 5 |
| 2003 | 6 |
Total: 13 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Electrolite by lightning:
Show all comments by lightning.