Taxing carbon use? Let's see... sure, let's call that a tax increase, too. What with it being, you know, a tax and whatnot.
how about you just stop throwing millions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere???
then you do not pay a "carbon tax"... in fact, can it be called a tax when you only need to pay if if you cause an environmental problem that others will need to clean up somehow... sounds like a fine to me, much like you get fined if your dog fouls the pavement...
or, you could just keep increasing the amount of carbon being pumped into the air and pay no immediate tax/fine and make no effort to clean it up... and the tax you pay can be events like hurricane katrina, increasing frequency on an exponential scale... even cheaper if you don't bother rushing things like medical aid or water to the survivors after these events occur (but i see people like you already thought of that).
you are seriously, honestly saying that bush and his cronies did not ENTIRELY cause the current worldwide recession with their corrupt, thieving, warmongering ways?
it's all the fault of the party that had no power, that had had the american economy in pretty good shape, with a fairly bright future when they lost the election to bush???
jesusssss effing christ on a bike...
you really don't think in any way spending trillions of dollars to fight unethical wars of aggression on multiple fronts over very long periods of time (making themselves EXTREMELY rich in the process) had anything to do with the ASS SANDWICH that we are all being forced to eat right now???
ok, fine... i guess those 29 automatic rifle are your constitutional right to own... just remember the have the WHOLE cult shoot at the FBI and drink poison before the ATF bursts in, not just yourself...
a case like yours is entirely the reason why they use the wording "dominant language" rather than "native language"
generally it will refer to whichever language you are most comfortable and commonly using day to day at the time of the study.
so, in your case, if the study were undertaken as you wrote that response, english will be your dominant language as you admit using it more now and you seem very comfortable speaking entirely in english.
it did actually say "bilinguals curse more in their dominant languages".
therefore your point about swearing more often in your non-dominant language is entirely valid, regardless of whether you are reserving the more emotionally involved swearing for when you really need it, you are still debunking the entire basis for that paper.
although i think it is a very poor choice to call it "cursing". you are swearing, not making a curse.
i am not fully fluent in languages other than english really, so i cannot submit my case to that study, but i do speak several other languages to some extent and i do find myself swearing in those languages probably as often as i do in english.
i could not even really tell you which language i swear the most in, and it is mostly reflex action when i do it, so i would not say i am controlling it either.
yes, a lot of cheaper alternatives exist. but i doubt productivity with those devices is especially high...
complexity of the interface and responsiveness are probably factors.
it WILL be a hard slog for apple to make inroads into entrenched corporate environments, but their ease of use and power give them a big advantage. financial outlay is less important in a corporate environment than productivity.
personally, i am hoping the iphone takes off in a big way in the corporate world, not because i care about corporations, but because that will make the iphone cheaper for the rest of us in the long run and will make carrier exclusivity less likely once the initial contracts expire.
an unlocked iphone generation 4 for £100 ($200), contract free in 2 years? yes please, i'll take 2...
lol, insults are the first refuge of the stupid and they don't make your point more valid, they just make you look pathetic and insecure.
you say my point is wrong, then go on to say my point hits the spirit of the law exactly, lol
so then, i am exactly right, thanks for supporting me.
also, lying about what i said doesn't make me wrong.
nowhere do i recall saying that criminal copyright infringement does not exist. in fact, copying copyrighted material with intention of selling it for financial gain is criminal. the police arrest people for this all the time, people go to prison for it, it's probably pretty much universally known to be criminal.
however, for personal use, with no intention of selling, distrubition, etc, it is not criminal, has never been criminal. it may change one day, though.
it's also been an acceptable part of life since it was even possible... your parents brought cassetes to their friends to record LPs in the '70s, etc, etc.
the links you posted are of american laws, so they are pretty much irrelevant for me... but even though, they are pretty similar to our laws and state right there in the first line "(A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain". it goes on to state a ton of other crap that i did not read, because it has no rellevance for me, but even in that first line you can see the intent is not to criminalise everyone who has taped an LP or recorded a TV show and kept it. if they had wanted to do that, it would state something like "any individual who makes any kind of copy of any type of media, design or idea without written permission from the copyright holder". it doesn't say anything like that.
in other words, the USA might have slightly different laws, but my point was just as valid. i hesitate to say "correct", because it is highly simplified, but it does stand. if you copy that audio cd, or that game cd, you have broken the law, but NOT criminal law, it's only civil law.
