The follow-up question is did you get that somebody's information, and did you follow up w/ a DMCA abuse lawsuit? To place their takedown notice, they had to sign that under penalty of perjury that they own the content. Obviously they couldn't for your self-portrait. So, you could follow up like the EFF is going after Uri Geller. Folks need to do a lot more of that; a few significant judgements against DMCA abusers plus fees & court costs could go a long way.
Agreed. Although after they laid off all their "overpaid" sales people then offered to hire them back at reduced wages, I decided to never shop at CC again. Haven't been into one of those annoying red stores since-- I can't boycott them any more than I already do. Damn.
Soooooo, they used two numbers (mass of clay & # of comets) to generate a 1e24 to 1 odd against life having started here? Seems like they might have left one or two variables out of their equation. Hopefully this is just junk reporting rather than junk science.
this is actually already true, because you need a creditcard to pay in the first place
/me scratches head
I pay no fee for my credit card. Don't carry a balance, so no interest. So how does paying via cc require me to pay for the privilege of paying them?
Ignorring that, you do know XBL works on points, and you can buy cards for those points at your local electronics bigbox store with cash, right? No card of any sort necessary.
It would be a weird way to say it, but from the GP's post I'd interpret the "suited pair" that turned into a straight flush to probably be suited connectors, one of which hit a pair on the flop. Anyway, if the player made a straight flush on the river, then he at least had a pair w/ a flush draw, which isn't a terribly bad hand depending on the pair.
He & his army of insurgents attacked & killed British soldiers, who were representatives of the lawful sovereign nation of Great Britian and were charged with enforcing the laws put in place by the democratically elected Parliament.
It wasn't an act of terrorism. It was an act of rebellion. There's a difference.
Yeah, the difference is which side you're on. Didn't you hear that destruction of property to make a point, even if it was carefully done to avoid harming any person, is terrorism now? Don't believe me? A federal judge declared Stanislas Meyerhoff to have committed terrorist acts, and gave him 13 years. Under the current rules, George Washington & friends most certainly would have been declared to be terrorists.
Seems like this will be a great tool to "out" companies using & abusing open software in their packages for Windows. Will be interesting to see who starts to find bits & pieces of GPL'd stuff hanging about various binary-only installations that don't come with source code for the app.
Not the "language is unchangeable" argument, the "something ought to be listed in the books as a crime before we call it that" argument.
Thank God my legal rights are defined by the US code and the code of the state of California, not by an "accepted enough term". If you check out the US code at the Cornell Law site, you'll find that piracy is listed in 53 sections of the Federal code, and not a single one of them has anything to do with copyright infringement.
More importantly, most copyright infringement is a civil cause for action, not a criminal offense. Hence the RIAA/MPAA/MAFIAA suing people in civil court, and the FBI mostly not worrying about kids in the basement swapping songs. By calling it Piracy, you elevate the civil offense to a perceived criminal act, and make it MY responsibility (as a taxpayer) to deal with it, rather than making the rights holder take care of things through the civil system. In my opinion, this is a way for the media companies to try to shift one of their costs of doing business onto me, and I really don't appreciate it.
It is piracy to hoist the Jolly Roger, run out the long 9's, and shipjack another vessel on the high seas for fun and profit. Downloading songs for which you already own the cassette would only be copyright infringement, and then only if a songs owner could convince a judge & jury to come down on you for doing so, as it hasn't been tested in the courts yet.
So no, I wouldn't say that it's clearly piracy to download a modded version of software for which you have a valid license, particularly if you did so for compatibility purposes only, were only using the exact version of the software for which you're licensed, and could document trying to get the vendor to help out & their failure to make a good-faith effort to fix your problem. Would such a defense hold up in court? Dunno, probably not, but no sane vendor would go after you in such a situation, it's not a guaranteed win for them & would be a PR disaster. Wink wink nudge nudge say no more, right?
Yes, but with your V-chip(tm) you can make sure that Bobby and Suzi can't watch shows like 24, CSI, ER, or Nova (might have animals doing the nasty, ya know). Now if we could just get something that would make our computers into a Trusted Platform where we could set undefeatable settings preventing little Johnny from playing those aweful violent sexy games, then maybe the terrorists won't have won.
Bought it months ago, sold it last week to lock in profits, re-bought yesterday at discount? Sounds like an easy free 3% income, lock in a new basis price, and indistinguishable from normal trading activity == no traces for the SEC.
Ask your electricity supplier to bill you per hadron...
Particularly since electricity suppliers only provide you with leptons, no hadrons. And they make you give them back when you're done with them. Bastards.
Never meant to imply that drug companies are angels. Or that the HMOs are devils. Both are just businesses, doing business the way that the people of the US, via their elected representatives, have chosen to run their contry, i.e. a pay-to-play system. Bully for them.
