You do realize that people have a right to be paid for their labor?
You have no right to lock the owner of the system out of his property and then hold it ransom and demand payment to unlock it.
Like I said, I'm not charging $50,000 for a password--that would be extortionate.
No, it would still be extortion no matter what you were charging. If you think such an argument would hold up in court, you are either extremely ignorant or stupid. The only thing you'd be winning is a one-way ticket to Federal Pound-me-in-the-ass prison.
What happens when the annoying content is embedded in the basic HTML of the webpage, and there's *no way* to stop it?
Why would there be no way to stop it? It's trivially easy to write scripts to modify the HTML in a webpage before it's rendered by the browser. Have you never heard of Greastmonkey?
No they aren't. Of the most used Mobile OSes the vast majority are not Linux based. Unless you care to show how Symbian, BlackBerry OS, iPhone OS or WinMo are Linux based. You can't even claim that Linux-based mobile platforms have even a majority market share as the previous 4 OSes market share combined is around 94%.
If I am fired, and then my boss realizes that he hasn't taken the proper steps (not saying this is the case with Childs) of making policies for documenting configurations and/or passwords, along with providing time during work-hours to document that information, he doesn't get them. I'm fired after all, and he doesn't get my free labor. I will be happy to provide him with the information though at my contracting rate of 1.5 times my normal pay.
You do realize that is extortion and you'd be in a whole mess of shit for doing so, right?
That's because you won't see any such citations. The whole "EULAs are unenforceable" is a false meme that constantly repeated on Slashdot. It's the same as the people who will talk about how ISPs are "common carriers" yet no such actual status for ISPs exist. The problem is that since these falsities have been repeated so many times that most Slashtards take them as fact.
Imagine a PVP game where dying killed your character dead. No resurrection. Of if that's too harsh, perhaps losing 5 levels as well as giving the keys to your bank to your slayer, or having the character lock out for a month. Or perhaps having every guard in every town on the continent kill you on sight? You think people would randomly attack strangers? Ganking would vanish in a heartbeat. You'd probably end up with a feudal system very quickly, where everyone was in one of a few massive guilds that would issue kill on sight orders for anyone that harmed one of their own- this may not be what the designers/players want, but it would work. Make losing hurt and the ganking issue solves itself
And you can also imagine that this game will be just as destitute in players as Darkfall. The vast majority of people aren't going to want to play that.
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Just because Democrats never get CAUGHT stealing music, doesn't mean they don't steal.
Well until you have any actual examples of them stealing music rather than vague claims about how they must be, then your claims might actually carry some weight.
Actually, it's more like: Democrats get whatever they want from their good buddies at the RIAA and get a pass from lefty music artists.
Is this the same RIAA that has a well-known Republican staffer/lobbyist as it's chairman and CEO? And the same RIAA who has made numerous donations to Republican senators and representatives for years? Yeah, let's ignore all that and just pretend that only the Democrats are allies of the RIAA.
More often than not, proprietary software licenses absolve the vendor from any guarantees in situations where the software likely to fail (or likely to fail with catastrophic results).
Why do you limit this to just proprietary software? I've yet to see a single free software license that also doesn't have a disclaimer of warranty or fitness.
I wasn't defending the actions of the police. Doesn't change the fact that Chen was being quite an idiot if he didn't think such a thing was clearly going to happen.
And the Law has been created to stop minors from smoking, drinking.
Yeah, those laws are so great. What they do is just instead of kids smoking or drinking in the open where it can be monitored by others to make sure they are doing it responsibly, they just do it in private and do it to excess.
Really? You just mentioned "M-rated" moments later. That is the rating! The problem is that the ESRB doesn't have the manpower to thoroughly rate a game entirely accurately, nor does anyone take the rating seriously enough to impose any actual limitations on it.
So do you or Ahhnold actually have any evidence of widespread selling of M-rated games to minors? I seriously doubt it.
If the parent doesn't object to, say, their 14 year old driving a car, drinking alcohol, or smoking a cigarette, or seeing an R-rated movie, why should it be the State of California's business to tell them they can't?
