The sooner we get to vote these clowns out, the better. Thr trouble is, the electorate have very short memories and either don't care about or don't remember such things when they get to vote.
Indeed they do have short memories, and have forgotten just how Big Brother the Tories were when they were in power. A change of administration won't fix this; both major parties will continue to do this stuff, just because they can. Lobbying, legal challenges and (peaceful) civil disobedience seem to be the only things that actually make a difference, and even they only have a limited effect.
I'm not sure what would count as "omnipresence" -- some writers, particularly those with Buddhist leanings, seem to regard the laws of nature as their God, and scientists assume them to "exist" everywhere (but couldn't possibly prove it, so Paddy Powers money is safe).
In terms of more western views of God, what could such a proof comprise? Scientists will make observations and will use Occam's razor to form a candidate hypothesis, then attempt to falsify that hypothesis. Even if scientists/hypothesize/ God (which I think it's Richard Dawkins points out, scientists won't do because the Western notion of God is more complex than any finite hypothesis, so Occam's razor will always steer them to some other hypothesis) then that is will never be a/proof/ of God, it will merely be a hypothesis that is not yet falsified.
Not quite. A ground-crash could take place on a stand or taxiway, and wouldn't be a runway incursion, and a runway incursion need not lead to an accident -- in fact, most don't, most lead to suspension of movements whilst ATC shout things like "Will somebody get that ****** off the runway!"
More precisely, a runway incursion is an incident, not an accident.
What are mid-air collisions called? With other aircraft?
"Mid-air collisions". See the bit about TCAS in this report
Or crashes while taxiing? I'd imagine those are less common though....
Don't know. The incident that springs to mind was the Tenerife crash in 1977, but I'm not aware of any usual terminology for that sort of incident (there can be a "usual terminology" for a highly unusual accident, because the folks managing safety will still talk about what they're working to avoid, but most of my experience is en-route or take-off/landing rather than ground movements).
The term is either "Controlled flight into terrain" or "Uncontrolled flight into terrain", depending on the cause of the crash. Either way, it's flight.
Er, Surely "MP3 100% compatible" doesn't mean the file is compatible with 100% of devices (I challenge you to play any of the formats that have been mentioned on my turntable), it means that the file is 100% compatible with MP3.
Easy to use is one thing, but it seems to be limited to being a glorified PDA. It happens to make for a particularly good PDA, I grant that, but as presented it's almost impossible to reconfigure -- get rid of the preschool stuff that's not relevant to our family and so on. Sure, the techies will find the advanced mode (although I've still not worked out how to add persistent icons to the desktop, and the stuff on the web about it seems scary even to this techie), but from the capability offered to the normal user the non-techies will think that Linux is in competition with PalmOS, not with MS Windows.
Your post just made me think of a positive use for this insane 'allegation=conviction' law:
You're in a 12 month lock-in contract with your ISP and a cheaper, better alternative has just come to market. You send 3 allegations of copyright infringement, accusing yourself. Voilla! New ISP.:)
...after a year of no internet at all. Not quite sure what you've gained there.
No, the Linux distro on my EeePc is far more retarded than any MS offering even from the very start of MS Windows, and frankly is likely to make anybody coming from MS Windows think that Linux is a pathetic, crippled OS. I can't help wondering whether this was all an MS stunt from the start.
It will have legal force on all of the publishers and authors who have signed up to the settlement agreement. Google will establish the registry but it will be independent, controlled by a board of directors, whom the signatories to the settlement (which includes many publishers, the Authors' Guild and Google) will jointly select.
But conditional distribution rights agreed between the registry and the signatories to the settlement is nothing at all like the book defaulting to public domain, as suggested by the message I "fixed", is it?
What's a "POD publisher"?
"Publish on Demand"
I don't see how it will be "a hell of a lot of work for publishers to retain their copyright". They'll retain their copyright regardless of what they do with Google.
Not if the work defaults to the public domain, as suggested by the message I "fixed".
I just bothered to actually READ the information that's available.
But not the thread you were commenting to. Such a pity.
As for the mechanism, Google will establish a Book Rights Registry which authors and publishers can use to assert their control over a particular book, to challenge its in-print/out-of-print status and to issue directives defining how Google makes their book available.
And that will have legal force on other possible distributors? And will Google have a monopoly on maintaining this registry? Because if every POD publisher is maintaining its own registry, then it suddenly looks like a hell of a lot of work for publishers to retain their copyright.
If the author or publisher has any intent to reprint at a future date, they can easily log onto Google and request that their book not be make available.
