Might as well use a car analogy for how poorly that worked.
NBC does sell advertising. So does FB. Adds everywhere. Extremely common business model.
NBC didn't force your default email address on a social network to their domain and then 6 months later start selling advertisers a way to directly bypass all spam/filter/etc controls you have in place.
If FB is smart, this will be killed off quickly (hence the 'limited test' to gauge public reaction) or it will be another nail in the coffin.
Facebook is selling a way to directly inconvenience me for their profit without my approval.
They've probably realized that their site has turned into crap reaction pictures and link spam (omg here are links to 14 youtube songs!) and holds much less value than it used to - except for finding people and their contact into. So in desperation they're grasping at that.
Did you also forget a few months ago when they went through and forcibly changed everyone's default contact email to @fb.com? That's no attaboy, that's abusing your customers.
How that's at all related to the failure of an idealistic business venture is beyond me.
Cars, cancer, alcohol, pills, drugs, etc. are all responsible for more deaths than gun accidents. The US has created a society that fears guns and assumes they do terrible things all the time.
Everyone worries "if you let everyone have guns imagine how many more accidents and attacks there would be" but I consider it the opposite. If guns were common, the necessary education that goes with owning, carying and using one would be MUCH more commonplace. Kids wouldn't "learn" how to use a "9" (yo) by watching TV. Almost everyone knows the basics about electrical safety as "well duh" knowledge. Guns *could* be the same.
As for intentional shootings, you'd see some - at least for a little while. Then the criminals who take the chance and pull a gun or shoot at someone will get dead by the OTHER people around them with guns. Consider it similar to the MAD policy with nuclear weapons but on a smaller scale. You're sure to get killed pretty quickly if you act stupidly with your gun. I'd say people are actually more likely to be polite and avoid a fight/argument if they understood their spouting reallity-tv level nonsense could get them killed.
Keep in mind the mall shooting in oregon was stopped by a bystander with a concealed carry permit confronting the shooter.
There aren't any tools today that do key mining from memory dumps? Free ones too I'd guess. Granted they probably have cheezy MIDI music and scrolling 'credits' to ignore so obviously not appropriate for gubermint agencies.
I'm sure I could google a half dozen quite easily if my proxy server didn't block those sites.
That article is 2+ years old and deals with XP. Also the author chews on words for the first paragraph or two and makes me want to shoot myself (not to mention being wrong on a few points...) but anyhow..
Does the memory dump apply to Win 7/8? Fully patched XP? FW ports are a niche and rather uncommon. Of more interesting concern - are hibernate files encrypted on a bitlocker encrypted drive?
I agree with GP - this is a terribly written submission (and/or just an advertizement.) Bitlocker, PGP, and trucrypt ALL decrypt in realtime already - if you provide them with keys!!!
That's NOT a high cost of living area. Using NYC as a comparison, you typically can't get a 2BR for that in the suburbs within commute distance of the city.
Within NYC? Forget it. Decent areas midtown and downtown you'll pay 4x that. 5-6K. Uptown ~4K.
Either you're comparing the wrong areas in SF or it's *FAR* more expensive in NYC...
And not only do we have less accidents than other regions, we also have less cars
There. Fixed that for you. You simply cannot expect every car in/around NYC to leave a proper following distance and follow all the other myriad of traffic rules all the time. Traffic would come to a complete halt.
Sure, in rural no-mans-land where traffic means waiting for a tractor to cross a road...it's workable. It's still a waste of time and resources to make a full stop at every stop sign when it's clear no one is around.
It was hugely played up by the news. I *personally* was standing in battery park behind the cameras filming the reporters being 'blown around' by the wind at one point. Note: I was standing. Still. It was quite windy but by no means as windy as they flat-out/pretended/ it was.
With that said, the storm surge was unprecedented (at least for the area) and disastrous. The odd part though, since it was water rising up from the ocean instead of rain coming down and flowing somewhere, was that some areas were practically dry and had no flooding at all while others...a bare foot lower in elevation...had 11 inches of water pouring into their basements. You have one store totally flooded and destroyed in a building still without power 20' across the street from another which had no damage at all.
Had Sandy struck as a category 1 hurricane with rain typical for that kind of storm...NYC would be a very different place today.
