You can download the forms and form a legal entity yourself for under $100 in about 2 hours. What they really need is *startup capital*. They should say that, otherwise, it's misleading.
They have also got to learn a way to earn revenue from a free product. Look at Google. Then they wouldn't have to beg for the money and pretend they are a charity.
That doesn't make them public. Lawyers can subpena relevant bank records, medical records, or any other private data. That doesn't necessarily make them public records, or make them considered as public records.
If a party to a lawsuit makes an admission on Facebook that has bearing on his case, it's just like telling his friends (who also can be subpenaed to testify) only it's in writing. It can be subpenaed and used in court.
Consider an internet posting as a writing that can be used later against you in court, and you will have no surprises.
Before now, there was no governmental control over the internet. the Internet was regulated by NGOs such as ICANN. Now, the FCC has imposed its authority over the internet with this "net neutrality" policy.
"Takeover" is defined as, "To seize with authority". By exerting its supposed authority over the internet, the FCC has indeed made a takeover of the internet. While some may argue that the low level of interference is not a grand takeover, the FCC has asserted authority, and can now impose any regulation it sees fit. Thus, it has seized with authority, and made a takeover of the internet.
As a right-winger myself, I am not that concerned with the actual net neutrality policy. I am concerned with the FCC imposing its authority over the internet without any authorization from Congress. In the last two years, we have seen the government "takeover" the banking industry, the finance industry, the health care industry, the automobile industry, and now the internet. Anyone see a pattern here?
Another article said they eat iron-oxide, ie rust (http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/301139). There are probably some pretty good practical applications for this.
I used to listen to Dr. Demento when I was a kid on KMET in Los Angeles, which is, sadly, also off the air. Then I started listening to this new station that came on the air from a small office building in Pasadena: KROQ.
Exactly. There is no single solution to improve education. The system must be changed to allow free market competition. The millions of choices by millions of students across the country voting with their feet will create the environment for improvements in eduction. This is why school vouchers are a must.
The other wrench in the gears is the teachers' unions. Unions were once necessary, but now they only inhibit.
The key to long term backup is redundancy. Any one solution may have problems over time. I would do your hard drive system as you are doing. I would also use an unlimited online backup service and explore a tape option.
As a lawyer, I can say that there is no protection for the "look and feel" of software. Lotus lost the precedent case against Microsoft for the "look and feel" of Excel.
Generally speaking, there is copyright protection for the game code. Since you are not using original code, you should not have a problem there.
Trademark protection can be for names and likenesses. If the name of your game or the characters of your game are too similar, you may have a trademark violation. However, you can do a trademark search online to see if they are registered (which is required before they can sue you).
The other trademark violation is if the 2 products are confusingly similar. A disclaimer in the About section stating the games are separate may help you there.
Lastly, you will only have to worry if you start making a ton of money. That is when these types of cases come out of the woodwork.
I happend to be reading an interesting book "Them and Us: how Neanderthal predation created modern humans" about how physical, social, and psychological characteristics now seen as uniquely human (ie hairless bodies) are direct results of Neanderthal predation and natural selection.
Trial courts are based at the county level, not the state level. Counties get their revenues from property taxes and sales taxes within their borders, not state income tax. It is wrong to say that Microsoft is avoiding paying the same taxes that fund the courts.
Also, each of the doctrines mentioned in the article has a specific usage. They don't stand alone as a cause of action (lawsuit). The author of the original article is not a lawyer. As they say, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".
Publishing the names of those who signed the petition in order to intimidate them is intolerance. When the anti-Prop 8 people did the same thing, it resulted in people losing their jobs, vandalism, and violence for exercising their right to vote. That is intolerance.
Divorce and adoption are exceptions to the rule. We should not make policy based on the exceptions, but on the rule. For instance, people drive drunk, but that does not mean we should ban driving.
You make think marriage is a right, but it is called a marriage "license". Procreation within the structure of marriage is a right, but as I said, gays cannot procreate.
The point is marriage is not a right, it's a license. The limited purpose of marriage is procreation (although it is not a requirement). Gays cannot procreate. We also limit marriage so you can't marry mulitple spouses, the same gender, immediate family, animals or objects.
Since the dawn of time, the family, consisting of a husband, wife, and their children, has been the fundamental unit of society. Now, gays want to legitimize their recreational lifestyle by demanding marriage. You can do whatever you want in the privacy of your bedroom, but we are not going to alter the whole structure of our civilization for your sexual preference.
I find it ironic that the pro-gay-rights faction preaching tolerance is intolerant of those who vote against their position. They are so intolerant that they select those who don't hold their views and ridicule and excoriate them. Isn't that what they are fighting against?
I'm not sure; most games use some variation of those. I do know that my gamepad is preprogrammed to keyboard keys and different games get different results. I usually end up re-mapping games to my gamepad. Of course, each games has unique key functions, but a reserved portion of the keyboard could accomodate that.
Some standards body should come up with a strict keyboard mapping protocol. This default configuration would be easier for players to learn new games and would lower the barrier for experienced users to try new games.
