faq
code
osdn
awards
privacy
slashNET
older stuff
rob's page
preferences
submit story
advertising
supporters
past polls
topics
about
jobs
hof
|
| 'Misleading Web Page Cons Conference
Organizers' | Login/Create
an Account | 130 comments | Search Discussion |
|
|
| The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by
whoever posted them. Slashdot is not responsible for what they say.
|
fp? (Score:-1, Troll)
by
Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08, @03:55AM EST (#1)
|
i own
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
SFPCC (Score:5,
Funny)
by SFPCC
(sfpcc@hotmail.com) on Monday
January 08, @04:03AM EST (#9)
(User
#302433 Info) |
Congratulations! You got the
First Post.
In an effort to help the Open
Source trolling community, the Slashdot First Post
Compensation Commission is prepared to offer you one US
dollar.
All you have to do to claim your payment is
e-mail us at sfpcc@hotmail.com with
the address to which you would like your compensation
sent.
This offer only valid for US mailing
addresses. Please allow 2 - 3 weeks for delivery. Please
include in your e-mail a link to your first
post.
Slashdot First Post Compensation
Commission |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:SFPCC
(Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08,
@04:33AM EST (#27)
|
This is a great idea. One dollar per
troll! But the real benifit to the SFPCC is that we get
the troll's home address! The SFPCC spends a dollar, and
the slashdot community gets trolls to tar and feather
physically.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:SFPCC
(Score:0, Offtopic)
by SFPCC (sfpcc@hotmail.com) on Monday January
08, @04:47AM EST (#33)
(User
#302433 Info) |
As an official spokesperson for the
SFPCC, I can assure you that the trolls' addresses will
be kept completely confidential.
Thank you for
your interest.
Slashdot First Post Compensation
Commission |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:SFPCC
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @07:18AM EST (#68)
|
I bet you think we don't know
about the "dominatrix" position you're trying to fill.
Then you can keep things "confidential", even
though 12-year olds are having "T R O L L" branded on
their forehead.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
That's
interesting (Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous
Coward on Monday January 08, @06:15AM EST (#47)
|
In an article down below about the
gastrobots this post was modded with a (Score:-1,
Offtopic). And here it's given a (Score:2, Funny)? That's
interesting. Personally I think it's a great idea. The
trolls troll so why not troll back? Fight fire with
fire... Yeah, that's it. IANAT (I Am Not A
Troll)
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
fp (Score:-1, Troll)
by
Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08, @03:58AM EST (#2)
|
bogus frist psot are you amused yet?
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Riot city!
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @06:52AM EST (#57)
|
riot breaks out every day
from
racism to people's gain
bloody riot to fiery hells
riot's a fact that never fails
riot city - L.A.
riot city - u.s.a.
riot city - U.K.
riot city -
africa
let's riot let's riot let's riot today
against the police or c.i.a.
stand up and don't be
quiet
it's a total fucking riot
riot city - china
riot city - russia
riot city - israel
riot city
- germany
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Grab a gun!
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @07:00AM EST (#60)
|
Here's a helmet, grab a gun
killing the enemy's lots of fun
load you down with
patriotism
and send you out on a suicide mission
you believe the shit they stick in your head
it's
your own damn fault you wind up dead
The leaders get fat while good men die
because
nationalism's a fucking lie
the war machines they
think they need
are never enough to fuel their greed
conquering armies kill the poor
it's mankinds
fault he invented war
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
Democracy (Score:1,
Interesting)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08, @04:01AM
EST (#3)
|
Why, in a democratic society, should anti-trade
groups feel they have to con a trade conference? Should they not be
able to present their views in the open? Seems to me that there
might more progress if the WTO listened to speakers who opposed
their viewpoint and the anti-trade groups tried talking instead of
providing a venue for looters.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Re:Democracy
(Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08,
@04:13AM EST (#17)
|
People want to hear from like minds.
Would you go to a linux conference if all the speakers (or
even 1/2) were pro Microsoft? Even if a few pro-microsoft
speakers were there, would you go listen? Would you be
swayed by their arguements?
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy
(Score:0, Interesting)
by Kierthos (Kierthos@aol.com) on Monday January 08,
@06:21AM EST (#49)
(User
#225954 Info) |
The problem is, after all the riots,
which 90% of the American news watchers did not understand,
anyone who protests the WTO "in the open" is probably going
to get labeled incorrectly by the news media.
By
propogating this hoax, which has no violence, the Yes Men
are showing that it is possible to speak against the W.T.O.
without resorting to violence. Yes, they had to resort to
trickery, but so what? It's not like the W.T.O. hasn't
resorted to trickery of their own (i.e. their own version of
key statistics) to sway people and government officials over
to their views.
By the way, I still don't know what
the supposed benefits of a nation joining the W.T.O. are, or
what the drawbacks to not joining are supposed to be. Anyone
got a factual link?
Kierthos
"Anonymous
Coward? More like Anonymous Moron." - NecroPuppy |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy
(Score:5, Informative)
by Cody Hatch (cody@chaos.net.nz) on Monday January
08, @07:19AM EST (#69)
(User
#136430 Info) http://chaos.net.nz/
|
| By the way, I still don't know what
the supposed benefits of a nation joining the W.T.O. are,
or what the drawbacks to not joining are supposed to
be.
That's simple. The point of the WTO is a mechanism for
"bargaining" down trade barriers--and enforcing the
bargains, once struck. The US says that it will drop
tarrifs on wine, if the EU drops tarrifs on beef, let's
say. The US could unilterally drop tarrifs on wine and be
done with it--but the WTO exists to allow the US to trade
that drop for another one.
That's the main reason why countries want to be
in--particularly developing countries, which are desperate
for lower tarrifs on agricultural products and textiles.
They know that the EU would never let their hugely
pampered farmers suffer without good cause--the WTO is
therefore their best best: If they're lucky, they can
trade something unimportant to them (removal of
restrictions on foreign ownership of telecoms, let's say)
for something vastly beneficial--lowered tarrifs on those
goods they export. It's not easy, even with the
WTO--witness the current breakdowns (which have little to
do with protests--rather, the developing countries are
sore that the 1st world hasn't done what it promised last
round yet). That's the choice a lot of countries are
having to make--stay out in the cold, with no chance of
ever having enough clout to get any important barriers
lowered...or enter, and have a much better chance.
Finally, the WTO is there to enforce agreements, once
struck (but don't forget it was YOUR politicians that
first have to agree). Once the US has agreed not to ban
tuna imports, it can't then turn around and ban them,
however popular or worthy the cause now is. The fault is
that of shortsighted politicians, not the WTO.
As an example, China has been working very hard to get
into the WTO--despite the fact that it entails a massive
shake up of their entire economy, and a real chance of
political instability. Why are they so keen? Easy--it's
the best, maybe even the only way, they can manage to
remove the massive barriers that have been set in front of
them--and China needs them removed very badly. China has a
massivly growing population--either the economy at least
matches it, or a nuclear power with the worlds largest
standing army, several territorial disputes with other
nuclear powers, and several rebellious provinces (one of
which is ALSO nuclear armed, probably)...goes BOOM! No, I
think we need to keep those peasents in poverty
myself--fatter subsidies for the steel workers! What's
that you say? Let them eat cake? I couldn't agree
more!
Yeah right... You'll notice that the protestors wearn't
Chinese. For that matter, the current head of the WTO is
from NZ, population 3.5 million, heavily dependent on
agricultural products, mostly wool, cheese, butter, and so
forth. Not a particularly important country--which is why
NZ is such a strong proponent of free trade. We don't ask
for an advantage, we just want a fair go...which is why
all my friends are as puzzled as I am about the protesters
in Seattle. Fair trade? That's what the WTO is
DOING.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy
(Score:1)
by LL on Monday January 08, @08:17AM EST
(#72)
(User
#20038 Info) |
Comes down to your definition of
"fair". There are a number of historically compounding
events
1) special interests find it a lot easier
to band together and lobby for privileges or corporate
handouts/franchises (cough*Bono Act*cough) where the
benefits are privatised but the costs are socialised
2) many states don't have a open/free capital
market and bureacratic misallocation of resources can
often lead to perceived dumping and lost opportunities
3) you are hitting many social gaps in beliefs
and what is considered "property". For example, some
people would consider that AT&T "stole" their logo
from a Budhhist motif and claims of biopiracy have
created resentment of pharmaceutical companies. You also
enter some very subtle issues here (e.g.fencing of the
intellectual commons in the genome map, appropriation of
tribal marks e.g. tattoos for commercial PR gain)
4) a perception that the biggest sets the rules
to suit themselves (you can guess who the instigators of
the intellectual rights portion of WTO was) which causes
a lot of resentment and ill-will (not to mention being
prey on by more sophisticated financial manipulations).
