1) Senator Coburn (R-Ok.) 2) I'm not sure what makes it outdated, I would guess it is because the exception for fetuses has been removed, but that may not be true. 3) He has put a "hold" on the bill.
Generally I find the article helpful in answering such questions.
As far as my opinion goes, it seems fair for a person to not want an exception allowing for genetic discrimination against fetuses because of that whole "eugenics" issue.
"In other words, if we like you, say anything you want. If you don't, we're going to dig through every single thing you do when your hands touch a keyboard and find something to hang you with."
Wrong.
In other words, if you are a clerk at a desk in Illinois (for example) we won't require you to submit everything you blog about, and will only do spot checks, but if you are a special ops member involved in secret operations we will check everything you post on the internet.
Doesn't seem unfair to me. Note that it is based on what UNIT you are with, not who YOU specifically are.
Preface: I'm not sure if the patent has expired yet or not.
Comment: Even if the patent has expired, if Apple infirnged while the patent was still valid, and the statute of limitations (which I'm not sure how long it is in patent cases) has not run, the Plaintiffs can still bring a suit based on the past infringement. Basically saying "We know we don't own the rights now, but while we did you infringed, so pay up for that time period."
Think about it: If you encrypt your files, great no unauthroised person can see it. RIAA takes it you laugh and sy good luck reading it. RIAA goes to judge and says "we subpeonad his hard drive and he gave it to us encrypted -- its not readable in this form." Judge orders you to give the encryption key and/or decrypt it for them.
At this point (all legal and all logical steps) you have two choices. Choice 1 involves you saying no, and then getting fined (or worse) jailed for contempt of court. Choice 2 involves complying with the judges order in which case your encryption is pointless anyways.
And yes it is a violation of the Federal Rules to try and obfuscate discovery documents.*
*Documents = anything not necessarily paper documents.
out curiosity, how does the knowlege level of the populace affect whether or not they have the right to vote on the issues? Say what you want, but the USA is still a representative democracy (it never was a true democracy) and even if 99% of the country had a reading level of a 5th grader it still would be... just not an efficient one...
also if 48% of the people is a "few" than what is the many?
"We know that from the fossil record and from continuing observations"
- not entirely true. we can hypothesize from the fossil record and we can prove micro-evolution (ie intraspecies evolution) Science has never observed and thus has never PROVEN the existence of a species jump as would be required to prove the theory of Macro-evolution...
a little nit-picky but it is a BIG point because the theory of evolution requires species jumps, and the only thing the fossil record can possibly PROVE is that there used to be a species with this particular bone configuration...
This isn't bad... I mean sure it'll be June before we get online multiplayer, but on the other hand... It'll be June before most of us manage to obtain a wii anyways:-)
Not quite accurate... AFAIK the companies are not illegally paying off radio broadcast networks, radio braodcast networks are illegally accepting payoffs...
the distinction is in who is committing the "crime". The Record Labels can offer to pay the radio stations to play only oops I did it agian 24/7 if they want, its only illegal for the radio station to say "ok"...
If there is anything I've learned from my two courses on patent law so far (I'm a law student) it's that the abstract and the spec don't mean anything with regards to wahts covered by the patent. ALL that matters is the claims. That said I don't know enough CS to know whats covered in these particular software patents without doing way more work than I want to right now.
I concur:
essentially here's how I see it, a drug company should be able to get a patented drug OR lobby for it to be a mandatory vaccine. If they have both it results in a ludicrous situation.
That said I'm pretty much against mandatory vaccinations in general, If the government wants to make it available to people who can't afford it there are ways to do that without REQUIRING everyone to get it.
I'm not sure if the author intended parent to be funny or not, but its definately more of a serious concern than a joke. We all know congress has a propensity for knee-jerk legislation with poorly thought out long term consequences... I'd say more scary than funny.
I dunno, I'm only 24 so I pretty much grew up in the internet erra as far as being a gamer, yet I've gone to GenCon every year for the past 5 years, and to Origins for many of them.
Several reasons bring me, and others to Cons.
First would be finding like minded people. There's just something about hanging out with tons of people who like the same thing you do that just isn't replicated by internet communities and such.
second: A LOT of companies run major events at cons that you can't really do anywhere else. For card games its world championships/qualifiers, for RPG's its major storyline events, for board games its release of new games. Etc.
Third: YOu get to find out a lot about new games / new game companies that you just wouldn't hear about otherwise, even with the internet. Plus you can demmo new games with the game designers, how cool is that?
Fourth: Vacation. honestly, I like taking my vacation to a con. I have something to do the whole time with minimal planning on my part. Its perfect. Plus I'd rather be doing that than sitting on some random beach staring at the ocean all day.
In order for something to be a lie it must be intentional...
Also clinton wasn't impeached for telling a lie. He was impeached for telling a lie UNDER OATH. If Bush had been Under Oath when he made statements about wmd'S he probly would be impeached.
