. Whine and hand-wring all you want. We did this to ourselves when we started giving away the store to save a few bucks for next quarter. We'll never win another war because of superior technology. Any technology we *do* create will be outsourced in seconds, so why please explain to me why I would ever bother? . Hope you're all enjoying the global marketplace.
I believe the benefit of the global marketplace is that when everyone has access to the same technology, we all start out on the same playing field, and wars based on technology are eliminated. Granted, this leaves us with only superficial wars, like ones over governmental form (lets get rid of oppression and dictatorship with no capital benefits at great personal expense).
If you remember the crusades, millions of people were killed over unprovable ideas, whereas recent wars have merely killed thousands for unproven ideas.
We seem to be headed towards a goal of being able to obtain roughly the same quality of life for the same work regardless of geographic location, except in situations where geographic location has a direct impact on the value of work performed (for example, construction).
When a lawyer is a lawyer is a lawyer, human nature is still that of he who dies with the most toys wins. When you come up with the newest and best toy, you should bother because when it gets outsourced, you make more money and can buy more toys by selling to a wider market. Seems like common sense to me...
The only reason anyone carries a gun around in public is because they intend to kill someone. You can rationalise it with "but it's for self-defence", but it still comes down to one simple thing - you've got it because you intend to murder someone with it if the opportunity and motive arise.
The only reason someone murders anyone is because...oh wait, its not because they have a gun.
That is not why I carry a gun, and it is not why the vast majority of people carry a gun. I don't go to the shooting range to murder people. I don't go deer hunting to murder people. I certainly don't carry a gun with the intention of shooting people; rather I do so because of the protection it provides should it be necessary for self-defense. A rationalization implies that I do something for another purpose, only I claim something else. To even imply that a statistical percentage of gun carriers do so is so ridiculous that I can only assume that your mother doesn't love you and didn't teach you the concept of thinking before you speak.
Get off my lawn, mature past the age of stupid democratic college nonsensical hippie, big brother is not watching you, the internet is not a magical place where what you make up suddenly is not insulting, etc, etc, etc.
You bring shame to the concept of a valid argument.
If we met in public and you tried to make these arguments, everyone in the area would assume you were on some sort of drug or mentally retarded.
I'm only insulting you, on the off chance that anyone, anywhere, anytime, made the mistake of thinking, for even a moment, that anything you said had any merit.
When are people going to begin to realise that as far as consumers go there is no free market. Sure you can get a better deal at carrier B than carrier C but you will never get the BEST DEAL POSSIBLE because they don't want to give it to you. Profit is paramount, but these guys are really taking it too far.
That isnt what a free market means. A free market means that someone else could come along and be competitive, without government interference (ie, you dont have to bribe your way in, and there are not a limited number of competitors allowed). Over time, if there are differences in competitors, the best price will win, all other elements excluded. If there are quality differences, such that two competing products are not equivalent substitutes (you can't make a butter roll with margerine) the best price might not win because of end user utility.
If you can get a better deal at Carrier B than Carrier C, and no one else beats Carrier B, and then Carrier B is currently the best deal possible. They are giving it to you. A free market means that you are not prohibited from creating carrier D, offering a better deal than everyone else, and taking market share. Carrier B, of course, would then have the option of undercutting you. Its a risk you take because its a free market.
Try econ 101 again, and this time, read the book and listen to the professor, and think about how all the stuff you have been ignoring might work in the real world.
to describe their probable sales volume. There's very little there in terms of improvements for PS3 owners. For those of us who bailed on PSx line after #2 I don't see anything enticing enough in terms of new features to make me consider purchasing a ps3 slim.
Except for the price drop, from 399 for an 80GB to 299 for a 120GB HD...even if you also buy a PS2 for BC, then its still a bigger hard drive for a (total) lower price.
