This thread is an experiment that may or may not be successful.

If it is, then it'll be a spawning point for a number of other threads.

The theory is this: many visitors to the Senate Chambers (http://www.lucasforums.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=445) have opinions about different things every day, but may be hesitant to start a new thread. That's okay. I often have the same problem... it's a natural tendency to not want to start a thread that will ultimately flop.

I'll sticky this thread -temporarily at least- then, if it's successful, I'll leave it as a sticky.

__________________________
How to Participate

Things to do:

Create posts that reflect something you've thought of after reading a news story or watching a news program, reading a book, engaging in a conversation with co-workers or classmates, etc.

Try to provide some links so others can see the source information and formulate some opinions and perhaps start a discussion.

If a discussion emerges (more than 3 or 4 posts that look like a discussion will take off), I'll split those posts out and create a new thread with a relative title/topic.

Adhere to the Forum Guidelines (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=135103) for the Senate Chambers and perhaps take note of the Debate Strategies and Tactics (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=99452) thread.

Things to avoid:

Avoid spam posts. I'll probably edit/delete these pretty heavy to keep the chatter and overall thread-length to a minimum.

Also, try to avoid responding to more than one topic in this thread at a time. If you notice in the thread two emerging topics -one on politics and one on religion for instance- try to respond separately in two different posts, even if the two topics are of the same person or even in the same post. That'll make it easier for splitting out the topic if an interesting enough discussion emerges.

_________________________________

I'll update this first post from time to time if the need arises.

In the mean time, feel free to start the process. Or, if no one posts, I'll come up with a post or two. Also, post questions about the Free Thoughts on Serious Topics thread here.

Cheers,
Skin

A blogger has posted a rant against the RIAA at this link (http://www.kcpimp.com/music/), and he doesn't even pirate music or make back up copies of his stuff!

He lists his music collection in detail along with a 7.1 MP digital image of the collection to be "safe" from the evil Gestapo of the RIAA. And he links to several news stories of the RIAA Gestapo tactics.

In my opinion, if the recording industry wants to fight piracy, it should do a better job at creating art. People have always and will always pay for "art." But the commercialization of music and the formulaic standards of modern music leave little to be desired.

I always buy the music of my beloved Jazz and Blues artists when I get the chance. I'm not interested in modern music because even Jazz is commercialized to the point that only one or two cuts of a CD/album is actually to the standard worth shelling out $16. I fu**ed up and paid for the new U2 cd. The title track was the only great one in my opinion and a couple others were barely good. The rest sounded like they just through some crap together to get out a CD. It definately was not the U2 I used to buy CDs of.

I remember the same thing with Rush's album with the big screw on the cover (Counterpoint?). Hell, I through that one away.

I totally agree with this guy's rant, though. And I'm glad to see that there are still those left that don't pirate music. I was beginning to think that I was all alone! :cool:

Recently I've been watching the news and seen things like "child found dead in van at daycare center" and I see parents come on "they should be taking better care of our kids, being more responsible for the wellbeing of our children, etc" and I don't know about you, but that whole thing is ridiculous. I agree it's sad the kids are dead, but perhaps if you didn't just basically abandon your child for hours on someone that's working at an OVERCROWDED facility that's been underfunded for years, your child wouldn't be dead, you've brought it on yourself.

Perhaps these people need to actually research the places they are putting their kids. If they were such great, responsible parents they'd realize where they're putting their kids and the dangers that could happen. I'm not saying the person that left the kid in the van or whatever shouldn't be punished for their neglect, but they shouldn't be charged with manslaughter/murder/whatever.

Hell, I research the kennel I will be taking my dog to when I'm going on vacation and can't leave him with a friend or family member. I don't just find a kennel and go "ooh, that place looks inexpensive and reasonably nice". I understand some of these people can't afford the top quality child care centers, but that doesn't mean they should just recklessly leave their child at a place they have little to no knowledge about. Most of the places these events are happening at are overcrowded, underfunded centers. So maybe these people need to rethink their priorities. Do I research where my child goes to assure the maximum amount of safety because I have to work. Or, do I need to set aside my pride as a "working person" and take on the responsibility of a parent and stay home with my child, even if it means possible ridicule by those working people with no child.

Perhaps I'm ranting, but sometimes peoples ignorance of reality creates a mess that could have easily been avoided.

