U+20A8 is the generic symbol for any Rupee and is visually like the letter combination "Rs". The new symbol is specific to the Indian Rupee. It will join the other Unicode codepoints for country specific Rupee symbols:
BENGALI RUPEE MARK 09F2 BENGALI RUPEE SIGN 09F3 GUJARATI RUPEE SIGN 0AF1 TAMIL RUPEE SIGN 0BF9
Until we see the complete C&D letter, there's no knowing.
It could be one of the hilts in the movie series---or, it occurred to me, one of the hilts in the merchandise as well.
Or it could be he's claiming the all hilts have a common design that is being copied. That would be harder to make stick because the hilts were quite different from one another, reflecting the story line that each was the unique design of its wielder.
Lucas is not trying to claim prior art on hand held lasers. It's not a patent dispute and has nothing to do with tech. It's a copyright claim. Lucas is claiming that the HILT DESIGN duplicates a light saber from the movie images.
It being a sushi restaurant, it is probably reasonable to think that patrons can actually order only what they can eat.
In what appears to be the original story, it turns out that HER posted policy begins by requesting patrons "to share meals, to thank the earth while eating and to be mindful of the amount they order". And the article states that you can take food home, but bring your own container.
You are of course correct that you should have the right to order whatever you like, and do whatever you like with it. And, equally, she should have the right to refuse you service for wasting or for any other reason that she considers sufficient. Only time will tell whether hers is a viable business model.
Here is a link to the restaurant website. The full eat in and take out policies seem to be online there.
The first count of the lawsuit claims the school is guilty of unauthorized wiretapping under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. To support this, it calls the retrieval of the webcam images from the laptop a transmission (which is reasonable), but then characterizes the school's receiving equipment not as receiving equipment but as an unauthorized wiretap---which intercepted the school's own transmission.
Based on my own reading, the ECPA does not take receiving your own transmission to be a form of wiretap. But if I am wrong, then all web surfing---including reading this comment---is unauthorized wiretap unless you have a court order.
While you won't run into a problem at the local Pep Boys, sulfuric acid is indeed regulated.
According to the DEA Chemical Handler's Manual, sulfuric acid is a List II Chemical. That means it is one of the chemicals which tends to be diverted to illicit drug labs.
Evidently sulfuric acid gets exported to South America for the manufacture of cocaine. It seems that DEA imposes List II regulatory requirements on all exports, transshipments, and international transactions involving 50 gallons or more of sulfuric acid to Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, French Guiana, Guyana, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay, or Venezuela.
I want to echo the notion that a stable system of laws is critical to commerce.
The effect that a 6 year sunset provision on all laws would have on commerce has already been pointed out.
Another problem. Those who vote for a law are, by definition, unanimously in favor of it. Therefore by your own rule those who vote for a law are bound by it regardless of how many voted against it. You think that there will be laws which apply within a particular "level of government." But in reality, each law will apply to a different subset of your populace. It will almost immediately become impossible to determine which laws apply to which people. Furthermore, each of these myriad of subsets, to whom a given law applies, will be dissolved in 6 years. Total chaos.
The ideal trip planner would take the endpoints and map either a driving route or a park-and-ride route. It would route me around current congestion and accidents and give me the choice of driving or taking public transit.
Texas DOT has a public database of road construction plans as well as a real-time network that tells motorists about accident locations and delays. What's lacking is the integration with trip planning.
Saturday Night Live got there years before The Onion. They spoofed 2-blade razors with a 3-blade razor, and 2-color toothpaste with a 3-color toothpaste.
Based, presumably, on Saturday evening market research, Madison Avenue promptly brought to market a 3-blade razor and a 3-color toothpaste.
The names of domains identify organizations, not categories of information. The domain name hierarchy was never envisioned as a system for classifying information by category. It was created to solve a technical problem.
The explosive growth of the Internet strained the scheme for distributing host name to address mappings. Mappings were maintained in a single file and distributed to all hosts. Two key drawbacks of this scheme were:
The network bandwidth required to distribute the file was proportional to the square of the number of hosts in the network; and,
local organizations had to wait for a central administrator to make their name changes visible to the network.
The domain name system was designed to eliminate bandwidth and administration bottlenecks without sacrificing consistency. The hierarchical structure of domain names made it easy to subdivide the mappings into zones. Each local organization could then maintain and distribute its own zone, instead of depending on a central administrator. The ability to query a remote zone file was added, along with a caching strategy. These greatly reduced the network bandwidth required to distribute and query the mappings.
The reason single-letter domains were reserved until now was also apparently technical. Engineers worried that the system might develop bottlenecks around top level domain names. One day it might need to be reorganized by initial letter (archive.org becomes archive.a.org, slashdot.org becomes slashdot.s.org, and so on). To keep this option open, single-letter domains were reserved. The conclusion seems to be that this is unnecessary. The problem then becomes how to manage the crowd of would-be registrants of single-letter domains.