If you purchase something from a merchant in the ordinary course of business, and you are a consumer, you take title above anyone else. If you buy a movie or a cd from Blockbuster's used section, you have nothing to worry about. If you buy it from some guy in a trench coat on the subway, it may not be reasonable to assume that he is a merchant, or that the property is legal. If you buy it from an indian grocery store, YMMV. Your netflix example is something completely different, because you are licensing, not purchasing. You are paying for the use of a service, but if netflix does not have the right to distribute that service and you use it reasonably without such knowledge, you have not committed a crime. Netflix would have committed infringement, and be subject to civil penalties.
IANAL, but downloading is not something you should worry about. Uploading is. If you download something, there is no basis that you would have otherwise purchased access to the material, therefore no actual damages could ever be proven. Uploading, on the other hand, is copyright infringement. You are distributing without a license to distribute, which, according to every movie made for home use, carries a monetary and criminal penalty for each instance.
Here is the fun part: If you have a reasonable belief that the person/s you download from have the right to distribute material, and they do not charge for it, you are in the clear. The reasonable person statute does not refer to/.ers, but rather to people who download things. Whether or not that download is free, or whether or not it has commercials, is irrelevant. If it is obvious that they do not have the right to do so, you can be held liable for the infringement (the same way that if you buy a car without a title, you might assume it was stolen, and the original owner can claim it back by proving title, but if you buy a car from a used car lot, the seller has merchantability, and thus warranty of title is implicit, so the original owner can only sue the used car lot owner, and you keep legal title).
Do you know anyone who has tried to train a guard cat?
That being said, cats are stupid, selfish, pointless animals. That being said, dogs act like two year olds because that is how people treat them (the two year olds, not the dogs).
I dont have a PS2. I paid 600 + tax and shipping for my BC 60 GB PS3. I then sold my PS2 for $175. Back then, they were going for $200 retail.
If you want a legally obtained (ie from a merchant, and with a warranty) PS2, you will pay $99.99 plus tax for new, or $80 for used. I would pay the extra for new for the additional 9 months of hardware warranty. If you want to buy one from craigslist, or your friend who doesn't play games anymore, or your cousin, of course YMMV. If you buy a PS2 for $30, it probably won't work in 6 months.
If you are buying a network adapter for PS2, I feel sorry for your wallet. It certainly isn't worth $10, never mind 50. I just looked, and I kid you not, the amazon version comes with a demo of Madden NFL 2003.
ObsessiveMathsFreak did it the same way I did - by buying a 60 GB PS3 when they first came out, which includes PS2/PS1 emulation ability (you have to make a virtual memory card to save PS2/PS1 files before you start playing, something I noted 10 hours into playing FF VII). Initially, there were 20, 40, and 60 GB models. Then they discountinued the 20 GB and came out with an 80 GB. Now they have 80 GB and 160 GB, without the ability to play the older platforms. Of course, you can now buy a new PS2 for $100, which allows you to play PS1 games.
Sony will laugh at any false advertising lawsuit, because no one advertises features that don't exist. Literacy is a wonderful thing.
If a client wants 500 widgets, then you make them enter into a contract for 500 widgets. If your new whizbang baby ITX thin client PCs are a significant portion of your annual revenue, you make em pay for the whole order prior to production and you slap a client logo on em as a bonus, so you can claim these are custom builds and an order for 500 can't be reduced since you can't resell them. If necessary, require custom, non-refundable orders on orders of 1+.
Then, when they later only want 350, you deliver 350 if they demand it, but you still invoice 500 (and you still produce 500 so that you are square on the contract). By the time you are assembling the last 20 PCs, the ability to back out of the contract should be down to the amount you have already begun to pay for. Not paying the $5k annual lawyer fee to set proper language in your contract terms is beyond negligent.
Seems pretty simple to me. Include a couple of clauses about delivery time and product spec (they get widgets, not the new widget+, delivery by [date] and not prior, if client wants full or partial delivery moved to [later date], client pays warehousing fees and cost of credit). With this, you should be able to renegotiate you mastercard interest costs because ADA is lowered. If the total cost is immaterial to the client, you likely will get the client's interest rates for a specific job order but get the gain of credit history. Alternatively, some larger clients are even willing to cover the float and take it out of the price of delivery (ie pay directly for the materials, so if they reduce the order to 350, they just have to resell the parts).
