http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books?hl=en
rec.arts.books@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Bring Back the Hot-Seat! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/63fc4bffc3d4bb77?hl=en
* Bookstores Around the World (rec.arts.books) (FAQ) (IMPORTANT UPDATE) - 7
messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/92153a6882249799?hl=en
* Who's in Big Brother's Database? (book review) - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/0b98cb1de08a1561?hl=en
* Cheaper Kindle - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/83369cb7977feb61?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bring Back the Hot-Seat!
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/63fc4bffc3d4bb77?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Oct 18 2009 11:25 pm
From: Msg. Scooter
On , , Sun, 18 Oct 2009 13:35:09 -0700 (PDT), Re: Bring Back the Hot-Seat!, Piet
de Arcilla <dearcilla@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Oct 15, 12:24 pm, Just Me <jpd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> And burn 'em at low voltage, right along with Mama. Strap her in
>> first.
>
>I don't think vengeance or retribution should ever be a basis for a
>punishment for a crime. Only deterrence, rehabilitation, or
>prevention.
There are some people that just don't learn.
Like rats or sharks or crocodiles they have no higher function, you can shoot a
rat for stealing grain and it will die with no concept of what it was doing was
wrong. Likewise sharks and crocodiles.
You can hand feed a crocodile from the day it emerges from it's egg. You can
continue to feed it till it is fully grown and the only thing it is waiting for
is the opportunity when you turn your back and it can grab you.
These people are like that. A type of person who would have been wiped out in
centuries before this are now still alive into adolescence and adulthood with no
conscience at all.
>On the other hand, I don't understand why people think the death
>penalty is particularly immoral when it's applied to children or the
>mentally disabled. If someone does something like this, they would
>seem unfit for society and unlikely to get better. IQ and age are
>irrelevant.
If they are unable to learn then executing them is the only humanitarian thing
to do. Imprisoning them does them no good, all it does is make them resentful
and looking for an opportunity to escape or go down in glory in their and other
prisoners eyes by lilling a guard. That they die in the process doesn't seem to
make much difference.
Keeping them alive and having them die old men or women, like Susan Atkins, is
unworthy of a "civilised" society.
We wouldn't do it with killer animals.
Yet we do it with "people" who richly deserve to be exterminated like a flock of
flies.
--
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor
to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
Anatole France.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bookstores Around the World (rec.arts.books) (FAQ) (IMPORTANT UPDATE)
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/92153a6882249799?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 19 2009 6:19 am
From: wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr)
In article <oaOdndSAGpwTLUrXnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
"Stanley Moore" <smoore20@comcast.net> said:
> "Scott Lurndal" <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote
>
>> When doma is struck, any similar state constitutional amendment
>> would also be struck, for the same reason. State constitution
>> can't trump the federal constitution.
>
> Will it? Texas has a statute forbidding same sex marriage. We then
> passed a constitutional amendment to that same effect. Sort of
> like using a belt and suspenders. The idea was that if the feds
> strick down the statutes then the state constitution would trump
> the issue. I agree if DOMA falls the various state statures will
> be nullified but I am not so sure about the state constitutions.
There's a particular paragraph in the U.S. Constitution --
specifically the second paragraph of Article VI -- that reads:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall
be made in Pursuance thereof, and all Treaties made, or which
shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be
the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall
be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any
State to the contrary notwithstanding.
It's commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause and, well, you can
see what it says about state constitutions.
-- wds
== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 19 2009 7:12 am
From: ELF
William December Starr wrote:
> In article <oaOdndSAGpwTLUrXnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> "Stanley Moore" <smoore20@comcast.net> said:
>
>> "Scott Lurndal" <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote
>>
>>> When doma is struck, any similar state constitutional amendment
>>> would also be struck, for the same reason. State constitution
>>> can't trump the federal constitution.
>> Will it? Texas has a statute forbidding same sex marriage. We then
>> passed a constitutional amendment to that same effect. Sort of
>> like using a belt and suspenders. The idea was that if the feds
>> strick down the statutes then the state constitution would trump
>> the issue. I agree if DOMA falls the various state statures will
>> be nullified but I am not so sure about the state constitutions.