BTW, the limits to liabilities for vaccines was a necessary item. Most of the majors have completely ended vaccine development. The rest mainly keep them around for PR purposes. The vaccines we've got are pretty much all based on technology that's older than I am. We're making the antigen in goddam EGGS fer chrissakes. Very few people are touching vaccines due to the high liability and low profit. If you want to completely end vaccine R&D, by all means, please drop the full potential liability back onto the companies. Then you can have as many new vaccines as you're getting new antibiotics.
Hate to break it to you, but we don't use publicly funded research to develop new drugs without paying for it. Starting about ten years ago, the NIH started encouraging universities to patent discoveries made off of grant money, and today the Uni's Tech Transfer offices are the biggest IP thugs out there. We pay through the nose if we use anything that came out of a univeristy.
Damn, somebody's cranky. Wow. I won't bother to address all of your points, but I will point out that the majority of that billion isn't in the compound discovery phase, it's in the clinical trials. You want to drop those costs, talk to the publicly owned teaching hospitals that are making massive money off of the trials. And talk to your representatives & senators, who keep the trial costs up by keeping the FDA from utilizing out-of-country trial data.
I will also point out that never once, in my career, have I ever seen a mouse liquidized.
Hahahahahahahahahahaha. That's funny. Please pull out a reference for how my tax dollars paid for that. (If you want to see a ref. for my $1e9, check up a couple of posts, I don't feel like re-entering the links).
Are you refering to how industries use the output of Universitie's basic research in their drug discovery efforts? Perhaps you're not aware, but Universities have become the biggest IP thugs there are out there. Any drug development effort now that uses university IP is paying royalties for that IP back to the Uni. Nothing's free anymore.
You are aware, of course, that the majority of the costs of the new drug development are in the clinical trials, not the actual compound discovery. And that those clinical trials are very much paid for by the Pharmas, and the people making the money are the doctors & teaching hospitals that are involved in the studies. So when you want to see the proceeds of the pittiance in basic research your taxpayer dollars paid for, please drive by your nearest University Hospital, and admire that beatiful new glass facade they just installed, and the Porche's in the Doctor's parking lot. That's where a very, very large portion of that drug bill you paid went.
Slashdot Mirror
There, fixed that for ya.
The follow-up question is did you get that somebody's information, and did you follow up w/ a DMCA abuse lawsuit? To place their takedown notice, they had to sign that under penalty of perjury that they own the content. Obviously they couldn't for your self-portrait. So, you could follow up like the EFF is going after Uri Geller. Folks need to do a lot more of that; a few significant judgements against DMCA abusers plus fees & court costs could go a long way.
Hahahahaha. Gawd, if I ever saw a post that deserves +5 funny, yours is it. Nice one, there.
Agreed. Although after they laid off all their "overpaid" sales people then offered to hire them back at reduced wages, I decided to never shop at CC again. Haven't been into one of those annoying red stores since-- I can't boycott them any more than I already do. Damn.
But what if I put my sovereign hi-tech city on the surface of the seafloor, well into international waters? What then?
Pfft. At least you had magma. Our parents sent us out for days on end, collecting enough radioactive dust & rocks to squeeze together to make magma.
Palatability is not a requirement for good theory.
Luckily, this is a federal case being decided by a federal judge who is not subject to election.
Soooooo, they used two numbers (mass of clay & # of comets) to generate a 1e24 to 1 odd against life having started here? Seems like they might have left one or two variables out of their equation. Hopefully this is just junk reporting rather than junk science.
I thought you paid for the BJ, then stole your money back & the ho's shoes, too. Must be too much GTA
I pay no fee for my credit card. Don't carry a balance, so no interest. So how does paying via cc require me to pay for the privilege of paying them?
Ignorring that, you do know XBL works on points, and you can buy cards for those points at your local electronics bigbox store with cash, right? No card of any sort necessary.
It would be a weird way to say it, but from the GP's post I'd interpret the "suited pair" that turned into a straight flush to probably be suited connectors, one of which hit a pair on the flop. Anyway, if the player made a straight flush on the river, then he at least had a pair w/ a flush draw, which isn't a terribly bad hand depending on the pair.
Neither did the ELF setting fire to a bunch of SUVs, but that's been declared to be terrorism under federal law.
Yeah, the difference is which side you're on. Didn't you hear that destruction of property to make a point, even if it was carefully done to avoid harming any person, is terrorism now? Don't believe me? A federal judge declared Stanislas Meyerhoff to have committed terrorist acts, and gave him 13 years. Under the current rules, George Washington & friends most certainly would have been declared to be terrorists.
Seems like this will be a great tool to "out" companies using & abusing open software in their packages for Windows. Will be interesting to see who starts to find bits & pieces of GPL'd stuff hanging about various binary-only installations that don't come with source code for the app.