On the other hand, if a client orders 500 and doesn't have the credit to cover 500, I would probably not take the client order, or require a cash downpayment, or have them put some assets in escrow prior to acceptance (like title to building, not intangible assets). Of course, if 500 widgets is a lot for you to make, client probably goes with a competitor who does 500 on an hour's notice.
Assuming your phone bill rounds 1 second as 1 minute, and you only care about being charged a minute when you otherwise would not,
14/60 phone calls will have an extra minute.
Assume 1/2 your calls go to voicemail and you pay 40 cents per minute above a threshold, and you go over by 30 minutes on your 600 minute plan,
(14/60 * 1/2 * 630) = 84 minutes per month due to voicemail.4 * 30 extra minutes all due to voicemail = $12 per month = $144 annually.
Assuming you use the same number of minutes,
but only 1/4 of your calls go to voicemail, you pay the same amount due to voicemail.
but only 10% of your calls go to voicemail, you still pay the same amount due to voicemail.
Personally, I just get the unlimited everything plan, which costs the same as the 2000 minute plan, but includes unlimited text, email, picture, video, IM, android market, you name it I get it, so the only thing I lose is actual time sitting through voicemail. Thats why I hang and send a text if I get voicemail.
If you actually like to cook, the Walmart deli is much lower quality than Kroger (nevermind wholefoods). The Walmart seafood station is absolute crap. These stem from how much of a solution is added to the product. Frozen chicken at walmart is half the price of publix, but publix chicken tastes orders of maginitude better, has more protein by weight, and gets less freezer burn in the first week. Housewares, you can buy towels and shower curtains and doormats, but they get old, ratty looking, and less effective in about 1/4 of the time as buying them from BBB or equivalent for 2x the price.
In other words, get your coors light from walmart, get your wine from a liquor store (the selection is better). Get your frozen chicken nuggets from walmart, get your grilling chicken from publix. Get your 24 packs of Coke from walmart, get your horchata from your local mexican restaurant (trust me, they know what they are doing with that).
When I work out, I see much better results getting my protein powder and vitamins and etc from GNC, not Walmart. Even though its the same brand of stuff, the stuff at walmart costs 40% less, but it just makes me fart, which means my body isnt digesting it. It is worthless. The stuff at GNC costs more, but I end up with a faster, better recovery.
This may be all anecdotal, so you can either trust me, or run your own trial. Have a dinner party for 100 guests, buy half the food from walmart, half from another place, prepare the same stuff, number your guests, make everyone fill out comment cards on freshness, taste, whatever metrics you want to test. Make sure no one knows that the food is from multiple places. Craigslist will help you find 100 strangers who want free food for their chef critics. Send samples of your pre and post preparation items to a lab to test for nutritional value.
Of course, if you don't have 30-40k to spend, you could always just figure it out for yourself, at a cost of a half a weeks groceries, instead of demanding research.
There are 2 ways to interperate this, and neither exist.
Inner city traffic never reaches highway speeds. There are too many vehicles trying to get to many places with too many traffic lights. Often, you don't get to go when the light turns green, due to the congestion.
Inner city congestion never hits a highway. Even in Atlanta, you will travel twice as fast on the highway at the peak of rush hour as you will in the city.
The only exception would be if someone gets in an accident. In this case, it doesn't matter if you are on the highway, in the city, a national park, or a golf course: every jackass for miles slows to a crawl, pauses next to the accident to see the damage/fire/injured people, and then drives off. Since the location doesn't matter, inner city doesn't meet highway.
Actually, the chicken egg incentives cause pharmaceuticals and farmers to produce chickens that lay more eggs.
You have just ignored numbers and tried to hide causation.