Your information is either wrong or/extremely/ out of date...and you mistake what "the exchange" is these days. The major exchanges (NYSE and NADQ in particular) do not house their matching engines (which is effectively "the exchange") in/on/at their trade floors. They're all located outside of NYC in large datacenters where they colocate servers for HFTs and other customers. It would be impractical in the extreme to run the types of links used by HFT systems between offices in NYC (or anywhere outside of a datacenter.)
They do, of course, have fail-over redundant datacenters.
Also - Matching latency is measured in microseconds, not miliseconds. Taking a single millisecond, much less 100+ms, to match a trade would represent serious delays.
I'm sorry but how often does lightning crack the roof of a skyscraper after splitting open a double-walled fuel tank all while missin the lightning rods? That also assumes an exposed tank on the roof. Generators and similar equipment is typically anywhere above the 5th floor. For example the new 4WTC building has it's generators on the ~50th floor.
Equipment malfunction or sabotage could easily have the basement pumps pushing diesel fuel into a huge puddle in the generator room that's on fire. When, excluding 9/11, did generator fuel spill from a roof tank in a skyscraper in the manner you describe?
It's overreaction to a single event. Just like every plastic bag is labeled to remind you not to let infants play with them, poison labels also explicitly state not to eat, and anything with an open flame usually says it's hot.
There are many disadvantages to putting critical infrastructure in the basement as well...as we've seen.
It's hard to find a cell plan without unlimited minutes unless you're buying a minimal-use, no-frills line...in which case you won't get a BB anyway. Might as well give a corpse a gym membership to stay healthy.
I can see it being somewhat useful in corporate situations where you have many BB users - but you still need to have everyone on WiFi. Sorry RIM, find a better way to stay relevant.
The carriers probably won't care - much - given above but I can't image they will be thrilled about it either. Everyone will just bake the cost into the "blackberry data plan" anyway.
The bartender did not own the phone. 'Finders-keepers' is NOT the law. The opposite in fact.
Yeah, it's not a federal manhunt type case but the guy knowingly in possession of property not belonging to him (the lost vs. stolen line gets blurred quickly) could definitely have criminal charges filed against him. How far they'd get, who knows.
Of course they insisted on meeting right away. They want to protect their secrecy - and getting the phone back is far easier on everyone than the guy possibly getting arrested. You can't expect a company to just let this type of thing go.
What I really want to know is why these people are bringing top secret phones to bars in the first place? I understand "testing" and all but is it secret or is it something you're bringing out in public?
Hell, get one of those bluetooth leashes. Problem solved.
Exactly. I paid for pre check (well global entry which gets you precheck) and it is 100% worthwhile at airports that have it.
This article is fluff and little else. It ONLY applies to the tiny portion of people in precheck which requires a full background check and in-person interview. That's more likely to weed out a terroist than a random selection for security.
I broke down and RTFA - i love the quote about how "randomness is necessary for security" NO. IT. IS. NOT. If 50% of people get porno-scanned and 1% get raped...erm...SSSS i mean... you still miss 49%. Yes, it's *harder* to knowingly bypass security but it is FAR from impossible. It all comes back to security theatre. Another wonderful quote 'it's about seen and unseen security measures'... yeah. Let's talk up the spooky mystery. Sounds like halloween. You know what works pretty well for security? Trained guards with M16s who pay attention instead of those idiots TSA had making "casual conversation" with people waiting on security lines. I watched that once, It was retarded. Some guy went along asking all the kids where they were going, why, and other stupid nonsense. Even going so far as to disturb people minding their own business listening to music, using their phones, or having a conversation.
You missed the other thing "we" can do. Stop playing China's game. If they want to price manipulate, play along. Set up a most-favored with some random 3rd world that's willing to basically be a corporate-owned state, build infrastructure and move your factories there. Labor is cheap, but they have a LOT LOT LOT of it. Idle 5% and see what happens.
Driving up supply chain costs in a cornerstone of a shakey global economy is a good idea? China is nowhere near mining out all their rare earths. If they were, other countries would have set up mines and production facilities in preparation for that because they'd have guaranteed profit. What exactly indicates other countries would have higher prices though? Plus we won't "run out" of rare earths. Unlike oil most can be recycled and reused more or less indefinitely.
This is 100% about China trying to streghten their powerbase in the global economy. It's blatant price manipulation in what's supposed to be open markets. China is taking their ball and going home till all the other kids come begging. Unfortunately someone else is going to buy their own ball eventually.
