Submitting a review for consideration is easy; please first read Slashdot's book review guidelines. Updated: 2008114 by samzenpus
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
Poor Aussies (Score:5, Funny)
Why does everyone keep treating them like a bunch of criminals?
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Insightful)
Why does everyone keep treating them like a bunch of criminals?
The sad part is that it seems that only Aussies treat Aussies like a bunch of criminals. Yes, I get the joke, but considering the great firewall and more, it just seems less funny.
Parent
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Funny)
The sad part is that it seems that only Aussies treat Aussies like a bunch of criminals.
That's because they forgot to kick out the guards.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In this case it represents the difference in slander laws. You can be sued for slander if you make a statement of fact about someone that you cannot prove to be factual in a court of law, rather than only having to demonstrate that you believed that fact to be true. The simple solution is to couch statements as opinions rather than as facts or where you manage a forum ensure that all users are informed that 'all' postings regardless of content are the 'opinions' of the poster and should not be construed as
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you just came up with a great idea on how to spend stimulus money!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Funny)
They're used to it, because iocane comes from Australia, as everyone knows, and Australia is entirely peopled with criminals, and criminals are used to having people not trust them
Parent
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Funny)
Why does everyone keep treating them like a bunch of criminals?
Oh come on... we can't be dicks to a penile colony?
Parent
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Interesting)
Who the heck moderated this interesting? It's supposed to be funny!
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Who the heck moderated this interesting? It's supposed to be funny!
Actually, I was shooting for "-1 Overrated". Apparently I missed.
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I prefer +5 Troll.
Parent
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Interesting)
Why does everyone keep treating them like a bunch of criminals?
Because the purpose of every country's legislative branch is to add laws, not remove them. The judiciary's job is to review laws, not remove them. And the executive branch's job is to suggest, review, and approve laws, not remove them. Therefore, the older the country, the more laws. And it doesn't take long before all the major ones required have been added, so there is an inevitable climb toward the bottom, to regulate even the smallest matters, until everyone is a criminal, though they may not know or consider themselves as such, in some fashion.
Consider this: The Ten Commandments contain 297 words, the Bill of Rights 463 words, and Lincoln's Gettysburg Address 266 words. A recent federal directive regulating the price of cabbage contains 26,911 words.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Informative)
Why are we regulating cabbage? Are they requiring the price to be low to combat anti-competition tactics in cabbage syndicates?
The government has regulated the cost of food for a long time for many reasons...
1. The free market cannot be trusted to maintain price stability. If there was a sudden drop or rise in the price of food, then people might not be able to afford it, or in the reverse, that farmers would go bankrupt and supply would diminish. When it comes to basic needs things like food, electricity, water, stability often sought after.
2. There is no cabbage cabal, only Zuul.
3. Incorporating a price floor prevents large corporations from winning based on economy of scale -- they cannot undersell smaller operations, thus existing infrastructure (land, mainly) will never be repurposed at a lower cost. But it "protects rural america" doing this.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You would be surprised at how unobvious that is to so many people. I recently spent the better part of 5 or 6 posts talking to a guy over subsidies and their intent whil
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If prices rises, farmers will likely try to increase their yields leading to eventually lower prices, or more farms will open. If the price falls, then that would almost certainly be due to supply. You say that farmers would go bankrupt and supply would diminish if prices fell too much, but you fail to ask why prices would fall--it would almost certainly be due to an overproduction of any particular foodstuff to begin with, so farms going out of businesses would be a corrective measure. The reason small
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:4, Informative)
Your scenerio would need infinite arable land.
Price fall for a variety of reasons. Farms aree NOT a corrective measure the way youi think of them. You can't stop and start a farm business, yit needs constent work. When you happen to ahve a poor yield, you need to work it so it's ready for the next year. If we let just the amrket drive it, we wil have a low yield years, farmers will go out of business, and then the next year we wont have enough.
A bad year, or decade even, can be caused by forces other then market forces. too little water, too much water,a freeze, insects, and disease can kill a yield even when demand is high.
You do realize we are talking about food here, right? People die without it?
maybe you should take a look of what farming and food markets are actually like before yapping off?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm normally for heavy regulation of corporations so long as it is GOOD regulation; corporations NEVER have the public welfare or public good in mind. People say the electricity problems in California were from overragulation, but rather than overragulation they stemmed from BAD regulation.