If anything, people who drive a little should save a ton of money with this type of insurance and will probably drive more, as insurance would no longer be overhead costs of car ownership. People who drive a significant amount are more likely to stick with drive all you want insurance, and drive all you want insurance companies will adjust their prices such that drive all you want insurance costs about the same as pay as you drive insurance for most people.
I'm fairly certain the only one to lose here is the insurance purchaser.
Quick, relevant point: Since when does Canada have jurisdiction over the internet?
Does Canadian law actually apply to facebook? If not, then facebook doesn't violate Canadian privacy law, its just not congruent with it.
Secondarily, even if facebook did violate Canadian privacy law, users of the site waive that right to privacy by signing up with the user agreement. [What's that random troll? You didnt actually read the user agreement? No one cares. Facebook isnt responsible for you not reading something that you agreed to, and it would be preposterous of facebook to assume that when you said you read and agree to terms and conditions that you didnt read and agree to terms and conditions.]
A sandwich simply means something encased in horizontal layers. Therefore, tacos are sandwiches.
What am I missing here?
As for contract law, if the language of a contract is not clear from reading, it becomes clear from action taken under the basis of fulfilling the contract. In the event that there is a dispute, a lawsuit will normally be brought, however, damages from the dispute must be shown, and reasonable belief in an action contrary to what occured must also be shown. In other words, you better be able to show why you were of the belief not only that tacos are not sandwiches, but that the other party had reason to believe that your contract did not include tacos as sandwiches, and that you suffered damages as a result of tacos being used instead of what you believed to be a sandwich.
Slashdot Mirror
.
Whine and hand-wring all you want. We did this to ourselves when we started giving away the store to save a few bucks for next quarter. We'll never win another war because of superior technology. Any technology we *do* create will be outsourced in seconds, so why please explain to me why I would ever bother?
.
Hope you're all enjoying the global marketplace.
I believe the benefit of the global marketplace is that when everyone has access to the same technology, we all start out on the same playing field, and wars based on technology are eliminated. Granted, this leaves us with only superficial wars, like ones over governmental form (lets get rid of oppression and dictatorship with no capital benefits at great personal expense).
If you remember the crusades, millions of people were killed over unprovable ideas, whereas recent wars have merely killed thousands for unproven ideas.
We seem to be headed towards a goal of being able to obtain roughly the same quality of life for the same work regardless of geographic location, except in situations where geographic location has a direct impact on the value of work performed (for example, construction).
When a lawyer is a lawyer is a lawyer, human nature is still that of he who dies with the most toys wins. When you come up with the newest and best toy, you should bother because when it gets outsourced, you make more money and can buy more toys by selling to a wider market. Seems like common sense to me...
The only reason anyone carries a gun around in public is because they intend to kill someone. You can rationalise it with "but it's for self-defence", but it still comes down to one simple thing - you've got it because you intend to murder someone with it if the opportunity and motive arise.
The only reason someone murders anyone is because...oh wait, its not because they have a gun.
That is not why I carry a gun, and it is not why the vast majority of people carry a gun. I don't go to the shooting range to murder people. I don't go deer hunting to murder people. I certainly don't carry a gun with the intention of shooting people; rather I do so because of the protection it provides should it be necessary for self-defense. A rationalization implies that I do something for another purpose, only I claim something else. To even imply that a statistical percentage of gun carriers do so is so ridiculous that I can only assume that your mother doesn't love you and didn't teach you the concept of thinking before you speak.
Get off my lawn, mature past the age of stupid democratic college nonsensical hippie, big brother is not watching you, the internet is not a magical place where what you make up suddenly is not insulting, etc, etc, etc.
You bring shame to the concept of a valid argument.
If we met in public and you tried to make these arguments, everyone in the area would assume you were on some sort of drug or mentally retarded.
I'm only insulting you, on the off chance that anyone, anywhere, anytime, made the mistake of thinking, for even a moment, that anything you said had any merit.
