Let's be clear though, Confucius also advocated that the leaders of said hierarchy were thinking of everyone in the tree when doing anything. Not that I think it's right either way, but that's the way he thought. There was an obligation for the bottom to respect the top, and also for the top to respect the bottom.
After yesterday's mexican food my top is certainly respecting my bottom!
Re:file sharing is the hydra of greek legend
on
LimeWire Lives Again
·
· Score: 1
Your argument regarding punitive damages makes little sense when you consider that a punitive amount will change depending on the financial wealth of the person being reprimanded. A large corporation or wealthy individual will have a much more vast fortune, whereas someone in the poor or middle class does not have such great wealth. How can you justify forcing them to pay the same amounts in damages when it is clearly more punitive to the person with less money? Your logic appears to be flawed.
I think it's because their attention span is so short that they've forgotten what you were talking about as soon as you respond and by then they've forgotten due to their short attention span.
One of them landed in the middle of this summary's word "its" and making the editor appear to be an idiot.
I highly suggest proofreading your own written statements before deriding others regarding theirs. Perhaps that errant "and" in your second sentence was also thrown out by the merging of two galaxies?
Slashdot Mirror
You read Slashdot, yet issues as fundamentally important as net neutrality are obscure to you?
Let's be clear though, Confucius also advocated that the leaders of said hierarchy were thinking of everyone in the tree when doing anything. Not that I think it's right either way, but that's the way he thought. There was an obligation for the bottom to respect the top, and also for the top to respect the bottom.
After yesterday's mexican food my top is certainly respecting my bottom!
file sharing is the hydra of geek legend
FTFY
Your argument regarding punitive damages makes little sense when you consider that a punitive amount will change depending on the financial wealth of the person being reprimanded. A large corporation or wealthy individual will have a much more vast fortune, whereas someone in the poor or middle class does not have such great wealth. How can you justify forcing them to pay the same amounts in damages when it is clearly more punitive to the person with less money? Your logic appears to be flawed.
I think it's because their attention span is so short that they've forgotten what you were talking about as soon as you respond and by then they've forgotten due to their short attention span.
FTFY
Perhaps we should call it an Internet beam.
I think this is part of them tightening up there security.
Where security? There security!
One of them landed in the middle of this summary's word "its" and making the editor appear to be an idiot.
I highly suggest proofreading your own written statements before deriding others regarding theirs. Perhaps that errant "and" in your second sentence was also thrown out by the merging of two galaxies?
It helps to be correct when being so pretentious.