>
> There's a particular paragraph in the U.S. Constitution --
> specifically the second paragraph of Article VI -- that reads:
>
> This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall
> be made in Pursuance thereof, and all Treaties made, or which
> shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be
> the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall
> be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any
> State to the contrary notwithstanding.
>
> It's commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause and, well, you can
> see what it says about state constitutions.
>
> -- wds
>
Except that same constitution also strictly limits the range of
federal jurisdiction. In legal speak, the federal government does not
have general police power. Family law is not within the purview of the
federal government so any laws passed by congress trying to regulate
such matters are without legal effect.
The Supremacy clause only applies where state and federal systems
share jurisdiction.
elf
--
"We live in the interface between radioactive molten rock and hard
vaccum and we worry about safety." --Chris Hunt in alt.sysadmin.recovery
== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 19 2009 11:52 am
From: Stephen Graham
ELF wrote:
> Except that same constitution also strictly limits the range of
> federal jurisdiction. In legal speak, the federal government does not
> have general police power. Family law is not within the purview of the
> federal government so any laws passed by congress trying to regulate
> such matters are without legal effect.
Given that the Full Faith and Credit clause is part of the US
Constitution, by virtue of the Supremacy Clause it overrides any state
constitutional clause.
== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 19 2009 3:40 pm
From: "Francis A. Miniter"
ELF wrote:
> William December Starr wrote:
>> In article <oaOdndSAGpwTLUrXnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>> "Stanley Moore" <smoore20@comcast.net> said:
>>
>>> "Scott Lurndal" <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote
>>>
>>>> When doma is struck, any similar state constitutional amendment
>>>> would also be struck, for the same reason. State constitution
>>>> can't trump the federal constitution.
>>> Will it? Texas has a statute forbidding same sex marriage. We then
>>> passed a constitutional amendment to that same effect. Sort of
>>> like using a belt and suspenders. The idea was that if the feds
>>> strick down the statutes then the state constitution would trump
>>> the issue. I agree if DOMA falls the various state statures will
>>> be nullified but I am not so sure about the state constitutions.
>>
>> There's a particular paragraph in the U.S. Constitution --
>> specifically the second paragraph of Article VI -- that reads:
>>
>> This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall
>> be made in Pursuance thereof, and all Treaties made, or which
>> shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be
>> the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall
>> be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any
>> State to the contrary notwithstanding.
>>
>> It's commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause and, well, you can
>> see what it says about state constitutions.
>>
>> -- wds
>>
>
> Except that same constitution also strictly limits the range of
> federal jurisdiction. In legal speak, the federal government does not
> have general police power. Family law is not within the purview of the
> federal government so any laws passed by congress trying to regulate
> such matters are without legal effect.
>
> The Supremacy clause only applies where state and federal systems
> share jurisdiction.
>
> elf
>
Where this gets real tricky is with respect to international
treaties!
--
Francis A. Miniter
Oscuramente
libros, laminas, llaves
siguen mi suerte.
Jorge Luis Borges, La Cifra Haiku, 6
== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 19 2009 3:43 pm
From: "Francis A. Miniter"
Stephen Graham wrote:
> ELF wrote:
>
>> Except that same constitution also strictly limits the range of
>> federal jurisdiction. In legal speak, the federal government does not
>> have general police power. Family law is not within the purview of the
>> federal government so any laws passed by congress trying to regulate
>> such matters are without legal effect.
>
> Given that the Full Faith and Credit clause is part of the US
> Constitution, by virtue of the Supremacy Clause it overrides any state
> constitutional clause.
No. The FF&C Clause operates between states only. The
Supremacy Clause governs state to federal relationship.
--
Francis A. Miniter
Oscuramente
libros, laminas, llaves
siguen mi suerte.
Jorge Luis Borges, La Cifra Haiku, 6
== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 19 2009 4:38 pm
From: Stephen Graham
Francis A. Miniter wrote:
> Stephen Graham wrote:
>> ELF wrote:
>>
>>> Except that same constitution also strictly limits the range of
>>> federal jurisdiction. In legal speak, the federal government does not
>>> have general police power. Family law is not within the purview of
>>> the federal government so any laws passed by congress trying to
>>> regulate such matters are without legal effect.
>>
>> Given that the Full Faith and Credit clause is part of the US
>> Constitution, by virtue of the Supremacy Clause it overrides any state
>> constitutional clause.
