As in specific persons, although the majority of those specific persons resided on the Indian subcontinent. The majority of people debunking people who continue the practice today also live on the Indian subcontinent and have my full support.
There is no such thing as "race," although there is certainly such a thing as religion; and yoga was developed out of certain religous philosophies, not scientific anatomy.
There is nothing wrong with using classical yoga secularly for stretching and exercise, so long as it is in accord with stretching and exercise. Often it is not. Its primary intent is to develop and display "superhuman" abilities, but being double jointed doesn't mean you're special:
Except in the sense that you've permanently fucked up your ligaments to the point that it will require surgery to do something about it.
I care about your ligaments. I don't give a damn what "race" they are.
Young instead suggests that people sit all the way back in their chair so that their sacrum touches the chair's back.
"When you do this, your pelvis and back are aligned properly and it allows you to move easily in the chair," said Young.
The simplest, most direct and most effective means of accomplishing this to remove the back from your chair. You were designed to sit on a platform (like, for instance, the Earth). Without a back to lean against you naturally rely on your muscles to maintain proper spinal alignment.
I'm puzzled by the article's statement that the slouched forward postion stretches muscles in the wrong direction though. This is the only direction muscles in the back should be stretched; the muscles in the abdomen are in contraction in this posture and should stretch no more than allowing the spine to be upright.
Do not do the yoga position known as The Cobra. Permanent spine injury can result which you may missinterpret as "flexability." Remember that classic yoga positions were invented by the same people who came up with the idea that shoving a knitting needle through your cheeks was a proof of "holiness." Pay attention to modern knowledge of anatomy and ergonomics. The spine isn't supposed to bend backwards. The Cat is the proper back stretch.
I was thinking of stores like Circuit City as being agents of the publisher, as they often do enter into special publicity deals.
Yes, even small mom and pops can enter into these deals. It's called co-op marketing. A sharing of local promotional efforts and expenses for the mutual benefit of both parties, but this does not create legal agency in the reseller, although it can create a shared liability in the specific marketing scheme. A form of very limited partnership.
Except for promotional giveaways the software is still purchased outright from the publisher (although usually on credit). The promotional giveaways are given to the retailer and become the retailer's property.
Only the largest of retailers even purchase from the publisher at all, but acquire the software from a third party who purchased it from either the publisher or a fourth party. In fact it's not at all unheard of for retailers to purchase from other retailers just like any other "consumer." I used to do this all the time if I could get a better price from one of my competitors (say, WD-40 from K-Mart) than I could from my wholesalers, as was sometimes the case given their large orders and my small ones. The local independant computer store that I usually deal with these days often "shops" at Newegg.
I'm not terribly familiar with USA law, but isn't it against the law to present something as a valid contract when you should know that it isn't?
We have invented standard contract disclaimers to deal with situations like that. In mass marketed things like boxed software it isn't even practical to insure the EULA is actually valid as written everywhere the software is sold (we have, at minimum, fifty one seperate legal jurisdictions in the US, Federal plus each state) so every possible term under the sun is thrown in with an implict acknowledgement that they might not all be binding in any particular jurisdiction or specific case.
Pure boilerplate license/contract and the courts get to sort it all out if a complaint is filed, starting with argument over just what court has the jurisdiction to hear the argument. Fun and games.
Many things are very obviously illegal, but ignored.
What sets the US apart from many other nations is our willingness to fund science in all its forms, whether or not a given research projects produces something whose value can be measured in dollars and cents.
I'm rather partial to the improved method for estimating the surface area of Indian elephants at Kerala Agricultural University, India myself, but the belly button lint study at the University of Sydney is also good for a chuckle.
The monitoring of the brains of locusts watching Star Wars, Newcastle University, England, is something I'll have to make time to look into, as well as the whole Exploding Trousers thingy, Massey University, New Zealand.
Not really sure about the Literature Prize to Nigerian 419 scammers, but that's off the science research topic anyway.
As the agent of the software distributors, entering into a contract with the store (for sale) is nearly the same as entering into it with the distributor themselves.
Except for items taken on consignment retail stores do not contract to sell. They purchase property and resell it. I have owned a brick and mortar retail store. I acted as noone's agent and neither did my wholesalers. We bought, we sold. The software I purchased for resale became my property to do with as I pleased. When I resold it it became the property of my customer to do with as he pleased, including reselling it if he wished. No power or obligation of attorney transfered from the rights holder to me to my customer.
Business multiseat licenses are sold by contract either directly from the rights holder or their agent. These licenses do not rely on click through EULAs and are not relevant to the discussion.
Second, a license is *not* needed to use or view a copyrighted work, NOR to make ephemeral copies, as needed by the technology and intended use of the work. In other words, explicit consent has been given for text-2-speech converters, copying to ram, to framebuffer, etc. Like reading a book you find at a bus stop, using software you find in such a place is equally legal regardless of any license, or intent of the author.
Of course, this is codified in the Berne Convention Treaty, although local laws may still vary somewhat, as the Berne Convention Treaty is really a framework rather than explicitly defined code.