Much of this information comes from the authoritative documentation on the domain name system. See: RFC 1034, DOMAIN NAMES - CONCEPTS AND FACILITIES.
Blackstone, the revered legal authority at the time of the writing of the First Amendment, made what I think is the definitive statement on the limits of free speech.
"The liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature of a free state; but this consists in laying no previous restraints upon publications, and not in freedom from censure for criminal matter when published. Every freeman has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments he pleases before the public; to forbid this, is to destroy the freedom of the press: but if he publishes what is improper, mischievous, or illegal, he must take the consequences of his own temerity. To subject the press to the restrictive power of a licenser, as was formerly done, both before and since the Revolution, is to subject all freedom of sentiment to the prejudices of one man, and make him the arbitrary and infallible judge of all controverted points in learning, religion and government. But to punish as the law does at present any dangerous or offensive writings, which, when published, shall on a fair and impartial trial be adjudged of a pernicious tendency, is necessary for the preservation of peace and good order, of government and religion, the only solid foundations of civil liberty. Thus, the will of individuals is still left free: the abuse only of that free will is the object of legal punishment. Neither is any restraint hereby laid upon freedom of thought or inquiry; liberty of private sentiment is still left; the disseminating, or making public, of bad sentiments, destructive to the ends of society, is the crime which society corrects."
(Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England)
Under the California ruling, Nike has lost neither its right to free speech nor its responsibility for the consequences. This is as it should be.
The court ruling on the liability of AOL has it right. A search engine is not, in terms of the DMCA, an information retrieval tool. The reason is elementary. The search engine does not retrieve the documents. It merely catalogs documents without storing them for retrieval. The user retrieves the documents directly from the original website.
This is true of Google Search, like any search engine. However, Google's caching feature is an information retrieval tool. Hence Google is responsible for uncaching infringing content.
And, any search engine such as Google Search which quotes the body of a document in its search result is responsible to suppress the quotation in future searches.
Nikola Tesla was experimenting with this technology--the principle of mechanical resonance--in the 1800's. Margaret Cheney, in her biography, Tesla: Man Out Of Time, relates several stories of his experiments. One was a near disaster, in which he shook nearby buildings--breaking windows and scaring occupants into the streets--before realizing the danger and turning off the tiny electromechanical oscillator he had attached to the iron frame of the building which housed his own laboratory.
Slashdot Mirror
U+20A8 is the generic symbol for any Rupee and is visually like the letter combination "Rs". The new symbol is specific to the Indian Rupee. It will join the other Unicode codepoints for country specific Rupee symbols:
BENGALI RUPEE MARK 09F2
BENGALI RUPEE SIGN 09F3
GUJARATI RUPEE SIGN 0AF1
TAMIL RUPEE SIGN 0BF9
http://nvl.nist.gov/pub/nistpubs/jres/115/3/V115.N03.A03.pdf
Until we see the complete C&D letter, there's no knowing.
It could be one of the hilts in the movie series---or, it occurred to me, one of the hilts in the merchandise as well.
Or it could be he's claiming the all hilts have a common design that is being copied. That would be harder to make stick because the hilts were quite different from one another, reflecting the story line that each was the unique design of its wielder.
Lucas is not trying to claim prior art on hand held lasers. It's not a patent dispute and has nothing to do with tech. It's a copyright claim. Lucas is claiming that the HILT DESIGN duplicates a light saber from the movie images.
Except the statement doesn't say that. It says there are no major changes between the alpha and beta releases of Firefox 4.
From the article: "highly concentrated aqueous salt solutions of lithium chloride or calcium chloride"
From the summary: "very strong aqueous solution of lithium chloride or sodium chloride"
Dumbed down too much.
It being a sushi restaurant, it is probably reasonable to think that patrons can actually order only what they can eat.
In what appears to be the original story, it turns out that HER posted policy begins by requesting patrons "to share meals, to thank the earth while eating and to be mindful of the amount they order". And the article states that you can take food home, but bring your own container.
You are of course correct that you should have the right to order whatever you like, and do whatever you like with it. And, equally, she should have the right to refuse you service for wasting or for any other reason that she considers sufficient. Only time will tell whether hers is a viable business model.
Here is a link to the restaurant website. The full eat in and take out policies seem to be online there.
The first count of the lawsuit claims the school is guilty of unauthorized wiretapping under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. To support this, it calls the retrieval of the webcam images from the laptop a transmission (which is reasonable), but then characterizes the school's receiving equipment not as receiving equipment but as an unauthorized wiretap---which intercepted the
school's own transmission.
Based on my own reading, the ECPA does not take receiving your own transmission to be a form of wiretap. But if I am wrong, then all web surfing---including reading this comment---is unauthorized wiretap unless you have a court order.
Makes sense to me. Ask any engineer, 2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2.
Actually, charging a given customer more for a product because that customer values it more is supply and demand at work.