>
>
> No. The FF&C Clause operates between states only. The Supremacy Clause
> governs state to federal relationship.
>
Why do you think the FF&C clause over-rides state constitutions if not
for the Supremacy Clause?
== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 19 2009 6:26 pm
From: "Francis A. Miniter"
Stephen Graham wrote:
> Francis A. Miniter wrote:
>> Stephen Graham wrote:
>>> ELF wrote:
>>>
>>>> Except that same constitution also strictly limits the range of
>>>> federal jurisdiction. In legal speak, the federal government does
>>>> not have general police power. Family law is not within the purview
>>>> of the federal government so any laws passed by congress trying to
>>>> regulate such matters are without legal effect.
>>>
>>> Given that the Full Faith and Credit clause is part of the US
>>> Constitution, by virtue of the Supremacy Clause it overrides any
>>> state constitutional clause.
>>
>>
>> No. The FF&C Clause operates between states only. The Supremacy
>> Clause governs state to federal relationship.
>>
>
> Why do you think the FF&C clause over-rides state constitutions if not
> for the Supremacy Clause?
The FF&C clause tells one state that it must recognize the
lawful acts, etc., of another state. What it generally
overrides are failures of one state to give effect to the
acts of another state. In itself, it does not override
state constitutions. Except, I suppose, if a state were to
amend its constitution to say that the state no longer had
to give full faith and credit to the acts of another state,
then the FF&C clause would override it. The FF&C clause is
one of the basic tenets of federalism.
--
Francis A. Miniter
Oscuramente
libros, laminas, llaves
siguen mi suerte.
Jorge Luis Borges, La Cifra Haiku, 6
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Who's in Big Brother's Database? (book review)
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/0b98cb1de08a1561?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 19 2009 1:58 pm
From: Jorge Cruz Rodriguez
Who's in Big Brother's Database?
By James Bamford
[review of] The Secret Sentry: The Untold History of the National
Security Agency
by Matthew M. Aid
Bloomsbury, 423 pp., $30.00
On a remote edge of Utah's dry and arid high desert, where
temperatures often zoom past 100 degrees, hard-hatted construction
workers with top-secret clearances are preparing to build what may
become America's equivalent of Jorge Luis Borges's "Library of Babel,"
a place where the collection of information is both infinite and at
the same time monstrous, where the entire world's knowledge is stored,
but not a single word is understood. At a million square feet, the
mammoth $2 billion structure will be one-third larger than the US
Capitol and will use the same amount of energy as every house in Salt
Lake City combined.
Unlike Borges's "labyrinth of letters," this library expects few
visitors. It's being built by the ultra-secret National Security Agency
—which is primarily responsible for "signals intelligence," the
collection and analysis of various forms of communication—to house
trillions of phone calls, e-mail messages, and data trails: Web
searches, parking receipts, bookstore visits, and other digital
"pocket litter." Lacking adequate space and power at its city-sized
Fort Meade, Maryland, headquarters, the NSA is also completing work on
another data archive, this one in San Antonio, Texas, which will be
nearly the size of the Alamodome.
Just how much information will be stored in these windowless
cybertemples? A clue comes from a recent report prepared by the MITRE
Corporation, a Pentagon think tank. "As the sensors associated with
the various surveillance missions improve," says the report, referring
to a variety of technical collection methods, "the data volumes are
increasing with a projection that sensor data volume could potentially
increase to the level of Yottabytes (1024 Bytes) by 2015." Roughly
equal to about a septillion (1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) pages
of text, numbers beyond Yottabytes haven't yet been named. Once
vacuumed up and stored in these near-infinite "libraries," the data
are then analyzed by powerful infoweapons, supercomputers running
complex algorithmic programs, to determine who among us may be—or may
one day become—a terrorist. In the NSA's world of automated
surveillance on steroids, every bit has a history and every keystroke
tells a story. ....
more at
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/23231
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 19 2009 10:29 pm
From: Steve Hayes
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 13:58:32 -0700 (PDT), Jorge Cruz Rodriguez
<jxrodri@yahoo.com> wrote:
>to a variety of technical collection methods, "the data volumes are
>increasing with a projection that sensor data volume could potentially
>increase to the level of Yottabytes (1024 Bytes) by 2015." Roughly
>equal to about a septillion (1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) pages
I thought 1024 bytes was a Kilobyte, and 1024 Kilobytes was a Megabyte, and
1024 Megabytes was a Gigabyte.
It's a bit like saying that the ocean could potentially increase tro a level
of millilitres by 2015 (as a result of the melting of the popar icecaps,
perhaps).