You try explaining pump and dump tactics on societies
which don't really understand what a stock exchange is
really for (hint ... not a gambling mecca).
5)
socio-economic discontinuities as the lossening of bonds
betweeo corporates and workers lead to social stress ...
there is a hidden cost in overworking your people so
much that they quit and change careers, not to mention
disruption of family life when relocating. People who
are fearful and resentful cannot reason as well as
politicians in cushy jobs.
In short, the
benefits are nebulous (although historically proven) and
the downside is up-front, especially to marginalised
unskilled labor who are suddenly faced with a couple of
billion competitors. Traditionally governments have
attempted to address this with the taxes of any
increased economic activity to help disadvantaged groups
but with globalisation, you can shift production base to
exploit tax policy differentials (cough*transfer pricing
+ vertical integration*cough). In short, the traditional
tools for balancing / redistributing social costs are
inadequate in a multi-juristictional environment.
"Fairness" requires a common framework of values
and ethics and the Western-centric notions of rational
economism and property exclusion/rivalry don't always go
down well.
LL
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy
(Score:2, Insightful)
by Cody Hatch
(cody@chaos.net.nz) on
Monday January 08, @10:47AM EST (#94)
(User
#136430 Info) http://chaos.net.nz/
|
Hey, your not the standard foaming
demagogue! I'm impressed. Now:
Point 1: Your
right.
Point 2: Perceived, yes. In actual
fact, it's kind of cool if an inept bureacrat decides
to subsidize the production of my new stick of
RAM...or the steel that goes into my new car. Of
course, those resources probably would have gone
somewhere more important (education, maybe), but I
can't help that. *IF* we want to treat this as a "race
between countries", then subsidizing exports is an own
goal. If we want to look at total human suffering,
it's pretty bad, but not buying it isn't the way to
fix it.
Point 3: Not strictly speaking
relavent. We are discussing ways and organizations to
enforce and defend intellectual property rights.
Perhaps it's more important to discuss what those
rights are (or should be), but that's a very seperate
issue.
Point 4: Yes, but... Yeah it does cause
a lot of ill-will that the big and powerful set the
rules to help themselves. The developing countries are
not happy that the big countries try and force reforms
on them, while refusing to swallow that medicine
themselves. The protests in Seattle suited a lot of
powerful people in suits. It didn't suit the WTO...or
the developing countries, although they were fed up
before then. No matter how you look at it, it's not
good. If the protesters had the best interests of the
powerless at heart (and knew what they were doing)
they'd be arguing for complete and unilateral removal
of all tarrifs, quotas, and subsidies. The US
corporations would never agree of course--which tells
you all you need to know about both the effects and
the possability of it happening.
Point 5:
Change hurts, yeah.
As for the benefits being
nebulous, and the costs concrete... Agreed. But that's
not REALLY the question. The question is, are the
benefits bigger than the costs? And the answer is yes,
by a great deal. A lot of economists have spent a lot
of time answering this question (and others like it),
and you can take it or not, as your opinion of
economists and economics dictate. The fact is,
lowering barriers to imports helps a country (and by
more than it helps the trading partners, regardless of
balance of trade). Similarly, export subsidies are bad
for a country, although they do help the trading
partners. Of course, in a democracy, more than a few
politicians have found the political risks to be the
inverse of the economic benefits...but that's a
seperate issue.
You lose it when you come to
taxation though. Don't forget where the benefits
are--not with the corporation. The megacorps, by and
large, LOSE from globalization. Subsidies in whatever
form (and tariffs are a common form) act as a
redistribution of wealth from the consumers (that is,
the Average Joe) to the corporations (why do you think
it's always the industrialists that lobby for
protection? The steel mills that ask for protection
from "dumping"?). Remove those barriers, and it's the
consumers that benefit--and they can't dodge taxes by
moving offshore without losing the benefits. Yeah,
it's DAMN tough to see it--especially when those 100
factory workers are picketing and the 100,000
benefitting from the slightly cheaper goods (and the
100 million benefitting from the slightly springier
economy) aren't... The corporations are a
sideshow--not least because while they can indeed
move, the shareholders can't. :-) Indeed, why have
corporation tax at all? A corporation is nothing more
than shareholders and employees, and you can tax them
however you choose.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy (Score:1)
by LL
on Monday January 08, @05:34PM EST (#121)
(User
#20038 Info) |
Well, fellow Kiwi (if you are
really in NZ and not ISPofConvenience), some minor
adjustments ...
3) Not strictly speaking
relavent ... this is to state the point that the
concept of "fairness" is dependent on your ethical
framework, what some people consider "fair" can be
in fact shown to be arbitrary and ego-based.
Offending the beliefs of sub-groups (e.g. using the
Islamic Koran as advertising is a boo-boo found out
by one fast-food chain which replicated the flag of
one Arabic country) may not make economic sense but
when you're dealing in a non mono-cultural
environment can be a cause of long-term resentment
(e.g. witness the Waitangi Treaty where the concept
of sovereignty has slightly different meanings in
the Maori and English version).
Taxation ...
the problem is that once business activities become
offshore, then it is possible to continually shift
resources out of the grasp of tax scrutiny. Even if
you consider taxes a necessary business cost and any
investment should be considered in terms of net
after tax, given compound interest and taxes as a
dissipating force, for some corporations it makes
sense (especially if activities are easily
relocatable) to have a rolling investment in the
latest country to offer tax-holidays. Now you may
consider this to be a net transfer of wealth from
developing countries citizens to gain the dubious
prestrige or bragging rights of hosting "hi-tech"
MNCs but given today's sophisticated financial/legal
complex designed specifically to shift the burden
onto ordinary citizens who can't escape PAYE or GST,
you can see that the tax base is shifted
disproportinately onto individuals that can't
benefit from trusts or options. Take a look at News
Corp. Analysis have noted that because it uses
accounting discrepencies in Australia (as vs US
peers) it gains some marginal advantages which is
reflected in a somewhat stronger stock price which
is then used as over-inflated script for Mergers and
Acqusitions. There are a number of tricks that
global corporations can use to minimise tax burdens
that are not available to the average person
(foreign controlled entities, bermuda IP havans,
singaporean cap-gains free holdings, Tongean trusts,
cascading losses crystalised at high-tax
juristictions, etc). In summary, becauses taxes are
tied to a geographical location (despite the
ferverant enactments of US tax-citizenship and
European tax borders) there will always be countries
that can see benefits in providing off-shore
"financial" services (cough*BVI*cough). Of course
first-world governments are not immune as they find
out with sophsicated financial engineering, any
subsidy can be trasmitted offshore In summary
economic "efficiecy" may come at a social cost
(export of pollution/wastes/risks) to third world
countries that may rebound in the future when those
countries respond by emigrating. Certain
not-so-hidden objectives in the US and Europe in
promoting globalism is the hope that by improving
the financial state of unstable developing
countries, they avoid the political necessity (cough
CNN effect*cough) of sending their troops on
unnecessary pacification exercises, not to mention
keeping the wogs out of their middle-class comfort
zone (cough*Australia*cough).
So in summary,
though the theory is nice, the details need serious
attention to ensure that social responsibility is
also globalsed as well as economic benefits.
LL
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy
(Score:2)
by Mr.
Slippery (tms@spambefuddler-infamous.net) on
Monday January 08, @08:25AM EST (#74)
(User
#47854 Info) http://www.infamous.net/
|
Finally, the WTO is there to enforce
agreements, once struck (but don't forget it was YOUR
politicians that first have to agree).
That being the root of the problem - they
ain't our politicans. They're the megacorp's politicans,
bought and paid for. Which is why the agreements struck
are generally good for megacorps and bad for people.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms |
http://www.infamous.net/
U.S. Gov't-in-Exile:
http://www.USGovernment-in-Exile.org |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy
(Score:4, Insightful)
by sql*kitten on Monday
January 08, @09:50AM EST (#83)
(User
#1359 Info) http://www.kitten.org.uk/
|
| Which is why the agreements
struck are generally good for megacorps and bad for
people.
Those would be the same organizations who employ
millions of people, fund the machinery of state
through corporate/employment/windfall taxes, and that
your pension fund is invested in?
Things are not as black and white as the "anti
capitalist" movement would have you believe. What do
you suppose the world was like prior to globalization?
The garden of Eden?!
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy (Score:1)
by
teatime on Monday January 08, @09:55AM EST (#85)
(User
#225707 Info) |
The word globalization is a
misnomer. AS if the world was not already
"globalized". This is part of the clever rhetoric
employed by the WTO. I must add that this group and
the other protestors are not anti trade per say but
against trade deciions being made by a small group
of men that aren't elected, behind closed doors.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy (Score:3,
Interesting)
by sql*kitten on Monday January
08, @10:51AM EST (#95)
(User
#1359 Info) http://www.kitten.org.uk/
|
| AS if the world was not
already "globalized".
