The issue isn't that Hasbro should have already trademarked "candy", it's that "candy" shouldn't be able to be trademarked at all.
Expressing surprise that Hasbro did not already have the trademark, is not the same thing as saying "I think the word 'candy' should be allowed to be trademarked". I agree that "candy" should not be trademarked, but I can also still express surprise that Hasbro had not already done it.
How about we save executions for only people who break laws and participated in enforcing or making laws.
Er, what? Is that "for people who break laws, and for people who participated in enforcing or making laws", or is that "for enforcers/makers of laws who also break the law"?
No you haven't. The only thing you have addressed is the fact that you won't tolerate government policy that you don't personally agree with.
Then allow me to make it crystal clear. If someone else came in and started pushing to have the Pastafarian creation myth taught in schools, and they managed to convince the majority of the nation to stand behind them, I would not, even though I share their opinion on the "correct" creation myth.
If I truly believed in the principles of representative democracy, then yes, I would HAVE to be ok with that. If I wasn't, then I would be a hypocrite.
I suppose, technically, that if you claimed to believe in a 100%, majority-can-inflict-whatever-it-wants-on-the-minority representative democracy, you'd be right that anyone opposing the pushing of the Pastafarian creation myth would be a hypocrite. But we aren't claiming to believe in a 100% representative democracy. At most, we are claiming to believe in a representative democracy that has certain things in place (like the Bill of Rights) to limit tyranny of the majority. And I for one tend to try and always respect those limits, even when I am among the majority.
But it is probably far more likely that we simply disbelieve in all other forms of government even more. "Democracy is the worst form of government ever, except for all other forms of government that came before it", or something like that.
I said that creationism in texas public schools is the will of the people, and if you truly believe in the philosophy of "representative" government, then you will accept that government is working exactly as planned.
So if I came in and started pushing schools to teach the Pastafarian creation myth, and I managed to get enough people backing me such that we represented the majority of the nation, you would be completely ok with that? Because it seems to me that that would be a gross violation of everyone elses First Amendment rights. But that is exactly what is happening here, just with a different creation myth.
Opposing the violation of certain fundamental rights is not "I gladly accept the will of the people, as long as I'm on the winning team".
Except an encrypted hard drive is not a locked shed. It is a notebook, made out of metal, written to with magnets (adjust analogy as needed for flash memory and other alternative storage devices).
And if I'm not required to teach the cops the made-up language I used in this physical paper notebook, why should that change just because the materials that make up the notebook change?
You don't have to actually tell us, but if you're like me, you have trouble remembering it unless you are in front of an ATM.
Just because the defendant was later able to give them the password, does not mean that he was lying when he said he could not remember it at the time.
(I really hope that page is what I think it is. It was linked to from the King Missile page, but I'm not in a position to actually check it for myself.)
he said he suspects it was messages sent through time.
Re-reading the post again, the closest I can find to referencing time travel is that he says he experienced "reality bending", which he later explains as he literally saw a window frame and a concrete pole bend, followed by the thought of an earthquake randomly coming to him. But nothing seems to imply that he believes that thought to have been planted from the future.
I guess the whole "I felt this 9 minutes prior" could be seen as a reference to time travel, but as I said, the time frame is small enough that I just chalked it up to him feeling it as it happened.
While Taco Cowboy's post does sound mildly far-fetched, the idea of "feeling" a quake before it happens (or in this case, feeling that a quake happened but not actually feeling the tremors) isn't so far-fetched. Aren't other animals supposed to be able to sense such things?
It is just another anecdote, but a few seconds before the actual shaking from that earthquake that struck the Washington DC area a while back, my environment felt... fuzzy. It is difficult to explain the exact feeling that I felt, but something felt off. It is not something that I can explain, but that is only because I do not have the knowledge required to explain it. It in no way leads me to claim that "God" was sending me a message about the impending quake, or that I had some sort of extrasensory experience (where extrasensory basically means cannot be explained by science).
Regarding Taco Cowboy, the time frame is small enough that it sounds less like a premonition and more like they merely felt whatever I had felt. And any visible bending that they saw could be explained as their brain attempting to make sense of this unknown feeling. As for why Taco Cowboy would not have felt any tremors, maybe they were far enough away to not feel the tremors, but still within range of whatever produced the "off" feeling? I don't know.
I would be remiss if I did not admit that, yes, it could have been complete coincidence. But it also seems within the realm of possibility that it is not.
and then somehow hoping that every person in Australia buys some sort of underwater twitter reading watch.
Why would they need to do that? Just have one person who has the job of watching out for shark attacks, drownings, etc. Or if they don't want to hire a life guard, put in an electronic sign that checks the appropriate twitter account.
Similarly IF THE WEBSITE advertises $1000, but when you got to checkout, your total shows $100.
The customer should expect the store won't honor the $100 price; if their online shopping cart disagrees with the advertised price.
Could you please explain why the customer should expect the store to not honor the $100 price? Because I would probably look at it and think "huh, I guess it was one of those 'add to cart to see the real price" items."