Really? Where can I log onto Google and prevent all electronic and physical distribution of a book? This is a new Google service that I was unaware of.
Many books go out of print only to be reprinted later, printed in different countries (thus making money on it, so fuck your "definition") for a while while the local used market dries up, or added to a compilation or collection that is in progress and will be printed later.
If the book comes back into print it's not out of print then is it you dumb piece of shit.
Clearly the OP wasn't talking about books that are between print runs or between editions but don't let that stop you from being a clueless fucking troll.
Shove a knife up your ass, dick eater.
And if the publisher hasn't yet decided whether to reprint, which is probably the most common case? Gp, pass the AC that knife, it seems it will be him that needs it, not you.
Where did the gp support the existing copyright durations? The issue was the broken logic that suggested a temporary break in publication should lead to a loss of all rights.
'out of print' by definition means they aren't making any more money on this book at the moment, but may choose to reprint at some future date and so start making money again, provided the market hasn't been flooded with illegal copies.
We have that in parts of the UK too, including where I live. Although Libery (an approximate UK equivalent of the ACLU) has done a good job of challenging the curfew orders, "imminently anticipated bad behaviour" is vague enough that they're effectively still in place.
As a math-inclined techie, I don't see the point of tax brackets -- I don't like discontinuities. Why not make the tax formula something like deductions = income*(1-exp(-a*(income^b)))? You could alter the overall tax rate by altering a and the extent to which the tax is progressive by altering b (heck, you could even make it regressive by making b negative, although those with no income would have an undefined tax burden!)
No discontinuities. Yes, there would still be pages and pages of tax law for what counted as income, and there might be different values of a and b for different types of income, but it would get rid of the resentment when one crosses a tax threshold.
It was also wrong, because it refers to Turkey as a muslim country, whereas (despite the alleged reason for this ruling) Turkey is actually a secular state.
Slashdot Mirror
The sooner we get to vote these clowns out, the better. Thr trouble is, the electorate have very short memories and either don't care about or don't remember such things when they get to vote.
Indeed they do have short memories, and have forgotten just how Big Brother the Tories were when they were in power. A change of administration won't fix this; both major parties will continue to do this stuff, just because they can. Lobbying, legal challenges and (peaceful) civil disobedience seem to be the only things that actually make a difference, and even they only have a limited effect.
I'm not sure what would count as "omnipresence" -- some writers, particularly those with Buddhist leanings, seem to regard the laws of nature as their God, and scientists assume them to "exist" everywhere (but couldn't possibly prove it, so Paddy Powers money is safe).
In terms of more western views of God, what could such a proof comprise? Scientists will make observations and will use Occam's razor to form a candidate hypothesis, then attempt to falsify that hypothesis. Even if scientists /hypothesize/ God (which I think it's Richard Dawkins points out, scientists won't do because the Western notion of God is more complex than any finite hypothesis, so Occam's razor will always steer them to some other hypothesis) then that is will never be a /proof/ of God, it will merely be a hypothesis that is not yet falsified.
Fix'd. ;)
Fixed your fix for ya.
Not quite. A ground-crash could take place on a stand or taxiway, and wouldn't be a runway incursion, and a runway incursion need not lead to an accident -- in fact, most don't, most lead to suspension of movements whilst ATC shout things like "Will somebody get that ****** off the runway!"
More precisely, a runway incursion is an incident, not an accident.
What are mid-air collisions called? With other aircraft?
"Mid-air collisions". See the bit about TCAS in this report
Or crashes while taxiing? I'd imagine those are less common though....
Don't know. The incident that springs to mind was the Tenerife crash in 1977, but I'm not aware of any usual terminology for that sort of incident (there can be a "usual terminology" for a highly unusual accident, because the folks managing safety will still talk about what they're working to avoid, but most of my experience is en-route or take-off/landing rather than ground movements).
Anyway, for aviation safety purposes,
flight is defined (in as slightly circular fashion) as being "between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight, until such time as all persons have disembarked". The pedant in me wants to rewrite that as "between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight, until such time as no living persons remain on the aircraft" -- I don't like termination (sorry!) conditions that may never be met.
The term is either "Controlled flight into terrain" or "Uncontrolled flight into terrain", depending on the cause of the crash. Either way, it's flight.
Er, Surely "MP3 100% compatible" doesn't mean the file is compatible with 100% of devices (I challenge you to play any of the formats that have been mentioned on my turntable), it means that the file is 100% compatible with MP3.
