Yes, it is - and if Australia were not an island, then despite being several times smaller Greenland would take the title of "world's largest island"...
Australia is indeed an island, being a landmass completely surrounded by water within the boundary of a single tectonic plate. Yes, some people claim that nothing that big can be an island; I'd be curious how many of them are from Greenland.:)
Personally, I would enjoy being a billionaire coder, though I'd also involve myself in a lot of philanthropic work. That much money could do a lot of good.
Ah. I think the problem is that we weren't debating using the same definition of "speech". Once we do that, then I can be the one to fail the argument! Nevermind.:)
Granted, but your examples imply the presence of some kind of carrot or stick coming out if the words don't work. Whether it's money or threats of implicit violence, that's not just speech.
IANAL. I thought extortion involved threatening to make it worse for someone if they don't hand over their stuff, not offering to let them keep it (what the court granted you permission to take) if they'll stop trying to make it worse for you...
This means that *NOTHING* created by artists, musicians, or *ANY* of the culture created today will move into the public domain in your lifetime (expected lifetime) unless the people or companies who control the rights let you have access to it through licensing or sales.
Why exactly is this a problem?
We are shaped by the culture we live in. Would you prefer one based on sharing or selfishness?
Really. Guess I'm not a big enough Batman (Joker) fan, or more likely I associate the Joker far more with his earlier snappily-dressed incarnations than the grunge style used in Dark Knight (insert "get off my lawn" joke here).
When I first saw the "Obama as Joker" "parody", I actually didn't think of the Joker at all. To me it was just a picture of Obama from Time that someone had smeared makeup on, parody's equivalent of a script kiddie. My reaction? "Meh." Now your idea of Obama on a Potter cover with the witticism? At least that would be obvious parody.
I live in neither country, but I'd still like to know the source for claiming it's illegal in the US, whether in a particular circumstance (e.g. "the lab they used also identified your honor's sample as coming from a small gerbil") or generally ("the method they relied upon to collect the DNA has been thoroughly debunked in the latest issue of Mad Scientists Weekly"). My weak google-fu hasn't netted me anything. Have I misunderstood?
P.S. My sympathies. Hopefully whatever passes in government circles for sanity will prevail.
A1. Yes.
A2. Objective.
A3. BAC is (a) a single number measuring a complex system, determined by equipment that is (b) susceptible to false positives and (c) reliant on being properly and regularly calibrated by the officers themselves (AFAIK, your jurisdiction and technology may differ). That said, this new technology may (hopefully) take care of any/all above issues?
A4. Not applicable (see A2).
But if you drive with a BAC over the legal limit, whatever that limit is, then you're breaking the law and you deserve to be thrown in jail. Period.
BAC 0.00? And is that a "good" jail or a "bad" jail, because I don't want to need a STD check afterwards.
The first time it happened I treated it like a police encounter ("No sir, I'm not aware," "am I being detained, or am I free to go?" "I don't have anything to say without my lawyer present."). I ended up missing my flight, missing a job interview, wasting a few hours in a security checkpoint waiting room, and getting nothing back in return - even with my lawyer's involvement.
Since then I've just played nice. I'm more interested in getting to my destination than being a martyr. It's one of those "You'd be right, but you'd still lose" scenarios.
I wonder: if enough people did every time what you did only once - exercise your rights - how quickly would the security theatre grind to a halt?
You're basically asking that some country that's been properly maintained allow you in, even though you've demonstrated your inability to maintain the government you have now.
Alternatively he's demonstrated an ability to notice a big leak below the waterline and that the armed crew of the ship are manipulating most of the passengers into ignoring said hole, and has weighed the risks and decided he can achieve more on some other ship where most of the passengers aren't quite so manipulable.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it is - and if Australia were not an island, then despite being several times smaller Greenland would take the title of "world's largest island"...
Australia is indeed an island, being a landmass completely surrounded by water within the boundary of a single tectonic plate. Yes, some people claim that nothing that big can be an island; I'd be curious how many of them are from Greenland. :)
Personally, I would enjoy being a billionaire coder, though I'd also involve myself in a lot of philanthropic work. That much money could do a lot of good.