i do not condone anything, this is just how it is. the sale of blank audio cassettes, blank video cassettes, blank CD-Rs, blank DVD-Rs, etc have always been VERY high. it's very well known that most of this is going to be used for copyright infringement, but the sale is still allowed because there are legitimate uses for blank media and most of this infringement is never prosecuted, and it would be impossible to ever prosecute it all civilly. no one would really consider you a criminal for taping the radio.
so, despite your insults, in your obtuseness you did nothing but support my point in the first instance, and argue against me by linking something that actually supports what i said in the first place in the second instance.
by the way, breaking the law and being a criminal are not the same thing. you can blantantly break a law, get sued, lose, pay damages and STILL never have been criminally prosecuted, never face jail time, never have a criminal record. hence, it was illegal, not criminal.
lol, it must suck to always be wrong like you. better watch your blood pressure...
let's hope those laws in Belgium are strong enough to ban tying a contract to a sale as well as banning locking of the phone...
if so, i'll be prepared to make an iphone run to there, for use on vodaphone in the UK, and i have a friend in the US who also wants and unlocked one for use there, knowing full well the american market has no chance to being close to offering a fair deal on it.
any price up to about 3 times the subsidised price will be acceptable, any more than that and i'll have to take pause and think about it...
by "additional contracts" for windows, would you be refering to the EULA?
did you notice that is does not say contract anywhere, it says EULA.
the reason for this is that a contract must include fair terms and full disclosure BEFORE agreement.
and EULA is not presented until AFTER purchase, and you do not physically sign it, you just click a box.
even if you print an EULA out, it would not be worth the paper it is printed on. as far as i know, an EULA has never been enforcable through legal procedings, and would be very unlikely to ever stand up in any western court if it were ever attempted.
basically, don't bother even reading them, it is just an extra screen to click past in an installer, it's not binding and you can ignore any part of it you don't like.
it's not a parliament, there is zero seperation of laws in Wales from England, they just have English law there.
Scotland has different laws from England, and different from the English law that rules Wales. The Scottish parliament can pass legislation into Scottish law, the Welsh assembly cannot. This is what seperates a parliament from an assembly and it is a very dinstinct difference.
it goes back to the fact that Wales was integrated much earlier and with less fuss than Scotland.
Scotland was brought into the union by a SCOTTISH king, not by an English king. in other words, the union there came about by a Scottish king ruling England and Wales, not the other way around.
many people can take offense at this, or wish it were different, but that is how it is.
i have had contract phones in the past, never again...
i am not entirely sure if you are saying you will own the phone you just got after two years, or if they will replace it after two years...
either way, the iphone contract was not two years here, the longest consumer contract you can get is 18 months, and that is what the iphone was...
it was yours from day one, there was no subsidy paid for it.
i have had subsidised contract phones before. nowhere does it state that you do not own the phone. you just get the bribe of the subsidy for signing the contract, then they make their money on that contract. they include the ETF to protect their profit in the event of you terminating your contract early.
maybe this "new phone after 2 years" you are refering to is the free upgrade they will give you once you complete the first contract, as an incentive to make you sign for another two years...
a person from Northern Ireland is a British Citizen, despite being in the UK and not in Great Britain.
a person from a British territory that is not part of the UK, but is a dependant nation of the UK is a British Subject.
technically, Great Britain does refer to the union of English, Wales and Scotland, but in all practical senses, the terms "British Citizen" and "UK Citizen" are entirely interchangable, and even government websites use either in places
Scotland has ALWAYS been semi-automous, with seperate laws, its own monetary notes, etc.
Wales is not actually technically seperate from england, does not have an official flag, does not have seperate laws, etc
Scotland does have it's own parliament now, with SOME powers within Scottish borders.
Wales and England do NOT have their own parliaments, they only have the NATIONAL UK parliament, which Scotland is also represented in, in addition to their own Scottish parliament.
Wales has the Welsh Assembly, it is not a parliament.
in all this mess, the ones who are LEAST represented are the ones in the great majority, ie, the English... they are the largest population, pay by far the most tax, get the worst services and have the smallest voice in politics now... democracy my ass...
