Technically, the age of consent in my state is 16. Problem is that there are other laws like "corrupting the morals of a minor" that you can be charged with.
No, the only time the first amendment comes into play is when Congress is involved. The purpose of the amendment is to keep the government from abridging the freedom of speech, or the freedom of religion, or what have you. That's where it starts and stops. It has nothing to say about disputes between individual citizens or between citizens and their employers.
Through the 14th amendment the protections of the first amendment are propagated down to state entities as well.
Since any appropriation of federal funds is done via an act of Congress, anyone who accepts federal funds also has to accept the strings that are attached.
I TOLD YOU SO! I TOLD YOU SO! I TOLD YOU SO! I TOLD YOU SO!
This is precisely the kind of bullshit that we said would happen if McCain-Feingold was passed. We were called paranoid. We were called kooks. Hell, maybe we were, but we were also right.
ANY obstacle to free speech and exchange of ideas will be abused by those who wish to silence those who want to say unpopular things.
A good example is modern Germany. You can be prosecuted if you deny the holocaust. Personally, I think it's a no-brainer that it really happened. I've known holocaust survivors and avoiders, but I think you should be able to say that you don't believe that it happened.
What exactly does it mean for a government agency to "ease" the transition from one kind of TV signal to another?
The FCC wants to get broadcast TV off of it's current portion of the broadcast spectrum so that they can start selling licenses for telecomm use of those same frequencies.
They know that Hollywood will put more effort behind a system that "protects" the digital transmissions so that they don't wind up on the internet. With the backing of the big film studios, the FCC believes that it will be a shorter time until current analog TV is obviated and they can start selling those licenses.
If you're listening to songs on your iPod, you've already bought them. Either through iTunes, ripping a CD, or maybe you just ripped it off from Kazaa, but no matter what they're not looking at any more sales.
To think that a medium that bolstered the US (and World) Economy via the "dotcom boom" and still generates billions of dollars a year for the pr0n industry would have started out with the transmission of such a stupid picture restores my hope for the future.
In 99.99% of all applications, I totally agree with you. Unless we're talking about specific embedded systems where the number of spare cycles is at a premium, go for the more readable code.
It seems that if your original maximum bid settnig[SIC] prevents your current bid from falling on an increment then your current bid will be raised to the next increment as soon as you raise your maximum.
Well, yes. That's how it's expected to work. If your maximum bid is below the increment threshhold then it won't increment your bid. As soon as you raise your maximum bid, if you're already the winner, your bid increases. That's common sense. If eBay is going to lose this lawsuit, there must be more to it than that.
It would be very, very hard to argue that you gave money without previously using the site to download illegal material, or that when you parted with your money you had no hope at all it would result in the continued usage of the illegal service LokiTorrent provided.
Not if you're known for taking principled stands. If you've given money to the EFF and can prove it, you can frame it differently.
"Your honor, I did not use the web site in question to violate copyright laws. I have ethical objections when anyone uses shady legal means to silence free speech. I have given money to other groups who fight such legal abuses. Look, I have bank statements to show how I've donated money to the EFF too."
In other words, its not a guess. Its a set of explanations to explain an observation. Thus, it requires some observations to begin with, and is only used in the context of scientific inquiry.
I never claimed that a hypothesis was a guess. Until it's proved or disproved, it's a belief.
Religion also requires observation. Religions didn't spring forth out of a vacuum.
That's absurd. The founding fathers were typical of their day in terms attitudes, but they were not as extreme as you paint them.
Washington owned slaves. Jefferson owned slaves. Jefferson even carried on a sexual relationship with one of his slaves. It's not absurd. It's historical fact.
The freedoms they espoused were universal and timeless.
Excapt for negros and women.
And while they made some mistakes (the slavery compromise was ultimately proven to be bad), overall, their work was and is timeless.
Several of them were slave owners. Where's the compromise?
Moderation not withstanding, you are incorrect with respect to a few items.
First, if describing the beliefs of deists, why not quote deists themselves?
Deism.org defines deism as "Belief in God as revealed by nature and reason combined with a disbelief in scripture, prophets, superstition and church authority. "
It may be subtle, but that distinction is important.
The separation of church and state was designed to give no one religion a particular upper hand
There is no such separation in the constitution, that was a later construct.
