If that day ever comes then I'll simply use the cash in my accounts to make my purchases instead and they'll lose the fees they earn from the retailers. Admittedly though, I'll miss cashing in my reward points as well.
They make money off the fees they charge retailers, which are enough apparently to allow me to collect a couple of hundred in "reward" points every few months.
If you discipline yourself to use a credit card correctly the interest rate should be of no matter to you. Never use it to make a purchase you can't cover with cash you have in the bank, and make it a rule to pay the balance in full each and every statement. Do this, and you will never have to pay a cent in interest ever.
To be clear, the power being discussed here is recording sounds in public places is it not? What is stopping any or all of the people from doing the same?
Aren't we talking about public airports here? My understanding is there is no expectation of privacy in public places, and personally I don't understand why there should be. If you say something in front of other people you should expect it to be heard by other people.
Because most people don't have an obsession against anonymous posting perhaps? Some of the best comments come from ACs because it gives them a small amount of protection from those who would not be happy with what the information they are providing. As a matter of fact, I've think one reason slashdot has sunken so low can be directly attributed to this trend of ignoring ACs.
I'd start with forbidding links that say that you are going to one place that send you to another. Everyone with half a brain knows FOX spins fact to suit their agenda.
The main cause of stroke is lack of blood to the brain. Reducing blood pressure can actually cause a stroke because it reduces the cerebral perfusion pressure.
McCain stood for people supporting society, Obama stood for society supporting people. That small nuiance is the the very difference between conservative and social libertarinism. It is a shame that we can't settle this difference between ourselves without letting the authortaians stay in charge.
Not really, because you haven't cited data, and the methodology used to support it, that demonstrates that a person 0.1% over the BMI is at more risk than a person who is normal BMI and vice-a-versa. This a life alterating subject being discussed here so please treat it a such. Maybe first would should start with why a BMI of 24.9 is more healthy than one of 25, and then continue with why a BMI of 18.5 is more healthy than one of 25? Really, all I'm asking for is the date to support the argument being made.
I see no correction in this study to correct for those who seek to correct for the bias inherent in studies such as these. What idiot in his right mind would vote how these things predict he would vote for goodness sakes!? Everyone knows the questions in these polls are all geared to prove the polster right anyhow.
But this is serious stuff! What do I tell my patients? That if you are 6'0 and weigh 185lbs you will live on average 70yrs but if you are 6'0 180lbs you will live on average 72yrs? And then, if you die at 70 you will be mentally and physically intact but at 72 you won't? Seriously, I'm just looking for some hard numbers and data here.
Interesting! Could it be that using the BMI as a determining factor in who is healthy and who is not is in itself a flawed concept? Perhaps the amount of sleep needed is related to caloric intake, and the caloric intake necessary to maintain a BMI less than 25 is not sufficient to avoid stroke? Certainly there is more here than meets the eye. I'd strongly recommend much further study before anyone changes their lifestyles due to this study.
At least with copyright, the small guy can actually stop a bigger corporation from potentially profiting from his work without compensation.
Would you mind citing some examples of where this has happened please? Best I've been able to find is artists being suckered by record publishing contracts and hollywood accounting schemes.
I believe the number of people that want to "own" a movie constitute a small minority. Very small. Even smaller for the number that want to own tv shows.
As an "owner" of many movies and tv shows ripped to my hard drives I'd like you to provide data for your assertion. Nothing beats being able to watch what I want when I want internet connection be damned.
No it's not. Water is free, but you can never be certain that it will rain enough to supply everyone's needs. That is why most people have no problem with paying for having available on tap for whenever they want it. Perhaps if content producers would follow that model they would have more success?
Killing the competition accomplishes the same thing. Think about it, would Google have asked for phone numbers and insisted on using real names a decade ago? They've got power now and their going to use it.
Slashdot Mirror
If that day ever comes then I'll simply use the cash in my accounts to make my purchases instead and they'll lose the fees they earn from the retailers. Admittedly though, I'll miss cashing in my reward points as well.
Then I must be an exception then. No annual fees, never paid interest, and take the cash option whenever I redeem my reward points.
They make money off the fees they charge retailers, which are enough apparently to allow me to collect a couple of hundred in "reward" points every few months.