When are people going to begin to realise that as far as consumers go there is no free market. Sure you can get a better deal at carrier B than carrier C but you will never get the BEST DEAL POSSIBLE because they don't want to give it to you. Profit is paramount, but these guys are really taking it too far.
That isnt what a free market means. A free market means that someone else could come along and be competitive, without government interference (ie, you dont have to bribe your way in, and there are not a limited number of competitors allowed). Over time, if there are differences in competitors, the best price will win, all other elements excluded. If there are quality differences, such that two competing products are not equivalent substitutes (you can't make a butter roll with margerine) the best price might not win because of end user utility.
If you can get a better deal at Carrier B than Carrier C, and no one else beats Carrier B, and then Carrier B is currently the best deal possible. They are giving it to you. A free market means that you are not prohibited from creating carrier D, offering a better deal than everyone else, and taking market share. Carrier B, of course, would then have the option of undercutting you. Its a risk you take because its a free market.
Try econ 101 again, and this time, read the book and listen to the professor, and think about how all the stuff you have been ignoring might work in the real world.
So how is anonymous coward's karma these days?
to describe their probable sales volume. There's very little there in terms of improvements for PS3 owners. For those of us who bailed on PSx line after #2 I don't see anything enticing enough in terms of new features to make me consider purchasing a ps3 slim.
Except for the price drop, from 399 for an 80GB to 299 for a 120GB HD...even if you also buy a PS2 for BC, then its still a bigger hard drive for a (total) lower price.
That depends on contract law.
If you purchase something from a merchant in the ordinary course of business, and you are a consumer, you take title above anyone else. If you buy a movie or a cd from Blockbuster's used section, you have nothing to worry about. If you buy it from some guy in a trench coat on the subway, it may not be reasonable to assume that he is a merchant, or that the property is legal. If you buy it from an indian grocery store, YMMV.
Your netflix example is something completely different, because you are licensing, not purchasing. You are paying for the use of a service, but if netflix does not have the right to distribute that service and you use it reasonably without such knowledge, you have not committed a crime. Netflix would have committed infringement, and be subject to civil penalties.
IANAL, but downloading is not something you should worry about. Uploading is. If you download something, there is no basis that you would have otherwise purchased access to the material, therefore no actual damages could ever be proven. Uploading, on the other hand, is copyright infringement. You are distributing without a license to distribute, which, according to every movie made for home use, carries a monetary and criminal penalty for each instance.
Here is the fun part: If you have a reasonable belief that the person/s you download from have the right to distribute material, and they do not charge for it, you are in the clear. The reasonable person statute does not refer to /.ers, but rather to people who download things. Whether or not that download is free, or whether or not it has commercials, is irrelevant. If it is obvious that they do not have the right to do so, you can be held liable for the infringement (the same way that if you buy a car without a title, you might assume it was stolen, and the original owner can claim it back by proving title, but if you buy a car from a used car lot, the seller has merchantability, and thus warranty of title is implicit, so the original owner can only sue the used car lot owner, and you keep legal title).
The same opportunity?
Do you know anyone who has tried to train a guard cat?
That being said, cats are stupid, selfish, pointless animals. That being said, dogs act like two year olds because that is how people treat them (the two year olds, not the dogs).
I dont have a PS2. I paid 600 + tax and shipping for my BC 60 GB PS3. I then sold my PS2 for $175. Back then, they were going for $200 retail.
If you want a legally obtained (ie from a merchant, and with a warranty) PS2, you will pay $99.99 plus tax for new, or $80 for used. I would pay the extra for new for the additional 9 months of hardware warranty. If you want to buy one from craigslist, or your friend who doesn't play games anymore, or your cousin, of course YMMV. If you buy a PS2 for $30, it probably won't work in 6 months.
If you are buying a network adapter for PS2, I feel sorry for your wallet. It certainly isn't worth $10, never mind 50. I just looked, and I kid you not, the amazon version comes with a demo of Madden NFL 2003.