Finally: I personally believe that Bush genuinely believed that there were WMD's, ergo not a lie.
You are assuming that all porn sites are actively attempting to reach out to minors with that statement. I would argue that there are plenty of sites that would love to have an easy way to say "look we're doing everything we possibly can to help parents, at this point its the parents fault." with a.XXX domain they could.
Essentially every website tied to a print medium would want that because it helps them avoid hassle.
Any time a plaintiff drops a suit (for the first time) it is dropped without prejudice. The RIAA could not have dropped the suit with prejudice. If the judge had dismissed it (an entirely different action altogether) then it could have been with prejudice up to the judge's discretion.
Essentially the RIAA said oh, oops never mind we don't want to sue this person. The court says ok thats fine we'll let you drop it. If they sue her again, and then try and drop it again it WILL be with prejudice. This rule is generally supported by public policy to prevent the courts from being flooded and to prevent tactics (like the RIAA's that are harrasing).
If they opperate out of the US then the US won't have jurisdiction over them, so even if they do find them liable for violating fcc rules or soemthing along those lines, they can just thumb their noses at it.
Radio station near me does that. FCC wouldn't grant them enough boradcasting power to cover the area they wanted to cover, so they said screw it relocate across the river to windsor and broadcast at it anyway. Damned good station too.
My only problem with this claim is the "artificial impact" part.
The whole idea that we are somehow "apart from nature" and anything we do that effects it is bad is contra-evolutionary. Shouldn't we by definition as a product of nature be part of nature, and therefore any impact we have on nature be a part of nature also?
Don't get me wrong I'm not syaing we should go all crazy and suck up the atmosphere with a giant robot maid or anything, but still if we did it wouldn't be "artificial."
I just can't see how people can claim that we are just a part of nature and at the same time claim that the affect we have on nature is artificial...
Clearly simplicity is out and ocmplexity is in. That explains perfectly why nobody uses google, and it certainly hasn't become so common place that it has been "verbed" in the english language. I bow before the amazing intellect of these people./sarcasm
although to be fair there is something very "truthy" about what the are saying...
Slashdot Mirror
1) Senator Coburn (R-Ok.)
2) I'm not sure what makes it outdated, I would guess it is because the exception for fetuses has been removed, but that may not be true.
3) He has put a "hold" on the bill.
Generally I find the article helpful in answering such questions.
As far as my opinion goes, it seems fair for a person to not want an exception allowing for genetic discrimination against fetuses because of that whole "eugenics" issue.
"In other words, if we like you, say anything you want. If you don't, we're going to dig through every single thing you do when your hands touch a keyboard and find something to hang you with."
Wrong.
In other words, if you are a clerk at a desk in Illinois (for example) we won't require you to submit everything you blog about, and will only do spot checks, but if you are a special ops member involved in secret operations we will check everything you post on the internet.
Doesn't seem unfair to me. Note that it is based on what UNIT you are with, not who YOU specifically are.
Preface: I'm not sure if the patent has expired yet or not.
Comment: Even if the patent has expired, if Apple infirnged while the patent was still valid, and the statute of limitations (which I'm not sure how long it is in patent cases) has not run, the Plaintiffs can still bring a suit based on the past infringement. Basically saying "We know we don't own the rights now, but while we did you infringed, so pay up for that time period."
Encryption is no help in a dsicovery issue.
Think about it: If you encrypt your files, great no unauthroised person can see it. RIAA takes it you laugh and sy good luck reading it. RIAA goes to judge and says "we subpeonad his hard drive and he gave it to us encrypted -- its not readable in this form." Judge orders you to give the encryption key and/or decrypt it for them.
At this point (all legal and all logical steps) you have two choices. Choice 1 involves you saying no, and then getting fined (or worse) jailed for contempt of court. Choice 2 involves complying with the judges order in which case your encryption is pointless anyways.
And yes it is a violation of the Federal Rules to try and obfuscate discovery documents.*
*Documents = anything not necessarily paper documents.
Because, you know, all creationists are racist... Wait. Thats not funny. or Intelligent.
out curiosity, how does the knowlege level of the populace affect whether or not they have the right to vote on the issues? Say what you want, but the USA is still a representative democracy (it never was a true democracy) and even if 99% of the country had a reading level of a 5th grader it still would be... just not an efficient one...
also if 48% of the people is a "few" than what is the many?
out of curiosity (and I could be wrong about this), isn't that one of the main tenants of ID?
"We know that from the fossil record and from continuing observations"
- not entirely true. we can hypothesize from the fossil record and we can prove micro-evolution (ie intraspecies evolution) Science has never observed and thus has never PROVEN the existence of a species jump as would be required to prove the theory of Macro-evolution...
a little nit-picky but it is a BIG point because the theory of evolution requires species jumps, and the only thing the fossil record can possibly PROVE is that there used to be a species with this particular bone configuration...
How is Parent insightful?
-1 troll...
I am a Law Student.