In the US, there is a lot of BAD regulation regarding farming. Small family farms are dying, big megacorporation food factories are taking over. And the food sucks. I'm glad I have a back yard I can grow a garden in, too
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Lobbyists, duh.
Does the GP ACTUALLY think that the massive and powerfull aggricultural lobbies exist to keep corporations from "winning"? Large "family" farms (usually a corporate operation privately owned at that size), very large family farms, and non-family farms (8 percent of all farms) account for 68% of production in the US. Who do you think is benefiting most from a price floor? Cut prices by 3/4 and eliminate the competition or make twice as much with a price floor. Hmmm... USDA stats on the matte [usda.gov]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Farms would certainly go under, but this would be a corrective measure. Populist farm measures were implemented to keep farmers in business, not to prevent starvation--there are too many chefs in the pot already, and instead of letting the market correct itself (who wants poor ol' farmers to have to feel the pinch?) it's more politically expedient to prop up the excess farms and get votes.
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:4, Informative)
The government has regulated the cost of food for a long time for many reasons...
Hey dude, as someone else has pointed out in this thread, your tale of cabbage regulation is an urban myth [snopes.com]
Do you have anything to back up anything you're saying - or are you just trolling?
Parent
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:4, Insightful)
That's an extremely starry eyed and naive idea of much primary production regulation.
The alternative and reality in most cases is that huge corporate interests, often the supermarkets and generally large agricultral management corps want to apply pressure on smaller and independant farmers. Large supermarkets don't like having to deal with small farmers and in many cases are in direct competition with smaller farms through their own holdings in large agricultural management firms. And obviously large agri-holdings have many reasons to want to shove the small old school independents out of business.
But you keep believing the government is acting primarily in the interests of the handful of small 100 - 2000 acre unorganized independent farmers remaining in the west rather than the large billion dollar agri-corps and supermarkets that give politicians hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign funds each year.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Which would be notable, if that was the only thing it was regulating.
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Informative)
Consider this: The Ten Commandments contain 297 words, the Bill of Rights 463 words, and Lincoln's Gettysburg Address 266 words. A recent federal directive regulating the price of cabbage contains 26,911 words.
I'm shocked nobody has called bullshit on this one yet. Damn, dude. Check snopes.
http://www.snopes.com/language/document/cabbage.asp [snopes.com]
Unless of course you also read this on snopes and decided it was a good time to perpetrate an urban legend. *shrugs*
Parent
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
But the fact is, as the GP pointed out, you don't have to be male to be called "dude". It was obvious that he wasn't calling girlintraining a city slicker or a fancy dresser. From the context it was obvious the meaning was "fellow". Kennedy would say "My fellow Americans", Obama would more likely use the more contemporary "Dudes". Kennedy wasn't just referring to men whan he spole to his "fellow Americans".
Re: (Score:2)
See Snopes for more info. [snopes.com]
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Funny)
A recent federal directive regulating the price of cabbage contains 26,911 words.
Ah, yes. Also known as "Cole's Law".
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Most of the ten commandments are not enforceable by law though. Murder the theft are crimes. Bearing false witness is only a crime in some circumstances. More to the point it is against the law to enforce some of them, seeing as most western countries have some provisions for freedom of religion).
Laws do get removed and replaced over time. What tends to happen is that breaches of some particular law first start getting minimal sentences. Then cases invoking it start getting dismissed the public prosecuto
Re:Poor Aussies (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Local solution (Score:5, Funny)
Throw anotha lawya' on the barbie, mate?
Forum website FTW (Score:2)
So Where is the Forbidden Thread? (Score:5, Interesting)
So where is the cache of the thread?
Australia is a little jumpy right now (Score:5, Funny)
what with Sasha Baron Cohen making a contentious movie about a flamboyant gay Australian
and their favorite Australian son, Arnold Schwarzenegger, is having major troubles in Caleefornya
but Australians will always have the Sound of Music, Mozart, the Tyrolean Alps, and Hitler
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
*Whoosh*
Re: (Score:2)
*WHOOOOSH* (Score:5, Funny)
Finally on BBC News we go to Sheila McCarthy, who is braving the UNIX longhairs on Slashdot to bring us a *WHOOOOSH* post. What's happening there Sheila, you big-titted should've-been-a-pornstar shagpot? Oh, thinking out loud again. Errrrm, cut to Sheila, cut to ...
