We would not have the city become the new monopoly on data access.
The City would have a monopoly on access to provide data access. Your solution kicks the monopoly problem back one level, but doesn't necessarily improve the outcome.
I favor telecommunications corporations that are owned and operated as consumer cooperatives as a reasonably likely best answer to natural monopolies.
First sale doctrine says they can do whatever they want with the DVDs once they buy them...
Unless the DVDs are manufactured and sold in another country (see Costco v. Omega) Netflix needs to get very cleaver politically and legally or they are going to get marginalized over the next 5 or so years.
The warning issued by the Internet Crime Complaint Center, which has some sort of hard to describe relationship with the FBI, is completely useless to any small business that would be susceptible to this attack. The only thing that they could get from the warning is to use virus scanner for all attachments to emails. No additional information that a small business might find useful is conveyed. Further, virus scanners are a) never going to catch the newest Trojans or other malicious software, and b) unlikely to be installed as a result of this warning. Any small business that knows about the IC3 and their warnings will be using up to date email security practices. Those that don't use up to date email security practices are unlikely to know about the IC3 and their warnings. This is a highly ineffective "warning" or "note" as the IC3 describes it.
We could start to see ISPs cooperatively owned buy their customers. There are currently a number of municipally owned and operated ISP that are working out quite well for resident/customers.
It is unlikely to happen but consumer cooperatives are clearly the best alternative to privately owned monopolies.
A high population density means a rapid decrease in effectiveness of police, law and social norms enforcement, which is the reason people are fleeing away from it.
This isn't obvious to me. I'd like to see some evidence to support your claim.
A metro system coming to them is simply iterating the cycle of "urbanites" flowing in and "pioneers" moving out.
I don't see what is inherently wrong with expanding the area with relatively high population density.
With sample size that large you can be pretty sure the numbers are meaningful.
Careful with statements like that. The population of customers of the Humble Bundle 2 is not a random sampling of potential computer game customers. It is a significant assumption to use this population as a representative sample of computer game customers.
The partially explained hypothesis in that article is mildly interesting, however, as with much of Huffington Post's reporting on health issues, there is no indication of data to support the theory. It is just a single Doctor offering personal observations and fitting it to a theory.
Using Occum's razor perhaps the most likely answer is that corn subsidies helped make the average price of calories cheaper at a time when average incomes were increasing. Companies also are motivated by profits to sell foods that are less filling per dollar. This resulted in increased caloric intake by most people and was accompanied by shift to a more sedentary lifestyle. So caloric intake increased and metabolic caloric expenditure decreased on average. The burden of proof lies with the claim that fructose of equal caloric value will lead to increase in weight compared to other calories. So far the evidence is lacking.
I've seen evidence that the increase in corn in the diets of livestock has changed the composition of fat ingested by people in the USA. This composition change may contribute to cardiovascular and other diseases but not to weight gain.
As Mark Haub recently demonstrated, the evidence for calorie control as the route toward weight loss is quite convincing. However, overall health is much more complicated than, though certainly influenced by, maintaining ones weight.
+1 Clear and correct summary of the ruling with a useful illustration of what the ruling prevents Costco or anyone from doing whenever a manufacturer asserts their legal copyright in the US.
Bottom line: copyright law is a larger dead weight net loss to society than it was before today.
Convince Congress or 2/3 of the States to change the laws, or live with it. In this case you may be able to bring another, similar case to get a definitive ruling since the court was split 4-4. Changing anything is a long shot if you don't have a lot of money to spend on the issue.
It's 2 days from the time you notice. Not two days from the time of the transaction. It is definitely increased risk over a credit card. Just not as severe as you described.
However, most people usually just run it as credit - and there's a good reason for that. If someone steals your card info for a debit card - you're pretty much screwed. Any money they pull out before you notice is _gone_ unless you report it pretty much immediately - and even then, that's no guarantee you'll get it back. I think they have a maximum amount they'll refund, and they'll only refund that if you notify them within 30 days.
Just to let you know, debit cards do have slightly more risk to the consumer, but not in the way you described. According to the Electronic Fund Transfer Act which is codified in Federal Reserve Board Regulation E, liability to consumers that had a fraudulent debit card transaction is limited to $50 unless the consumer does not notify their bank within 2 days of learning of the fraud or loss of debit card. The $50 limit is not normally enforced, because banks don't want to loose your deposits. The Federal Reserve Bank of San Fransisco has a good summary of the differences in liability between Debit and Credit cards. Further, a bank must return any funds transferred by error or fraud within ten days {see paragraph (c)(1&2)}, unless the bank can prove no error or fraud took place.
One might say that 2 days is not enough time, but my bank (ING) sends me an email for every transaction in my accounts. If one is not familiar, I can easily check the detail.
With Visa - they'll refund everything. And I don't recall there being any significant time limit on it.
The law imposes a strict $50 limit on liability for credit cards, but credit card issuers rarely enforce this in order to retain you as a customer.