O2 have stated they will offer a PAYG option on the iphone 3G, it will be either no sibsidy, or minimal subsidy...
still not good for those of use who do not want O2 (probably the vast majority, O2 are crap), the phones will all be locked to O2 here.
i can see myself hopping over to belgium on a cheap flight and picking one up there. as far as i know, phone locking is illegal there and they must be free to be used with any carrier. sure, there will be zero subsidy, it's worth it.
apple have announced they will sell it in belgium, and they announced that all iphones will come with all languages...
sounds like belgium will have runaway iphone sales...
i don't know so much about the rest of Europe, but here in the UK PAYG is becoming the norm, and has been for a while.
of course, business users often still need the thousands of minutes per month that is normal in a contract, but PAYG can cost less than $5/month to normal consumers and represents a much better deal.
i even get unlimited calls, day and night, for free to 4 family members and i pay less than $5/month (about £30/year) (i rarely make calls outside those 4 people).
you can't spit without hitting 5 different billboards advertising different PAYG deals here.
all very good, and i remember here in the UK having all the same phones, which were leased from BT also, the single phone company here until deregulation...
but it doesn't change the fact that you are NOT leasing that mobile phone that you bought with a subsidy from the carrier.
there is NOWHERE on your monthly bill that says anything like "phone lease charge"
sibsidies are like BRIBES to get you onto their network with cheaper phones, often below cost... for the simple reason that they REAM you on the contract, it's pretty much pure profit for them baby, so they'll take the hit of bribing you to get you giving them that monthly fee.
Slashdot Mirror
totally unworkable
who is to say that one report is ripping off another?
or that another report is not ripping off the first?
impossible to police, even harder to prosecute.
do you have a gran torino parked in your carhole by any chance?
and less of the "people punching you in the face to shut you up" side-effects also...
if it were, then the choice of word would not matter at all. only the manner in which you spoke it would matter.
so, no, it is not like "chi" or whatever at all.
"may you one day regret your actions here": cursing
"XXXX you, you XXXXXX-XXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXX": swearing
really not that hard to get...
Taxing carbon use? Let's see... sure, let's call that a tax increase, too. What with it being, you know, a tax and whatnot.
how about you just stop throwing millions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere???
then you do not pay a "carbon tax"... in fact, can it be called a tax when you only need to pay if if you cause an environmental problem that others will need to clean up somehow... sounds like a fine to me, much like you get fined if your dog fouls the pavement...
or, you could just keep increasing the amount of carbon being pumped into the air and pay no immediate tax/fine and make no effort to clean it up... and the tax you pay can be events like hurricane katrina, increasing frequency on an exponential scale... even cheaper if you don't bother rushing things like medical aid or water to the survivors after these events occur (but i see people like you already thought of that).
you are seriously, honestly saying that bush and his cronies did not ENTIRELY cause the current worldwide recession with their corrupt, thieving, warmongering ways?
it's all the fault of the party that had no power, that had had the american economy in pretty good shape, with a fairly bright future when they lost the election to bush???
jesusssss effing christ on a bike...
you really don't think in any way spending trillions of dollars to fight unethical wars of aggression on multiple fronts over very long periods of time (making themselves EXTREMELY rich in the process) had anything to do with the ASS SANDWICH that we are all being forced to eat right now???
ok, fine... i guess those 29 automatic rifle are your constitutional right to own... just remember the have the WHOLE cult shoot at the FBI and drink poison before the ATF bursts in, not just yourself...
Don't mod this up or you never mod again. The first rule of Slashdot is permaban for anyone who talks about Slashdot on Slashdot.
the first rule of slashdot is you don't talk about slashdot?
the second rule of slashdot is YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT SLASHDOT? ...jeez...
a case like yours is entirely the reason why they use the wording "dominant language" rather than "native language"
generally it will refer to whichever language you are most comfortable and commonly using day to day at the time of the study.
so, in your case, if the study were undertaken as you wrote that response, english will be your dominant language as you admit using it more now and you seem very comfortable speaking entirely in english.
it did actually say "bilinguals curse more in their dominant languages".
therefore your point about swearing more often in your non-dominant language is entirely valid, regardless of whether you are reserving the more emotionally involved swearing for when you really need it, you are still debunking the entire basis for that paper.
although i think it is a very poor choice to call it "cursing". you are swearing, not making a curse.
i am not fully fluent in languages other than english really, so i cannot submit my case to that study, but i do speak several other languages to some extent and i do find myself swearing in those languages probably as often as i do in english.