"Globalization" in this context usually means
the removal of barriers to trade, such as
tarriffs. These barriers are artificial anyway,
and were not usually erected for economic reasons.
For example, a politician might impose a tax in
imported steel in order to safeguard steelworkers
in his/her own country. Sometimes this might be
because the country wants to have steel production
capability because it needs to be able to
manufacture its own weapons, sometimes it's
because the politician wants to votes of the
steelworkers and their communities.
Doing so, however, screws the consumer by
making them pay higher prices, since without
competition the monopolies and unions can dictate
their own terms, it screws the taxpayer, who need
to pay for the subsidies, it screws trading
partners (other countries) who can't sell their
products (which may be cheaper or better) and
ultimately it screws the beneficiaries, who find
that as soon as the barriers are no longer
effective, they've become too inefficient to
survive.
I must add that this group and the other
protestors are not anti trade per say but against
trade deciions being made by a small group of men
that aren't elected, behind closed doors.
I've seen the posters and the demonstrators.
They're against capitalism, industry, trade, the
monetary system, the whole works. They seem to
think that if they just do away with the economy
altogether, they'll be free to party their whole
lives. Where on earth do they suppose their dole
comes from?
Now, personally, I'm happy for anyone to live
any lifestyle they want to. I'm just not happy
about paying for it.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy (Score:1)
by
flimflam
(jester at macconnect dot
com) on Monday January 08, @11:40AM EST
(#104)
(User
#21332 Info) |
"Globalization" in this context
usually means the removal of barriers to trade,
such as tarriffs. These barriers are artificial
anyway, and were not usually erected for
economic reasons. For example, a politician
might impose a tax in imported steel in order to
safeguard steelworkers in his/her own country.
Sometimes this might be because the country
wants to have steel production capability
because it needs to be able to manufacture its
own weapons, sometimes it's because the
politician wants to votes of the steelworkers
and their communities.
There
are always barriers to trade, whether or not they
are placed by polititians. There are natural ones
like oceans and mountains, and there are normal
variations in local economies. Plus there are
differences in social policies that lead to
differences costs of production. What the current
wave of globalization aims to do is essentially
negate past social policy aimed at improving
workers rights, environmental protection, etc. Big
(and some not so big) corporations don't like
these policies because they are expensive and cut
into corporate profits. But there are other
consituencies that need to be taken into account.
We need to look at what benefits society as a
whole -- and that includes working people,
students, unemployed people, etc. etc. whose
interests don't coincide with those of the
corporations.
I've seen the posters and the
demonstrators. They're against capitalism,
industry, trade, the monetary system, the whole
works. They seem to think that if they just do
away with the economy altogether, they'll be
free to party their whole lives. Where on earth
do they suppose their dole comes from?
You may have seen them, but
you clearly don't understand them.
-- I am
always an optimist, but frankly there is no hope.
-Hosni Mubarek |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy (Score:0)
by
Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08, @09:25PM
EST (#128)
|
I've seen the posters and
the demonstrators. They're against capitalism,
industry, trade, the monetary system, the whole
works. They seem to think that if they just do
away with the economy altogether, they'll be free
to party their whole lives. Where on earth do they
suppose their dole comes from?
Give me
a fucking break. You're a complete idiot. Please
go back to staring lovingly at your photographic
shrine to Ayn Rand, and spare us your uninformed
theoretical perspective. Until you've actually
been out on the streets with these people, don't
presume to tell us "how it is" from behind your
computer screen, just because you saw it on the
tee-vee and read it in your books. You're as
guilty of rendering things "black and white" as
the next moron, and your economic class is pretty
much laid bare by your stock set of dogmas. You
myopic wanker, I pray that life fucks you hard one
day and makes you re-evalutate all these
preconceived notions of yours.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy (Score:0,
Offtopic)
by bellings on Monday January 08,
@10:22AM EST (#88)
(User
#137948 Info) |
What do you suppose the world
was like prior to globalization? The garden of
Eden?!
Well, I don't know about you, but
it was pretty danged good for me. I had a trained
monkey butler.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy (Score:2)
by Mr.
Slippery (tms@spambefuddler-infamous.net)
on Monday January 08, @03:02PM EST (#112)
(User
#47854 Info) http://www.infamous.net/
|
Those would be the same
organizations who employ millions of people, fund
the machinery of state through
corporate/employment/windfall taxes, and that your
pension fund is invested in?
Large corporations pay little, if any tax. For
example, Cisco
and Microsoft pay no federal income taxes.
Cities and states fall all over themselves to give
tax breaks to megacorps in the name of attracting
jobs - instead of more sensibly and justly helping
smaller locally-owned businesses to grow.
(And I try to make my own investing socially
responsible, as best I can.)
And your point does not justify the way megacorps
buy legislators like baseball cards.
It's not just about globalization - the removal
of environmental, health, and justice considerations
from international trade policy is a symptom of too
much corporate power, not a cause.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms |
http://www.infamous.net/
U.S. Gov't-in-Exile:
http://www.USGovernment-in-Exile.org |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @08:25AM EST (#75)
|
How about speaking against the WTO
without violence OR trickery? Is that too much to ask?
Seriously, violence and stupid publicity stunts only harm
their public image. If their goal is to increase public
support for their positions, they need to spend their
resources trying to develop cogent arguments, back them up
with evidence, and educate the public. Seriously, if the
www.gatt.org site is any indication, this group doesn't
back their pranks up with any substance. The sad thing is
these jokesters are undermining the credibility of serious
free trade opponents and confusing their message.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy
(Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08,
@04:41PM EST (#118)
|
| Property Desctruction is not
violence.
So tell me where you live, and I'll burn down your
house.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Modded down???
(Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08,
@12:51PM EST (#106)
|
Why did this get modded down? It's on
topic and not a troll. What's the problem?
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy
(Score:1)
by SpacePunk (sensei@techdojo.net) on Monday January
08, @09:47AM EST (#82)
(User
#17960 Info) |
The problem is that the anti-trade folks
come off as a bunch of freakin assholes and lunatics. Any
person that is not in the grip of complete and total
insanity will take them seriously.
By reading this
message you agree to all concepts, statements, and idea's
contained in this message. |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Democracy
(Score:1)
by teatime on Monday January 08, @10:27AM EST
(#90)
(User
#225707 Info) |
|
In depth information about the WTO
As for your generalization concerning the looting. Can
you imagine 50,000 pissed off linux users protesting copy
protection on Har drives on the streets of Seattle? Can you
imagine an army of cops in battle gear who think that you
are the epitomy of evil? Can you imagine 20 to 30 people out
of the 50,000 misbehaving? That's what happened in Seattle.
The media mischaracerized practically everything about the
protests in Seattle in order to make the WTO look good. The
thoughts and opinions protesting in the streeets where
effectively marginalized by the focus on the few incidents
of property damage. What if the seeds your family has grown
for centuriesm were being patented by Monsanto and Backed by
the WTO?
NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
The WTO is not "in the
open"... (Score:1)
by fmaxwell (postmaster@127.0.0.1) on Monday January
08, @11:10AM EST (#97)
(User
#249001 Info) |
| Why, in a democratic society, should
anti-trade groups feel they have to con a trade
conference?
Because the WTO is not under any obligation to let
dissenters speak to their members.
Should they not be able to present their views in the
open?
The WTO is not "the open." The WTO has no obligation to
give the floor to every non-elected, non-appointed citizen
who wishes to air their views. Can you imagine the chaos
that would ensue if organizations like the WTO, U.N., and
NATO let each and every person/group that opposes them
speak?
Seems to me that there might more progress if the WTO
listened to speakers who opposed their viewpoint and the
anti-trade groups tried talking instead of providing a venue
for looters.
I am certain that the WTO is aware of the views of its
opponents. They are well-publicized and unlikely to be
overlooked.
I agree wholeheartedly with your statements against the
looting and rioting by anti-WTO groups. If they think that
their behavior is going to get them invited to address the
WTO, they are sadly mistaken.
I'm not opinionated. I'm right!
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
This is the most bogus site
around (Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @04:02AM EST (#4)
|
This is
bogus, they keep giving these lies. Someone needs to put an end to
the chaos!! third p0st too by the way!
And this is b0gus too. what do
youll think?
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Re:This is the most bogus
site around (Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous
Coward on Monday January 08, @04:06AM EST (#11)
|
its THIS
MADNESS! sorry, wasnt thinking, was trying to go as fast
as i could. Its not easy being a troll you know, Its caused
me great carpell tunnel syndrome. And i have a callice on my
ass too. I should sue slashdot!!
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:This is the most bogus
site around (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on
Monday January 08, @04:19AM EST (#21)
|
Mr. Goat sex. Why are lawyers so
infatuated with buggering goats? Is the law firm you work at
a place where goat fucking takes place, and if so, why don't
you post links to those pics. This one is tired.
