Though I disagree with doing such a thing, that seems to me to be the only thing that would make sense. Give it to people before they are an addict, then when they try the stuff and find that "eh, this isn't so great", they stop. Give it to someone who is already an addict, and suddenly you've got someone who is even more desperate to get their fix.
IIRC my high school history class, only 2 of the 6 did he have killed (divorced, beheaded, died (but not by Henry's decree), divorced, beheaded, survived).
If we make copyright terms sufficiently short that people could just wait and get a cheap-ass bootleg copy legally they might just do that.
Perhaps. Or perhaps as evidenced by video game sales, people would prefer to get it RITE NAO rather than wait even just a couple months for a guaranteed price reduction.
You don't want the house so stop paying your mortgage. Then go find an apartment
Won't that kind of hurt your chances of actually getting said apartment? Nevermind what kind of an example that sets for your kids.
or move in with you parents
Are most parents really that cool about their adult child, spouse, and grandkids all moving in with them, especially if said child just didn't feel like paying their mortgage?
I think what residieu was trying to say is... if someone has, say, about 10,000 pennies that they are trying to unload, how much paper cash would you be willing to exchange for it? Obviously no more than $100, but unless you are required to accept all those pennies in exchange for $100, you'd likely say something like "Hell no! For the inconvenience of that much luggage, I'll give you $10 for it."
For tracking your purchasing habits they just use your credit cards.
I can attest to that. Recently, I started getting emails from Home Depot for in store purchases made with a credit card. They don't have a loyalty card (or if they do, I'm not signed up for it), and this is not a Home Depot credit card. Near as I can tell, they likely associated my credit card with my email when I made an online purchase with it over a year ago, but that's beside the point. All I'm saying is, yes, stores certainly can and do track your purchases via credit card.
It still is an hardware change that induced fragmentation
I wasn't aware that there were PS3 games that would not work properly / at all on a PS3 that lacked PS2 hardware support.
and if you bring back one for repair they swap you out with a newer one without the hardare
Now there you might have a point. Though not if the topic at hand is "market fragmentation", because again, I am unaware of any PS3 games that won't work properly / at all on a PS3 that lacks PS2 hardware support.
The legal standard is reasonable doubt. The prosecutor doesn't have to prove that she doesn't remember. He/she just has to prove that it's unreasonable to believe she doesn't remember.
Except that's not what you said. You didn't say "it is unreasonable to believe that she forgot", you said "she obviously does remember". I apologize for not being clearer in my initial post, but I was asking why it was so obvious to you, because it wasn't obvious to me at all.
But I have read your other replies in this thread, and though I disagree, you did end up explaining why, to you, it seemed obvious.
in fact, you seem oblivious to fact that in over half of planet earth, women are subjected, unliberated, partially or wholly enslaved, abused.
"Company hires applicant based on qualifications" might be news, if said company used to put qualifications second to gender/race/religion/etc.
s/company/country/i
So no, I'm not oblivious as you seem to think I am. I know full well there are places on earth where women are treated like crap. One of those places suddenly treating women with respect would be news. However, I am unaware that Red Hat was one of those places that treat women like crap.
And there-in lies the problem. Your definition of porn is not my definition of porn is not the library's definition of porn. Much better to allow the "porn" than let someone proclaim that I am disallowed from researching, say, the history of bras.
That said.. I'd prolly be ok with, say, a three-tier approach to filtering in libraries.
1) One set of computers with absolutely no filtering.
2) One set of computers with light filtering and/or a black-list.
3) One set of computers with heavy filtering and/or a white-list.
Someone smarter than I can figure out where it'd make sense to place each set of computers. And feel free to rip my idea to shreds and tell me why it's stupid.:)
Similarly, if a new aircraft would cost $244 million, while it sustained just $25 million worth of damages, how exactly has it been damaged beyond economical repair? Am I just missing something here?