How long is a piece of string?
Ooh, it's millimetres long, no,. it could even be inches long.
--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/litmain.htm
http://www.goodreads.com/hayesstw
http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Cheaper Kindle
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/83369cb7977feb61?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 19 2009 3:51 pm
From: "W. Citoan"
rmak wrote:
> x-no-archive:yes On Oct 7, 9:23 am, rab <remai...@reece.net.au>
> wrote:
> > MarketWatch - Anticipating the arrival of fresh competition,
> > Amazon.com Inc. on Wednesday slashed the price of its Kindle
> > electronic-book reader by $40 to $259 (Amazon.com:
> > http://xrl.us/Kindle259) and announced a version that can work
> > internationally.
> >
> >
> > More: http://xrl.us/Kindle2A
>
> "10 reasons to buy a Kindle 2...and 10 reasons not to":
> http://tinyurl.com/Kindle10
Like most top 10 lists, it's got its share of pointless pro and con
reasons....
- W. Citoan
--
I will not be ashamed to defend a friend; neither will I hid myself from
him.
-- Ecclesiasticus (Book of Sirach)
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 19 2009 9:01 pm
From: Lawrence Watt-Evans
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:51:41 +0000 (UTC), "W. Citoan"
<wcitoan@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
>rmak wrote:
>> x-no-archive:yes On Oct 7, 9:23 am, rab <remai...@reece.net.au>
>> >
>> > More: http://xrl.us/Kindle2A
>>
>> "10 reasons to buy a Kindle 2...and 10 reasons not to":
>> http://tinyurl.com/Kindle10
>
>Like most top 10 lists, it's got its share of pointless pro and con
>reasons....
I gotta say, I found none of the con items worthy of mention, and only
about half the pro ones.
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
I'm selling my comic collection -- see http://www.watt-evans.com/comics.html
I'm serializing a novel at http://www.watt-evans.com/realmsoflight0.html
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 19 2009 9:29 pm
From: Kurt Busiek
On 2009-10-19 21:01:01 -0700, Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> said:
> On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:51:41 +0000 (UTC), "W. Citoan"
> <wcitoan@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> rmak wrote:
>>> x-no-archive:yes On Oct 7, 9:23 am, rab <remai...@reece.net.au>
>>>>
>>>> More: http://xrl.us/Kindle2A
>>>
>>> "10 reasons to buy a Kindle 2...and 10 reasons not to":
>>> http://tinyurl.com/Kindle10
>>
>> Like most top 10 lists, it's got its share of pointless pro and con
>> reasons....
>
> I gotta say, I found none of the con items worthy of mention, and only
> about half the pro ones.
Me, too, I think. Running through them:
"1. It's great if you travel."
Yep.
"2. You can put anything you want on it. You can easily email DOC, TXT,
and PDF files to your own Kindle email address for conversion to the
Kindle – but that costs 10 cents."
There's a free workaround for that, as well.
"3. It looks great. The Kindle 2 is an amazing improvement over the Kindle 1."
I'll agree that it looks much better than the Kindle 1, but I don't
think that's a strong reason for buying it.
"4. It feels great. This new version has excellent button placement and
is thin enough to cut cheese."
This, on the other hand, is a good reason. It works well.
"5. Almost any book at any time. Except for a few esoteric reference
books I've found just about everything I need on the Kindle store."
I haven't. There are plenty enough books available for it to keep me
supplied, but there are plenty as yet that aren't available, either.
"6. It works in inclement conditions. I was in Mexico with the wife and
kids and I wanted to test the Kindle out near the pool."
What does this mean? "Inclement" means it's raining or storming. Was
it raining by the pool? Were people dunking their books? I wouldn't
read a Kindle or a regular book outside in the rain; I'd read either
poolside on a pleasant day.
"7. The bookmarking and highlighting systems are vastly improved."
Can't say I care.
"8. The dictionary is now in-line. When you move to a word, its
definition appears at the bottom of the page."