The author says, "there are so many camera systems that games have yet to fully explore." Like what? There is first person and third person. What else is there?
I think the author blurs immersion with point of view. POV is first person or third person, or other general camera placement.
Immersion is based on interactivity in the environment and identification with the character. Half Life 2, with its advanced physics and material properties broke ground on environmental interactivity. Fallout 3 excelled at character interaction and plot choice, as well as, creating a non-linear map.
POV can aid in immersion. As someone said above, a first person POV is more like the real world.
If game developers want to make games for more casual users, they should decide on a standard control pattern. That is, "f" for forward, "v" for back, "mouse1" for fire, etc. This way, users would not have to learn a whole new set of commands for each game.
Under federal law, most of your household possessions are exempt from execution. In other words, you cannot "lose most of your worldly possessions" as the article states.
The whole story is based on a third-hand account of someone who obviously does not know what they are talking about.
Further, there were no "unkind words" by the judge. The court used the statutory language in awarding attorney's fees to the defendants. This would be a run of the mill case if it did not involve the novel issue of spam.
As a lawyer who has used Pacer for many years, my first reaction was the same. Why am I paying for something with no marginal cost that should be free in the first place? However, look at the alternative: driving down to the courthouse and making physical photocopies at even greater expense.
I then learned that they are using the money to build their IT infrastructure to allow even better access. Of course, they will probably never remove the fees, but $.03 is really quite cheap compared to say, Lexis or Westlaw which charge about $100 per day to access their data without a subscription.
Right now, it is optional for lawyers (some courts even charge you to do it) to file electronic versions of your documents. Eventually, all lawyers will file electronic versions of their documents, and access will be better.
I support public.resource.org which is attempting to make all government laws free online.
Organize the cables by termination, that is, bundle cables going to one device together and combine them with other cables going to nearby devices. Don't overlap the cables. Do power cables in a separate run as they can interfere with certain information carrying cables.
If the cables are different lengths, loop the cables in a spot that can be hidden. Make sure you keep enough slack so you can pull the device out to access the cable terminations.
Slashdot Mirror
You can download the forms and form a legal entity yourself for under $100 in about 2 hours. What they really need is *startup capital*. They should say that, otherwise, it's misleading.
They have also got to learn a way to earn revenue from a free product. Look at Google. Then they wouldn't have to beg for the money and pretend they are a charity.
That doesn't make them public. Lawyers can subpena relevant bank records, medical records, or any other private data. That doesn't necessarily make them public records, or make them considered as public records.
If a party to a lawsuit makes an admission on Facebook that has bearing on his case, it's just like telling his friends (who also can be subpenaed to testify) only it's in writing. It can be subpenaed and used in court.
Consider an internet posting as a writing that can be used later against you in court, and you will have no surprises.
Before now, there was no governmental control over the internet. the Internet was regulated by NGOs such as ICANN. Now, the FCC has imposed its authority over the internet with this "net neutrality" policy.
"Takeover" is defined as, "To seize with authority". By exerting its supposed authority over the internet, the FCC has indeed made a takeover of the internet. While some may argue that the low level of interference is not a grand takeover, the FCC has asserted authority, and can now impose any regulation it sees fit. Thus, it has seized with authority, and made a takeover of the internet.
As a right-winger myself, I am not that concerned with the actual net neutrality policy. I am concerned with the FCC imposing its authority over the internet without any authorization from Congress. In the last two years, we have seen the government "takeover" the banking industry, the finance industry, the health care industry, the automobile industry, and now the internet. Anyone see a pattern here?
Another article said they eat iron-oxide, ie rust (http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/301139). There are probably some pretty good practical applications for this.
I used to listen to Dr. Demento when I was a kid on KMET in Los Angeles, which is, sadly, also off the air. Then I started listening to this new station that came on the air from a small office building in Pasadena: KROQ.
It's Lieberman's bill to give the executive branch, ie Obama, the power. Lieberman would give Obama the power to take over the internet.
Will Smith will play a black president who will save the day. Any similarities to actual people or events are coincidence, of course.
Exactly. There is no single solution to improve education. The system must be changed to allow free market competition. The millions of choices by millions of students across the country voting with their feet will create the environment for improvements in eduction. This is why school vouchers are a must.
The other wrench in the gears is the teachers' unions. Unions were once necessary, but now they only inhibit.
The key to long term backup is redundancy. Any one solution may have problems over time. I would do your hard drive system as you are doing. I would also use an unlimited online backup service and explore a tape option.
As a lawyer, I can say that there is no protection for the "look and feel" of software. Lotus lost the precedent case against Microsoft for the "look and feel" of Excel.
Generally speaking, there is copyright protection for the game code. Since you are not using original code, you should not have a problem there.
Trademark protection can be for names and likenesses. If the name of your game or the characters of your game are too similar, you may have a trademark violation. However, you can do a trademark search online to see if they are registered (which is required before they can sue you).
The other trademark violation is if the 2 products are confusingly similar. A disclaimer in the About section stating the games are separate may help you there.