Yes, the State of California should have no business telling a parent that they can't let their kids, smoke, drink and see R-rated movies. The driving part is different as unlike the previous 3, an young teenage, an age where one is most prone to unsafe driving, can cause harm to others while the first three don't. But if the kid is say on a farm and doing nothing but driving a truck or tractor around on an isolate plot of land, yes the State of California should again have no say. Unless a parent is willfully and/or maliciously putting their minor kid's healthy or safety at harm (such as physical/sexual abuse, intentionally starving the kid, etc) then the wishes of the parents should be respected.
It's funny that people like you have such panic attacks over these things and yet kids were still growing up just fine before we had laws banning them from drinking and smoking.
First of all, I doubt there is any evidence that companies on the whole are selling "R"-rated (ignoring the fact that there is no such rating) games to minors. Secondly, if the parent doesn't object to, say, their 16 year old buying an M-rated game why should it be the State of California's business to tell them they can't?
I agree with you. My post was purely to deal with the anonymous above who was trying to claim that it could have been the codeine to do it. I'm just pointing out how ridiculous that claim would be as tylenol+codeine has such a small dosage amount versus what is a lethal adult dose.
Slashdot Mirror
You do realize that people have a right to be paid for their labor?
You have no right to lock the owner of the system out of his property and then hold it ransom and demand payment to unlock it.
Like I said, I'm not charging $50,000 for a password--that would be extortionate.
No, it would still be extortion no matter what you were charging. If you think such an argument would hold up in court, you are either extremely ignorant or stupid. The only thing you'd be winning is a one-way ticket to Federal Pound-me-in-the-ass prison.
What happens when the annoying content is embedded in the basic HTML of the webpage, and there's *no way* to stop it?
Why would there be no way to stop it? It's trivially easy to write scripts to modify the HTML in a webpage before it's rendered by the browser. Have you never heard of Greastmonkey?
Doesn't really sound like a standard at all. Sounds like a 'feature' just waiting to be replaced by the thing that actually works.
So it's pretty much like the current state of HTML5 in many ways?
I hope you get your phone and proceed to crawl under a rock before someone else tries to give you an STD.
There's no worries there. To potentially get a STD one actually has to have the potential to have sex. The GP will never have such potential.
The majority of mobile platforms are Linux based
No they aren't. Of the most used Mobile OSes the vast majority are not Linux based. Unless you care to show how Symbian, BlackBerry OS, iPhone OS or WinMo are Linux based. You can't even claim that Linux-based mobile platforms have even a majority market share as the previous 4 OSes market share combined is around 94%.
If I am fired, and then my boss realizes that he hasn't taken the proper steps (not saying this is the case with Childs) of making policies for documenting configurations and/or passwords, along with providing time during work-hours to document that information, he doesn't get them. I'm fired after all, and he doesn't get my free labor. I will be happy to provide him with the information though at my contracting rate of 1.5 times my normal pay.
You do realize that is extortion and you'd be in a whole mess of shit for doing so, right?
That's because you won't see any such citations. The whole "EULAs are unenforceable" is a false meme that constantly repeated on Slashdot. It's the same as the people who will talk about how ISPs are "common carriers" yet no such actual status for ISPs exist. The problem is that since these falsities have been repeated so many times that most Slashtards take them as fact.
The spelling "Icarus" is derived from the Etruscan spelling which was Vicare.
The Latin spelling is Íkaros. So they are using the Latinized name.
Imagine a PVP game where dying killed your character dead. No resurrection. Of if that's too harsh, perhaps losing 5 levels as well as giving the keys to your bank to your slayer, or having the character lock out for a month. Or perhaps having every guard in every town on the continent kill you on sight? You think people would randomly attack strangers? Ganking would vanish in a heartbeat. You'd probably end up with a feudal system very quickly, where everyone was in one of a few massive guilds that would issue kill on sight orders for anyone that harmed one of their own- this may not be what the designers/players want, but it would work. Make losing hurt and the ganking issue solves itself
And you can also imagine that this game will be just as destitute in players as Darkfall. The vast majority of people aren't going to want to play that.