1) Woosh
2) A PS2 costs $100. You get $30 when you trade one in.
ObsessiveMathsFreak did it the same way I did - by buying a 60 GB PS3 when they first came out, which includes PS2/PS1 emulation ability (you have to make a virtual memory card to save PS2/PS1 files before you start playing, something I noted 10 hours into playing FF VII). Initially, there were 20, 40, and 60 GB models. Then they discountinued the 20 GB and came out with an 80 GB. Now they have 80 GB and 160 GB, without the ability to play the older platforms. Of course, you can now buy a new PS2 for $100, which allows you to play PS1 games.
Sony will laugh at any false advertising lawsuit, because no one advertises features that don't exist. Literacy is a wonderful thing.
If a client wants 500 widgets, then you make them enter into a contract for 500 widgets. If your new whizbang baby ITX thin client PCs are a significant portion of your annual revenue, you make em pay for the whole order prior to production and you slap a client logo on em as a bonus, so you can claim these are custom builds and an order for 500 can't be reduced since you can't resell them. If necessary, require custom, non-refundable orders on orders of 1+.
Then, when they later only want 350, you deliver 350 if they demand it, but you still invoice 500 (and you still produce 500 so that you are square on the contract). By the time you are assembling the last 20 PCs, the ability to back out of the contract should be down to the amount you have already begun to pay for. Not paying the $5k annual lawyer fee to set proper language in your contract terms is beyond negligent.
Seems pretty simple to me. Include a couple of clauses about delivery time and product spec (they get widgets, not the new widget+, delivery by [date] and not prior, if client wants full or partial delivery moved to [later date], client pays warehousing fees and cost of credit). With this, you should be able to renegotiate you mastercard interest costs because ADA is lowered. If the total cost is immaterial to the client, you likely will get the client's interest rates for a specific job order but get the gain of credit history. Alternatively, some larger clients are even willing to cover the float and take it out of the price of delivery (ie pay directly for the materials, so if they reduce the order to 350, they just have to resell the parts).
On the other hand, if a client orders 500 and doesn't have the credit to cover 500, I would probably not take the client order, or require a cash downpayment, or have them put some assets in escrow prior to acceptance (like title to building, not intangible assets).
Of course, if 500 widgets is a lot for you to make, client probably goes with a competitor who does 500 on an hour's notice.
Assuming your phone bill rounds 1 second as 1 minute, and you only care about being charged a minute when you otherwise would not,
14/60 phone calls will have an extra minute.
Assume 1/2 your calls go to voicemail and you pay 40 cents per minute above a threshold, and you go over by 30 minutes on your 600 minute plan,
(14/60 * 1/2 * 630) = 84 minutes per month due to voicemail .4 * 30 extra minutes all due to voicemail = $12 per month = $144 annually.
Assuming you use the same number of minutes,
but only 1/4 of your calls go to voicemail, you pay the same amount due to voicemail.
but only 10% of your calls go to voicemail, you still pay the same amount due to voicemail.
Personally, I just get the unlimited everything plan, which costs the same as the 2000 minute plan, but includes unlimited text, email, picture, video, IM, android market, you name it I get it, so the only thing I lose is actual time sitting through voicemail. Thats why I hang and send a text if I get voicemail.
Brand name food stuffs are cheaper at Walmart.
If you actually like to cook, the Walmart deli is much lower quality than Kroger (nevermind wholefoods). The Walmart seafood station is absolute crap. These stem from how much of a solution is added to the product. Frozen chicken at walmart is half the price of publix, but publix chicken tastes orders of maginitude better, has more protein by weight, and gets less freezer burn in the first week. Housewares, you can buy towels and shower curtains and doormats, but they get old, ratty looking, and less effective in about 1/4 of the time as buying them from BBB or equivalent for 2x the price.
In other words, get your coors light from walmart, get your wine from a liquor store (the selection is better). Get your frozen chicken nuggets from walmart, get your grilling chicken from publix. Get your 24 packs of Coke from walmart, get your horchata from your local mexican restaurant (trust me, they know what they are doing with that).