Not the "language is unchangeable" argument, the "something ought to be listed in the books as a crime before we call it that" argument.
Thank God my legal rights are defined by the US code and the code of the state of California, not by an "accepted enough term". If you check out the US code at the Cornell Law site, you'll find that piracy is listed in 53 sections of the Federal code, and not a single one of them has anything to do with copyright infringement.
More importantly, most copyright infringement is a civil cause for action, not a criminal offense. Hence the RIAA/MPAA/MAFIAA suing people in civil court, and the FBI mostly not worrying about kids in the basement swapping songs. By calling it Piracy, you elevate the civil offense to a perceived criminal act, and make it MY responsibility (as a taxpayer) to deal with it, rather than making the rights holder take care of things through the civil system. In my opinion, this is a way for the media companies to try to shift one of their costs of doing business onto me, and I really don't appreciate it.
It is piracy to hoist the Jolly Roger, run out the long 9's, and shipjack another vessel on the high seas for fun and profit. Downloading songs for which you already own the cassette would only be copyright infringement, and then only if a songs owner could convince a judge & jury to come down on you for doing so, as it hasn't been tested in the courts yet.
So no, I wouldn't say that it's clearly piracy to download a modded version of software for which you have a valid license, particularly if you did so for compatibility purposes only, were only using the exact version of the software for which you're licensed, and could document trying to get the vendor to help out & their failure to make a good-faith effort to fix your problem. Would such a defense hold up in court? Dunno, probably not, but no sane vendor would go after you in such a situation, it's not a guaranteed win for them & would be a PR disaster. Wink wink nudge nudge say no more, right?
Yes, I would have to agree. Ru Paul is definitly better than anybody else in the field
And (s)he adequately represents both sides
Yes, but with your V-chip(tm) you can make sure that Bobby and Suzi can't watch shows like 24, CSI, ER, or Nova (might have animals doing the nasty, ya know). Now if we could just get something that would make our computers into a Trusted Platform where we could set undefeatable settings preventing little Johnny from playing those aweful violent sexy games, then maybe the terrorists won't have won.
Bought it months ago, sold it last week to lock in profits, re-bought yesterday at discount? Sounds like an easy free 3% income, lock in a new basis price, and indistinguishable from normal trading activity == no traces for the SEC.
Never meant to imply that drug companies are angels. Or that the HMOs are devils. Both are just businesses, doing business the way that the people of the US, via their elected representatives, have chosen to run their contry, i.e. a pay-to-play system. Bully for them.
BTW, the limits to liabilities for vaccines was a necessary item. Most of the majors have completely ended vaccine development. The rest mainly keep them around for PR purposes. The vaccines we've got are pretty much all based on technology that's older than I am. We're making the antigen in goddam EGGS fer chrissakes. Very few people are touching vaccines due to the high liability and low profit. If you want to completely end vaccine R&D, by all means, please drop the full potential liability back onto the companies. Then you can have as many new vaccines as you're getting new antibiotics.
Hate to break it to you, but we don't use publicly funded research to develop new drugs without paying for it. Starting about ten years ago, the NIH started encouraging universities to patent discoveries made off of grant money, and today the Uni's Tech Transfer offices are the biggest IP thugs out there. We pay through the nose if we use anything that came out of a univeristy.
Damn, somebody's cranky. Wow. I won't bother to address all of your points, but I will point out that the majority of that billion isn't in the compound discovery phase, it's in the clinical trials. You want to drop those costs, talk to the publicly owned teaching hospitals that are making massive money off of the trials. And talk to your representatives & senators, who keep the trial costs up by keeping the FDA from utilizing out-of-country trial data.
I will also point out that never once, in my career, have I ever seen a mouse liquidized.
Hahahahahahahahahahaha. That's funny. Please pull out a reference for how my tax dollars paid for that. (If you want to see a ref. for my $1e9, check up a couple of posts, I don't feel like re-entering the links).
Are you refering to how industries use the output of Universitie's basic research in their drug discovery efforts? Perhaps you're not aware, but Universities have become the biggest IP thugs there are out there. Any drug development effort now that uses university IP is paying royalties for that IP back to the Uni. Nothing's free anymore.
You are aware, of course, that the majority of the costs of the new drug development are in the clinical trials, not the actual compound discovery. And that those clinical trials are very much paid for by the Pharmas, and the people making the money are the doctors & teaching hospitals that are involved in the studies. So when you want to see the proceeds of the pittiance in basic research your taxpayer dollars paid for, please drive by your nearest University Hospital, and admire that beatiful new glass facade they just installed, and the Porche's in the Doctor's parking lot. That's where a very, very large portion of that drug bill you paid went.