i could not even really tell you which language i swear the most in, and it is mostly reflex action when i do it, so i would not say i am controlling it either.
yes, a lot of cheaper alternatives exist. but i doubt productivity with those devices is especially high...
complexity of the interface and responsiveness are probably factors.
it WILL be a hard slog for apple to make inroads into entrenched corporate environments, but their ease of use and power give them a big advantage. financial outlay is less important in a corporate environment than productivity.
personally, i am hoping the iphone takes off in a big way in the corporate world, not because i care about corporations, but because that will make the iphone cheaper for the rest of us in the long run and will make carrier exclusivity less likely once the initial contracts expire.
an unlocked iphone generation 4 for £100 ($200), contract free in 2 years? yes please, i'll take 2...
lol, insults are the first refuge of the stupid and they don't make your point more valid, they just make you look pathetic and insecure.
you say my point is wrong, then go on to say my point hits the spirit of the law exactly, lol
so then, i am exactly right, thanks for supporting me.
also, lying about what i said doesn't make me wrong.
nowhere do i recall saying that criminal copyright infringement does not exist. in fact, copying copyrighted material with intention of selling it for financial gain is criminal. the police arrest people for this all the time, people go to prison for it, it's probably pretty much universally known to be criminal.
however, for personal use, with no intention of selling, distrubition, etc, it is not criminal, has never been criminal. it may change one day, though.
it's also been an acceptable part of life since it was even possible... your parents brought cassetes to their friends to record LPs in the '70s, etc, etc.
the links you posted are of american laws, so they are pretty much irrelevant for me... but even though, they are pretty similar to our laws and state right there in the first line "(A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain". it goes on to state a ton of other crap that i did not read, because it has no rellevance for me, but even in that first line you can see the intent is not to criminalise everyone who has taped an LP or recorded a TV show and kept it. if they had wanted to do that, it would state something like "any individual who makes any kind of copy of any type of media, design or idea without written permission from the copyright holder". it doesn't say anything like that.
in other words, the USA might have slightly different laws, but my point was just as valid. i hesitate to say "correct", because it is highly simplified, but it does stand. if you copy that audio cd, or that game cd, you have broken the law, but NOT criminal law, it's only civil law.
i do not condone anything, this is just how it is. the sale of blank audio cassettes, blank video cassettes, blank CD-Rs, blank DVD-Rs, etc have always been VERY high. it's very well known that most of this is going to be used for copyright infringement, but the sale is still allowed because there are legitimate uses for blank media and most of this infringement is never prosecuted, and it would be impossible to ever prosecute it all civilly. no one would really consider you a criminal for taping the radio.
so, despite your insults, in your obtuseness you did nothing but support my point in the first instance, and argue against me by linking something that actually supports what i said in the first place in the second instance.
by the way, breaking the law and being a criminal are not the same thing. you can blantantly break a law, get sued, lose, pay damages and STILL never have been criminally prosecuted, never face jail time, never have a criminal record. hence, it was illegal, not criminal.
lol, it must suck to always be wrong like you. better watch your blood pressure...
not that it really matters anyway... will it even be out this decade?
we'll probably be on the iphone version 6 by the time you see any for sale.
let's hope those laws in Belgium are strong enough to ban tying a contract to a sale as well as banning locking of the phone...
if so, i'll be prepared to make an iphone run to there, for use on vodaphone in the UK, and i have a friend in the US who also wants and unlocked one for use there, knowing full well the american market has no chance to being close to offering a fair deal on it.
any price up to about 3 times the subsidised price will be acceptable, any more than that and i'll have to take pause and think about it...
by "additional contracts" for windows, would you be refering to the EULA?
did you notice that is does not say contract anywhere, it says EULA.
the reason for this is that a contract must include fair terms and full disclosure BEFORE agreement.
and EULA is not presented until AFTER purchase, and you do not physically sign it, you just click a box.
even if you print an EULA out, it would not be worth the paper it is printed on. as far as i know, an EULA has never been enforcable through legal procedings, and would be very unlikely to ever stand up in any western court if it were ever attempted.
basically, don't bother even reading them, it is just an extra screen to click past in an installer, it's not binding and you can ignore any part of it you don't like.
it's similar to a parliament, no doubt about it.
it's not a parliament, there is zero seperation of laws in Wales from England, they just have English law there.