While I've never dealt with sub-accounts, last I checked there was a limit to the number of devices that you can register to stream to. So it's not like you could create an unlimited number of sub-accounts and enable streaming on all of them.
And before you ask, it's real easy to remove a device if you should exceed that limit. As long as only the master account could do this, I could see streaming to sub-accounts as being no problem (The MPAA on the other hand...).
Hmm.. I wonder how well a series of fences would work.. how well it'd slow down the thief if he had to hop each one individually as they are placed just far enough apart to risk falling in between two fences should he try and drape a thick cloth across more than one at a time. Or maybe thieves would just start cutting through the fence instead of hopping over it.
We are talking 8+ feet tall chain-link fences, and not some little white-picket fence, right?
But whether you are in the middle of the woods, or right by some building, how do you then keep the fire from spreading? Perhaps there are some locations where this would work, but I'd rather deal with the inconvenience of losing the copper in my AC than losing my house.
there are far more egregious violations of the first amendment
While I agree with you, I'm a little confused about why you chose an example that isn't a violation of the first amendment. I mean, I'm an atheist, and I can pretty easily see how one could make the argument that taxing churches violates the right to freedom of religion, as only those with enough money would be allowed to worship.
Though then you've got the situation of letting the government define what is and is not religion, and in essence, violating the right to freedom of religion of anyone not practicing an "approved" religion. So I guess I can see your side of it too.
Not advocating any particular side, just thinking out loud.
Slashdot Mirror
Though I disagree with doing such a thing, that seems to me to be the only thing that would make sense. Give it to people before they are an addict, then when they try the stuff and find that "eh, this isn't so great", they stop. Give it to someone who is already an addict, and suddenly you've got someone who is even more desperate to get their fix.
IIRC my high school history class, only 2 of the 6 did he have killed (divorced, beheaded, died (but not by Henry's decree), divorced, beheaded, survived).
If we make copyright terms sufficiently short that people could just wait and get a cheap-ass bootleg copy legally they might just do that.
Perhaps. Or perhaps as evidenced by video game sales, people would prefer to get it RITE NAO rather than wait even just a couple months for a guaranteed price reduction.
You don't want the house so stop paying your mortgage. Then go find an apartment
Won't that kind of hurt your chances of actually getting said apartment? Nevermind what kind of an example that sets for your kids.
or move in with you parents
Are most parents really that cool about their adult child, spouse, and grandkids all moving in with them, especially if said child just didn't feel like paying their mortgage?
I think what residieu was trying to say is... if someone has, say, about 10,000 pennies that they are trying to unload, how much paper cash would you be willing to exchange for it? Obviously no more than $100, but unless you are required to accept all those pennies in exchange for $100, you'd likely say something like "Hell no! For the inconvenience of that much luggage, I'll give you $10 for it."
Didn't you read the user name? Clearly he is only partly human, if that, and is thus exempt. :P
Sorry, not sure I follow how iTunes relates to political bribes... er, campaign contributions.
Unless.. is there an app for that?
Excellent post! Would read again! AAAAAAAAAA++++++++
Oh, right, I forgot: this is the U.S., where your politicians can be bought and paid for.
Which brings us to the following important question, are politicians bought or licensed?
I think it's more of a rental than either a purchase or a license...
For tracking your purchasing habits they just use your credit cards.
I can attest to that. Recently, I started getting emails from Home Depot for in store purchases made with a credit card. They don't have a loyalty card (or if they do, I'm not signed up for it), and this is not a Home Depot credit card. Near as I can tell, they likely associated my credit card with my email when I made an online purchase with it over a year ago, but that's beside the point. All I'm saying is, yes, stores certainly can and do track your purchases via credit card.
It still is an hardware change that induced fragmentation
I wasn't aware that there were PS3 games that would not work properly / at all on a PS3 that lacked PS2 hardware support.
and if you bring back one for repair they swap you out with a newer one without the hardare
Now there you might have a point. Though not if the topic at hand is "market fragmentation", because again, I am unaware of any PS3 games that won't work properly / at all on a PS3 that lacks PS2 hardware support.