As for environmental concerns - sorry but that's just laughable. If they cared, they would close the mine or update to more modern and clean processes (which are still quite dirty.) Also they'd so something about the myriad of severe pollution problems they have. The main reason China has a monopoly right now is because they were content to pollute their country and (more or less) everyone else was (more or less) happy to let them. That balance is shifting now.
But that's changing too. With legal streaming and torrent-based application updates (and installs!) bandwidth is climbing in a big way.
Heck, reimage your Mac and watch it eat several GB of bandwidth. Download WoW from scratch. Yes, those seeding a dozen torrents are gobbling up more than their 'fair' share. But if you're an ISP and don't want that...get a bandwidth cap. Suck it up, take the big PR hit, and do it. Don't hide behind MAFIAA backdoor regulation.
It AMAZES me that the MAFIAA, after being essentially kicked in the balls over sue-john-doe, decided that they not only weren't going to back off but were essentially going to create their own laws and legislation entirely separate from our actual legal system. They coerced the big ISPs into basically accepting a law that doesn't exist in any jurisdiction but the MAFIAA's court of corporate interests.
Am I the only one who things our legal system is enough of a joke that companies shouldn't be creating their own judicial branch?
I would do one of those quirky replies where every word is a link but i'm too lazy.
Still, ask the various US Police who have been caught blatantly assaulting and abusing innocent people. (is that enough words to cover links for this year?)
I think parent was referring to portrayls of violence vs. sex. TV shows portray violence ALL the time in the US and it's rarely commented on. The moment someone slips a boobie in, all hell breaks loose.
...consider exposing yourself, or having sex in front of, a young child every day. Clearly this will cause harm.
No. A thousand times NO. Just because you say it's clear does not make it so. There are thousands? millions? of people in cultures that embrace various degrees of nudity (or simply live with it due to weather/poverty/etc). According to your statement that entire society must be debilitated beyond comprenehsion. It is not. What injures the child is the parents' extreme negative reaction. Now, if you go a step further and molest that child - yes, you've voilated their person against their will. THAT is harm. It also happens to not be the point of discussion.
Similarly, repeated application of freedom of speech, say following a Muslim around trying to discuss anti-Islam literature, probably crosses the line over to bullying.
No. It's harassment and entirely dissimilar to the topic. Which, to remind you, is two legal and consentual acts practiced together becoming illegal.
The issue is that humans are limited and have to exist in public. This means there are times they cannot just 'turn away'. Even though there is probably nothing everyone agrees upon there are some commonalities between us that can be generalised enough to make this a rule. Not having sex in public is usually one of them.
You're fixated on this happening in public. That is not - AT ALL - the point of this argument.
Carlin's argument is flawless. Two harmless acts, placed together to create a third harmless act
That wasn't his argument. It was about legality. I.e. that two legal acts placed together should create a third legal act. Even from the principle that harmless acts should be legal, the fact that your statement assumes the third act is harmless makes the legality and harmfulness of the first two acts irrelevant (there is no logical connection). Perhaps you wish to state that two harmless acts placed together always create a third harmless act?
Or perhaps he (poorly) paraphrased and you're attacking the grammar instead of the point.
Title says it all. How many people did you know bought a Wii because they "saw it in stock somewhere" and figured they should get it while they had the chance?
Apple's trying to slam down the banhammer on Samsung so of course it drives up perceived scarcity (or scarcity-to-be). Same reason every single sale is 'limited time, act now or miss out' and so on.
Also keep in mind Apple gave Samsung tons of free publicity. I'm comfortable saying that anyone who uses a cell phone knows what an iPhone is, but until now not as many people knew Samsung sells such 'obviously similiar' products. They sure do now. Oh, and they're cheaper? Wait...maybe I should run out and get one while I still can. People who follow tech trials are also plenty fed up with patent nonsense so heck, let's support the underdog. They tend to innovate better anyhow.
Are you sure that's the case for vaccines like MMR or MMRV?
Definitely true for the Flu virus - to the point that they need to reformulate yearly because the virus mutates so far. That's also a big reason why there's a yearly flu virus and the flu hasn't been eradicated. If the measles mutated like that, we wouldn't have vaccinated it (virtually) out of existence.
Yes, Viagra had a huge up-front cost and now is a cash cow like so many others. But if the flu vaccine took years for approval and had a huge up-front cost it would be impossible to make and sell.
