Missed a little bit there - Tamar (Er's wife) had the right to a child (fathered by his brother or other close relative), to inherit Er's estate. Onan tried to deny her that, and God killed him for it. Tamar later conned Judah into being the sperm donor.
Reminds me of when Thomas Covenant visited the world of r.h.o.d, and also of "Flowers for Thagernon" - a colaboratively produced pastiche so well written that I was laughing at the puns and distortions as I wept for the protagonist.
I was referring back to the Christian / Muslim / etc. society.
Aside from them, I'd say that the golden rule, whilst still subjective, is an attempt in the right direction.
Well, they're different societies. If I lived in the US, I'd want a gun, and want to be able to hit want I intended to aim it at - the original "well regulated militia" that George and co were talking about.
The problem in the UK is that our government make more laws, instead of using the ones that we've got properly. If the gun licensing agency (probably the police or the Home Office, but I'm not sure which) had done their job properly, neither of them would have had licenses in the first place.
probably the appropriate comparison would be between similarly sized cities in the US, one with a gun ownership ban (DC or NY perhaps?) and one without (not sure - somewhere in California, perhaps?).
Her power is much like that of King Verence:
In the same way that his people will do anything he tells them, as long as he only tells them to do what they already wanted to, Her Majesty has the power to remove the government, as long as she doesn't actually use it.
It may not change bin Laden's mind, but there would be a hell of a lot less young muslims thinking "you know, maybe he's got a point..."
BTW, I don't support Israel ceasing to exist, but it would be nice if their government and armed forces stopped acting like terrorists.
Or on the other hand we could relent a bit on shoving our way of life down their throaghts, and maybe lighten upon treating anyone from the middle east as suspected terrorists. Maybe then we'd not be alienating them, and building support for extremists.
Of course, the people of China, and some other eastern nations, may well (and quite rightly by their standards ) consider that our government is evil for failing to provide strong leadership and not protecting us from pornography, etc.
In that case, I'm sure you'll agree that it is evil of you to keep us ignorant of your bank details.
Care to share them with us, or would you prefer to be evil, and keep them concealed?
If I understand things correctly, he would have been using the bowl to wash himself, not as a toilet.
Still bloody disgusting to have to eat out of the same bowl, mind.
Don't depend on that.
I wrote to my MP (UK equivalent of a congressman), giving a careful argument against the IFPI moves to extend copyright, specifically pointing out that it would be of no benefit to most artists, etc.
He wrote back parroting the IFPI bullshit, how it was needed to help poor artists, etc.
As I understand it, it works like this:
If the RIAA (or one of their member companies)makes a million from sales, some of that goes to the artist (or to paying back their advance). If they get a million from suing a file-sharer, they get to keep the lot. A bit of a no-brainer, really. Of course they're more interested in suits than sales.
What we should do is give the damages (or a proportion of them - say standard royalties proportion + 50%) to the artists. If the RIAA are bona fide, and not cynically choosing to pursue a revenue stream that benefits them at the artists' expense, then how can they complain? (To answer my own question, they'll probably try their standard proof by assertion - my MP has swallowed their bullshit, so it'll probably work elsewhere.)
You don't want to take whatever shit they shovel at you and pay over the odds for the privilege?
What are you, some kind of islamist hacker terrorist?;)>
These people are sht scared that their kids are going to grow up like me.
A large proportion of autistic people are nothing like as disabled as the likes of Autism Speaks like to pretend. It's bad enough having so called support organisations using scare stories about us as an excuse for fame and sympathy, without fcktrds like this using us as an excuse for personal injury scams.
(note - disemvoweled by poster)
Basically, he sells lecture notes through a company, and another company is buying notes from his students and selling them.
He says that students taking notes is fair use, but another company selling those notes is infringement.
In terms of a bird singing, then the copyright is yours, but if you record a lecture, then that is a copy of the professor's performance of it, and so it is his or hers. I record all the lectures that I go to because I have Asperger Syndrome, and got the permission of all my professors in advance. Similarly, for one class, I posted my lecture notes and lab results in a blog for a friend that had to quit the class because she was pregnant - again, no problem,but I checked with the relevant professor first, and got his permission.
Slashdot Mirror
Missed a little bit there - Tamar (Er's wife) had the right to a child (fathered by his brother or other close relative), to inherit Er's estate. Onan tried to deny her that, and God killed him for it. Tamar later conned Judah into being the sperm donor.