The founding fathers intended there to be no state church because they had seen how a state church becomes a propaganda machine for those in power.
For example, the Church of England was formed primarily because a king wanted a divorce that his church wouldn't grant.
Would you be offended if your child were forced to pray to Allah before every school event?
For his sake, stop it!
It is annoying beyond all explanation when people act as if "Allah" is a proper name. It is not. It's the english spelling of what would best be described as an arabic contraction. "Ah" meaning the and "Illah" meaning God. Allah is a direct translation of "The God".
Thomas Jefferson would not approve of religion being taught in science class for the simple fact that reason is not the same thing as faith. Reason is about taking the measurable, the observable, and the manipulatable and abstracting the process and system by which they work. Faith is about believing, in the absence of reason or evidence, that something must be true for the simple fact that nobody can say that it isn't.
Deism is about reason and observation of nature. As are most other sciences. Don't you think he'd be opposed to it being taught as well?
I suspect that he would. Unanswerable question have no place being taught in school.
Science cannot be about faith. We've got other subjects for religion and philosophy. Science is pure reason, pristine and untouchable.
What then is a hypothesis? It's a belief, one that will either be proved or disproved.
Science is far from untouchable. 100 years ago science said that it wasn't possible for mankind to visit the moon. Science is in a state of flux, it is always changing.
Science named the atom. A the prefix meaning "not" and tom meaning "cut", science said that it wasn't possible to cut the atom. In the 1940s science evolved when it was shown that we can split atoms.
I promise you that if Thomas Jefferson were alive today, there'd be a whole lot of ass kicking going on.
I'll grant you that there'd be a lot of bitching if Jefferson or any of the founding fathers were alive today. We have negros walking free and intermarrying with whites. We have homosexuals trying to get married. We have women voting, holding public office and owning property.
He was an exceptional man in his day, but that day has long since passed.
Why is it whenever anyone mentions X-rays or gamma rays, people freak out about cancer.
Two things. I didn't "freak out", I suggested a possible explanation. And I posited such an explanation because X Rays and gamma radiation are known to cause cancer.
And while these gama ray bursts may happen, they are relatively weak. AND THERE STREAMING UP, NOT DOWN.
Perhaps, but then again perhaps not. They were only able to measure the ones streaming up because THAT'S WHERE THE SATELLITES ARE.
As for my own experiences, I'll say that in the year and a half that I've been an Apple customer, they've never done anything but bend over backwards whenever I've had a problem.
A few years back I worked for an Apple Reseller. One of my customers had a 17" display that was going to go soon. He told me what it was doing, and occasionally the video would wobble. If he cycled the power it would be fine again. I advised him that NOW was the time to get the Applecare Extended warranty. He agreed and purchased one. About a month later, Apple said that his machine had been out of warranty too long to sign up for Applecare. This was during the month that Apple changed their policy about renewing Warranty coverage. He missed the deadline by about a week.
My customer was pretty much left out. A month after that the monitor died. He wasn't covered by his original warranty or Applecare. He asked me what he should do. We decided that I'd call my local Apple Rep and he'd call their SOS-APPL number.
It took one call from me and two from him, but Apple agreed to pay for the repair of his monitor.
I may have issues with Apple as a former Mac user, but they are fantastic about taking care of their customers. Since they have such a small market share, they really need to keep their customers happy and they do.
Slashdot Mirror
Technically, the age of consent in my state is 16. Problem is that there are other laws like "corrupting the morals of a minor" that you can be charged with.
LK
I, for one, welcome our 17 year old female overlords.
In one year, so will I.
LK
RTFA.
No Money. Just applause.
LK
No, the only time the first amendment comes into play is when Congress is involved. The purpose of the amendment is to keep the government from abridging the freedom of speech, or the freedom of religion, or what have you. That's where it starts and stops. It has nothing to say about disputes between individual citizens or between citizens and their employers.
Through the 14th amendment the protections of the first amendment are propagated down to state entities as well.
Since any appropriation of federal funds is done via an act of Congress, anyone who accepts federal funds also has to accept the strings that are attached.
LK
I TOLD YOU SO!
I TOLD YOU SO!
I TOLD YOU SO!
I TOLD YOU SO!