Because such a cure would be worse than the disease; we don't need nor want that much bureaucracy.
Ah. I think the problem is that we weren't debating using the same definition of "speech". Once we do that, then I can be the one to fail the argument! Nevermind. :)
Granted, but your examples imply the presence of some kind of carrot or stick coming out if the words don't work. Whether it's money or threats of implicit violence, that's not just speech.
I think the part where you hired them with money ruins the rest of your attempted argument.
You appear to be under the impression that this can only happen once.
Childs might disagree with you on that one.
An idiot with a backhoe could damage the network. Justice is neither being done nor being seen to be done.
I occasionally wonder how the gov plans to regulate molecular assemblers. Some nuke designs don't need fissile material.
Just don't miss your first shot with that pocket howitzer. The recoil's almost as bad as the bear. :)
IANAL. I thought extortion involved threatening to make it worse for someone if they don't hand over their stuff, not offering to let them keep it (what the court granted you permission to take) if they'll stop trying to make it worse for you...
This means that *NOTHING* created by artists, musicians, or *ANY* of the culture created today will move into the public domain in your lifetime (expected lifetime) unless the people or companies who control the rights let you have access to it through licensing or sales.
Why exactly is this a problem?
We are shaped by the culture we live in. Would you prefer one based on sharing or selfishness?
Really. Guess I'm not a big enough Batman (Joker) fan, or more likely I associate the Joker far more with his earlier snappily-dressed incarnations than the grunge style used in Dark Knight (insert "get off my lawn" joke here).
When I first saw the "Obama as Joker" "parody", I actually didn't think of the Joker at all. To me it was just a picture of Obama from Time that someone had smeared makeup on, parody's equivalent of a script kiddie. My reaction? "Meh." Now your idea of Obama on a Potter cover with the witticism? At least that would be obvious parody.
I live in neither country, but I'd still like to know the source for claiming it's illegal in the US, whether in a particular circumstance (e.g. "the lab they used also identified your honor's sample as coming from a small gerbil") or generally ("the method they relied upon to collect the DNA has been thoroughly debunked in the latest issue of Mad Scientists Weekly"). My weak google-fu hasn't netted me anything. Have I misunderstood?
P.S. My sympathies. Hopefully whatever passes in government circles for sanity will prevail.
Citation needed?
Um, what's to stop a Microsoft that decides to start fresh from creating their own "WINE" or even using WINE themselves?
A2. Objective.
A3. BAC is (a) a single number measuring a complex system, determined by equipment that is (b) susceptible to false positives and (c) reliant on being properly and regularly calibrated by the officers themselves (AFAIK, your jurisdiction and technology may differ). That said, this new technology may (hopefully) take care of any/all above issues?
A4. Not applicable (see A2).
BAC 0.00? And is that a "good" jail or a "bad" jail, because I don't want to need a STD check afterwards.
Not unless your blender has a "bend, fold, spindle and mutilate" setting.
Of course, this presumes all he did was leave a note. If he actually vandalised my stuff...
Me? "Cool, how'd you like to be paid to do that?" And then I'd fire the punk who hadn't even bothered to change the default manufacturer passwords!
20 years and the social stigma may be carrying around that old junk when all the cool kids have neural links.
The first time it happened I treated it like a police encounter ("No sir, I'm not aware," "am I being detained, or am I free to go?" "I don't have anything to say without my lawyer present."). I ended up missing my flight, missing a job interview, wasting a few hours in a security checkpoint waiting room, and getting nothing back in return - even with my lawyer's involvement.
Since then I've just played nice. I'm more interested in getting to my destination than being a martyr. It's one of those "You'd be right, but you'd still lose" scenarios.
I wonder: if enough people did every time what you did only once - exercise your rights - how quickly would the security theatre grind to a halt?
You're basically asking that some country that's been properly maintained allow you in, even though you've demonstrated your inability to maintain the government you have now.
Alternatively he's demonstrated an ability to notice a big leak below the waterline and that the armed crew of the ship are manipulating most of the passengers into ignoring said hole, and has weighed the risks and decided he can achieve more on some other ship where most of the passengers aren't quite so manipulable.