ZZZZZZZZZZ
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
first (Score:-1,
Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08, @04:02AM EST
(#5)
|
fist up your ass
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
GATT Sucks!!! (Score:-1,
Troll)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08, @04:02AM EST (#6)
|
Down with those building the Global
Plantation!
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
|
|
No need to register!
(Score:-1, Troll)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08,
@04:02AM EST (#7)
|
| ...just use this handy link direct to the
article:
http://goatse.cx/
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
What are you talking
about? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @03:39PM EST (#113)
|
Really though he should have used the
the
partners link anyway. Everyone knows that's the link
to the nologin site by now anyway.
Moderators-
please moderate this one up as informative and the above
goatse.cx tripe down as the flamebait it is. Thank you.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
wake up bastards!
(Score:-1, Troll)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08,
@04:02AM EST (#8)
|
nobody posting?
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Hmmmm (Score:0)
by
Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08, @04:09AM EST (#13)
|
I think that getting email from any large
organization would be just plain boring. It takes many many emails
to see anything interesting about anything. Think of the mail you
recieve in a day. Most are junk or spam or jokes with 50
forwards....
[ Reply to
This | Parent
]
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Already a discussion about
this (Score:-1, Troll)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @04:12AM EST (#16)
|
There is a large discussion with some very
interesting points over at the waffle.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
|
|
shoulda known better
(Score:3, Informative)
by crayz on Monday January 08, @04:21AM
EST (#22)
(User
#1056 Info) |
If you really read the page, a lot of it is
satirical and someone should've realized something was up. e.g.:
"These electorates, always reluctant to adopt the
rational thinking of the free trade extremists (who have, after all,
proved their worth by being the world's wealthiest people, or hired
by same), are the only real obstacle to the kind of progress and
development that is considered most likely to benefit all."
"Does free trade mean a high growth rate?
There is
no evidence at all that it does. There is evidence it does not..."
"Does free trade mean a better standard of living?
During the last thirty years, the U.S. market has been
"opened" and deregulated more, and more quickly, than that of any
other developed country. But the average hours worked per year in
the U.S. increased greatly between 1980 and 1997, while in every
other developed country but one, they declined. Compared with 1973,
Americans must now work six weeks more per year to achieve the same
standard of living--and not surprisingly, Americans are increasingly
dissatisfied with their lives...."
"The WTO's purpose is to
broaden and enforce global free trade. Global free trade already
gives multinational corporations vast powers to enforce their will
against democratic governments. Expanding these corporate powers--as
the WTO intends to do in Seattle and beyond--will further cripple
governments and make them even less able to protect their citizens
from the ravages of those entities whose only aim is to grow richer
and richer and richer."
etc.
BTW, if you haven't
already, read the story at the NYT, it's really hilarious.
Ain't
Nobody's Business if You Do: read it
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
|
|
problem not unique to
internet (Score:2, Interesting)
by mkcmkc on Monday
January 08, @04:25AM EST (#24)
(User
#197982 Info) http://home.kc.rr.com/mikecoleman/
|
| Around 1990, as I recall, a Los Angeles TV
station called the embassy of a Latin American country (I forget) to
ask for an interview with the ambassador. Unluckily for them, they
actually reached the phone number of a local actor, who
enterprisingly showed up for the interview in a suit, mustache, and
thick glasses. He did it straight, with a nice accent, and then
revealed the stunt a few days later.
Congrats to the WTO on having a sense of humor. Is there anyone
that doesn't love this stuff?
P.S. "bunny
burgers"
"Not an actor, but he plays one on TV." |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Re:problem not unique to
internet (Score:2, Informative)
by Anonymous
Coward on Monday January 08, @04:37AM EST (#28)
|
| Congrats to the WTO on having a sense
of humor. Is there anyone that doesn't love this stuff?
They don't really have a sense of humor. They complained
bitterly about it not so long ago. Here
is an earlier statement by the WTO... to which gatt.org
responds on their website.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:problem not unique to
internet (Score:1)
by Kierthos (Kierthos@aol.com) on Monday January 08,
@06:24AM EST (#50)
(User
#225954 Info) |
Considering what the Yes Men could
have done and didn't do, I'd say both sides are showing
signs of great restraint here. Not that I like the W.T.O.
or anything, but can't anyone else see the inherent humour
value of this whole thing?
BTW, I wonder if anyone
has ever "crashed" a computer conference pretending to
from Microsoft and gotten away with it? (Or for that
matter, crashed a computer conference as a /.
representative...)
Kierthos
"Anonymous
Coward? More like Anonymous Moron." - NecroPuppy |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Interesting...
(Score:0)
by Karma
Sink (oakianus@metallicasoldout.com)
on Monday January 08, @04:32AM EST (#26)
(User
#229208 Info) |
Although I despise the WTO, I am really
pleasantly surprised that they are taking something like this in
stride, and with a sense of humour. Of course, they probably have
enough people pissed off at them, and they'd like to keep anyone
else from getting angry...
This doesn't really make me like
them, but it certainly makes me respect them a bit more, as a
group.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
(Score:3, Funny)
by don.g
(donald@gordon.co.nz.remove.everthing.after.and.inc)
on Monday January 08, @04:37AM EST (#29)
(User
#6394 Info) http://my.dis.org.nz/
|
That was excellent. Really. I'm surprised they
managed to carry it that far, but in terms of practical jokes,
sending a bogus WTO representitve to a conference UNDETECTED who
raises a few eyebrows (unsurprisingly) but still gets away with it
has to rank up there with the best.
--
content->headlines(); |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Re:HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @04:44PM EST (#119)
|
I find it especially funny that everyone
seems to have missed a big point: The only thing that the
delegates found remiss were the Italian work ethic comments.
Thus:
Either the delegates weren't paying attention,
which negates the whole point of the conference,
OR
The delegates agreed with the assertions of the Yes
Men's rep, ie that the world should be moved towards a
consumerist monoculture to remove culturally-caused trade
barriers. See the Powerpoint presentation the guy gave at:
http://www.theyesmen.org/wto/ppt/sld001.htm
HA HA ha um ugh.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
Mixed feelings...
(Score:5, Insightful)
by Cody
Hatch (cody@chaos.net.nz) on Monday
January 08, @04:40AM EST (#30)
(User
#136430 Info) http://chaos.net.nz/
|
I've got mixed feelings, to tell the truth. On
the one hand, I deeply dislike organizations that try and bully all
and sundry (remember eToys?) about domain names. And as an added
bonus, the message of their victims (if any) is usually cool. Nobody
LIKES to see someone making jokes about corporate stupidity get shut
down by the corporation in question--you lose access to the jokes.
In this case, it seems the WTO is being cool about this
website--which they can be congratulated on. This is, after all, the
way it's supposed to work. On the other hand that website is getting
close to crossing the very fine line between satire (one of the
highest forms of humour) and libel, which is just lying about
people.
I looked through the site, and these people aren't
saying anything informed or intelligent...or even funny. There are
legitament criticizism of many of the things the WTO has done...but
these people don't seem to know what they are. There are funny jokes
that could be made...but these people aren't making them. The WTO
has done stupid things...but these people don't know what they are.
There are flaws in some bits of the economic reasoning you could
drive a truck through...but these people have no clue. The entire
point of the site seems to be to confuse and mislead--NOT to
entertain or convince.
As it happens, I agree with much (not
all) of WTO policy. But I ALSO agree with the right for people to
disagree. These people may or may not have the right message--that
doesn't matter. But they aren't using the right method. I have a
right to tell you what I think of Bush--I don't have the right to
tell you I *AM* Bush.
How come it's always the cool sites
that get slapped down?
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Re:-1 yourself
flame-boy. get a llife (Score:0)
by Anonymous
Coward on Monday January 08, @03:48PM EST (#116)
|
I don't think you understand the
point of the other AC above there. It isn't a matter of
agreeing with the message, or trying to make light of
it. The point is that in a public forum quite a few
deductions are made about a poster based upon there
spelling/grammar. You see, these are the only ways of
presenting one's self online, and are the online
parallels of being able to button up a shirt properly,
or remembering to zip one's pants before leaving the
house.
There isn't an argument to make here:
Either learn to spell before posting or run your message
through a spell checker on your system before pasting it
onto Slashdot, particularly if you anticipate getting
some sort of insightful moderation. Professionals and
academics read this site, and it would be unfortunate to
miss an opportunity to be quoted in a national
publication or paper because of a few easily avoidable
errors.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Mixed
feelings... (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on
Monday January 08, @09:00AM EST (#78)
|
| On the one hand, I deeply dislike
organizations that try and bully all and sundry (remember
eToys?)