Easy to use is one thing, but it seems to be limited to being a glorified PDA. It happens to make for a particularly good PDA, I grant that, but as presented it's almost impossible to reconfigure -- get rid of the preschool stuff that's not relevant to our family and so on. Sure, the techies will find the advanced mode (although I've still not worked out how to add persistent icons to the desktop, and the stuff on the web about it seems scary even to this techie), but from the capability offered to the normal user the non-techies will think that Linux is in competition with PalmOS, not with MS Windows.
Your post just made me think of a positive use for this insane 'allegation=conviction' law:
You're in a 12 month lock-in contract with your ISP and a cheaper, better alternative has just come to market. You send 3 allegations of copyright infringement, accusing yourself. Voilla! New ISP. :)
...after a year of no internet at all. Not quite sure what you've gained there.
No, the Linux distro on my EeePc is far more retarded than any MS offering even from the very start of MS Windows, and frankly is likely to make anybody coming from MS Windows think that Linux is a pathetic, crippled OS. I can't help wondering whether this was all an MS stunt from the start.
I did lose the context along the way, sorry.
It's a /. tradition :-)
It will have legal force on all of the publishers and authors who have signed up to the settlement agreement. Google will establish the registry but it will be independent, controlled by a board of directors, whom the signatories to the settlement (which includes many publishers, the Authors' Guild and Google) will jointly select.
But conditional distribution rights agreed between the registry and the signatories to the settlement is nothing at all like the book defaulting to public domain, as suggested by the message I "fixed", is it?
What's a "POD publisher"?
"Publish on Demand"
I don't see how it will be "a hell of a lot of work for publishers to retain their copyright". They'll retain their copyright regardless of what they do with Google.
Not if the work defaults to the public domain, as suggested by the message I "fixed".
I just bothered to actually READ the information that's available.
But not the thread you were commenting to. Such a pity.
As for the mechanism, Google will establish a Book Rights Registry which authors and publishers can use to assert their control over a particular book, to challenge its in-print/out-of-print status and to issue directives defining how Google makes their book available.
And that will have legal force on other possible distributors? And will Google have a monopoly on maintaining this registry? Because if every POD publisher is maintaining its own registry, then it suddenly looks like a hell of a lot of work for publishers to retain their copyright.
If the author or publisher has any intent to reprint at a future date, they can easily log onto Google and request that their book not be make available.
Really? Where can I log onto Google and prevent all electronic and physical distribution of a book? This is a new Google service that I was unaware of.
Many books go out of print only to be reprinted later, printed in different countries (thus making money on it, so fuck your "definition") for a while while the local used market dries up, or added to a compilation or collection that is in progress and will be printed later.
If the book comes back into print it's not out of print then is it you dumb piece of shit.
Clearly the OP wasn't talking about books that are between print runs or between editions but don't let that stop you from being a clueless fucking troll.
Shove a knife up your ass, dick eater.
And if the publisher hasn't yet decided whether to reprint, which is probably the most common case? Gp, pass the AC that knife, it seems it will be him that needs it, not you.
You might find that the bookstore still has a few copies left if it's only recently gone out of print.
Where did the gp support the existing copyright durations? The issue was the broken logic that suggested a temporary break in publication should lead to a loss of all rights.
'out of print' by definition means they aren't making any more money on this book at the moment, but may choose to reprint at some future date and so start making money again, provided the market hasn't been flooded with illegal copies.
Fixed that for ya.
out past 10 pm
9pm for most of the UK curfews.
We have that in parts of the UK too, including where I live. Although Libery (an approximate UK equivalent of the ACLU) has done a good job of challenging the curfew orders, "imminently anticipated bad behaviour" is vague enough that they're effectively still in place.
As a math-inclined techie, I don't see the point of tax brackets -- I don't like discontinuities. Why not make the tax formula something like deductions = income*(1-exp(-a*(income^b)))? You could alter the overall tax rate by altering a and the extent to which the tax is progressive by altering b (heck, you could even make it regressive by making b negative, although those with no income would have an undefined tax burden!)
No discontinuities. Yes, there would still be pages and pages of tax law for what counted as income, and there might be different values of a and b for different types of income, but it would get rid of the resentment when one crosses a tax threshold.
Not entierely joking...
One of the basics of UI design is that if the intended users can't use it, you got the UI wrong. Simple as that.
That makes it a country of Muslims, not a Muslim country. There is a difference.
It was also wrong, because it refers to Turkey as a muslim country, whereas (despite the alleged reason for this ruling) Turkey is actually a secular state.
Ah! You've seen the T&Cs then? In that case you have the advantage over me.