This is precisely the kind of bullshit that we said would happen if McCain-Feingold was passed. We were called paranoid. We were called kooks. Hell, maybe we were, but we were also right.
ANY obstacle to free speech and exchange of ideas will be abused by those who wish to silence those who want to say unpopular things.
A good example is modern Germany. You can be prosecuted if you deny the holocaust. Personally, I think it's a no-brainer that it really happened. I've known holocaust survivors and avoiders, but I think you should be able to say that you don't believe that it happened.
LK
In Soviet Russia, your hard drive backs up YOU.
LK
I loved Carrier Command originally on my Mac Plus. 9 inch screen with one bit greyscale graphic.
I loved the amiga version.
I also loved the DOS version. I still fire up the DOS game via DOSBOX. Damn, I love that game.
LK
I can't wait for the Carrier Command remake to be released.
LK
By that logic, a "taxpayer" is a government institution, and telling someone to STFU would be government-endorsed oppression.
What if someone on welfare, Social Security, SSI or some other assistance program tells you to STFU?
The government is providing them with financial support while they try to impede your right to free speech.
LK
What exactly does it mean for a government agency to "ease" the transition from one kind of TV signal to another?
The FCC wants to get broadcast TV off of it's current portion of the broadcast spectrum so that they can start selling licenses for telecomm use of those same frequencies.
They know that Hollywood will put more effort behind a system that "protects" the digital transmissions so that they don't wind up on the internet. With the backing of the big film studios, the FCC believes that it will be a shorter time until current analog TV is obviated and they can start selling those licenses.
LK
Edison went all the way up to electrocuting horses, and advertised it could be done on people with "Westinghouse's Electric Chair".
Edison even electrocuted an elephant to prove how "Dangerous" AC power was.
Even so, the fact they AC didn't require substations every 3 miles made it more practical for widespread distribution.
LK
Like I didn't have a reason to hate England before.
LK
If you're listening to songs on your iPod, you've already bought them. Either through iTunes, ripping a CD, or maybe you just ripped it off from Kazaa, but no matter what they're not looking at any more sales.
LK
That is a lame picture.
To think that a medium that bolstered the US (and World) Economy via the "dotcom boom" and still generates billions of dollars a year for the pr0n industry would have started out with the transmission of such a stupid picture restores my hope for the future.
LK
In 99.99% of all applications, I totally agree with you. Unless we're talking about specific embedded systems where the number of spare cycles is at a premium, go for the more readable code.
LK
It seems that if your original maximum bid settnig[SIC] prevents your current bid from falling on an increment then your current bid will be raised to the next increment as soon as you raise your maximum.
Well, yes. That's how it's expected to work. If your maximum bid is below the increment threshhold then it won't increment your bid. As soon as you raise your maximum bid, if you're already the winner, your bid increases. That's common sense. If eBay is going to lose this lawsuit, there must be more to it than that.
LK
I can't be googled
Yes you can.
LK
I can be googled, therefore I am.
Me Too.
LK
It would be very, very hard to argue that you gave money without previously using the site to download illegal material, or that when you parted with your money you had no hope at all it would result in the continued usage of the illegal service LokiTorrent provided.
Not if you're known for taking principled stands. If you've given money to the EFF and can prove it, you can frame it differently.
"Your honor, I did not use the web site in question to violate copyright laws. I have ethical objections when anyone uses shady legal means to silence free speech. I have given money to other groups who fight such legal abuses. Look, I have bank statements to show how I've donated money to the EFF too."
LK
If the court even suspects that a juror candidate favours jury nullification, then it will not select him.
You don't have to tell them.
Your political beliefs are no one's business except your own.
LK
If this outrages you, well, it should. Best way to express this is by contributing to any anti-spyware defenese funds that get organized.
That's one way. Another is to rediscover our right of Jury Nullification.
People will quit filing bullshit lawsuits when juries stop handing them victories.
LK
In other words, its not a guess. Its a set of explanations to explain an observation. Thus, it requires some observations to begin with, and is only used in the context of scientific inquiry.
I never claimed that a hypothesis was a guess. Until it's proved or disproved, it's a belief.
Religion also requires observation. Religions didn't spring forth out of a vacuum.