You don't seem to have realized - the gatt.org site
is the old EToy.org site (now defunct) - just with a
slightly different look and feel, and with a different
cover-up!
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Mixed
feelings... (Score:1)
by consumer on Monday
January 08, @12:56PM EST (#107)
(User
#9588 Info) |
| On the one hand, I deeply dislike
organizations that try and bully all and sundry (remember
eToys?) about domain names. [...] I have a right to tell you
what I think of Bush--I don't have the right to tell you I
*AM* Bush.
Whether you agreed with it or not, the eToys lawsuit had
many similarities to this. The etoy site had pictures of
toys on the front page, and kids were going there by
accident, getting tricked by the toy pictures, and clicking
around on the etoy site which contained various S & M
pictures, etc. They refused to say something on their site
about not being eToys (unless they were paid a hefty sum),
so eToys took them to court to stop the complaints they were
getting from parents.
Now these anti-GATT people are deliberately trying to
dupe visitors into thinking they are officially represent an
organization they have no affiliation with. I don't think
they should be allowed to do that. They can parody or insult
GATT, but this was no parody.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Mixed
feelings... (Score:1)
by randomuser on Monday
January 08, @06:28PM EST (#123)
(User
#302557 Info) |
| a) I think you are mixed up about the
eToys suit. Etoy had been running their art website years
before Etoys came along - Etoy weren't trying to confuse
Etoys customers - they weren't even interested in Etoys
until Etoys started messing with them.
b) The GATT site is a parody. A work does not have to
do pratfalls to be a parody. If you read it, you'll see
it's a parody. The conference organizers obviously didn't
read it - they just clicked the mailto link.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Mixed
feelings... (Score:1)
by consumer on Monday
January 08, @07:48PM EST (#125)
(User
#9588 Info) |
| I think you are mixed up about
the eToys suit. Etoy had been running their art website
years before Etoys came along - Etoy weren't trying to
confuse Etoys customers - they weren't even interested
in Etoys until Etoys started messing with them.
Sounds like you never actually saw their site before
the lawsuit. Yes, they were around before eToys, but at
the time of the suit they were clearly aware of the
confusion they were causing and loving it. They did
their fake IPO thing as a joke about the eToys IPO, and
had pictures of little plastic toys on their front page.
Remember, the major achievement these guys are famous
for is putting the word "playboy" in their META tags to
lead people who searched for Playboy astray.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Mixed
feelings... (Score:1)
by randomuser on
Monday January 08, @09:01PM EST (#126)
(User
#302557 Info) |
| Yes, I've been looking at the Etoy
site since about 1997.... it's been around since aroun
94/95. When you say "at the time of the suit" you are
talking about a time when they had been already in a
tussle with Etoys for months. Sure, Etoy being Etoy,
if someone messes with them, they don't miss the
opportunity to speak their mind. If you've been in a
similar situation (I have), you understand the gut
reaction to mock the "tyrants." It's important to be
able to do that, not just roll over.
What do you mean by the fake toys? Sure, they've
used those little lego-esque characters, but I
wouldn't think those characters would make anyone
think "Etoys!" except for the lawsuit situation.
Toywar, obviously, uses all sorts of Toy references,
but of course, it was all about the war with Etoys.
I think you're trivializing the work of etoy and
even the Digital Hijack project itself by your
reference to "playboy" in meta tags; there's a lot
more to it than that; it's like saying the WTO is best
known for putting unflattering pictures of Mike Moore
on its website. :-) ... But even that isn't really
important; I may not be a fan of all of the work of
eToy, but they should certainly have a right to the
website they were operating for years... the Etoys
tussle had been going on for months before the actual
suit hit, and Etoy did respond to it, but it was Etoys
who threw the first legal punches.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Mixed
feelings... (Score:2, Insightful)
by randomuser
on Monday January 08, @06:40PM EST (#124)
(User
#302557 Info) |
| In this case, it seems the WTO is
being cool about this website--which they can be
congratulated on.
Only to avoid bad PR. Here's
more about how they feel on the matter. Remember, it's a
press release, with Fluff Value Added.
What have things come to when we congratulate
corporations or mega-corp-organizations for not abusing the
legal system with SLAPP suits against their critics? Shows
you where the status quo has fallen to, and probably why
groups like the yesmen feel the need to shake up the
corporate hegemony somewhat creatively.
I looked through the site, and these people aren't
saying anything informed or intelligent...or even funny.
Try reading it again. If you feel you have to read it too
carefully to get it, then think how much more carefully
people need to read the WTO's site.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
208.48.26.217
www.nytimes.com (Score:5, Informative)
by cyberdonny on
Monday January 08, @04:43AM EST (#31)
(User
#46462 Info) |
| > Yes, it's the New York times, so
no-login URLs will doubtless soon appear.
Actually, the URL given
(http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/07/weekinreview/07 WORD.html) is
already a no-login URL, if your /etc/hosts or DNS
nameserver is set up "correctly". Just be sure you have the
following line somewhere in your
/etc/hosts:
208.48.26.217
www.nytimes.com
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
GOATSE.CX
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @04:50AM EST (#35)
|
nslookup goatse.cx
...
Non-authoritative answer:
Name: goatse.cx
Address: 208.48.26.217
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:GOATSE.CX
(Score:1)
by cyberdonny on Monday January 08, @05:09AM
EST (#40)
(User
#46462 Info) |
Nope, goatse is 209.242.124.241. But
goatse won't work anyways, if you access it by IP: It is
on a multi-homed site, and the default site is an
innocuous looking picture of a cow.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:GOATSE.CX
(Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08,
@03:51PM EST (#117)
|
Yeah it looks innocent enough but
you have no idea what's going on behind that cow! I've
seen the whole picture set, I know. You want the
cow..you can't handle the cow...
What were we
talking about again?
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re: rewriting the
URL (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @11:46AM EST (#105)
|
For users who are not the sys admin,
manually rewriting the URL is the only option, and I am
glad that it was revealed. Profound did not discredit
the benefits of reconfiguring your DNS, he just gave
another option.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:nonlogin
nytimes... (Score:2)
by Speare
(e d @ e x p l o r a t i . c o m)
on Monday January 08, @10:35AM EST (#92)
(User
#84249 Info) http://www.explorati.com/people/ed/
|
|
NYT's online group just laid off 17 people. I wonder if
it's because they aren't getting the revenues generated by
selling the marketing info from those annoying
registrations?
I doubt they'll change anytime soon, though now they're
the only "registration required" login that c|net, Wired and
Slashdot regularly link.
Ed Halley [ e d @ e x p l o
r a t i . c o m ] |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:208.48.26.217
www.nytimes.com (Score:1)
by algae on Monday
January 08, @01:23PM EST (#108)
(User
#2196 Info) http://www.netspace.org/~algae
|
|
Why do people get their panties in such a knot about not
wanting to do a simple site registration. Fer pete's sake,
I've been registered at nytimes.com for as long as it's
existed (1994 maybe?). It's not like they're getting any
more personal information out of me than if I actually
subscribed to their PAPER newspaper. Actually, they're
getting far less info than a non-web subscription.
So, do all these anti-registration cookie people also
feel that I shouldn't ever subscribe to a magazine (paper,
not electron), since that involves giving my name and
address out? (Far more information than I gave away to
register for nytimes.com)
Slashdot User since 1998 |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Are you
joking?? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on
Monday January 08, @02:31PM EST (#110)
|
There are 3,000 sites out there that
require registration/login. Each has different rules about
usernames, and often one will find one's preferred
username(s) already in use. Each has different rules about
passwords, so often one can't use one's preferred password
(many sites require less that 8 characters, many require
more than 8 characters, many require punctuation in the
password, many don't allow punctuation). So basically,
you'll probably wind up using as many as 3,000 different
username/passwords. Since nobody is as anal as to remember
3,000 username/passwords, that means registered a NEW
account EVERY time you visit the site. I've registered
TWELVE accounts at the NY Times because I couldn't
remember my username/password, and each registration
requires a person to basically fill out his life story in
a form: by the way, the New York Times think there are
twelve people out there who make greater than
$100,000/year, uses a 486, is unmarried with 12 kids,
enjoys wine, antique collecting, and power tools, has not
bought toilet paper within the past 12 months, and reads
every newspaper in the country.
Polute their
database, kids: it's good honest work.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:208.48.26.217
www.nytimes.com (Score:1)
by Phibian on Monday
January 08, @05:11PM EST (#120)
(User
#213437 Info) |
Why should I subscribe? If I were
paying for the nytimes paper edition, they would *need* to
know certain information in order to deliver the paper and
charge me for it. Even if the paper were free, I'd still
*need* to give them sufficient info to allow delivery.