The study you linked to does not seem to be as supportive of the net benefit of Algorithmic or High Frequency Trading as you implied. The paper merely confirms that such trading increases liquidity in rising markets over a short period (less than 5 years). The paper does not indicate the value of the additional liquidity provided and does not compare that value to the costs of providing the liquidity. The paper does not consider in depth what those costs may be.
On page 34 the authors indicate a limitation of there study and offer a cursory glance at one negative effect of algorithmic trading:
...it remains an open question whether algorithmic trading and algorithmic liquidity supply are equally beneficial in more turbulent or declining markets.
...the decline in depth has hampered the ability to trade large amounts without substantial costs....innovations can offset some of these effects. For instance, some "dark pools" such as LiquidNet and Pipeline represent a modern version of an upstairs market, allowing traders with large orders to electronically search for counter- parties without revealing their trading interest.
Apparently in the SOFA agreement if the Iraqi interim government says GTFO, the US has 1 year to leave... They haven't requested the US leave yet
I wonder what incentives are being offered to the Iraqi interim government to not say GTFO other than the obvious consequence of having to provide 100% of their own police and military services. What are the members of the Iraqi government being offered (or threatened with) from the USA and USA corporations that benefit from a greater USA military?
I think that you would be pleased with hdtracks.com's classical selection. They don't have anything composed by György Ligeti. But you could always visit thepiratebay.org since you don't seem to mind US copyright law. Also, Wikipedia seems to provide some useful links to György Ligeti recordings.
They do see the the non-income-tax portion of payroll taxes that are removed from their pay checks i.e. Social Security and Medicare taxes and Unemployment taxes. These are the portions of the federal budget that are always being labeled as unsustainable by politicians.
By the way, what makes you think that the visibility of ones tax burden has any correlation to someone's interest in and ability to understand the sources and uses of government funds.
Slashdot Mirror
I just sent the following email to feedback@slashdot.org:
1)
Look at this comment:
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1971610&cid=35039378
The # of comments indicated under the word "Comments" is 9.
The number of comments shown with a 3 / 0 threshold is 3 (1 full / 2
abbreviated).
2)
Now actually read the comment:
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1971610&cid=35039378
Understand the complaint in the comment (be sure to follow the link
within to see an example).
3)
Fix both or you will loose readership and page views.
4)
Don't tell me that it will be fixed. Just tell me when it is fixed. I'll
be getting my news from elsewhere in the mean time.
Better graph: http://waxy.org/2011/01/colorblind_leading_the_blind/
We would not have the city become the new monopoly on data access.
The City would have a monopoly on access to provide data access. Your solution kicks the monopoly problem back one level, but doesn't necessarily improve the outcome. I favor telecommunications corporations that are owned and operated as consumer cooperatives as a reasonably likely best answer to natural monopolies.
First sale doctrine says they can do whatever they want with the DVDs once they buy them...
Unless the DVDs are manufactured and sold in another country (see Costco v. Omega) Netflix needs to get very cleaver politically and legally or they are going to get marginalized over the next 5 or so years.
The warning issued by the Internet Crime Complaint Center, which has some sort of hard to describe relationship with the FBI, is completely useless to any small business that would be susceptible to this attack. The only thing that they could get from the warning is to use virus scanner for all attachments to emails. No additional information that a small business might find useful is conveyed. Further, virus scanners are a) never going to catch the newest Trojans or other malicious software, and b) unlikely to be installed as a result of this warning. Any small business that knows about the IC3 and their warnings will be using up to date email security practices. Those that don't use up to date email security practices are unlikely to know about the IC3 and their warnings. This is a highly ineffective "warning" or "note" as the IC3 describes it.
We could start to see ISPs cooperatively owned buy their customers. There are currently a number of municipally owned and operated ISP that are working out quite well for resident/customers. It is unlikely to happen but consumer cooperatives are clearly the best alternative to privately owned monopolies.
http://sowhyiswikileaksagoodthingagain.com/ Offers no direct or indirect links to source material on Wikileaks.org that I could find.
A high population density means a rapid decrease in effectiveness of police, law and social norms enforcement, which is the reason people are fleeing away from it.
This isn't obvious to me. I'd like to see some evidence to support your claim.
A metro system coming to them is simply iterating the cycle of "urbanites" flowing in and "pioneers" moving out.
I don't see what is inherently wrong with expanding the area with relatively high population density.
With sample size that large you can be pretty sure the numbers are meaningful.
Careful with statements like that. The population of customers of the Humble Bundle 2 is not a random sampling of potential computer game customers. It is a significant assumption to use this population as a representative sample of computer game customers.
The partially explained hypothesis in that article is mildly interesting, however, as with much of Huffington Post's reporting on health issues, there is no indication of data to support the theory. It is just a single Doctor offering personal observations and fitting it to a theory.