That's absurd. The founding fathers were typical of their day in terms attitudes, but they were not as extreme as you paint them.
Washington owned slaves. Jefferson owned slaves. Jefferson even carried on a sexual relationship with one of his slaves. It's not absurd. It's historical fact.
The freedoms they espoused were universal and timeless.
Excapt for negros and women.
And while they made some mistakes (the slavery compromise was ultimately proven to be bad), overall, their work was and is timeless.
Several of them were slave owners. Where's the compromise?
LK
Moderation not withstanding, you are incorrect with respect to a few items.
First, if describing the beliefs of deists, why not quote deists themselves?
Deism.org defines deism as "Belief in God as revealed by nature and reason combined with a disbelief in scripture, prophets, superstition and church authority. "
It may be subtle, but that distinction is important.
The separation of church and state was designed to give no one religion a particular upper hand
There is no such separation in the constitution, that was a later construct.
The founding fathers intended there to be no state church because they had seen how a state church becomes a propaganda machine for those in power.
For example, the Church of England was formed primarily because a king wanted a divorce that his church wouldn't grant.
Would you be offended if your child were forced to pray to Allah before every school event?
For his sake, stop it!
It is annoying beyond all explanation when people act as if "Allah" is a proper name. It is not. It's the english spelling of what would best be described as an arabic contraction. "Ah" meaning the and "Illah" meaning God. Allah is a direct translation of "The God".
Thomas Jefferson would not approve of religion being taught in science class for the simple fact that reason is not the same thing as faith. Reason is about taking the measurable, the observable, and the manipulatable and abstracting the process and system by which they work. Faith is about believing, in the absence of reason or evidence, that something must be true for the simple fact that nobody can say that it isn't.
Deism is about reason and observation of nature. As are most other sciences. Don't you think he'd be opposed to it being taught as well?
I suspect that he would. Unanswerable question have no place being taught in school.
Science cannot be about faith. We've got other subjects for religion and philosophy. Science is pure reason, pristine and untouchable.
What then is a hypothesis? It's a belief, one that will either be proved or disproved.
Science is far from untouchable. 100 years ago science said that it wasn't possible for mankind to visit the moon. Science is in a state of flux, it is always changing.
Science named the atom. A the prefix meaning "not" and tom meaning "cut", science said that it wasn't possible to cut the atom. In the 1940s science evolved when it was shown that we can split atoms.
I promise you that if Thomas Jefferson were alive today, there'd be a whole lot of ass kicking going on.
I'll grant you that there'd be a lot of bitching if Jefferson or any of the founding fathers were alive today. We have negros walking free and intermarrying with whites. We have homosexuals trying to get married. We have women voting, holding public office and owning property.
He was an exceptional man in his day, but that day has long since passed.
LK
Why is it whenever anyone mentions X-rays or gamma rays, people freak out about cancer.
Two things. I didn't "freak out", I suggested a possible explanation. And I posited such an explanation because X Rays and gamma radiation are known to cause cancer.
And while these gama ray bursts may happen, they are relatively weak. AND THERE STREAMING UP, NOT DOWN.
Perhaps, but then again perhaps not. They were only able to measure the ones streaming up because THAT'S WHERE THE SATELLITES ARE.
LK
As for my own experiences, I'll say that in the year and a half that I've been an Apple customer, they've never done anything but bend over backwards whenever I've had a problem.
A few years back I worked for an Apple Reseller. One of my customers had a 17" display that was going to go soon. He told me what it was doing, and occasionally the video would wobble. If he cycled the power it would be fine again. I advised him that NOW was the time to get the Applecare Extended warranty. He agreed and purchased one. About a month later, Apple said that his machine had been out of warranty too long to sign up for Applecare. This was during the month that Apple changed their policy about renewing Warranty coverage. He missed the deadline by about a week.
My customer was pretty much left out. A month after that the monitor died. He wasn't covered by his original warranty or Applecare. He asked me what he should do. We decided that I'd call my local Apple Rep and he'd call their SOS-APPL number.
It took one call from me and two from him, but Apple agreed to pay for the repair of his monitor.
I may have issues with Apple as a former Mac user, but they are fantastic about taking care of their customers. Since they have such a small market share, they really need to keep their customers happy and they do.
LK