Whoops - minor correction there: Flowers for Thagernon was written by the Oracle. Beautiful work. The rhod/covenant tales were collaborative, though.
Reminds me of when Thomas Covenant visited the world of r.h.o.d, and also of "Flowers for Thagernon" - a colaboratively produced pastiche so well written that I was laughing at the puns and distortions as I wept for the protagonist.
I was referring back to the Christian / Muslim / etc. society.
Aside from them, I'd say that the golden rule, whilst still subjective, is an attempt in the right direction.
Well, they're different societies. If I lived in the US, I'd want a gun, and want to be able to hit want I intended to aim it at - the original "well regulated militia" that George and co were talking about.
The problem in the UK is that our government make more laws, instead of using the ones that we've got properly. If the gun licensing agency (probably the police or the Home Office, but I'm not sure which) had done their job properly, neither of them would have had licenses in the first place.
probably the appropriate comparison would be between similarly sized cities in the US, one with a gun ownership ban (DC or NY perhaps?) and one without (not sure - somewhere in California, perhaps?).
Right.
People like Thomas Hamilton, and Michael Ryan.
Don't count on it. They'll just keep it as something to bring out if they can't find anything else to arrest someone for.
Her power is much like that of King Verence: In the same way that his people will do anything he tells them, as long as he only tells them to do what they already wanted to, Her Majesty has the power to remove the government, as long as she doesn't actually use it.
It may not change bin Laden's mind, but there would be a hell of a lot less young muslims thinking "you know, maybe he's got a point..."
BTW, I don't support Israel ceasing to exist, but it would be nice if their government and armed forces stopped acting like terrorists.
Or on the other hand we could relent a bit on shoving our way of life down their throaghts, and maybe lighten upon treating anyone from the middle east as suspected terrorists. Maybe then we'd not be alienating them, and building support for extremists.
By reference to the eternal, unchanging word of [insert God here].
Of course, the people of China, and some other eastern nations, may well (and quite rightly by their standards ) consider that our government is evil for failing to provide strong leadership and not protecting us from pornography, etc.
In that case, I'm sure you'll agree that it is evil of you to keep us ignorant of your bank details. Care to share them with us, or would you prefer to be evil, and keep them concealed?
Thou art God.
That explains it. It's all Canada's fault.
If I understand things correctly, he would have been using the bowl to wash himself, not as a toilet. Still bloody disgusting to have to eat out of the same bowl, mind.
Don't depend on that.
I wrote to my MP (UK equivalent of a congressman), giving a careful argument against the IFPI moves to extend copyright, specifically pointing out that it would be of no benefit to most artists, etc.
He wrote back parroting the IFPI bullshit, how it was needed to help poor artists, etc.
As I understand it, it works like this: If the RIAA (or one of their member companies)makes a million from sales, some of that goes to the artist (or to paying back their advance). If they get a million from suing a file-sharer, they get to keep the lot.
A bit of a no-brainer, really. Of course they're more interested in suits than sales.
What we should do is give the damages (or a proportion of them - say standard royalties proportion + 50%) to the artists. If the RIAA are bona fide, and not cynically choosing to pursue a revenue stream that benefits them at the artists' expense, then how can they complain?
(To answer my own question, they'll probably try their standard proof by assertion - my MP has swallowed their bullshit, so it'll probably work elsewhere.)
The next step for the RIAA will be to try to get direct sales by the artists outlawed.
You don't want to take whatever shit they shovel at you and pay over the odds for the privilege?
What are you, some kind of islamist hacker terrorist?;)>
These people are sht scared that their kids are going to grow up like me.
A large proportion of autistic people are nothing like as disabled as the likes of Autism Speaks like to pretend. It's bad enough having so called support organisations using scare stories about us as an excuse for fame and sympathy, without fcktrds like this using us as an excuse for personal injury scams.
(note - disemvoweled by poster)
You can't fool me, young man. It's Gods all the way down.
Basically, he sells lecture notes through a company, and another company is buying notes from his students and selling them. He says that students taking notes is fair use, but another company selling those notes is infringement.
In terms of a bird singing, then the copyright is yours, but if you record a lecture, then that is a copy of the professor's performance of it, and so it is his or hers. I record all the lectures that I go to because I have Asperger Syndrome, and got the permission of all my professors in advance. Similarly, for one class, I posted my lecture notes and lab results in a blog for a friend that had to quit the class because she was pregnant - again, no problem,but I checked with the relevant professor first, and got his permission.