Supposing two of them carry it together?
What, held under the dorsal guiding feathers?
According to the DEA Chemical Handler's Manual, sulfuric acid is a List II Chemical. That means it is one of the chemicals which tends to be diverted to illicit drug labs.
Evidently sulfuric acid gets exported to South America for the manufacture of cocaine. It seems that DEA imposes List II regulatory requirements on all exports, transshipments, and international transactions involving 50 gallons or more of sulfuric acid to Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, French Guiana, Guyana, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay, or Venezuela.
I want to echo the notion that a stable system of laws is critical to commerce.
The effect that a 6 year sunset provision on all laws would have on commerce has already been pointed out.
Another problem. Those who vote for a law are, by definition, unanimously in favor of it. Therefore by your own rule those who vote for a law are bound by it regardless of how many voted against it. You think that there will be laws which apply within a particular "level of government." But in reality, each law will apply to a different subset of your populace. It will almost immediately become impossible to determine which laws apply to which people. Furthermore, each of these myriad of subsets, to whom a given law applies, will be dissolved in 6 years. Total chaos.
My PC has that. Of course it's 30 years old.
The ideal trip planner would take the endpoints and map either a driving route or a park-and-ride route. It would route me around current congestion and accidents and give me the choice of driving or taking public transit.
Texas DOT has a public database of road construction plans as well as a real-time network that tells motorists about accident locations and delays. What's lacking is the integration with trip planning.
Saturday Night Live got there years before The Onion. They spoofed 2-blade razors with a 3-blade razor, and 2-color toothpaste with a 3-color toothpaste.
Based, presumably, on Saturday evening market research, Madison Avenue promptly brought to market a 3-blade razor and a 3-color toothpaste.
The names of domains identify organizations, not categories of information. The domain name hierarchy was never envisioned as a system for classifying information by category. It was created to solve a technical problem.
The explosive growth of the Internet strained the scheme for distributing host name to address mappings. Mappings were maintained in a single file and distributed to all hosts. Two key drawbacks of this scheme were:
The domain name system was designed to eliminate bandwidth and administration bottlenecks without sacrificing consistency. The hierarchical structure of domain names made it easy to subdivide the mappings into zones. Each local organization could then maintain and distribute its own zone, instead of depending on a central administrator. The ability to query a remote zone file was added, along with a caching strategy. These greatly reduced the network bandwidth required to distribute and query the mappings.
The reason single-letter domains were reserved until now was also apparently technical. Engineers worried that the system might develop bottlenecks around top level domain names. One day it might need to be reorganized by initial letter (archive.org becomes archive.a.org, slashdot.org becomes slashdot.s.org, and so on). To keep this option open, single-letter domains were reserved. The conclusion seems to be that this is unnecessary. The problem then becomes how to manage the crowd of would-be registrants of single-letter domains.
Much of this information comes from the authoritative documentation on the domain name system. See: RFC 1034, DOMAIN NAMES - CONCEPTS AND FACILITIES.
Blackstone, the revered legal authority at the time of the writing of the First Amendment, made what I think is the definitive statement on the limits of free speech.
"The liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature of a free state; but this consists in laying no previous restraints upon publications, and not in freedom from censure for criminal matter when published. Every freeman has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments he pleases before the public; to forbid this, is to destroy the freedom of the press: but if he publishes what is improper, mischievous, or illegal, he must take the consequences of his own temerity. To subject the press to the restrictive power of a licenser, as was formerly done, both before and since the Revolution, is to subject all freedom of sentiment to the prejudices of one man, and make him the arbitrary and infallible judge of all controverted points in learning, religion and government. But to punish as the law does at present any dangerous or offensive writings, which, when published, shall on a fair and impartial trial be adjudged of a pernicious tendency, is necessary for the preservation of peace and good order, of government and religion, the only solid foundations of civil liberty. Thus, the will of individuals is still left free: the abuse only of that free will is the object of legal punishment. Neither is any restraint hereby laid upon freedom of thought or inquiry; liberty of private sentiment is still left; the disseminating, or making public, of bad sentiments, destructive to the ends of society, is the crime which society corrects."
(Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England)
Under the California ruling, Nike has lost neither its right to free speech nor its responsibility for the consequences. This is as it should be.
This is true of Google Search, like any search engine. However, Google's caching feature is an information retrieval tool. Hence Google is responsible for uncaching infringing content.
And, any search engine such as Google Search which quotes the body of a document in its search result is responsible to suppress the quotation in future searches.
This is my opinion, not legal advice.
Nikola Tesla was experimenting with this technology--the principle of mechanical resonance--in the 1800's. Margaret Cheney, in her biography, Tesla: Man Out Of Time, relates several stories of his experiments. One was a near disaster, in which he shook nearby buildings--breaking windows and scaring occupants into the streets--before realizing the danger and turning off the tiny electromechanical oscillator he had attached to the iron frame of the building which housed his own laboratory.