Is there a lower profit on flu vaccines than viagra? Sure. Is it manufactured solely for the good of mankind? Certainly not.
P.s. pills don't have an unlimited shelf life (though it's typically far longer than the expiration date on the bottle)
Actually at this point I'd like to do exactly that. I'm tired of the nonsense surrounding copyright claims, obscene damanges, the lawmaker-for-hire way of running the US, the US bullying the rest of the world who typically gives in, and the fact that virtually all the "profits" go to anyone but the artists.
F*ck copyright "law". It's a farce. It's the recording industry buying laws to enforce their long-failed business model.
I'll take the flamebait or troll mod on this one if I must, but I'm *REALLY* tired of hearing about the abusive laws around copyright (and patents). The anger isn't aimed at parent, but the general situation.
Bidding process cost >>> actual delivered service or hardware
Go government! On a more serious note, a prosumer NAS sounds nice but this is storing evidence for a federal investigation. The server must be able to pass an audit review, show detailed metadata, and show that data wasn't tampered with. Just like physical evidence is secured and has a chain of custody. If you question where that pound of heroin came from, you can show - signature to signature - how it got from your trunk to the DEA's analysis office to the courtroom evidence table and question each individual in the process if necessary.
Just because the evidence is digital doesn't mean you can throw out all those requirements by slapping truecrypt on a NAS or eSATA drive. If anything, it's more important because digital information is easier to manipulate - especially from afar. It's much harder to replace that brick of coke with flour from outside the evidence locker unless you brought your portal gun.
Given that 48% of those surveyed *had not flown in the preceeding 12 months* and they only got a 54% positive response rate...
Therefore 6% of air travelers actually approve of the TSA. Personally I still think this is high so I arbitrarily apply a +/- 5% rule to lower that to 1%...and then can claim "as much as 99% of people think the TSA is the the root of all evil"
Ok? Ok! Wait...Crap why am I some list that says I can't fly ever again? >.>
Slashdot Mirror
Might as well use a car analogy for how poorly that worked.
NBC does sell advertising. So does FB. Adds everywhere. Extremely common business model.
NBC didn't force your default email address on a social network to their domain and then 6 months later start selling advertisers a way to directly bypass all spam/filter/etc controls you have in place.
If FB is smart, this will be killed off quickly (hence the 'limited test' to gauge public reaction) or it will be another nail in the coffin.
Facebook is selling a way to directly inconvenience me for their profit without my approval.
They've probably realized that their site has turned into crap reaction pictures and link spam (omg here are links to 14 youtube songs!) and holds much less value than it used to - except for finding people and their contact into. So in desperation they're grasping at that.
Did you also forget a few months ago when they went through and forcibly changed everyone's default contact email to @fb.com? That's no attaboy, that's abusing your customers.
How that's at all related to the failure of an idealistic business venture is beyond me.
> Maybe more gun safety is to be taught?
This x1000000.
Cars, cancer, alcohol, pills, drugs, etc. are all responsible for more deaths than gun accidents. The US has created a society that fears guns and assumes they do terrible things all the time.
Everyone worries "if you let everyone have guns imagine how many more accidents and attacks there would be" but I consider it the opposite. If guns were common, the necessary education that goes with owning, carying and using one would be MUCH more commonplace. Kids wouldn't "learn" how to use a "9" (yo) by watching TV. Almost everyone knows the basics about electrical safety as "well duh" knowledge. Guns *could* be the same.
As for intentional shootings, you'd see some - at least for a little while. Then the criminals who take the chance and pull a gun or shoot at someone will get dead by the OTHER people around them with guns. Consider it similar to the MAD policy with nuclear weapons but on a smaller scale. You're sure to get killed pretty quickly if you act stupidly with your gun. I'd say people are actually more likely to be polite and avoid a fight/argument if they understood their spouting reallity-tv level nonsense could get them killed.
Keep in mind the mall shooting in oregon was stopped by a bystander with a concealed carry permit confronting the shooter.
...or just unmount your encrypted volume (assuming it's not the system partition) when you're not in front of your computer.
Leaving anything truly sensitive in an 'always open' state is poor security practice to begin with.
There aren't any tools today that do key mining from memory dumps? Free ones too I'd guess. Granted they probably have cheezy MIDI music and scrolling 'credits' to ignore so obviously not appropriate for gubermint agencies.
I'm sure I could google a half dozen quite easily if my proxy server didn't block those sites.
