That's not bullshit at all. A woman may say stop at any point during sex and you stop, you don't keep on going, if you do, I'm sorry but you're a rapist. I thought this was a pretty well known and accepted fact.
If afterwards she decides she didn't want to and was coerced or pressured by word or deed, then it really is rape. This is especially true if alcohol was involved in the night. So be nice after sex.
I understand what you mean, you do the crime and you should do the time. I've done my bit before and taken my medicine from a court and I argued with my parents that the sentencing was fair even if we thought what I had done was harmless. Wrong is wrong and it's true that some punishment should be levied, still, excessive punishment is excessive punishment. I would suspect that even the process of having to go through the trial would discourage this individual from file sharing again, but a fine of a couple thousand dollars would definitely make it stick, but nearly thirty thousand dollars and far, far more in other cases? The only reason the RIAA could be seeking these amounts is to discourage others, and I think at that point you stop punishing this girl for what she has done and start punishing her for what other people might do.
The past decade or more of these RIAA cases have been less about teaching people that file sharing copyrighted material is wrong and more about trying to make them scared of it. And it doesn't seem to be working, the punishments are so excessive that rather than feeling regret for a misdeed, it makes the people being charged (and others) get defensive and rationalize what they did, blaming the RIAA for their situation rather than themselves. And that's because the RIAA IS responsible for asking for such ridiculous amounts.
Just my two cents to chew the cud over.
Re:Considering how long it takes to get a patent..
on
8-Year-Old Receives Patent
·
· Score: 4, Informative
He was 6 when the patent applied for. I guess it also helps that his father is a lawyer that founded a law firm actually named Patent Technologies LLC.
Now your discussion has me imagining specialized bacteria that live only on the hands of OCD germophobes. Unlikely, but the thought does bring a smile to my face, and I wanted to share.
Actually, funny fact. Protecting the right of the individual is the function of a republic and not of a democracy. Didn't even realize that until I read this a few minutes ago.
So what you're saying is the Wii shouldn't be compared to the PS3 or 360, but instead should be compared to the PS2? Wow, Nintendo is kicking the living crap out of the competition then, since apparently the only competition for it is the PS2.
Hey look, even by your metric Wii is still the best console of its generation! ^_^
As for the PS3 and 360, well, they're outdated tech compared to some of the computers my friends built. I wonder when they're going to hobble together something more modern.
Naw, I know that the PS3 and 360 are excellent systems and with the might of two mega-corporations behind them I don't see how anyone can keep pace with their hardware development. There's just too much money going into their development for a smaller company like Nintendo to compete. We won't be surprised by a huge jump in power with Nintendo's next home console, yet somehow that rag-tag tenacious Nintendo will still manage to hang on without great graphics or mind blowing processor power. My belief? They've been cursed by a witch.
Cheating is always out there, whether you get the answers from someone who stole it out of the teacher's desk, or from someone who grabbed the answers from a not so secure database. Whether or not it is easy to cheat on an exam doesn't make it any less cheating, these kids obviously knew what they were doing was wrong.
I mean, it sounds like if someone cheated you in poker, you'd say they weren't cheating and that it was your fault for not keeping a closer eye on them to stop them.
Yes it was naive of the professor to believe students have ethics, but that doesn't excuse cheating or in any way ennoble their actions.
The Houqua, built in 1844 was $45,000. Though many other ships cost as much as $70,000.
What cost $45000 in 1844 would cost $1,024,086.13 in 2009.
Even galleons in the 1600's and 1700's were a huge investment of capital. Though admittedly these are far smaller than the cost of spacecraft, with reasonable payoff per ton in products shipped (which we obviously don't expect for spacecrat).
But like I said, I wouldn't say ships are any more expendable than tankers of today simply because they were made of timber.
But yes, people WERE expendable. They actually designed ships that could be rigged and run by a bare minimum of crew simply because they expected some of the crew to die off.
Despite illusions in the media and hollywood to the contrary. Sideshow performers don't like to be called freaks, or to be lumped together under two small aspects of their varied performances. Just like I would think not all IT Professionals like to have their careers truncated by someone saying their job is "computer programming".
I apologize if I read more vehemence in your statement than had been intended.
Maybe we do have the technology to fix the Earth. But its easier to get 10 people on Mars to do what you need for them to survive than 6.7 billion people across the globe to even believe they need to do something much less doing it. It's like cat herding trying to get the world to agree to do anything, so I don't think your argument about fixing earth first really works, problems on this planet can't always be fixed by throwing money at them.
Not that you don't make other good and valid points.
You got that backwards. People were more expendable during the age of exploration, the ships were valuable and for more expensive than the crews. Just saying.
I know it's not good to answer a question with a question, but here it is: What do the people living in Antarctica do for a living? I mean, they don't manufacture things there and send stuff back north do they? Same with the ISS.
Now I get your point, and Mars is an order of magnitude more expensive to ship to, and far more hostile than Antarctica or the ISS, but my point is that it's already been illustrated that investment into scientific research and hostile environment engineering, with no immediate payoff expected, already has precedent.
And I believe the reason plans haven't gotten off the ground is that government space programs try to take fewer risks than they have in the past.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not bullshit at all. A woman may say stop at any point during sex and you stop, you don't keep on going, if you do, I'm sorry but you're a rapist. I thought this was a pretty well known and accepted fact.
If afterwards she decides she didn't want to and was coerced or pressured by word or deed, then it really is rape. This is especially true if alcohol was involved in the night. So be nice after sex.
It was in reference to a thread of conversation earlier.