The legal standard is reasonable doubt. The prosecutor doesn't have to prove that she doesn't remember. He/she just has to prove that it's unreasonable to believe she doesn't remember.
Except that's not what you said. You didn't say "it is unreasonable to believe that she forgot", you said "she obviously does remember". I apologize for not being clearer in my initial post, but I was asking why it was so obvious to you, because it wasn't obvious to me at all.
But I have read your other replies in this thread, and though I disagree, you did end up explaining why, to you, it seemed obvious.
in fact, you seem oblivious to fact that in over half of planet earth, women are subjected, unliberated, partially or wholly enslaved, abused.
"Company hires applicant based on qualifications" might be news, if said company used to put qualifications second to gender/race/religion/etc.
s/company/country/i
So no, I'm not oblivious as you seem to think I am. I know full well there are places on earth where women are treated like crap. One of those places suddenly treating women with respect would be news. However, I am unaware that Red Hat was one of those places that treat women like crap.
Sorry, but you've not managed to explain why it is news.
"Person gets job based on qualifications" is not news.
"Company hires applicant based on qualifications" might be news, if said company used to put qualifications second to gender/race/religion/etc.
The thing is, she obviously does remember her password.
Mind sharing with the rest of us how you were able to prove that?
who decides what porn is?
And there-in lies the problem. Your definition of porn is not my definition of porn is not the library's definition of porn. Much better to allow the "porn" than let someone proclaim that I am disallowed from researching, say, the history of bras.
:)
That said.. I'd prolly be ok with, say, a three-tier approach to filtering in libraries.
1) One set of computers with absolutely no filtering.
2) One set of computers with light filtering and/or a black-list.
3) One set of computers with heavy filtering and/or a white-list.
Someone smarter than I can figure out where it'd make sense to place each set of computers. And feel free to rip my idea to shreds and tell me why it's stupid.
Need to go to Mars for that.
Similarly, if a new aircraft would cost $244 million, while it sustained just $25 million worth of damages, how exactly has it been damaged beyond economical repair? Am I just missing something here?
Maybe they just mean that you should carry with you a GPS jammer device at all times? Not that I know where one would acquire such a device...
and sets your house on fire.
Just don't accept any unsolicited packages containing lemons. ;)
While I've never dealt with sub-accounts, last I checked there was a limit to the number of devices that you can register to stream to. So it's not like you could create an unlimited number of sub-accounts and enable streaming on all of them.
And before you ask, it's real easy to remove a device if you should exceed that limit. As long as only the master account could do this, I could see streaming to sub-accounts as being no problem (The MPAA on the other hand...).
Hmm.. I wonder how well a series of fences would work.. how well it'd slow down the thief if he had to hop each one individually as they are placed just far enough apart to risk falling in between two fences should he try and drape a thick cloth across more than one at a time. Or maybe thieves would just start cutting through the fence instead of hopping over it.
We are talking 8+ feet tall chain-link fences, and not some little white-picket fence, right?
But whether you are in the middle of the woods, or right by some building, how do you then keep the fire from spreading? Perhaps there are some locations where this would work, but I'd rather deal with the inconvenience of losing the copper in my AC than losing my house.
there are far more egregious violations of the first amendment
While I agree with you, I'm a little confused about why you chose an example that isn't a violation of the first amendment. I mean, I'm an atheist, and I can pretty easily see how one could make the argument that taxing churches violates the right to freedom of religion, as only those with enough money would be allowed to worship.
Though then you've got the situation of letting the government define what is and is not religion, and in essence, violating the right to freedom of religion of anyone not practicing an "approved" religion. So I guess I can see your side of it too.
Not advocating any particular side, just thinking out loud.
Come on guys, get together, Grandma's only going to die once.
Not necessarily...