Scotland has different laws from England, and different from the English law that rules Wales. The Scottish parliament can pass legislation into Scottish law, the Welsh assembly cannot. This is what seperates a parliament from an assembly and it is a very dinstinct difference.
it goes back to the fact that Wales was integrated much earlier and with less fuss than Scotland.
Scotland was brought into the union by a SCOTTISH king, not by an English king. in other words, the union there came about by a Scottish king ruling England and Wales, not the other way around.
many people can take offense at this, or wish it were different, but that is how it is.
i have had contract phones in the past, never again...
i am not entirely sure if you are saying you will own the phone you just got after two years, or if they will replace it after two years...
either way, the iphone contract was not two years here, the longest consumer contract you can get is 18 months, and that is what the iphone was...
it was yours from day one, there was no subsidy paid for it.
i have had subsidised contract phones before. nowhere does it state that you do not own the phone. you just get the bribe of the subsidy for signing the contract, then they make their money on that contract. they include the ETF to protect their profit in the event of you terminating your contract early.
maybe this "new phone after 2 years" you are refering to is the free upgrade they will give you once you complete the first contract, as an incentive to make you sign for another two years...
a person from Northern Ireland is a British Citizen, despite being in the UK and not in Great Britain.
a person from a British territory that is not part of the UK, but is a dependant nation of the UK is a British Subject.
technically, Great Britain does refer to the union of English, Wales and Scotland, but in all practical senses, the terms "British Citizen" and "UK Citizen" are entirely interchangable, and even government websites use either in places
i don't hear of many people saying they are "Iowanian", but Iowa is a state in the USA...
pretty sure they just say they are American, America being the country, Iowa being a semi-autonomous part of that country.
same sort of thing here, but less of the semi-autonomous nature, except in Scotland
because "Queendom" is a word used to refer to a state of utter campness in homosexuals.
completely wrong.
Great Britain is a country
Scotland has ALWAYS been semi-automous, with seperate laws, its own monetary notes, etc.
Wales is not actually technically seperate from england, does not have an official flag, does not have seperate laws, etc
Scotland does have it's own parliament now, with SOME powers within Scottish borders.
Wales and England do NOT have their own parliaments, they only have the NATIONAL UK parliament, which Scotland is also represented in, in addition to their own Scottish parliament.
Wales has the Welsh Assembly, it is not a parliament.
in all this mess, the ones who are LEAST represented are the ones in the great majority, ie, the English... they are the largest population, pay by far the most tax, get the worst services and have the smallest voice in politics now... democracy my ass...
who told you that it's illegal to burn down a property you own???
you MAY have to inform some authorities, or you may just be recommended to do so.
and it will probably become illegal if you do it in a way to endanger other property or lives.
but that does not make burning down your own house illegal in the right conditions
O2 have stated they will offer a PAYG option on the iphone 3G, it will be either no sibsidy, or minimal subsidy...
still not good for those of use who do not want O2 (probably the vast majority, O2 are crap), the phones will all be locked to O2 here.
i can see myself hopping over to belgium on a cheap flight and picking one up there. as far as i know, phone locking is illegal there and they must be free to be used with any carrier. sure, there will be zero subsidy, it's worth it.
apple have announced they will sell it in belgium, and they announced that all iphones will come with all languages...
sounds like belgium will have runaway iphone sales...
i don't know so much about the rest of Europe, but here in the UK PAYG is becoming the norm, and has been for a while.
of course, business users often still need the thousands of minutes per month that is normal in a contract, but PAYG can cost less than $5/month to normal consumers and represents a much better deal.
i even get unlimited calls, day and night, for free to 4 family members and i pay less than $5/month (about £30/year) (i rarely make calls outside those 4 people).
you can't spit without hitting 5 different billboards advertising different PAYG deals here.
all very good, and i remember here in the UK having all the same phones, which were leased from BT also, the single phone company here until deregulation...
but it doesn't change the fact that you are NOT leasing that mobile phone that you bought with a subsidy from the carrier.
there is NOWHERE on your monthly bill that says anything like "phone lease charge"
sibsidies are like BRIBES to get you onto their network with cheaper phones, often below cost... for the simple reason that they REAM you on the contract, it's pretty much pure profit for them baby, so they'll take the hit of bribing you to get you giving them that monthly fee.