That article is 2+ years old and deals with XP. Also the author chews on words for the first paragraph or two and makes me want to shoot myself (not to mention being wrong on a few points...) but anyhow..
Does the memory dump apply to Win 7/8? Fully patched XP? FW ports are a niche and rather uncommon. Of more interesting concern - are hibernate files encrypted on a bitlocker encrypted drive?
I agree with GP - this is a terribly written submission (and/or just an advertizement.) Bitlocker, PGP, and trucrypt ALL decrypt in realtime already - if you provide them with keys!!!
That's NOT a high cost of living area. Using NYC as a comparison, you typically can't get a 2BR for that in the suburbs within commute distance of the city.
Within NYC? Forget it. Decent areas midtown and downtown you'll pay 4x that. 5-6K. Uptown ~4K.
Either you're comparing the wrong areas in SF or it's *FAR* more expensive in NYC...
And not only do we have less accidents than other regions, we also have less cars
There. Fixed that for you. You simply cannot expect every car in/around NYC to leave a proper following distance and follow all the other myriad of traffic rules all the time. Traffic would come to a complete halt.
Sure, in rural no-mans-land where traffic means waiting for a tractor to cross a road...it's workable. It's still a waste of time and resources to make a full stop at every stop sign when it's clear no one is around.
It was hugely played up by the news. I *personally* was standing in battery park behind the cameras filming the reporters being 'blown around' by the wind at one point. Note: I was standing. Still. It was quite windy but by no means as windy as they flat-out /pretended/ it was.
With that said, the storm surge was unprecedented (at least for the area) and disastrous. The odd part though, since it was water rising up from the ocean instead of rain coming down and flowing somewhere, was that some areas were practically dry and had no flooding at all while others...a bare foot lower in elevation...had 11 inches of water pouring into their basements. You have one store totally flooded and destroyed in a building still without power 20' across the street from another which had no damage at all.
Had Sandy struck as a category 1 hurricane with rain typical for that kind of storm...NYC would be a very different place today.
Your information is either wrong or /extremely/ out of date...and you mistake what "the exchange" is these days. The major exchanges (NYSE and NADQ in particular) do not house their matching engines (which is effectively "the exchange") in/on/at their trade floors. They're all located outside of NYC in large datacenters where they colocate servers for HFTs and other customers. It would be impractical in the extreme to run the types of links used by HFT systems between offices in NYC (or anywhere outside of a datacenter.)
They do, of course, have fail-over redundant datacenters.
Also - Matching latency is measured in microseconds, not miliseconds. Taking a single millisecond, much less 100+ms, to match a trade would represent serious delays.
Good theory, except your example is poor. The matching engines for NYSE and Nasdaq are in NJ (with backups elsewhere) and not in lower NYC.
HFT servers colo in those datacenters, they could be in islamabad for all it matters.
There is a lot of business in NYC that doesn't 'make sense' when you look at a cost vs. space perspective though. It's not just the datacenter(s).
I'm sorry but how often does lightning crack the roof of a skyscraper after splitting open a double-walled fuel tank all while missin the lightning rods? That also assumes an exposed tank on the roof. Generators and similar equipment is typically anywhere above the 5th floor. For example the new 4WTC building has it's generators on the ~50th floor.
Equipment malfunction or sabotage could easily have the basement pumps pushing diesel fuel into a huge puddle in the generator room that's on fire. When, excluding 9/11, did generator fuel spill from a roof tank in a skyscraper in the manner you describe?
It's overreaction to a single event. Just like every plastic bag is labeled to remind you not to let infants play with them, poison labels also explicitly state not to eat, and anything with an open flame usually says it's hot.
There are many disadvantages to putting critical infrastructure in the basement as well...as we've seen.
It's hard to find a cell plan without unlimited minutes unless you're buying a minimal-use, no-frills line...in which case you won't get a BB anyway. Might as well give a corpse a gym membership to stay healthy.
I can see it being somewhat useful in corporate situations where you have many BB users - but you still need to have everyone on WiFi. Sorry RIM, find a better way to stay relevant.
The carriers probably won't care - much - given above but I can't image they will be thrilled about it either. Everyone will just bake the cost into the "blackberry data plan" anyway.
Here's the thing...
The bartender did not own the phone. 'Finders-keepers' is NOT the law. The opposite in fact.