When I work out, I see much better results getting my protein powder and vitamins and etc from GNC, not Walmart. Even though its the same brand of stuff, the stuff at walmart costs 40% less, but it just makes me fart, which means my body isnt digesting it. It is worthless. The stuff at GNC costs more, but I end up with a faster, better recovery.
This may be all anecdotal, so you can either trust me, or run your own trial. Have a dinner party for 100 guests, buy half the food from walmart, half from another place, prepare the same stuff, number your guests, make everyone fill out comment cards on freshness, taste, whatever metrics you want to test. Make sure no one knows that the food is from multiple places. Craigslist will help you find 100 strangers who want free food for their chef critics. Send samples of your pre and post preparation items to a lab to test for nutritional value.
Of course, if you don't have 30-40k to spend, you could always just figure it out for yourself, at a cost of a half a weeks groceries, instead of demanding research.
This has been done a couple dozen times...the original is always better.
Well, from a physics point of view, women who weigh more would be more attractive...
This isn't France. We don't censor free speech.
Yeah, this is the internet. We just obscure by raising the signal:noise ratio until all useful information is safely hidden. Then we blame France.
There are 2 ways to interperate this, and neither exist.
Inner city traffic never reaches highway speeds. There are too many vehicles trying to get to many places with too many traffic lights. Often, you don't get to go when the light turns green, due to the congestion.
Inner city congestion never hits a highway. Even in Atlanta, you will travel twice as fast on the highway at the peak of rush hour as you will in the city.
The only exception would be if someone gets in an accident. In this case, it doesn't matter if you are on the highway, in the city, a national park, or a golf course: every jackass for miles slows to a crawl, pauses next to the accident to see the damage/fire/injured people, and then drives off. Since the location doesn't matter, inner city doesn't meet highway.
Actually, the chicken egg incentives cause pharmaceuticals and farmers to produce chickens that lay more eggs.
You have just ignored numbers and tried to hide causation.
If anything, people who drive a little should save a ton of money with this type of insurance and will probably drive more, as insurance would no longer be overhead costs of car ownership. People who drive a significant amount are more likely to stick with drive all you want insurance, and drive all you want insurance companies will adjust their prices such that drive all you want insurance costs about the same as pay as you drive insurance for most people.
I'm fairly certain the only one to lose here is the insurance purchaser.
I believe its commonly referred to as /. forums (see ask slashdot).
Forget the waffles, Belgium created French Fries.
Quick, relevant point: Since when does Canada have jurisdiction over the internet?
Does Canadian law actually apply to facebook? If not, then facebook doesn't violate Canadian privacy law, its just not congruent with it.
Secondarily, even if facebook did violate Canadian privacy law, users of the site waive that right to privacy by signing up with the user agreement. [What's that random troll? You didnt actually read the user agreement? No one cares. Facebook isnt responsible for you not reading something that you agreed to, and it would be preposterous of facebook to assume that when you said you read and agree to terms and conditions that you didnt read and agree to terms and conditions.]
Holy crap, there are 15 hidden comments on this troll...at 0.
or the nature of the mistakes we repeatedly make (like listening to "1980's music").
FTFY
IANAL, but thats not right.
A sandwich simply means something encased in horizontal layers. Therefore, tacos are sandwiches.
What am I missing here?
As for contract law, if the language of a contract is not clear from reading, it becomes clear from action taken under the basis of fulfilling the contract. In the event that there is a dispute, a lawsuit will normally be brought, however, damages from the dispute must be shown, and reasonable belief in an action contrary to what occured must also be shown. In other words, you better be able to show why you were of the belief not only that tacos are not sandwiches, but that the other party had reason to believe that your contract did not include tacos as sandwiches, and that you suffered damages as a result of tacos being used instead of what you believed to be a sandwich.
People who don't have a problem combining science and religion are neither scientists nor are they people that kids can look up to.