Which, incidentally, is also true of me... I'm sitting in my patent drafting class right now!
This isn't bad... I mean sure it'll be June before we get online multiplayer, but on the other hand... It'll be June before most of us manage to obtain a wii anyways :-)
Not quite accurate... AFAIK the companies are not illegally paying off radio broadcast networks, radio braodcast networks are illegally accepting payoffs...
the distinction is in who is committing the "crime". The Record Labels can offer to pay the radio stations to play only oops I did it agian 24/7 if they want, its only illegal for the radio station to say "ok"...
If there is anything I've learned from my two courses on patent law so far (I'm a law student) it's that the abstract and the spec don't mean anything with regards to wahts covered by the patent. ALL that matters is the claims. That said I don't know enough CS to know whats covered in these particular software patents without doing way more work than I want to right now.
I concur: essentially here's how I see it, a drug company should be able to get a patented drug OR lobby for it to be a mandatory vaccine. If they have both it results in a ludicrous situation. That said I'm pretty much against mandatory vaccinations in general, If the government wants to make it available to people who can't afford it there are ways to do that without REQUIRING everyone to get it.
I'm not sure if the author intended parent to be funny or not, but its definately more of a serious concern than a joke. We all know congress has a propensity for knee-jerk legislation with poorly thought out long term consequences... I'd say more scary than funny.
Default judgements are only bad when the court has jurisdiction over you... or you wnat to visit that jursidiction... ever... in your life...
I dunno, I'm only 24 so I pretty much grew up in the internet erra as far as being a gamer, yet I've gone to GenCon every year for the past 5 years, and to Origins for many of them.
Several reasons bring me, and others to Cons.
First would be finding like minded people. There's just something about hanging out with tons of people who like the same thing you do that just isn't replicated by internet communities and such.
second: A LOT of companies run major events at cons that you can't really do anywhere else. For card games its world championships/qualifiers, for RPG's its major storyline events, for board games its release of new games. Etc.
Third: YOu get to find out a lot about new games / new game companies that you just wouldn't hear about otherwise, even with the internet. Plus you can demmo new games with the game designers, how cool is that?
Fourth: Vacation. honestly, I like taking my vacation to a con. I have something to do the whole time with minimal planning on my part. Its perfect. Plus I'd rather be doing that than sitting on some random beach staring at the ocean all day.
In order for something to be a lie it must be intentional...
Also clinton wasn't impeached for telling a lie. He was impeached for telling a lie UNDER OATH. If Bush had been Under Oath when he made statements about wmd'S he probly would be impeached.
Finally: I personally believe that Bush genuinely believed that there were WMD's, ergo not a lie.
just my 2 cents
You are assuming that all porn sites are actively attempting to reach out to minors with that statement. I would argue that there are plenty of sites that would love to have an easy way to say "look we're doing everything we possibly can to help parents, at this point its the parents fault." with a .XXX domain they could.
Essentially every website tied to a print medium would want that because it helps them avoid hassle.
Doesn't allofmp3.com have mob ties? And if so wouldn't their bribe be bigger (and more dangerous to ignore?)
I could be wrong of course...
Any time a plaintiff drops a suit (for the first time) it is dropped without prejudice. The RIAA could not have dropped the suit with prejudice. If the judge had dismissed it (an entirely different action altogether) then it could have been with prejudice up to the judge's discretion.
Essentially the RIAA said oh, oops never mind we don't want to sue this person. The court says ok thats fine we'll let you drop it. If they sue her again, and then try and drop it again it WILL be with prejudice. This rule is generally supported by public policy to prevent the courts from being flooded and to prevent tactics (like the RIAA's that are harrasing).
Its just the way American courts work...
IANAL, but I am in law school.
Thank God for jurisdictional issues.
If they opperate out of the US then the US won't have jurisdiction over them, so even if they do find them liable for violating fcc rules or soemthing along those lines, they can just thumb their noses at it.
Radio station near me does that. FCC wouldn't grant them enough boradcasting power to cover the area they wanted to cover, so they said screw it relocate across the river to windsor and broadcast at it anyway. Damned good station too.
My only problem with this claim is the "artificial impact" part.
The whole idea that we are somehow "apart from nature" and anything we do that effects it is bad is contra-evolutionary. Shouldn't we by definition as a product of nature be part of nature, and therefore any impact we have on nature be a part of nature also?
Don't get me wrong I'm not syaing we should go all crazy and suck up the atmosphere with a giant robot maid or anything, but still if we did it wouldn't be "artificial."
I just can't see how people can claim that we are just a part of nature and at the same time claim that the affect we have on nature is artificial...
Thanks for all the fish,
Are you sure they didn't just leave?
Clearly simplicity is out and ocmplexity is in. That explains perfectly why nobody uses google, and it certainly hasn't become so common place that it has been "verbed" in the english language. I bow before the amazing intellect of these people. /sarcasm
although to be fair there is something very "truthy" about what the are saying...