Any artist whose art can be mistaken for a biological weapon ought to be detained imho. What was so bad about paintings and sculptures of people and nature that they had to be completely abandoned by modern artists in favor of making mostly stuff that a scrap yard would turn down as too hideous.
Back on topic, the mail fraud charge really smells of them trying to find something, anything to charge him with to justify all the damage they did to the guy. Hope he has a good lawyer because if the facts are as they seem from a casual reading of the article (a big IF) he might have a good case for a lawsuit.
The article barely mentions it, and the summary not at all, but the background to this is the battle over the ownership of Arsenal, one of the big four English football (soccer) clubs. The Arsenal fans (and apparently Craig Murray) are generally opposed to Usmanov's takeover of the club and some of them have blogs, hence the attacks on him and the unleashing of lawyers in response.
Otherwise why would a bunch of British bloggers care about the business practices of an Uzbekistani businessman, and why would he care what they think.
I guess if nobody reads the article, they figure it's not that important where they (don't) start reading from? Or else Stony Stevenson likes to read articles from back to front? I wonder how many/. readers will even notice.
Is it just me or the summary bears no relation to the article it links to. The article talks about this kid inventing a board game, not "a technology that lets users make payments and shop for other items".
From TFA:
A "white list" would instead compile every known legitimate software program, including applications such as Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobat, and add new ones as they are developed.
And what loops does a small software developer have to jump through to get Symantec to put his program on their white list?
The purpose of prisons is to separate those who are a danger to society from society.
There is a bit more to it than that. In all countries there is a retributive element in the justice system, i.e. making the punishment proportional to the severity of the crime. If your statement were true, anyone who commits a crime and can show that they are not able to commit that crime again should just be let go.
Exactly, and I would like to hear what else is included in this $105 bil. The total amount of money companies spend on data security, virus protection etc? The article doesn't say but it wouldn't surprise me. That would be a) closer to matching a number like that b) completely pointless. You might as well count the cost of all the locks, security guards and alarms in the world and call it the cost of burglaries.
Is it really that clear-cut that violent crimes should be punished more harshly than non-violent "white collar" crimes? An employee of a 7-11 who gets held up suffers some stress (unless he gets shot, but that's rare) and the company loses a few hundred dollars. I would say that people responsible for the Enron fraud for example caused much greater suffering to more people (who lost their life savings, pensions etc) than a crackhead who robs a 7-11.
I just googled "ringtones" and it came up with 112 million results. Going by the first 3-4 pages, most of them seem to be either selling or offering "free" ringtones. Some comparisons:
bread: 78 million
oxygen: 91 million
global warming: 80 million
world peace: 2.8 million
liberty: 95 million
while 7 of the top 10 real polluters are Soviet/Russia and China.
I am not nitpicking when I point out that those are 7 out of 10 most polluted cities/areas, not the biggest polluters. Not the same thing.
If you bother to check the actual data USA consistently comes up in top 5 biggest polluters both per capita and overall. China and (not Soviet anymore) Russia are right up there as well to be sure, but ranting about media propaganda and hypocritcal AlGore elitists doesn't reveal anything about the actual problem, only about your political preferences (and perhaps what radio stations you listen to).
The key words here are "privately funded organization". Its not about landing a robot on the moon, its about encouraging non-governmental space exploration
How about if you don't switch windows. As you type your credit card number just include a bunch of random numbers in between the actual numbers. Then use the mouse to select and delete everything other than your card number.
If there's any news in this, it's watching the semantic argument that should result. People love to quote Google's tenet of "do no evil" and accuse Google of violating it wheneverGoogle opens up a new avenue for earning money. But it's not necessarily evil. It's just something they disagree with. And it's interesting, from a sociological perspective, to see how people can regard the opposing party viewpoint, in what are essentially minor disagreements, as "evil".
Doesn't seem to be an old wreck as it doesn't show up in older maps. I looked before I downloaded the maps in the article and there was nothing there. Also, measuring the plane with the ruler tool shows 22 feet, exactly the length of Fossett's plane.