Using Occum's razor perhaps the most likely answer is that corn subsidies helped make the average price of calories cheaper at a time when average incomes were increasing. Companies also are motivated by profits to sell foods that are less filling per dollar. This resulted in increased caloric intake by most people and was accompanied by shift to a more sedentary lifestyle. So caloric intake increased and metabolic caloric expenditure decreased on average. The burden of proof lies with the claim that fructose of equal caloric value will lead to increase in weight compared to other calories. So far the evidence is lacking.
I've seen evidence that the increase in corn in the diets of livestock has changed the composition of fat ingested by people in the USA. This composition change may contribute to cardiovascular and other diseases but not to weight gain.
As Mark Haub recently demonstrated, the evidence for calorie control as the route toward weight loss is quite convincing. However, overall health is much more complicated than, though certainly influenced by, maintaining ones weight.
+1 Clear and correct summary of the ruling with a useful illustration of what the ruling prevents Costco or anyone from doing whenever a manufacturer asserts their legal copyright in the US.
Bottom line: copyright law is a larger dead weight net loss to society than it was before today.
Convince Congress or 2/3 of the States to change the laws, or live with it. In this case you may be able to bring another, similar case to get a definitive ruling since the court was split 4-4. Changing anything is a long shot if you don't have a lot of money to spend on the issue.
That's strange. All I see is ********** for the names of your cat, school, hometown, and mother's maiden name.
What do they even do?
omg.yahoo.com = ad sales
It's 2 days from the time you notice. Not two days from the time of the transaction. It is definitely increased risk over a credit card. Just not as severe as you described.
However, most people usually just run it as credit - and there's a good reason for that. If someone steals your card info for a debit card - you're pretty much screwed. Any money they pull out before you notice is _gone_ unless you report it pretty much immediately - and even then, that's no guarantee you'll get it back. I think they have a maximum amount they'll refund, and they'll only refund that if you notify them within 30 days.
Just to let you know, debit cards do have slightly more risk to the consumer, but not in the way you described. According to the Electronic Fund Transfer Act which is codified in Federal Reserve Board Regulation E, liability to consumers that had a fraudulent debit card transaction is limited to $50 unless the consumer does not notify their bank within 2 days of learning of the fraud or loss of debit card. The $50 limit is not normally enforced, because banks don't want to loose your deposits. The Federal Reserve Bank of San Fransisco has a good summary of the differences in liability between Debit and Credit cards. Further, a bank must return any funds transferred by error or fraud within ten days {see paragraph (c)(1&2)}, unless the bank can prove no error or fraud took place.
One might say that 2 days is not enough time, but my bank (ING) sends me an email for every transaction in my accounts. If one is not familiar, I can easily check the detail.
With Visa - they'll refund everything. And I don't recall there being any significant time limit on it.
The law imposes a strict $50 limit on liability for credit cards, but credit card issuers rarely enforce this in order to retain you as a customer.
The study you linked to does not seem to be as supportive of the net benefit of Algorithmic or High Frequency Trading as you implied. The paper merely confirms that such trading increases liquidity in rising markets over a short period (less than 5 years). The paper does not indicate the value of the additional liquidity provided and does not compare that value to the costs of providing the liquidity. The paper does not consider in depth what those costs may be.
On page 34 the authors indicate a limitation of there study and offer a cursory glance at one negative effect of algorithmic trading:
Both Republics and Democrats have been pushing this shit. Who the hell is standing against it?
Lawrence Lessig
Watch these videos to understand his take on the problem and the first step toward a solution.
Institutional Corruption - v3 50min 50sec
Good Soul "corruption" 4min 12sec
Apparently in the SOFA agreement if the Iraqi interim government says GTFO, the US has 1 year to leave... They haven't requested the US leave yet
I wonder what incentives are being offered to the Iraqi interim government to not say GTFO other than the obvious consequence of having to provide 100% of their own police and military services. What are the members of the Iraqi government being offered (or threatened with) from the USA and USA corporations that benefit from a greater USA military?
VinayDeolalikar has a direct link to his most recently updated version of his paper, "P is not equal to NP". 6th August, 2010 on his personal page on HP Labs' website.
VinayDeolalikar has a direct link to his most recently updated version of his paper, "P is not equal to NP". 6th August, 2010 on his personal page on HP Labs' website.
VinayDeolalikar has a direct link to his most recently updated version of his paper, "P is not equal to NP". 6th August, 2010 on his personal page on HP Labs' website.
VinayDeolalikar has a direct link to his most recently updated version of his paper, "P is not equal to NP". 6th August, 2010 on his personal page on HP Labs' website.
I think that you would be pleased with hdtracks.com's classical selection. They don't have anything composed by György Ligeti. But you could always visit thepiratebay.org since you don't seem to mind US copyright law. Also, Wikipedia seems to provide some useful links to György Ligeti recordings.
So what? They don't see those taxes.
They do see the the non-income-tax portion of payroll taxes that are removed from their pay checks i.e. Social Security and Medicare taxes and Unemployment taxes. These are the portions of the federal budget that are always being labeled as unsustainable by politicians.
By the way, what makes you think that the visibility of ones tax burden has any correlation to someone's interest in and ability to understand the sources and uses of government funds.