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Just because Democrats never get CAUGHT stealing music, doesn't mean they don't steal.
Well until you have any actual examples of them stealing music rather than vague claims about how they must be, then your claims might actually carry some weight.
Actually, it's more like: Democrats get whatever they want from their good buddies at the RIAA and get a pass from lefty music artists.
Is this the same RIAA that has a well-known Republican staffer/lobbyist as it's chairman and CEO? And the same RIAA who has made numerous donations to Republican senators and representatives for years? Yeah, let's ignore all that and just pretend that only the Democrats are allies of the RIAA.
When a Democrat uses a song without paying for it from an artist who is a Democrat, they're not going to complain.
So then provide an actual example rather than a vague claim with no actual citation.
If this is satire, it could be fair use.
No, if it is a parody, it could be fair use. As TFA and the summary state if it is ruled a "satire" then it is most likely infringing.
And Microsoft makes a ton of free software too. So basically you made the term "free software" meaningless.
More often than not, proprietary software licenses absolve the vendor from any guarantees in situations where the software likely to fail (or likely to fail with catastrophic results).
Why do you limit this to just proprietary software? I've yet to see a single free software license that also doesn't have a disclaimer of warranty or fitness.
I wasn't defending the actions of the police. Doesn't change the fact that Chen was being quite an idiot if he didn't think such a thing was clearly going to happen.
found != stolen
They didn't "find" it. They paid for it from the person who stole it.
And the Law has been created to stop minors from smoking, drinking.
Yeah, those laws are so great. What they do is just instead of kids smoking or drinking in the open where it can be monitored by others to make sure they are doing it responsibly, they just do it in private and do it to excess.
Really? You just mentioned "M-rated" moments later. That is the rating! The problem is that the ESRB doesn't have the manpower to thoroughly rate a game entirely accurately, nor does anyone take the rating seriously enough to impose any actual limitations on it.
So do you or Ahhnold actually have any evidence of widespread selling of M-rated games to minors? I seriously doubt it.
If the parent doesn't object to, say, their 14 year old driving a car, drinking alcohol, or smoking a cigarette, or seeing an R-rated movie, why should it be the State of California's business to tell them they can't?
Yes, the State of California should have no business telling a parent that they can't let their kids, smoke, drink and see R-rated movies. The driving part is different as unlike the previous 3, an young teenage, an age where one is most prone to unsafe driving, can cause harm to others while the first three don't. But if the kid is say on a farm and doing nothing but driving a truck or tractor around on an isolate plot of land, yes the State of California should again have no say. Unless a parent is willfully and/or maliciously putting their minor kid's healthy or safety at harm (such as physical/sexual abuse, intentionally starving the kid, etc) then the wishes of the parents should be respected.
It's funny that people like you have such panic attacks over these things and yet kids were still growing up just fine before we had laws banning them from drinking and smoking.
Gizmodo clearly. One should know that it's illegal to purchase stolen goods.
First of all, I doubt there is any evidence that companies on the whole are selling "R"-rated (ignoring the fact that there is no such rating) games to minors. Secondly, if the parent doesn't object to, say, their 16 year old buying an M-rated game why should it be the State of California's business to tell them they can't?
Apple has (for all intents and purposes) one phone on one carrier.
You do realize that the US isn't the entire world, right?
You misunderstand freedom of speech, you can say anything about anyone, but it is never legal to falsely accuse someone of a crime.
And you misunderstand defamation law in the United States. It isn't limited to just falsely accusing people of crimes.
Tylenol+codeine has about 30 mg in it. That's a joke dosage.
I agree with you. My post was purely to deal with the anonymous above who was trying to claim that it could have been the codeine to do it. I'm just pointing out how ridiculous that claim would be as tylenol+codeine has such a small dosage amount versus what is a lethal adult dose.