I like this, though, and have found it useful.
"9. You can almost see and understand the illustrations in 16 greyscale
shades."
Not a good reason.
"10. It is the future. Sorry, it is. Amazon nailed the ebook and
they're going to own the space for the next few years."
Not this, either.
Add to this:
11. You can download sample chapters for free, and get to read more of
the book as a test-read than you're likely to read standing around in a
bookstore sampling a book.
12. Project Gutenberg's files are Kindle-compatible.
13. Owning a Kindle has allowed me to buy stories I'd otherwise have to
have bought entire anthologies to get; I've bought two Donald Westlake
novellas and a mort of Sherwood Smith short stories as individual files
for cheap.
14. Free books for the Kindle, including stuff like PERDIDO STRET STATION.
"10 reasons not to buy a Kindle 2
1. It's bad for research. I'm working
on a book right now and I wanted to use the Kindle for all of my
research. Sadly, this is almost impossible. The book is a physical
object – you can move through it, skimming for notes and important
points – and there is something in our education that gives us a sense
of space inside a book. I don't quite know how to explain it, but you
know how you can pick up a book and show someone what you're looking
for in a few page turns? You know it was halfway through, maybe a third
of the way down the page, and it was near another set of words. The
Kindle is not conducive to that kind of mental map-making… yet."
No, but the ability to do a text search is an advantage one doesn't
have with paper books. It's harder to search via the "it was somewhere
about a third of the way through up on the left," true, but it's easier
to search by, "When did this Harold show up and who is he again? Show
me all the instances of 'Harold.'"
"2. It's horrible for reference. Don't buy a Kindle if you just read
programming manuals."
Not a factor for me.
"3. The Kindle is flimsy. You'll go through your day thinking you will
break your Kindle."
No, I won't. It doesn't feel flimsy to me and I have it in a nice
protective case.
"4. It's not ready for students. Add points 1, 2, and 3 together and
you come to the conclusion that this is not ready for students."
Since I disagree on 1 and 3 and don't care about 2, I don't buy this
reasoning. Plus, I'm not a student, so it's not a factor for me.
"5. The net connection doesn't work internationally."
Don't care. And not just because they now have an international Kindle
and the workaround he describes in his own answer works just fine
anyway.
"6. No SD slot. While the Kindle can easily hold 1,500 books, what if
you're the kind of person who likes to keep everything in its right
place? Maybe you want to make a book playlist? Maybe you have 1,501
books?"
So what? If you want 1501 books, store them on outside media, and load
them back in as needed. The fact that you can't carry around 1501
books at once is not a hardship; carry the Kindle and a thumb drive, if
you really need to have that many books available at once.
"7. Flight attendants will tell you to turn it off on take off and landing."
This bit's annoying, yes. I can generally find enough in the inflight
magazine to fill my time during those periods, but it's annoying.
"8. It contains a battery. Remember, Reader, the Kindle is mortal. It
will die on you when you don't have your charger."
The battery lasts so long that it's not really a problem. If you're
going to be away from home for weeks, bring the cord.
"9. It's bottom heavy. The internal battery makes the device want to
plop face down on your chest."
I haven't noticed it being difficult to prop up while reading; it
weighs less than a hardcover book, so if my brawny thews are up to the
herculean task of lifting a hardcover book, I expect this won't be a
problem.
"10. There's just something about a dead tree book, isn't there? It's
nice to pop into the airport news stand and pick up a novel."
The thing I was most surprised about with the Kindle was how little the
"there's just something about a book" mattered. I expected it to be a
huge adjustment, and it just wasn't. And no, I'd much rather have the
ability to browse in Amazon's extensive Kindle store (plus Project
Gutenberg and other places, with appropriate planning) than be limited
to the contents of an airport bookstore. Heck, I can go ahead and
browse in the airport bookstore, and if I find something I want, I can
probably buy it for the Kindle; I do that in bookstores as is.
So that's four of the pro reasons I agree with (plus four more I
added), and one of the cons.
kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com -- for all your Busiek needs!
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.arts.books"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.arts.books+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
Has laoreet percipitur ad. Vide interesset in mei, no his legimus verterem. Et nostrum imperdiet appellantur usu, mnesarchum referrentur id vim.
0 comments:
Post a Comment