Similarly, if I was receiving an electronic version of the
nytimes (whether free or not), they would *need* my email
address in order to deliver the email. But: they don't
*need* any information at all in order to provide the
website version to me (aside from the stuff that goes on
in the background, which I think they are perfectly
welcome to, as long as they cannot link that aggregate
data to individuals) I resent having to provide them with
extra information that they don't need, for major
inconvenience to me, and for limited benefit to them
(which they ARE entitled to, as content providers who are
trying to make some money off their labors).
Inconveniences: why should I have to remember some other
password, and why should I have to spend the time
registering? Worse, the use of registration forces the
user to give up privacy. If you get the paper version, the
marketing department of the paper can't target your junk
mail based on the fact that you spent slightly longer
reading article A vs Article B, and thus must be
passionately interested in reading more articles like
article A, or worse yet, wish to purchase the latest
related products. But I digress. Mainly, I don't wish to
subscribe to nytimes, because the only context in which I
read it is the occasional time where it is a) quoted in
Slashdot, and b) also looks interesting. I've never read
anything so compelling that I've said "Gee, I should get
an account and go to the site every day.."
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
Obligatory link (Score:-1,
Redundant)
by Karma Sink (oakianus@metallicasoldout.com) on Monday January
08, @04:49AM EST (#34)
(User
#229208 Info) |
Here's
a link.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Immediate reaction to headline
(OT) (Score:0, Offtopic)
by Billings
(bill_ings@hotmail.hotmail.whatever.com)
on Monday January 08, @05:06AM EST (#38)
(User
#87611 Info) |
| ((Misleading Web Page) . (Conference
Organizers))
That's my geek joke for the day. Time to go to hell for that one
now.
Something profound. |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
At least they weren't throwing
bricks... (Score:3, Interesting)
by sanemind (spamme@rhodes.mine.nu) on Monday January 08,
@05:07AM EST (#39)
(User
#155251 Info) |
...molotov cocktails, or destroying the
obligatory local McDonalds resteraunt franchiser's property. This
was at least only intellectual violence and vandalism, somewhat of a
step up compared to the average vitriolic thuggishness embraced by
the modern anti-capitalists, anarchists, and the like.
Still, the later continuation of the prank with the, ahem,
joke about the 'pieing' of the man turning out to have been a method
for the delivery of botulism toxin... Biological warfare; of course,
they are only joking, right? Still, as real-world pies in the face
have become a popular mechanism for delivery of some subversive
shaming dissent [or, to be more honest, of symbolic violence. Of
demonstrating to someone that you can get to them physically, and
that your ilk might not always be only packing a meringue to assult
them with].
---
man sig
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Re:At least they weren't
throwing bricks... (Score:-1, Offtopic)
by
Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08, @10:02AM EST (#86)
|
Your view of the protestors is
equivalent to the lame rhetoric the media spits out about
hackers. HAs it ever occured to you that people are pissed
off that they are being taxed but not represented by these
world governing bodies? Is uppoes you woudl lambast the
american revolutionaries as vitriolic thugs for pouring tea
in the Boston harbor before the Amewrican
Revolution.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
WTO doesn't have much of a sense
of humor... (Score:1)
by randomuser on Monday January 08,
@05:10AM EST (#41)
(User
#302557 Info) |
Since everyone seems to think the WTO has such a
great sense of humor about this, check out their earlier statement
on related matters.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Re:WTO doesn't have much
of a sense of humor... (Score:1)
by Cody Hatch (cody@chaos.net.nz) on Monday January 08,
@06:26AM EST (#51)
(User
#136430 Info) http://chaos.net.nz/
|
*scratch head*
Sounds fair
enough to me. What he said was, in essence: "These people
are complaining that the WTO is not transparent (true). Not
only is the WTO transparent (also true), the form of these
complaints harms transparency (very definetly true)."
On the other hand, it wouldn't even be an abuse of
the law (although the law probably should be changed--but
that's a seperate issue) to do the "standard" thing, and sic
a bunch of lawyers, writs, restraining orders, court orders,
and so forth on those responsible. Other organizations have
done it with less grounds--and sone so succesfully, over a
more important issue, and with less public outcry than I
judge they would get here.
All in all, I'd say the
fact that the WTO disagrees with their critics is hardly
surprising, or proof of anything. If they didn't disagree
with them, they wouldn't be critics would they? But note
that instead of sending in the heavies, they're talking
about it. No, they don't like it (who would?), but I'm at a
loss to think of anything BETTER they could do.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:WTO doesn't have
much of a sense of humor... (Score:1)
by
randomuser on Monday January 08, @06:13PM EST (#122)
(User
#302557 Info) |
| Transparency? That's gatt.org's point.
WTO are not transparent. They try to prove they are
transparent by boasting about hundreds of thousands of
documents online at their website? Where do they talk
about how they pressure countries to change laws aimed at
protecting public health, working standards, etc., because
they interfere with "free trade?" Somewhere in the
hundreds of thousands of documents?
Yeah, great, WTO can sic lawyers on their critics and
abuse the legal system just like all the other big
corporations. What swell guys they are for not doing that;
lets give a medal of honor to any corporation or group
that doesn't resort to SLAPP suits as a means of silencing
individuals without the financial means to fight them.
Anyway, the point of my post was to point out the
obvious, which has also been stated elsewhere - the WTO
are not "cool;" they do not "have a sense of humor."
They simply don't want the bad PR for suing their
critics.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
Wow. (Score:1)
by pb (pdbaylie@eos.ncsu.edu) on Monday January 08,
@05:14AM EST (#42)
(User
#1020 Info) http://www4.ncsu.edu/~pdbaylie
|
Troll stories at troll times; what will they
think of next?
Man, I'm only reading slashdot at night if I
can help it now; the WTO will never restrict my pancakes, right,
ninjas???
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely
moderate.
1020 Signal is better than noise. |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Its RTMark (Score:0)
by
Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08, @05:17AM EST (#43)
|
The people who forced the eToys corporation to
drop it's baseless trademark suit
(http://slashdot.org/articles/00/01/25/2049214.sht ml) against the
eToy art collective are at it again. Several links on the gatt.org
site take you to http://rtmark.com or one of rtmark's other cultural
interventions. They are an art collective that uses the tools of
global capitolism against itself. Using the limited liability of a
corporate entity, they throw a monkey wrench into the works of
faceless global corporate entities.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Practical Jokes...
(Score:1)
by F1D094 on Monday January 08, @05:50AM EST (#44)
(User
#302562 Info) |
Definitely in the running for the best practical
joke of the year. It just nudges out my previous favorite, the Monolith
in Seattle.....Judging from the number of /. readers, this stunt
might actually cause more registered voters to mull over what it is
the WTO is actually up to. Moreso than the "protestors in Nike
tennis shoes." ever did.
Advice is like cooking. You should try
it before feeding it to others. |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
LetsRiot!
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @06:39AM EST (#54)
|
You know what else might help is if you
go to LetsRiot! and
participate in a little memetic warfare!
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Racial Rupture!
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @06:56AM EST (#59)
|
black or white it's all a disgrace
mockery of the human race
don't think you really
wanna try it
it's a total racial riot
chorus:
racial rupture - peace destructor
racial rupture -
blows the structure
invasion of the poor chinese
looks like it's become a disease
their shattered
dreams still reach some ears
and tell them of their
darkest fear
chorus:
racial rupture - fear the
blame
racial rupture - the world's insane
africans
who cross the border
driven back by human mortar
foreign children covered with flies
why dosen't
this country open it's
eyes
peace
destructor
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
Gatt people are fair
(Score:2)
by mirko
(mirko@myfamilyname.org) on Monday
January 08, @05:57AM EST (#45)
(User
#198274 Info) http://www.vidovic.org/mirko
|
You might dislike Gatt people's economic/social
positions but others groups would have prosecuted the jokers for
much less.
At least they were fair enough to take it as what it
was : a joke.
--
Have you heard the Free Software
Song Remix ? |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
WTO can't get the domain name
back... (Score:2)
by cperciva (cperciva@sfu.ca) on Monday January 08, @06:03AM
EST (#46)
(User
#102828 Info) |
... at least not if the ICANN UDRP is applied.
One of the requirements for tranfer of a domain name is that it is
being used "in bad faith". No problem there, they are deliberately
misleading people. Right?
Wrong.
The four criteria
which can construe "bad faith" are:
(i) circumstances indicating that you have
registered or you have acquired the domain name primarily for the
purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain
name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the
trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant,
for valuable consideration in excess of your documented
out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or
(ii) you have registered the domain name in order to
prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting
the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that you have
engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or
(iii) you have
registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting
the business of a competitor; or
(iv) by using the domain
name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial
gain, Internet users to your web site or other on-line location,
by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark
as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your
web site or location or of a product or service on your web site
or location.
For the first one, they have shown
no sign of wanting to sell the domain name, so that doesn't apply.