By posting this I'm opening myself to a lot of "You're not a parent, you don't know the struggle of our responsiblity and how it eats at you" kind of responses. I'll gladly admit I don't know the struggle of being a parent, sometimes I hope I never will. But I do know how most of life works from what I've seen, experienced, and heard. And going by what's on the pamphlet, parenting is a great responsibility that requires top priority in your, the parents, life.

I think a factor that has to be considered when criticizing parents for the daycare choices is money.

Good daycares that have capable personnel and effective procedures are costly (I know!). The ones that are affordable for someone working a couple of part-time jobs or a single parent cashiering at Walmart are not as well-staffed and they're a little more sloppy in procedure and facilities.

It's a dilemma: do you stay home and earn no money; or do you go to work and use the daycare that you can afford?

I guess that's why they made Welfare.

I know about the money thing, but I know of many places that have reasonable prices and much more decent daycare systems than what these people are ditching their kids in. Like I said, people should research.

La Petite has been on the run along with Kindercare, both doing very decent prices lately, I've been told. At least in my area.

But I think if parents researched the facilities they wouldn't be as shocked to realize the place is incredibly overcrowded and rundown.

But yeah, I just think charging the daycare people with murder or manslaughter and whatever is just wrong. Perhaps criminal neglect, do 5 years max. I think if we charge the care takers we should also charge the parents for neglect by not checking on the wellbeing of their own child.

It's just this whole "they should be taking better care of our children" thing, it's absurd. It's your child, you put them in this risky enviroment and thus are just as resposnible. I know if I left my kid there I'd want myself charged because I was responsible for allowing it to happen.

[RIAA Post]

I pretty much agree with that guy. I've bought quite a few CDs lately, Tenacious D, Juno Reactor, and some soundtracks. I could have easily gotten them off the internet, but instead I purchased them.

I remember reading how the RIAA had some "RIAA SWAT" squad running around dress in swat gear with "RIAA" on their back with guns and everything. At that point, I'd like to wonder if the people they confronted did not know their rights, or if they were just stupid? I would have asked for permits for their guns, some sort of law enforcement badge, and a warrant to search/detain me... [/rant]

A Story Link (http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2004Jan/gee20040112023398.htm)

So, isn't impersonating an officer against the law? And since when did the RIAA have any legal jurisdiction anywhere?

Hmmm.... I wonder, were they charged with any violations? Or did the government accept a big check in apology?

I've been learning the history and current situation of Afghanistan in my World Geography class recently, and we had a discussion in my recitation last friday, and it totally blew me away. I had no idea the literacy level was so low (Around 30% for males, less than half that for femalels) Women in Afghanistan average 6+ children, but life expectancy is around 42. 60% of their GDP comes from drug money, but the only people who profit from that are the warlords of the regions. The country is so abysmally poor with no real options to build their economy outside of drug production.


I was absolutely shocked that those kinds of statistics exist, and are almost unheard of. The only person outside of that class I've talked to who knew SOME of those things has Middle Eastern roots.

It makes me absolutely sick that Terri Shiavo got so much media attention, and so many people cried when she died, when there are thousands and thousands of people who can actually be saved but are dying, and nobody here even knows.

Originally posted by ET Warrior
*stuff about Afghanistan*
<_< I could've told you that.

But yeah, it's so sad. :(

I know that most of the people who frequent here are well enough informed about such things, but in general the American populace is COMPLETELY unaware, and that is absolutely ridiculous.

From slashdot:

First Monday runs a great article this month from Canadian law professor Michael Geist that dismantles the recording industry's claims about the peer-to-peer. Using actual data from Canada, Piercing the P2P Myths, demonstrates that the loss claims are greatly exaggerated and that P2P has had little, if any impact on the income of the artists themselves." From the article: "The Canadian government has been the target of intense lobbying for stronger copyright legislation in recent months. Led by the music industry, which claims that it has experienced significant financial losses due to music downloading, the campaign culminated in November 2004 with a lobby day on Parliament Hill."

Article: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue10_4/geist/)
Slashdot discussion: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/10/0445225&from=rss)

You know, we could have an electric monorail bown the median of our highways from city to city.

We could build little electric trains within the cities.