Unfortunately, the lack of north-west facing shadows around the plane (see the trees) suggests that this is a plane in the air, not on the ground.
Actually, we are not talking about fraud here. Would a libertarian prosecute the phone company for fraud for writing some contract details in small font or in a complicated legalistic language? Are you going to tell me that government regulation of what can and cannot be written in a contract between two consenting parties is not directly contrary to libertarian ideals?
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against libertarian philosophy in principle but this case is just a small illustration of the practical problems.
My coworker switched phone companies and didn't get a chance to try the new phone from home for the three days window they give you (can't remember why but he had a good reason). Guess what, it turns out he didn't have any service in his house, as in zero bars. He wrangled with them for weeks but in the end he had to pay cancellation fees.
That's the problem with the buyer beware libertarian crowd. What if the buyer is not a trained lawyer and does not understand every small print clause in every contract for everything he buys which is deliberately made as convoluted as possible? Is there any good reason why there shouldn't be some legal requirement for the seller to make it clear in plain english what the hell exactly are you getting for your money, not just in cell phone contracts but in general?
There are too many places for you to put cameras and screens everywhere, and if you did, you'd freak the hell out of people. With the robot, if he hears an interesting conversation in the distance, he can have the robot wander over so he can join in.
Slashdot Mirror
Any artist whose art can be mistaken for a biological weapon ought to be detained imho. What was so bad about paintings and sculptures of people and nature that they had to be completely abandoned by modern artists in favor of making mostly stuff that a scrap yard would turn down as too hideous.
Back on topic, the mail fraud charge really smells of them trying to find something, anything to charge him with to justify all the damage they did to the guy. Hope he has a good lawyer because if the facts are as they seem from a casual reading of the article (a big IF) he might have a good case for a lawsuit.
The article barely mentions it, and the summary not at all, but the background to this is the battle over the ownership of Arsenal, one of the big four English football (soccer) clubs. The Arsenal fans (and apparently Craig Murray) are generally opposed to Usmanov's takeover of the club and some of them have blogs, hence the attacks on him and the unleashing of lawyers in response.
Some more details here: ahref=http://www.forbes.com/2007/09/18/arsenal-usmanov-kroenke-lifestyle-sport-cx_pm_0918arsenal_print.html/rel=url2html-32009http://www.forbes.com/2007/09/18/arsenal-usmanov-kroenke-lifestyle-sport-cx_pm_0918arsenal_print.html/>
Otherwise why would a bunch of British bloggers care about the business practices of an Uzbekistani businessman, and why would he care what they think.
I guess if nobody reads the article, they figure it's not that important where they (don't) start reading from? Or else Stony Stevenson likes to read articles from back to front? I wonder how many /. readers will even notice.
Here is page 1 anyway: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/23/AR2007092301471.html?nav=rss_business
You mean your porn server?
Ah, go on tell us. We won't tell anybody
Is it just me or the summary bears no relation to the article it links to. The article talks about this kid inventing a board game, not "a technology that lets users make payments and shop for other items".
From TFA: A "white list" would instead compile every known legitimate software program, including applications such as Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobat, and add new ones as they are developed.
And what loops does a small software developer have to jump through to get Symantec to put his program on their white list?
When will they focus on usability and speed rather than adding features.
"they" being every software developer who ever existed
The purpose of prisons is to separate those who are a danger to society from society.
There is a bit more to it than that. In all countries there is a retributive element in the justice system, i.e. making the punishment proportional to the severity of the crime. If your statement were true, anyone who commits a crime and can show that they are not able to commit that crime again should just be let go.
Exactly, and I would like to hear what else is included in this $105 bil. The total amount of money companies spend on data security, virus protection etc? The article doesn't say but it wouldn't surprise me. That would be a) closer to matching a number like that b) completely pointless. You might as well count the cost of all the locks, security guards and alarms in the world and call it the cost of burglaries.