I understand what you mean, you do the crime and you should do the time. I've done my bit before and taken my medicine from a court and I argued with my parents that the sentencing was fair even if we thought what I had done was harmless. Wrong is wrong and it's true that some punishment should be levied, still, excessive punishment is excessive punishment. I would suspect that even the process of having to go through the trial would discourage this individual from file sharing again, but a fine of a couple thousand dollars would definitely make it stick, but nearly thirty thousand dollars and far, far more in other cases? The only reason the RIAA could be seeking these amounts is to discourage others, and I think at that point you stop punishing this girl for what she has done and start punishing her for what other people might do.
The past decade or more of these RIAA cases have been less about teaching people that file sharing copyrighted material is wrong and more about trying to make them scared of it. And it doesn't seem to be working, the punishments are so excessive that rather than feeling regret for a misdeed, it makes the people being charged (and others) get defensive and rationalize what they did, blaming the RIAA for their situation rather than themselves. And that's because the RIAA IS responsible for asking for such ridiculous amounts.
Just my two cents to chew the cud over.
He was 6 when the patent applied for. I guess it also helps that his father is a lawyer that founded a law firm actually named Patent Technologies LLC.
Now your discussion has me imagining specialized bacteria that live only on the hands of OCD germophobes. Unlikely, but the thought does bring a smile to my face, and I wanted to share.
Actually, funny fact. Protecting the right of the individual is the function of a republic and not of a democracy. Didn't even realize that until I read this a few minutes ago.
http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/aspects/demrep.html
But I take the meaning of your point and agree.
Don't worry. There's still plenty of things to be afraid of, even if you've never done anything wrong. Evil robots for one.
Flight hijacking has never been exactly a common occurance on domestic flights.
Point out where walking from one place to another is a right and I'll concede your point.
Are you suggesting that X-rays aren't harmful to humans?
Damnit...my sarcasm tags got pulled out by the slashdot commenting system...now people have to guess.
So what you're saying is the Wii shouldn't be compared to the PS3 or 360, but instead should be compared to the PS2? Wow, Nintendo is kicking the living crap out of the competition then, since apparently the only competition for it is the PS2.
Hey look, even by your metric Wii is still the best console of its generation! ^_^
As for the PS3 and 360, well, they're outdated tech compared to some of the computers my friends built. I wonder when they're going to hobble together something more modern.
Naw, I know that the PS3 and 360 are excellent systems and with the might of two mega-corporations behind them I don't see how anyone can keep pace with their hardware development. There's just too much money going into their development for a smaller company like Nintendo to compete. We won't be surprised by a huge jump in power with Nintendo's next home console, yet somehow that rag-tag tenacious Nintendo will still manage to hang on without great graphics or mind blowing processor power. My belief? They've been cursed by a witch.
Cheating is always out there, whether you get the answers from someone who stole it out of the teacher's desk, or from someone who grabbed the answers from a not so secure database. Whether or not it is easy to cheat on an exam doesn't make it any less cheating, these kids obviously knew what they were doing was wrong.
I mean, it sounds like if someone cheated you in poker, you'd say they weren't cheating and that it was your fault for not keeping a closer eye on them to stop them.
Yes it was naive of the professor to believe students have ethics, but that doesn't excuse cheating or in any way ennoble their actions.
I don't get it...how is getting all the answers to the test beforehand not cheating?
Does the method you use to get answers matter that much?
No problem. You're welcome. ^_^
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/11/15/california.airport.security/index.html
The Houqua, built in 1844 was $45,000. Though many other ships cost as much as $70,000.
What cost $45000 in 1844 would cost $1,024,086.13 in 2009.
Even galleons in the 1600's and 1700's were a huge investment of capital. Though admittedly these are far smaller than the cost of spacecraft, with reasonable payoff per ton in products shipped (which we obviously don't expect for spacecrat).
http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/student-theses/2007-1113-200356/FINAL%20-%20A%20comparative%20look%20at%20the%20funding%20of%20colonial%20enterprises%20in%20Asia.doc
But like I said, I wouldn't say ships are any more expendable than tankers of today simply because they were made of timber.
But yes, people WERE expendable. They actually designed ships that could be rigged and run by a bare minimum of crew simply because they expected some of the crew to die off.
Despite illusions in the media and hollywood to the contrary. Sideshow performers don't like to be called freaks, or to be lumped together under two small aspects of their varied performances. Just like I would think not all IT Professionals like to have their careers truncated by someone saying their job is "computer programming".
I apologize if I read more vehemence in your statement than had been intended.
Maybe we do have the technology to fix the Earth. But its easier to get 10 people on Mars to do what you need for them to survive than 6.7 billion people across the globe to even believe they need to do something much less doing it. It's like cat herding trying to get the world to agree to do anything, so I don't think your argument about fixing earth first really works, problems on this planet can't always be fixed by throwing money at them.
Not that you don't make other good and valid points.
I don't think the suggestion was to throw you on a rocket and send you, personally, off to Mars. So I suggest you don't worry about that.
You got that backwards. People were more expendable during the age of exploration, the ships were valuable and for more expensive than the crews. Just saying.
"But inexplicably we designated the experiment a "failure" and decided to learn nothing from it."
I blame Pauly Shore's interference in the experiment.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115683/
I know it's not good to answer a question with a question, but here it is: What do the people living in Antarctica do for a living? I mean, they don't manufacture things there and send stuff back north do they? Same with the ISS.
Now I get your point, and Mars is an order of magnitude more expensive to ship to, and far more hostile than Antarctica or the ISS, but my point is that it's already been illustrated that investment into scientific research and hostile environment engineering, with no immediate payoff expected, already has precedent.
And I believe the reason plans haven't gotten off the ground is that government space programs try to take fewer risks than they have in the past.
As I quoted to you before, there are plenty of well qualified individuals who would volunteer.