- At Slashdot -
I'm reporting live from Slashdot where someone has just mis-understood a joke. "Now what's unusual about that, you news-readin' ho'?" You might ask. The person doing the mis-understanding is a male, basement-dweller, with an enormous beard and a stupendously huge ... collection of adult videos. But the unusual thing is how smash here is a four-digit UID'er. This is someone who has spent literally millenia on Slashdot, yet when he saw this -- fairly elementary -- joke, it flew right over his head. Let me tell you, Dermot MacDermott, it was quite a sight and not something this community is likely to forget in a hurry.
- back in the studio (where Dermot is scratching his crotch with one hand, whilst gesticulating toward a monitor screen with another) -
Those fuckin' tits man, they're like what they model implants on, you sure they're fuckin' real man? *Ahem* So Sheila ... Is it likely that Slashdotters will erect some sort of monument to this event, maybe erect a ... ummm ... statue?
- Outside Slashdot HQ, Soviet Nealistan -
There have been discussions of celebrating this event yearly, some names for the event have been discussed, but have all been shit so far. For example: "smash-n-whooosh", "-1 Funny Day" and "Day of the Whooosh" are some of the names suggested. Since these are a bit shit, it has been decided -- in a joint meeting of Neal Industry executives, Netcraft's resident BSD troll, and Rob - Dingo Ate Ma Baby - Malda -- that a name for this soon-to-be historic occassion be opened up to the wider Slashdot community. With a winner being the first post following this one to be moderated "+5 Troll". We're attempting to get an interview with smash, but until we can find him it's back to Dermot in the studio in London, where hopefully he's not having a wank like during the report on women's mud wrestling last Thursday, dirty bastard.
Parent
i W0n teh intarwebs! (Score:3, Interesting)
what's awful is that although its the most spectacular troll i've done in awhile, its this retired chestnut of a joke that should be old and tired and expired by now
i think this silly joke has been featured in at least 100 fark headlines over the years, no?
oy
Sad to see you go. (Score:5, Insightful)
Hate to see you guys drop off the face of the Internet, but I guess that's what happens when you get a bunch of pricks in Parliament.
But I guess that the government will figure it out when no one wants to deal with Australia as far as the Internet goes.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Banned? Not so much. (Score:5, Informative)
Wait what?
As a longtime user (~10 years) of Zgeek, and an Aussie, I'm pretty sure we haven't been banned. It's just that the site, which is hosted in the US already is going to legally set up shop outside of Australia to avoid these kinds of legal hassles.
For the record, the whole lawsuit thing is a joke, and everyone's aware that it's doomed to failure. The problem is that since Zgeek is essentially run by one guy in his spare time, he doesn't have the resources to fight it effectively, so it's better to run away rather than set yourself up for future problems.
For the record, the site really isn't too much more than a place were people post random news, and a forum which is dominated by in-fighting, trolling, and a bizarre 'shit-in-his-shoes' meme (it was started after Google started rating us highly as place to get life advice). And yes, it's as much fun as it sounds.
Some snippets of the thread from caches. (Score:5, Informative)
Page 1 [74.125.47.132].
Page 2 (John posts as "Doghead" on this page) [74.6.239.67].
Page 4 [74.6.239.67].
Greg Smith's threat/post [74.125.47.132].
Mirror - Page 1 [dyndns.org]
Mirror - Page 2 [dyndns.org]
Mirror - Page 4 [dyndns.org]
Mirror - Greg's Threat [dyndns.org]
If there are any other pages I missed that got picked up in the cache, post them here.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm starting to have serious concerns about anyone who puts the queen on their money.
Funny, I have concerns about anyone who puts his money on a queen.
You are the yin to my yang.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:So much for the First Amendment. (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry, amendment to what? We don't have that fancy-schmansy Bill of Rights you yanks have, we go back to the Magna Carta, mate.
Oh, wait...
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
.92% of windows sales would send slashdot broke and keep hundreds of lawyers in beer and skittles.