Firefighters putting out a fire may need to cut into walls or the roof in order to put out a fire. Since there are potentially energized wires in the walls and in the roof, a hazard exists for firefighters. Normally you can turn off the power to a house by removing the electrical meter (at least here in the US anyway), which emergency personnel may do if they are concerned about cutting into energized wires.
I figured that, whether power came in from a solar panel or the grid, the danger of energized wires would exist regardless. Did not realize they would be able to disconnect the burning house from the grid. Though I wonder what they'd do if the meter is inside the house.
I could see how it might be dangerous to electrical workers that are working to restore power to your neighborhood, if your house is putting power on the line when they expect nothing on the line, but to firefighters trying to put out a house fire?
Agreed. Many years ago, when I was at the DMV waiting around for my number to be called, I plugged my laptop in to one of the outlets around the walls. A short time later, a cop came up and told me I couldn't do that. I said "oh, sorry", and unplugged my laptop.
Er... you know that Segway was actually a spin-off technology from the iBot, which was basically a Segway wheelchair with a second pair of wheels it could use in places that were too unstable for Segway-like operation (read: sand at a beach), when the user wanted to lower the chair down to normal seating height (to sit at a table/desk or converse), or even to climb stairs.
Actually, I was not aware of that. Thank you for informing me about it.
If I have misread your post, I just want to apologize up-front about it.
---
You know, I really hate lmgtfy. It implies that there are such things as stupid questions, which is something that I try to not believe in. And why should anyone ask anything of anyone else, when non-judgmental google is just a mouse-click away? It's not like someone might want to contribute to a semi-realtime conversation with other actual humans, right?
I was genuinely curious what kinds of disabilities a segway would help with. I mean, if you can stand and lean, that implies that you can walk, does it not? And if you can walk, what do you need a seqway for? What part of your disability is it compensating for at that point?
Now? I don't know. But the attitude that I read in your post? I wouldn't be surprised if those kinds of attitudes are part of the reason some people "go ape shit over someone who has an actual disability".
Whether or not it is a disability, I just cannot imagine an obese person using a segway. Wouldn't they prefer an option that did not require them to stand?
Slashdot Mirror
The issue isn't that Hasbro should have already trademarked "candy", it's that "candy" shouldn't be able to be trademarked at all.
Expressing surprise that Hasbro did not already have the trademark, is not the same thing as saying "I think the word 'candy' should be allowed to be trademarked". I agree that "candy" should not be trademarked, but I can also still express surprise that Hasbro had not already done it.
Scissors decapitates lizard. It's Spock he'd have to worry about.
Figured as much, but still had to ask. Thanks for clearing that up.
Let's not pretend that this man didn't understand or even endorse the death penalty.
That is an interesting theory. Should the death penalty be reserved only for those who support it?
I would say that no, it should be abolished completely. While I support the concept, the risks of getting things wrong are not worth it IMO.
I guess it depends on whether the European companies consider that the same as "using the drugs to kill", and forbid exports.
How about we save executions for only people who break laws and participated in enforcing or making laws.
Er, what? Is that "for people who break laws, and for people who participated in enforcing or making laws", or is that "for enforcers/makers of laws who also break the law"?
No you haven't. The only thing you have addressed is the fact that you won't tolerate government policy that you don't personally agree with.
Then allow me to make it crystal clear. If someone else came in and started pushing to have the Pastafarian creation myth taught in schools, and they managed to convince the majority of the nation to stand behind them, I would not, even though I share their opinion on the "correct" creation myth.
If I truly believed in the principles of representative democracy, then yes, I would HAVE to be ok with that. If I wasn't, then I would be a hypocrite.
I suppose, technically, that if you claimed to believe in a 100%, majority-can-inflict-whatever-it-wants-on-the-minority representative democracy, you'd be right that anyone opposing the pushing of the Pastafarian creation myth would be a hypocrite. But we aren't claiming to believe in a 100% representative democracy. At most, we are claiming to believe in a representative democracy that has certain things in place (like the Bill of Rights) to limit tyranny of the majority. And I for one tend to try and always respect those limits, even when I am among the majority.
But it is probably far more likely that we simply disbelieve in all other forms of government even more. "Democracy is the worst form of government ever, except for all other forms of government that came before it", or something like that.
either you accept that government is working as planned and eat your own dog food, or you're merely another hypocrite. Which is it?
I believe I have already adequately addressed that it is neither.
Do you think they would so proudly admit to being unable to read and write?
Yes actually. Maybe not the same set of people, but I find it entirely plausible that there exists a group of people who would find pride in that.
I said that creationism in texas public schools is the will of the people, and if you truly believe in the philosophy of "representative" government, then you will accept that government is working exactly as planned.
So if I came in and started pushing schools to teach the Pastafarian creation myth, and I managed to get enough people backing me such that we represented the majority of the nation, you would be completely ok with that? Because it seems to me that that would be a gross violation of everyone elses First Amendment rights. But that is exactly what is happening here, just with a different creation myth.
Opposing the violation of certain fundamental rights is not "I gladly accept the will of the people, as long as I'm on the winning team".
Except an encrypted hard drive is not a locked shed. It is a notebook, made out of metal, written to with magnets (adjust analogy as needed for flash memory and other alternative storage devices).