Yeah, it's not a federal manhunt type case but the guy knowingly in possession of property not belonging to him (the lost vs. stolen line gets blurred quickly) could definitely have criminal charges filed against him. How far they'd get, who knows.
Of course they insisted on meeting right away. They want to protect their secrecy - and getting the phone back is far easier on everyone than the guy possibly getting arrested. You can't expect a company to just let this type of thing go.
What I really want to know is why these people are bringing top secret phones to bars in the first place? I understand "testing" and all but is it secret or is it something you're bringing out in public?
Hell, get one of those bluetooth leashes. Problem solved.
Exactly. I paid for pre check (well global entry which gets you precheck) and it is 100% worthwhile at airports that have it.
This article is fluff and little else. It ONLY applies to the tiny portion of people in precheck which requires a full background check and in-person interview. That's more likely to weed out a terroist than a random selection for security.
I broke down and RTFA - i love the quote about how "randomness is necessary for security" NO. IT. IS. NOT. If 50% of people get porno-scanned and 1% get raped...erm...SSSS i mean ... you still miss 49%. Yes, it's *harder* to knowingly bypass security but it is FAR from impossible. It all comes back to security theatre. Another wonderful quote 'it's about seen and unseen security measures' ... yeah. Let's talk up the spooky mystery. Sounds like halloween. You know what works pretty well for security? Trained guards with M16s who pay attention instead of those idiots TSA had making "casual conversation" with people waiting on security lines. I watched that once, It was retarded. Some guy went along asking all the kids where they were going, why, and other stupid nonsense. Even going so far as to disturb people minding their own business listening to music, using their phones, or having a conversation.
You missed the other thing "we" can do. Stop playing China's game. If they want to price manipulate, play along. Set up a most-favored with some random 3rd world that's willing to basically be a corporate-owned state, build infrastructure and move your factories there. Labor is cheap, but they have a LOT LOT LOT of it. Idle 5% and see what happens.
Driving up supply chain costs in a cornerstone of a shakey global economy is a good idea? China is nowhere near mining out all their rare earths. If they were, other countries would have set up mines and production facilities in preparation for that because they'd have guaranteed profit. What exactly indicates other countries would have higher prices though? Plus we won't "run out" of rare earths. Unlike oil most can be recycled and reused more or less indefinitely.
This is 100% about China trying to streghten their powerbase in the global economy. It's blatant price manipulation in what's supposed to be open markets. China is taking their ball and going home till all the other kids come begging. Unfortunately someone else is going to buy their own ball eventually.
As for environmental concerns - sorry but that's just laughable. If they cared, they would close the mine or update to more modern and clean processes (which are still quite dirty.) Also they'd so something about the myriad of severe pollution problems they have. The main reason China has a monopoly right now is because they were content to pollute their country and (more or less) everyone else was (more or less) happy to let them. That balance is shifting now.
But that's changing too. With legal streaming and torrent-based application updates (and installs!) bandwidth is climbing in a big way.
Heck, reimage your Mac and watch it eat several GB of bandwidth. Download WoW from scratch. Yes, those seeding a dozen torrents are gobbling up more than their 'fair' share. But if you're an ISP and don't want that...get a bandwidth cap. Suck it up, take the big PR hit, and do it. Don't hide behind MAFIAA backdoor regulation.
It AMAZES me that the MAFIAA, after being essentially kicked in the balls over sue-john-doe, decided that they not only weren't going to back off but were essentially going to create their own laws and legislation entirely separate from our actual legal system. They coerced the big ISPs into basically accepting a law that doesn't exist in any jurisdiction but the MAFIAA's court of corporate interests.
Am I the only one who things our legal system is enough of a joke that companies shouldn't be creating their own judicial branch?
I would do one of those quirky replies where every word is a link but i'm too lazy.
Still, ask the various US Police who have been caught blatantly assaulting and abusing innocent people. (is that enough words to cover links for this year?)
I think parent was referring to portrayls of violence vs. sex. TV shows portray violence ALL the time in the US and it's rarely commented on. The moment someone slips a boobie in, all hell breaks loose.
No. A thousand times NO. Just because you say it's clear does not make it so. There are thousands? millions? of people in cultures that embrace various degrees of nudity (or simply live with it due to weather/poverty/etc). According to your statement that entire society must be debilitated beyond comprenehsion. It is not. What injures the child is the parents' extreme negative reaction. Now, if you go a step further and molest that child - yes, you've voilated their person against their will. THAT is harm. It also happens to not be the point of discussion.