For the second, AFAIK they haven't "engaged in a pattern of such
conduct", so that doesn't apply.
For the third, the WTO
isn't a competitor of theirs, so that doesn't apply. And the
last doesn't apply because they aren't trying to attrack users
for commercial gain.
So even though the domain was
obviously registered in bad faith, none of the "bad faith"
requirements are met, and the domain shouldn't be transferred
according to the UDRP.
Of course, that hasn't stopped WIPO
in the past...
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Misleading domain name?
(Score:2, Interesting)
by Garry Anderson on Monday January 08,
@06:17AM EST (#48)
(User
#194949 Info) http://www.skilful.com/
|
I believe that WIPO should change its name to
something more descriptive and fitting. For those that missed
this:
WIPO PRESS RELEASE - September 11, 2000
The
World Intellectual Property Organisation, to improve commercial
profitability, are to have a name and Internet site change. Formally
WIPO, is now to be known as SWIPO. We can be found at our new site
SWIPO.ORG.
We have the full
backing of United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO.GOV) and Internet Corporation
for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN.ORG).
We are the first
and most excellent of the arbitration services for ICANNs big
business friendly process - the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy
(UDRP). Do not think just because we are part of the United Nations
(UN.ORG) that we are even-handed,
therefore may rule against you. Being financed by big business - we
know where our loyalties lie.
We are to shortly start an
advertising campaign to inform of this name change, aimed at the
corporate and celebrity world. We will guarantee to them with
absolute certainty, that they we will get any domain name they covet
- whoever already owns it. Unless owners have more money and power,
of course. We can do this because of rationalisation, ridding
ourselves of honest panellists in readiness for our Initial Public
Offering in January 2001.
Do not use any of the other
arbitration services - eResolution etc, even in the past we were the
most successful in getting the name you want. We made the rules - we
know all the tricks. We are the most powerful, growing daily, and
can take whatever you want. Tell us the name; we will do the rest.
Example: Paramount approached us a short while back, saying they
would quite like CREW.com for their camera crews to use. We thought
about it and came up with a winning excuse - Star Trek has the most
famous crews of any ship on the planet (or off). We told them to
hang on until after a smaller case for the name had gone through. It
would be silly to turn down jCREW money.
We will push aside
ALL competition, using the quote from Francis Gurry, Advertising and
Publicity Executive, "Domain Name Hijacking - Forget the Rest - We
Swipe Best".
We deny all of the libellous slurs being put by
our critics. WIPO.org.uk say we do
not look after the interests of all trademark holders. It is a
malicious lie; we follow a strict set procedure to make sure we do
so:
1. We give domain to UDRP appellant, after their cheque
clears.
2. We contact each trademark in turn, no matter how
obscure or tenuous the link.
3. We offer them arbitration to take
domain away from the new owner.
Case in point: After winning
them JethroTull.com, told Tull about JT.com, which we just usurped
for Japan Tobacco. Tull decided it was wanted; their money is as
good as anyone's. We came up a winning argument; they are 'JT' to
friends, all families and fans.
Seen a domain name you would
like to hijack? Order it now from our site at SWIPO.ORG.
"Domain Name
Hijacking - Forget the Rest - We Swipe Best"
Semblance of any
the above to reality is purely a joke, as is the true state of
affairs. All TM acknowledged. This has been written in the spirit of
'free speech' (you may have heard the expression). SWIPO is pointed
to WIPO. If you want more of the truth (you be the judge), visit my
site wipo.org.uk. You can see the
answer to trademark problems there.
Wipo.org.uk and swipo.org
have no connection with, and wishes to be totally disassociated
from, the World Intellectual Property Organization. The above is
considered and informed opinion.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
In case you missed it
(Score:-1, Troll)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08,
@06:37AM EST (#52)
|
In case you missed it, here is that weird Goat
Sex link everyone seems to be talking about: www.goatse.cx
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Re:In case you missed
it (Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on
Monday January 08, @06:40AM EST (#55)
|
is that your mother ejecting you from
inside her or some Kro$oft-koder implementing some MFC
method ?
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:In case you missed
it (Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on
Monday January 08, @06:46AM EST (#56)
|
| Kro$oft-koder
implementing some MFC method ?
KFC method. It's the Kernel's Secret RECIPE of herbs
and spices. But for the love of Christ, why don't they
just spell it out instead of using majuscules? Huh. On a
related topic, I hope my Betty and Veronica double digest
arrives in the mail today.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
Misleading domain names
(Score:1)
by TheMoog (matthew@argonaut.com.no-schpamm) on Monday
January 08, @07:01AM EST (#61)
(User
#8407 Info) http://www.monkeypilot.com/
|
| On the subject of misleading domain names, a
friend of mine used to have 'ilm.com' ... ostensibly 'ImageLine
Multimedia'
He had a barrage of CVs/happy birthdays to lucas@ilm.com before
eventually ilm bought the domain back off of him.
--
Connection Beset By Beer |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
No login URL (Score:-1,
Redundant)
by fungai (fungaiatmightydotseeohdotzetay) on Monday January
08, @07:04AM EST (#62)
(User
#133594 Info) |
If you don't have a NYT login/password go to http://partners.nytimes.com/2001/01/07/weekinreview/07WORD.html
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
|
|
negativland's new gig
(Score:1)
by jothenull (jothenull@NO.SPAM.home.com) on Monday January 08,
@07:27AM EST (#70)
(User
#141276 Info) http://www.mp3.com/robotman
|
check out http://www.gatt.org/fundintel.html
C'mon... when you see the words "Intellectual Property Fund"
and Negativland together, how can you take it seriously?
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Spoofs & Legality
(Score:2, Interesting)
by deran9ed (deran9ed@hushmail.com) on Monday January 08,
@07:40AM EST (#71)
(User
#300694 Info) http://www.antioffline.com/
|
I think I have done the most spoofs for one site
to date with everything ranging from Microsoft, FreeBSD, SourceForge,
ABCNews, Redhat, Firestone, Napster, Slashdot, and a
few more, I think people should exercise a bit of common sense
before following the information contained on spoofed
pages.
Now anyone can surely see any of the pages are made in
good or bad taste depending on judgement, and many can say "They
should have known better", should anyone have been technologically
challenged to take anything serious, but people have to take into
consideration that not everyone is a tech savvy /.'er and will often
fall for these jokes and misguided info filled pages (Lord knows
agencies like the FBI play off some judges who are non technically
adept in an effort to get warrant issued.) I've had people who
thought these were hacks I had done, I had those complain to me
about their (spoofed sites) judgement to use offensive things, so
its clear that some people are dolts.
Should someone have
intent to make money, misguide (for financial gain), or other ill
motive outside of just typical fun poking of a site using a spoof
then there should be some form restitution they should have the pay
and the content be removed.
Coming soon, NSA Spoof
Home sweet home
access-list 102 deny tcp any any established |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Re:Spoofs &
Legality (Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward
on Monday January 08, @10:04AM EST (#87)
|
I think I have done the most spoofs
for one site to date
Next time, go for quality
over quantity. Those spoofs are terrible.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
They are not the good guys
(Score:2, Insightful)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08,
@09:31AM EST (#79)
|
| Well.. Everybody seems heartily conserted that
the WTO is only a buch of good guys because they didn't open their
can of lawyers against all jokers in their path.. (what apparently
is mere good conduct these days or so it seems)
Let me be the first to post it then:the WTO is not sueing
these people because they could not possibly face any more bad
publicity
The WTO is simply a cartel beyond the biggest of cartels that you
can think of; they unite the biggest corporations (countries) to
come to terms about resources and prices. Simple as that. Nothing
free market about it. (As is most of capitalism is most western
countries; they all start resembling communism in an eerie way by
now). Be afraid.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
internic.com
(Score:1)
by hymie3 on Monday January 08, @09:35AM EST (#80)
(User
#187934 Info) |
| One of my friends, matt, was the guy who
originally registered internic.com. (not the aussie guy; matt sold
the domain to the aussie guy) Matt had up a fake internic web page.
It was very obviously a fake page; lots of questions like "what is
your quest?" and "spoon?"
People would send him mail all of the time saying stuff
like "I have to get my domain registered or I will lose my job!!!"
The best part of it all was that internic.net employees started
referring trouble cases to matt at internic.com (obviously knowing
that was not the correct site).
If you can scrounge up some old usenet archives, alt.pud had a
lot of misplaced mail forwarded there.
hymie
Stale oreos *do* taste good! |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
10 reason to oppose the
WTO (Score:0, Insightful)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday
January 08, @10:36AM EST (#93)
|
What are ten key reasons to oppose or even shut
down the WTO?