And if I'm not required to teach the cops the made-up language I used in this physical paper notebook, why should that change just because the materials that make up the notebook change?
Quick, what is your ATM PIN?
You don't have to actually tell us, but if you're like me, you have trouble remembering it unless you are in front of an ATM.
Just because the defendant was later able to give them the password, does not mean that he was lying when he said he could not remember it at the time.
Only if you are King Missile.
(I really hope that page is what I think it is. It was linked to from the King Missile page, but I'm not in a position to actually check it for myself.)
Guessing you mean this post, which yeah, totally didn't see until now.
Thanks for the clarification.
he said he suspects it was messages sent through time.
Re-reading the post again, the closest I can find to referencing time travel is that he says he experienced "reality bending", which he later explains as he literally saw a window frame and a concrete pole bend, followed by the thought of an earthquake randomly coming to him. But nothing seems to imply that he believes that thought to have been planted from the future.
I guess the whole "I felt this 9 minutes prior" could be seen as a reference to time travel, but as I said, the time frame is small enough that I just chalked it up to him feeling it as it happened.
While Taco Cowboy's post does sound mildly far-fetched, the idea of "feeling" a quake before it happens (or in this case, feeling that a quake happened but not actually feeling the tremors) isn't so far-fetched. Aren't other animals supposed to be able to sense such things?
It is just another anecdote, but a few seconds before the actual shaking from that earthquake that struck the Washington DC area a while back, my environment felt... fuzzy. It is difficult to explain the exact feeling that I felt, but something felt off. It is not something that I can explain, but that is only because I do not have the knowledge required to explain it. It in no way leads me to claim that "God" was sending me a message about the impending quake, or that I had some sort of extrasensory experience (where extrasensory basically means cannot be explained by science).
Regarding Taco Cowboy, the time frame is small enough that it sounds less like a premonition and more like they merely felt whatever I had felt. And any visible bending that they saw could be explained as their brain attempting to make sense of this unknown feeling. As for why Taco Cowboy would not have felt any tremors, maybe they were far enough away to not feel the tremors, but still within range of whatever produced the "off" feeling? I don't know.
I would be remiss if I did not admit that, yes, it could have been complete coincidence. But it also seems within the realm of possibility that it is not.
and then somehow hoping that every person in Australia buys some sort of underwater twitter reading watch.
Why would they need to do that? Just have one person who has the job of watching out for shark attacks, drownings, etc. Or if they don't want to hire a life guard, put in an electronic sign that checks the appropriate twitter account.
Similarly IF THE WEBSITE advertises $1000, but when you got to checkout, your total shows $100. The customer should expect the store won't honor the $100 price; if their online shopping cart disagrees with the advertised price.
Could you please explain why the customer should expect the store to not honor the $100 price? Because I would probably look at it and think "huh, I guess it was one of those 'add to cart to see the real price" items."
Firefighters putting out a fire may need to cut into walls or the roof in order to put out a fire. Since there are potentially energized wires in the walls and in the roof, a hazard exists for firefighters. Normally you can turn off the power to a house by removing the electrical meter (at least here in the US anyway), which emergency personnel may do if they are concerned about cutting into energized wires.
I figured that, whether power came in from a solar panel or the grid, the danger of energized wires would exist regardless. Did not realize they would be able to disconnect the burning house from the grid. Though I wonder what they'd do if the meter is inside the house.
I could see how it might be dangerous to electrical workers that are working to restore power to your neighborhood, if your house is putting power on the line when they expect nothing on the line, but to firefighters trying to put out a house fire?
Ah, thanks for that information.
Agreed. Many years ago, when I was at the DMV waiting around for my number to be called, I plugged my laptop in to one of the outlets around the walls. A short time later, a cop came up and told me I couldn't do that. I said "oh, sorry", and unplugged my laptop.
That is how this story should have gone down.
Er... you know that Segway was actually a spin-off technology from the iBot, which was basically a Segway wheelchair with a second pair of wheels it could use in places that were too unstable for Segway-like operation (read: sand at a beach), when the user wanted to lower the chair down to normal seating height (to sit at a table/desk or converse), or even to climb stairs.
Actually, I was not aware of that. Thank you for informing me about it.
If I have misread your post, I just want to apologize up-front about it.
---
You know, I really hate lmgtfy. It implies that there are such things as stupid questions, which is something that I try to not believe in. And why should anyone ask anything of anyone else, when non-judgmental google is just a mouse-click away? It's not like someone might want to contribute to a semi-realtime conversation with other actual humans, right?
I was genuinely curious what kinds of disabilities a segway would help with. I mean, if you can stand and lean, that implies that you can walk, does it not? And if you can walk, what do you need a seqway for? What part of your disability is it compensating for at that point?
Now? I don't know. But the attitude that I read in your post? I wouldn't be surprised if those kinds of attitudes are part of the reason some people "go ape shit over someone who has an actual disability".
Obesity.
I thought that's what those scooters were for.
Yeah, it's a disability. Deal with it.
Whether or not it is a disability, I just cannot imagine an obese person using a segway. Wouldn't they prefer an option that did not require them to stand?