Lastly, you will only have to worry if you start making a ton of money. That is when these types of cases come out of the woodwork.
I don't know what the Voynich Manuscript is, so I think I'll look it up on Wikipedia.
I happend to be reading an interesting book "Them and Us: how Neanderthal predation created modern humans" about how physical, social, and psychological characteristics now seen as uniquely human (ie hairless bodies) are direct results of Neanderthal predation and natural selection.
Here's an article summarizing the book:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0909/S00246.htm
A must read if you are interested in this topic.
Trial courts are based at the county level, not the state level. Counties get their revenues from property taxes and sales taxes within their borders, not state income tax. It is wrong to say that Microsoft is avoiding paying the same taxes that fund the courts.
Also, each of the doctrines mentioned in the article has a specific usage. They don't stand alone as a cause of action (lawsuit). The author of the original article is not a lawyer. As they say, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".
Publishing the names of those who signed the petition in order to intimidate them is intolerance. When the anti-Prop 8 people did the same thing, it resulted in people losing their jobs, vandalism, and violence for exercising their right to vote. That is intolerance.
Divorce and adoption are exceptions to the rule. We should not make policy based on the exceptions, but on the rule. For instance, people drive drunk, but that does not mean we should ban driving.
You make think marriage is a right, but it is called a marriage "license". Procreation within the structure of marriage is a right, but as I said, gays cannot procreate.
The point is marriage is not a right, it's a license. The limited purpose of marriage is procreation (although it is not a requirement). Gays cannot procreate. We also limit marriage so you can't marry mulitple spouses, the same gender, immediate family, animals or objects.
Since the dawn of time, the family, consisting of a husband, wife, and their children, has been the fundamental unit of society. Now, gays want to legitimize their recreational lifestyle by demanding marriage. You can do whatever you want in the privacy of your bedroom, but we are not going to alter the whole structure of our civilization for your sexual preference.
I find it ironic that the pro-gay-rights faction preaching tolerance is intolerant of those who vote against their position. They are so intolerant that they select those who don't hold their views and ridicule and excoriate them. Isn't that what they are fighting against?
I can't marry my dog, what's your point? If you have a loved one dying in a hospital download the one-page Health Care Power of Attorney form.
I'm not sure; most games use some variation of those. I do know that my gamepad is preprogrammed to keyboard keys and different games get different results. I usually end up re-mapping games to my gamepad. Of course, each games has unique key functions, but a reserved portion of the keyboard could accomodate that.
Some standards body should come up with a strict keyboard mapping protocol. This default configuration would be easier for players to learn new games and would lower the barrier for experienced users to try new games.
The author says, "there are so many camera systems that games have yet to fully explore." Like what? There is first person and third person. What else is there?
I think the author blurs immersion with point of view. POV is first person or third person, or other general camera placement.
Immersion is based on interactivity in the environment and identification with the character. Half Life 2, with its advanced physics and material properties broke ground on environmental interactivity. Fallout 3 excelled at character interaction and plot choice, as well as, creating a non-linear map.
POV can aid in immersion. As someone said above, a first person POV is more like the real world.
If game developers want to make games for more casual users, they should decide on a standard control pattern. That is, "f" for forward, "v" for back, "mouse1" for fire, etc. This way, users would not have to learn a whole new set of commands for each game.
Those San Francisco lefties did it because they hate our country.
Under federal law, most of your household possessions are exempt from execution. In other words, you cannot "lose most of your worldly possessions" as the article states.
The whole story is based on a third-hand account of someone who obviously does not know what they are talking about.
Further, there were no "unkind words" by the judge. The court used the statutory language in awarding attorney's fees to the defendants. This would be a run of the mill case if it did not involve the novel issue of spam.
You are missing the point. They make it difficult on purpose in order to reap the real revenue: parking tickets.
As a lawyer who has used Pacer for many years, my first reaction was the same. Why am I paying for something with no marginal cost that should be free in the first place? However, look at the alternative: driving down to the courthouse and making physical photocopies at even greater expense.
I then learned that they are using the money to build their IT infrastructure to allow even better access. Of course, they will probably never remove the fees, but $.03 is really quite cheap compared to say, Lexis or Westlaw which charge about $100 per day to access their data without a subscription.
Right now, it is optional for lawyers (some courts even charge you to do it) to file electronic versions of your documents. Eventually, all lawyers will file electronic versions of their documents, and access will be better.
I support public.resource.org which is attempting to make all government laws free online.
The wheels of justice move slowly but surely.
Use a velcro product called rip wrap to tie your cables together.
http://cableorganizer.com/ripwrap/?src=froogle&CAWELAID=261927836
Organize the cables by termination, that is, bundle cables going to one device together and combine them with other cables going to nearby devices. Don't overlap the cables. Do power cables in a separate run as they can interfere with certain information carrying cables.
If the cables are different lengths, loop the cables in a spot that can be hidden. Make sure you keep enough slack so you can pull the device out to access the cable terminations.