1. The WTO prioritizes trade and commercial
considerations over all other values. WTO rules generally require
domestic laws, rules, and regulations designed to further worker,
consumer, environmental, health, safety, human rights, animal
protection, or other non-profit centered interests to be undertaken
in the "least trade restrictive" fashion possible?almost never is
trade subordinated to these noncommercial concerns
2. The WTO
undermines democracy by shrinking the choices available to
democratically controlled governments, with violations potentially
punished with harsh penalties
3. The WTO actively promotes
global trade even at the expense of efforts to promote local
economic development and policies that move communities, countries,
and regions in the direction of greater self-reliance
4. The
WTO forces Third World countries to open their markets to rich
multinationals and to abandon efforts to protect infant domestic
industries. In agriculture, the opening to foreign imports will
catalyze a massive social dislocation of many millions of rural
people on a scale that only war approximates
5. The WTO
blocks countries from acting in response to potential risk?impeding
governments from moving to resolve harms to human health or the
environment, much less imposing preventive precautions
6.
The WTO establishes international health, environmental, and other
standards at a low level through a process called "harmonization."
Countries or even states and cities can only exceed these low norms
by winning special permission, rarely granted. The WTO thereby
promotes a race to the bottom and imposes powerful constraints to
keep people there
7. WTO tribunals rule on the "legality" of
nations? laws, but carry out their work behind closed doors. The
very few therefore impact the life situations of the many, without
even a pretense at participation, cooperation, and democracy
8. The WTO limits governments? ability to use their
purchasing dollars for human rights, environmental, worker rights,
and other non-commercial purposes. The WTO requires that governments
make purchases based only on quality and cost considerations. Not
only must corporations operate with an open eye regarding profits
and a blind eye to everything else, so must governments and thus
whole populations
9. WTO rules do not allow countries to
treat products differently based on how they were
produced?irrespective of whether they were made with brutalized
child labor, with workers exposed to toxins or with no regard for
species protection
10. WTO rules permit and, in some cases,
require patents or similar exclusive protections for life forms. In
other words, the WTO does whatever it can to promote the interests
of huge multinationals?there are no principles at work, only power
and greed
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
DJ Spooky, robots, and the
Frontier Fund (Score:2, Informative)
by Jammer@CMH
(Jamie@NetEnabled SpamSpamSpammitySpam
.com) on Monday January 08, @11:08AM EST (#96)
(User
#117977 Info) http://www.netenabled.com/
|
| Check out their page for The Frontier Fund,
managed by DJ Spooky, the
Subliminal Kid.
From the description of one of the holdings (VRWR):
"Develop a 'virtual worker' system that allows
populations normally engaged in migrant labor to work over the web
instead. For example, develop a telepresent robot that picks
oranges or strawberries while being controlled through the
internet. Then, unionize both the robots and the telepresent
workers." Not hijacking. Clever prank.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
More information...
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 08,
@11:11AM EST (#98)
|
Can be found at the Yes Men's website.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Differences in
misleadings (Score:1)
by TWX_the_Linux_Zealot
(oliver.clozoff@usa.net) on Monday
January 08, @11:14AM EST (#101)
(User
#227666 Info) |
It's one thing if someone puts up a banner ad on
a site that is a misspelling of a company's site, it's quite another
to build a page that has "World Trade Organization" at the top of
the page and "World Trade Organization / GATT" in the header for the
title. This could be interpreted as a group claiming false identity.
If I were to somehow get a domain name that was the name of a
company or organization and I put information on a site claiming to
be that organization, I'd probably be convicted of fraud
. I think that they can use the domain name IF the are willing
to upfront claim who they are versus intentionally trying to
convince people that this is the official site of the WTO. I don't
know about anyone else, but if someone wants me to take their side
in a cause they'd better be damn honest about everything upfront,
else they will lose my support, and I will also try to convince
others that they are a con. This is a perfect
example.
"Titanic was 3hr and 17min long. They could
have lost 3hr and 17min from that."
- Bruce Campbell |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Re:Differences in
misleadings (Score:1)
by Kevin T. on Monday
January 08, @03:46PM EST (#115)
(User
#25654 Info) http://limits.org/
|
I don't know about anyone else, but
if someone wants me to take their side in a cause they'd
better be damn honest about everything upfront, else they
will lose my support, and I will also try to convince others
that they are a con. This is a perfect example.
This is a deliberate attempt by the "Yesmen" to
incite you to think of the WTO itself as the ultimate con.
Incidentally, the reason Negativland, who have
probably inspired 37.4% of the WTO protestors, got sued by
their label SST was for putting out an album with the title
"U2" and a picture of a U-2 spy plane on it, which used a
sample from "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For."
Island Records sued SST for, supposedly, conning U2 fans
into buying a Negativland record, and SST turned around and
sued Negativland for getting them in trouble (I believe
that's the legal term).
The idea behind this form of
art/activism is that, every single day, people accept the
Word of the corporations (and the multinational governmental
organizations that support them), delivered through mass
media. If you read gatt.org with suspicion, you should read
wto.org with the same amount of suspicion.
Or so the
theory goes.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
Re:Differences in
misleadings (Score:1)
by TWX_the_Linux_Zealot
(oliver.clozoff@usa.net) on
Tuesday January 09, @01:01PM EST (#129)
(User
#227666 Info) |
"If you read gatt.org with
suspicion, you should read wto.org with the same amount of
suspicion."
But on first glance, one would
not be reading gatt.org with suspicion. I don't like
mass market companies that bend information or deceive in
order to achieve profits. In response to the group
Negativland, well, if you take something that is
associated with another successful entity and take pieces
of it without permission, don't be surprised when
someone gets mad. It would have been more honest if the
band U2 had been the group taking exception to
Negativland's publication instead of a record label
*cough*cartel*cough* doing it, but little guys do get
stepped on by big guys when they get the attention of big
guys, so if you don't call attention to yourself, you
probably won't get burned at the stake.
"Titanic
was 3hr and 17min long. They could have lost 3hr and 17min
from that."
- Bruce Campbell |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
The real fun is here
(Score:2)
by crisco
(chris@cothrun.com) on Monday January 08,
@11:35AM EST (#102)
(User
#4669 Info) http://cothrun.com/
|
http://www.theyesmen.org/wto/ Where they
successfully sent an individual as someone impersonating a speaker
from the WTO, staged a pie in the face incident and when his
horrible speech didn't raise enough of a reaction from the audience
they staged his death.
Chris Cothrun |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Re:The real fun is
here (Score:1)
by Kevin T. on Monday January 08,
@03:39PM EST (#114)
(User
#25654 Info) http://limits.org/
|
Where they successfully sent an
individual as someone impersonating a speaker from the WTO,
staged a pie in the face incident and when his horrible
speech didn't raise enough of a reaction from the audience
they staged his death.
That's odd, the prank you
describe seems somewhat familiar. I think I read about it in
a NYT article Slashdot linked to recently.
;)
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
Anyone noticed the Y2K+1 bug on
NYTIMES page? (Score:1)
by dalibor on Monday January 08,
@01:54PM EST (#109)
(User
#241079 Info) |
Check the right side of the article:
Headlines updated 1/8/101 7:48 P.M.
:-)
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
clever (Score:2)
by grappler (thegrappler@DIE_SPAMMERS.usa.net) on Monday
January 08, @02:53PM EST (#111)
(User
#14976 Info) http://www.mines.edu/Stu_life/organ/ufo/
|
No matter what your politics are, ya gotta admit
that's a pretty cool Hack. They carried it pretty far. I wonder what
the guy was thinking when he gave the speech? That must have been
fun :-)
-------
I hate .sigs |
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
|
Why are these people againts free
trade? (Score:1)
by rent on Monday January 08, @09:15PM
EST (#127)
(User
#66355 Info) http://www.cit.nepean.uws.edu.au/~amalinow
|
Free trade increases wealth. Here is a
simplified example of how it works:
Alice has produced 100
cups, which to her are worth only $1 each.
Total wealth of Alice
= $100
Meanwhile, Bob has produced 100 plates, which to him
are worth only $1 each.
Total wealth of Bob = $100
Alice
has lots of cups, but no plates. She will pay $4 for a plate from
Bob, because plates are not available where she lives.
Bob has
lots of plates, but no cups. He will pay $4 for a cup from Alice,
because cups not available where he lives.
Alice and Bob
meet, and agree to trade. Alice gives 10 of her cups to Bob, and Bob
gives 10 of his plates to Alice.
Alice now has 90 cups at $1
each and 10 plates at $4 each. Total wealth of Alice has
increased to $130 (because $90 worth of cups + $40 worth of
plates = $130)
Bob now has 90 plates at $1 each and 10 cups
at $4 each. Total wealth of Bob has increased to $130
(because $90 worth of plates + $40 worth of cups = $130)
Both Alice and Bob had their wealth increased.
That's
why Free Trade is so important.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
| |