We could desighn it to go places where people go to most and not make too many stops and get places faster.people would get fairly close to their destination.
( Maybie even put people's own electric car on he tracks and desighn it to where it can funtion mostly like a real road. )

Then tell the middle east "you can keep your stinkin oil. we dont need it." they'll be sitting on a hump of sand again.

Oil is not only needed for gas. Its a main component in synthetic products like plastic. Even for electric cars/trains we need oil to build them. Also, I think I read/heard somewhere that the US has *huge* reservoirs of oil but is keeping it back for 'bad times'. That's not the best source, tough. But the first argument is valid..

And electricity needs to come from somewhere. So an electrical mono-rail might well be adding to Co2 emissions.

Apparently the new battlestar galactica was the most downloaded TV series of all time (partly because for once it came out in the UK before the US).
However when it opened on the Sci-fi channel in the US it also instantly became their highest rated tv show of all time.
And the dvd sales haven't been too bad either.

Does this show that the recent batch of MPAA attempts to sue tv torrent sites/downloaders is a mistake and that they should embrace the technology as a cheap way to syndicate their shows worldwide? Or should they keep on suing and trying to shut down filesharers?

With the recent news (did it make it onto US tv?) that the president of Uzbekistan had the army shoot 500-1000 men women and children, are our friends in the war on terror as bad as those we are going after?

For those that don't know uzbekistan is next to afganistan, and therefore very useful to the US.

The Uzbek government has denied killing a single civilian in Andijan, but four days after what locals are calling "bloody Friday" first-hand accounts are emerging of a cold-blooded killing spree by security forces.

One eyewitness, who would not be named for fear of reprisals, told The Independent that he saw death squads killing civilians after the army opened fire on protesters in the eastern Uzbek city on Friday.
more... (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/story.jsp?story=639323)

and

Uzbekistan is the most populous Central Asian country and has the largest armed forces. There is no real internal opposition and the media is tightly controlled by the state. A UN report has described the use of torture as "systematic".

The rigidity of political control is mirrored in the tightly centralised planning of the economy. Economic reform has been painfully slow to materialise.

The emergence of radical Islamist groups in Central Asia led to increased security fears in Uzbekistan. A series of bomb blasts in the capital in 1999 left more than a dozen people dead. The leadership blamed Islamic extremists, accusing them of seeking to kill President Karimov and destabilise the country.

Following the 11 September attacks on the US, the Uzbek authorities won favour with Washington by allowing its forces a base in Uzbekistan, affording ready access across the Afghan border. US aid increased. Human rights observers have voiced mounting fears that it has become harder to focus international attention on the many reported cases of abuse and torture.
more.. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/country_profiles/1238242.stm)

seems like anyone who opposes the president gets called an islamic extremist and locked up.

[edit] better story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4559031.stm)

Originally posted by toms
Apparently the new battlestar galactica was the most downloaded TV series of all time (partly because for once it came out in the UK before the US).
However when it opened on the Sci-fi channel in the US it also instantly became their highest rated tv show of all time.
And the dvd sales haven't been too bad either.

Does this show that the recent batch of MPAA attempts to sue tv torrent sites/downloaders is a mistake and that they should embrace the technology as a cheap way to syndicate their shows worldwide? Or should they keep on suing and trying to shut down filesharers?

I think the torrent downloads helped BG. There are many people that simply don't get the SciFi channel and were able to d/l the episodes... but the real benefit for SciFi was the demographic that was captured through advertising by word-of-mouth.

I also think that the television industry is short-sighted with regard to distribution. The viewing public has globally chosen its distribution method of preference... at least a huge portion has. Large enough a portion that legal steps have been instituted to disrupt and stop the distribution.

The industry should embrace the concept and host it's own trackers that require registration for download (such measures are already in place as a security feature for the pirates... uh, so I'm told). As "payment," they could have the downloader fill out a quick survey about viewing habits or consumer choices. They could even keep a few short commercials in it, though if they go overboard, the consumer will find alternative means.

The point is, bit torrent is like a VCR to many people. How is it different if I set my VCR's timer to record a show while I'm at work than if I download a torrent of the same show? My VCR strips the commercials.. Tivo does as well. The only difference is that there might be some people who don't have access to the channel that the show is on... but is this really a problem? You can't get better advertising for you channel than letting someone d/l a torrent and then think to themselves, "gee, what else am I missing on SciFi?"

The industry is screwing itself, in my opinion.