*trade*marks are designed to prevent Joe Schmoe from making and selling cars (the trade) and putting Ford's badge (the mark) on them. When said cars kersplodey, killing all occupants, this makes *Ford* look bad.
If you are not in the motor trade, you may call your products "Ford" anything, and use a horse badge to advertise them. You may even have a brand of cornflakes called Ford Mustangs and trademark law can do nothing about it - not in the same trade, y'see? This is why a company selling tiny devices made out of marshmellow for looking through walls can safely call them Microsoft Windows.
Note I am not addressing copyright law here since that is an entirely different beastie.
You just solved it for date-based events. The GP talked about "stuff in general". Now come up with a solution that encompasses all possible future data requirements (not XML, since that is not specific to any single application).
That said, I think impossible might be too strong a word, but it's certainly a moving target.
1. I work, because I need to eat. Without eating I die.
or
2. I work, because if I do not work, I am killed.
This sounds like Hobson's choice to me.
I believe in the edict that the only thing a free man can be forced to do is die. This draws no distinction between the methods of death, and by it, all men are equally (un)free.
You admonition to avoid pedantry nullifies your argument. Clearly, if someone finds CD-based music offensive or harmful, that puts CDs into the category of "things someone finds harmful" and thus must be added to your list.
is it any more responsible for those companies to avoid *their* responsibility to their customers? I say hang 'em high, and let their customers decide if the companies deserve the business.
Don't blame the soldiers that do the killing, blame the people in their pinstriped suits that don't have to do the trigger pulling.
While I have sympathy for your situation, every single (US) soldier who is pulling a trigger is a volunteer. "I was only following orders" stopped being a valid excuse for government-sanctioned murder a loooong time ago in an all-volunteer army.
The Civil War, when we decided that the Federal moral responsibility to abolish slavery outweighed the rights of states to institutionalize the ownership of people of a different race.
But the states never did institutionalize this - all they (or any then-US govt) did was to say "we will protect the rights of people to own property" - they didn't at any time make the determination that person A would be a slave and person B a slave-owner.
Not that that invalidates your overall point (that of federal laws trumping those of a state), but it's worth clarifying.
The banks, merchants, etc... are the real losers. However, if it was a serious problem, banks and merchants would be doing something about it.
and the reason they're not is because, and this is the important bit, they pass the costs on to their customers. That's right, banks and merchants don't lose one red cent over identity theft. They simply raise rates or add extra fees or apply previously non-existent charges, when it happens too often. *every* instance of identity theft is subsised by *every* customer of that organisation, without exception.
I don't understand. Why is it any easier to remember method A than method B, if one is not used to either? Not that your larger point (use prepared queries vs. escaping strings) is under dispute, but if a developer is more used to using the latter, how would he be more likely to remember to use the former?
No, but you can cut out the text (or picture) from a purchased greeting card, and paste it into a montage of pictures or what-have-you from other sources, and give *that* to someone else. "Derivative works" is I believe the term.
Slashdot Mirror
No no no, no, and no.
*trade*marks are designed to prevent Joe Schmoe from making and selling cars (the trade) and putting Ford's badge (the mark) on them. When said cars kersplodey, killing all occupants, this makes *Ford* look bad.
If you are not in the motor trade, you may call your products "Ford" anything, and use a horse badge to advertise them. You may even have a brand of cornflakes called Ford Mustangs and trademark law can do nothing about it - not in the same trade, y'see? This is why a company selling tiny devices made out of marshmellow for looking through walls can safely call them Microsoft Windows.
Note I am not addressing copyright law here since that is an entirely different beastie.
Can I get a 'Duh' ? I knew I could.
You just solved it for date-based events. The GP talked about "stuff in general". Now come up with a solution that encompasses all possible future data requirements (not XML, since that is not specific to any single application).
That said, I think impossible might be too strong a word, but it's certainly a moving target.
So your choice boils down to:
1. I work, because I need to eat. Without eating I die.
or
2. I work, because if I do not work, I am killed.
This sounds like Hobson's choice to me.
I believe in the edict that the only thing a free man can be forced to do is die. This draws no distinction between the methods of death, and by it, all men are equally (un)free.
By your logic a slave is not a slave, since he is free to starve or otherwise kill himself.
come on, it's like nude-female jello wrestling - you just hope it goes the distance.
You admonition to avoid pedantry nullifies your argument. Clearly, if someone finds CD-based music offensive or harmful, that puts CDs into the category of "things someone finds harmful" and thus must be added to your list.
Also known as Boiling Frog Syndrome.
Then the law needs to be clarified, and a jury can notify the judge of this with a 'not guilty' verdict.
Not sure that advertising these companies for free is really the effect you want to have.
That's why I said 'correct form' not 'correct command' :)
And most geeks know the correct form would be select count(id) (select count(*) is slower, and your syntax is wrong)
..at least, on an out-of-date distribution.
is it any more responsible for those companies to avoid *their* responsibility to their customers? I say hang 'em high, and let their customers decide if the companies deserve the business.
While I have sympathy for your situation, every single (US) soldier who is pulling a trigger is a volunteer. "I was only following orders" stopped being a valid excuse for government-sanctioned murder a loooong time ago in an all-volunteer army.
But the states never did institutionalize this - all they (or any then-US govt) did was to say "we will protect the rights of people to own property" - they didn't at any time make the determination that person A would be a slave and person B a slave-owner.
Not that that invalidates your overall point (that of federal laws trumping those of a state), but it's worth clarifying.
and the reason they're not is because, and this is the important bit, they pass the costs on to their customers. That's right, banks and merchants don't lose one red cent over identity theft. They simply raise rates or add extra fees or apply previously non-existent charges, when it happens too often. *every* instance of identity theft is subsised by *every* customer of that organisation, without exception.
Beautifully put.
I don't understand. Why is it any easier to remember method A than method B, if one is not used to either? Not that your larger point (use prepared queries vs. escaping strings) is under dispute, but if a developer is more used to using the latter, how would he be more likely to remember to use the former?
Awesome rebuttal! Well done! I know I'm swayed by your convincing arguments!
like a bulldog licking piss of a thistle, over here.
You're right. Thanks for the correction.
No, but you can cut out the text (or picture) from a purchased greeting card, and paste it into a montage of pictures or what-have-you from other sources, and give *that* to someone else. "Derivative works" is I believe the term.