If you discipline yourself to use a credit card correctly the interest rate should be of no matter to you. Never use it to make a purchase you can't cover with cash you have in the bank, and make it a rule to pay the balance in full each and every statement. Do this, and you will never have to pay a cent in interest ever.
In other words, you don't disclose your private things in public places. Point taken.
So in Canada it is a human right that nobody can listen to what you say in public?
To be clear, the power being discussed here is recording sounds in public places is it not? What is stopping any or all of the people from doing the same?
Rational people do not disclose PRIVATE things in PUBLIC places.
Aren't we talking about public airports here? My understanding is there is no expectation of privacy in public places, and personally I don't understand why there should be. If you say something in front of other people you should expect it to be heard by other people.
Because most people don't have an obsession against anonymous posting perhaps? Some of the best comments come from ACs because it gives them a small amount of protection from those who would not be happy with what the information they are providing. As a matter of fact, I've think one reason slashdot has sunken so low can be directly attributed to this trend of ignoring ACs.
Wait, what!? And this scheme is actually interpreted as promoting the arts and sciences? Have the RIAA and MPAA gotten wind of this?
I'd start with forbidding links that say that you are going to one place that send you to another. Everyone with half a brain knows FOX spins fact to suit their agenda.
So how many bitcoins do I need to plunk into the soda machine to get a coke, and what bank to I go to to have a few of them jingling in my pocket?
Certainly some researchers works are worth more than others, so is this a set fee the publisher is paying or does it vary?
The main cause of stroke is lack of blood to the brain. Reducing blood pressure can actually cause a stroke because it reduces the cerebral perfusion pressure.
McCain stood for people supporting society, Obama stood for society supporting people. That small nuiance is the the very difference between conservative and social libertarinism. It is a shame that we can't settle this difference between ourselves without letting the authortaians stay in charge.
Not really, because you haven't cited data, and the methodology used to support it, that demonstrates that a person 0.1% over the BMI is at more risk than a person who is normal BMI and vice-a-versa. This a life alterating subject being discussed here so please treat it a such. Maybe first would should start with why a BMI of 24.9 is more healthy than one of 25, and then continue with why a BMI of 18.5 is more healthy than one of 25? Really, all I'm asking for is the date to support the argument being made.
I see no correction in this study to correct for those who seek to correct for the bias inherent in studies such as these. What idiot in his right mind would vote how these things predict he would vote for goodness sakes!? Everyone knows the questions in these polls are all geared to prove the polster right anyhow.
But this is serious stuff! What do I tell my patients? That if you are 6'0 and weigh 185lbs you will live on average 70yrs but if you are 6'0 180lbs you will live on average 72yrs? And then, if you die at 70 you will be mentally and physically intact but at 72 you won't? Seriously, I'm just looking for some hard numbers and data here.
Interesting! Could it be that using the BMI as a determining factor in who is healthy and who is not is in itself a flawed concept? Perhaps the amount of sleep needed is related to caloric intake, and the caloric intake necessary to maintain a BMI less than 25 is not sufficient to avoid stroke? Certainly there is more here than meets the eye. I'd strongly recommend much further study before anyone changes their lifestyles due to this study.
At least with copyright, the small guy can actually stop a bigger corporation from potentially profiting from his work without compensation.
Would you mind citing some examples of where this has happened please? Best I've been able to find is artists being suckered by record publishing contracts and hollywood accounting schemes.
I believe the number of people that want to "own" a movie constitute a small minority. Very small.
Even smaller for the number that want to own tv shows.
As an "owner" of many movies and tv shows ripped to my hard drives I'd like you to provide data for your assertion. Nothing beats being able to watch what I want when I want internet connection be damned.
What is your point? Is that only idiots buy alchohol or is it that the majority of NZ'ers are theives?
No it's not. Water is free, but you can never be certain that it will rain enough to supply everyone's needs. That is why most people have no problem with paying for having available on tap for whenever they want it. Perhaps if content producers would follow that model they would have more success?
Killing the competition accomplishes the same thing. Think about it, would Google have asked for phone numbers and insisted on using real names a decade ago? They've got power now and their going to use it.