Similarly, repeated application of freedom of speech, say following a Muslim around trying to discuss anti-Islam literature, probably crosses the line over to bullying.
No. It's harassment and entirely dissimilar to the topic. Which, to remind you, is two legal and consentual acts practiced together becoming illegal.
The issue is that humans are limited and have to exist in public. This means there are times they cannot just 'turn away'. Even though there is probably nothing everyone agrees upon there are some commonalities between us that can be generalised enough to make this a rule. Not having sex in public is usually one of them.
You're fixated on this happening in public. That is not - AT ALL - the point of this argument.
Carlin's argument is flawless. Two harmless acts, placed together to create a third harmless act
That wasn't his argument. It was about legality. I.e. that two legal acts placed together should create a third legal act. Even from the principle that harmless acts should be legal, the fact that your statement assumes the third act is harmless makes the legality and harmfulness of the first two acts irrelevant (there is no logical connection). Perhaps you wish to state that two harmless acts placed together always create a third harmless act?
Or perhaps he (poorly) paraphrased and you're attacking the grammar instead of the point.
Title says it all. How many people did you know bought a Wii because they "saw it in stock somewhere" and figured they should get it while they had the chance?
Apple's trying to slam down the banhammer on Samsung so of course it drives up perceived scarcity (or scarcity-to-be). Same reason every single sale is 'limited time, act now or miss out' and so on.
Also keep in mind Apple gave Samsung tons of free publicity. I'm comfortable saying that anyone who uses a cell phone knows what an iPhone is, but until now not as many people knew Samsung sells such 'obviously similiar' products. They sure do now. Oh, and they're cheaper? Wait...maybe I should run out and get one while I still can. People who follow tech trials are also plenty fed up with patent nonsense so heck, let's support the underdog. They tend to innovate better anyhow.
So really, I'm not surprised at all.
Are you sure that's the case for vaccines like MMR or MMRV?
Definitely true for the Flu virus - to the point that they need to reformulate yearly because the virus mutates so far. That's also a big reason why there's a yearly flu virus and the flu hasn't been eradicated. If the measles mutated like that, we wouldn't have vaccinated it (virtually) out of existence.
Yes, Viagra had a huge up-front cost and now is a cash cow like so many others. But if the flu vaccine took years for approval and had a huge up-front cost it would be impossible to make and sell.
Is there a lower profit on flu vaccines than viagra? Sure. Is it manufactured solely for the good of mankind? Certainly not.
P.s. pills don't have an unlimited shelf life (though it's typically far longer than the expiration date on the bottle)
Actually at this point I'd like to do exactly that. I'm tired of the nonsense surrounding copyright claims, obscene damanges, the lawmaker-for-hire way of running the US, the US bullying the rest of the world who typically gives in, and the fact that virtually all the "profits" go to anyone but the artists.
F*ck copyright "law". It's a farce. It's the recording industry buying laws to enforce their long-failed business model.
I'll take the flamebait or troll mod on this one if I must, but I'm *REALLY* tired of hearing about the abusive laws around copyright (and patents). The anger isn't aimed at parent, but the general situation.
Don't these things have to go out for bid? :)
Bidding process cost >>> actual delivered service or hardware
Go government! On a more serious note, a prosumer NAS sounds nice but this is storing evidence for a federal investigation. The server must be able to pass an audit review, show detailed metadata, and show that data wasn't tampered with. Just like physical evidence is secured and has a chain of custody. If you question where that pound of heroin came from, you can show - signature to signature - how it got from your trunk to the DEA's analysis office to the courtroom evidence table and question each individual in the process if necessary.
Just because the evidence is digital doesn't mean you can throw out all those requirements by slapping truecrypt on a NAS or eSATA drive. If anything, it's more important because digital information is easier to manipulate - especially from afar. It's much harder to replace that brick of coke with flour from outside the evidence locker unless you brought your portal gun.
Given that 48% of those surveyed *had not flown in the preceeding 12 months* and they only got a 54% positive response rate...
Therefore 6% of air travelers actually approve of the TSA. Personally I still think this is high so I arbitrarily apply a +/- 5% rule to lower that to 1%...and then can claim "as much as 99% of people think the TSA is the the root of all evil"
Ok? Ok! Wait...Crap why am I some list that says I can't fly ever again? >.>