Is it really that clear-cut that violent crimes should be punished more harshly than non-violent "white collar" crimes? An employee of a 7-11 who gets held up suffers some stress (unless he gets shot, but that's rare) and the company loses a few hundred dollars. I would say that people responsible for the Enron fraud for example caused much greater suffering to more people (who lost their life savings, pensions etc) than a crackhead who robs a 7-11.
I just googled "ringtones" and it came up with 112 million results. Going by the first 3-4 pages, most of them seem to be either selling or offering "free" ringtones. Some comparisons:
bread: 78 million
oxygen: 91 million
global warming: 80 million
world peace: 2.8 million
liberty: 95 million
But, fortunately:
beer: 128 million
Whew... close
while 7 of the top 10 real polluters are Soviet/Russia and China.
I am not nitpicking when I point out that those are 7 out of 10 most polluted cities/areas, not the biggest polluters. Not the same thing.
If you bother to check the actual data USA consistently comes up in top 5 biggest polluters both per capita and overall. China and (not Soviet anymore) Russia are right up there as well to be sure, but ranting about media propaganda and hypocritcal AlGore elitists doesn't reveal anything about the actual problem, only about your political preferences (and perhaps what radio stations you listen to).
I need a map with country border on it
I hear you can obtain one of those at your local bookstore. Some other options are things called "atlases" and "globes".
Here: http://www.google.com/products?hl=en&q=refrigerator&&price1=&price2=200
The key words here are "privately funded organization". Its not about landing a robot on the moon, its about encouraging non-governmental space exploration
Wow, and you are getting a ringtone as well. That's a $3 value absolutely free!
How about if you don't switch windows. As you type your credit card number just include a bunch of random numbers in between the actual numbers. Then use the mouse to select and delete everything other than your card number.
If there's any news in this, it's watching the semantic argument that should result. People love to quote Google's tenet of "do no evil" and accuse Google of violating it wheneverGoogle opens up a new avenue for earning money. But it's not necessarily evil. It's just something they disagree with. And it's interesting, from a sociological perspective, to see how people can regard the opposing party viewpoint, in what are essentially minor disagreements, as "evil".
t mlrel=url2html-17653http://www.google.com/corporat e/tenthings.html>
...Google has also proven that advertising can be effective without being flashy....
:)
You can blame google for that. From Google Philosophy page on their site: ahref=http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.h
: Number 6 You can make money without doing evil.
So they are associating not having flashy ads with not being evil. Now that they will have flashy ads that means they are evil.
Doesn't seem to be an old wreck as it doesn't show up in older maps. I looked before I downloaded the maps in the article and there was nothing there. Also, measuring the plane with the ruler tool shows 22 feet, exactly the length of Fossett's plane.
Unfortunately, the lack of north-west facing shadows around the plane (see the trees) suggests that this is a plane in the air, not on the ground.
Actually, we are not talking about fraud here. Would a libertarian prosecute the phone company for fraud for writing some contract details in small font or in a complicated legalistic language? Are you going to tell me that government regulation of what can and cannot be written in a contract between two consenting parties is not directly contrary to libertarian ideals?
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against libertarian philosophy in principle but this case is just a small illustration of the practical problems.
My coworker switched phone companies and didn't get a chance to try the new phone from home for the three days window they give you (can't remember why but he had a good reason). Guess what, it turns out he didn't have any service in his house, as in zero bars. He wrangled with them for weeks but in the end he had to pay cancellation fees.
That's the problem with the buyer beware libertarian crowd. What if the buyer is not a trained lawyer and does not understand every small print clause in every contract for everything he buys which is deliberately made as convoluted as possible? Is there any good reason why there shouldn't be some legal requirement for the seller to make it clear in plain english what the hell exactly are you getting for your money, not just in cell phone contracts but in general?
There are too many places for you to put cameras and screens everywhere, and if you did, you'd freak the hell out of people. With the robot, if he hears an interesting conversation in the distance, he can have the robot wander over so he can join in.
And of course that wouldn't freak them out at all
The robots could vacuum the floors when not in use. Oh ok, that's productive. Never mind
The feed deliverers us news of research ...
And my thanks go to "The feed", for deliverering us this information.