The American DMCA, for instance, is not part of the Berne Convention Treaty.
You can contract to the contrary, but if you don't realize you're doing it, it likely isn't binding anyways, so unless you did so in a room with a bunch of lawyers and IBM salesmen, likely none of the software you use is licensed in this fashion.
I explictly limited my comments to retail boxed software with a click through EULA.A EULA is not typically a contract. It is merely a license, some of the terms of which may not even be legally binding. As I have written before and alluded to here the main function of a EULA is to give the licensee the impression of a legally binding agreement, because the impressionable will believe it is.
The inherent rights and obligations of the rights holder and the retail purchaser are defined by law, not the EULA and the courts have been known to reject EULAs that are in contravention to the law.
This does not, however, mean that certain terms of the EULA are not enforceable if they are in accord with the law (in fact they may be nothing more than a statement of the law) and the courts have been know to enforce them.
I could construct many scenarios that logically would be consistent but have no relationship to the desired end of the application. ..
Bingo! In fact, unless you are working at the very cutting edge of science and/or technology, going where no man has gone before, the really hard part of program design is figuring out just what the heck that desired end really is.
The rest is just a programming exercise.
Computers may be able to prove a program correct, logically consistent and even generate algorithms, but these have nothing to do with design. They're the mere implimentation of design.
A computer will never be able to design a program until you can clearly and explicitly tell it what you want the program to do, at which point, you have already designed the program.
When did "design" become a dirty word in programming anyway? And how about giving programmers a solid foundation in analytical logic?
Show of hands. How many of you out there who claim that you learned everything you ever needed to know about programming from the web spent the first few months, at least, ignoring code and studying design?
Not meaning to unduly ruffle any feathers, really, but maybe that's why so much software sucks.
I vaguely remember the days when culture had something to do with people, not just competing marketing departments...
You should come sign up for my online social network. We're much cooler than the dorks on MySpace, because we'd never sign up for something dorky like MySpace.
I'm of the belief that EULAs are considered contracts. ..
If and when actual legally contractual terms are involved in the EULA document.
. ..just what law gives EULAs force?
Copyright law. The DMCA. The law as it exists. EULAs are a license. The license is required because the law restricts your rights. The rights holder grants you those rights, under license, as is his right. No contractual obligation need be invoked. It's simply a question of permission.
Contractual obligations only need be invoked when consideration is demanded for license rights. The contract spells out those obligations. These may be bundled into the document granting license, but the license and the contract are not the same thing, despite sharing a document.
License is about rights. Contract is about obligation. The average EULA says nothing about the obligations of either the licensee or the licensor. In fact, most of the commercial variety only mention obligations in the context of denying that the licensor has any! That is not enforcable contract.
What law makes the copyright on a book enforcable, even though no license is required for you to possess, read, burn, eat, lend or sell it?
What gives the RIAA the right prosecute copyright violations when no contract or license is involved?
Copyright law. The Law. The fact that said law innately forbids you to perform certain actions with regard to that book; unless you have license from the rights holder.
If you violate The Law you may be prosecuted.
Do not confuse the lack of an enforcable contract with the lack of enforcability of The Law.
The correct button label on most EULAs would be not "I Accept," but "I Understand."
Except that most EULAs want to leave you with the impression that you really have "signed" away your right to redress of grievance, or entered into an obligation to have your grievance heard in Botswana.
We all know it's going to suck, but at least let them release it first before you criticize . . . They're looking for feedback to make improvements . ..
Slashdot Mirror
People as in indians or as in specific persons.
As in specific persons, although the majority of those specific persons resided on the Indian subcontinent. The majority of people debunking people who continue the practice today also live on the Indian subcontinent and have my full support.
There is no such thing as "race," although there is certainly such a thing as religion; and yoga was developed out of certain religous philosophies, not scientific anatomy.
There is nothing wrong with using classical yoga secularly for stretching and exercise, so long as it is in accord with stretching and exercise. Often it is not. Its primary intent is to develop and display "superhuman" abilities, but being double jointed doesn't mean you're special:
Except in the sense that you've permanently fucked up your ligaments to the point that it will require surgery to do something about it.
I care about your ligaments. I don't give a damn what "race" they are.
KFG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect
KFG
Young instead suggests that people sit all the way back in their chair so that their sacrum touches the chair's back.
"When you do this, your pelvis and back are aligned properly and it allows you to move easily in the chair," said Young.
The simplest, most direct and most effective means of accomplishing this to remove the back from your chair. You were designed to sit on a platform (like, for instance, the Earth). Without a back to lean against you naturally rely on your muscles to maintain proper spinal alignment.
I'm puzzled by the article's statement that the slouched forward postion stretches muscles in the wrong direction though. This is the only direction muscles in the back should be stretched; the muscles in the abdomen are in contraction in this posture and should stretch no more than allowing the spine to be upright.
Do not do the yoga position known as The Cobra. Permanent spine injury can result which you may missinterpret as "flexability." Remember that classic yoga positions were invented by the same people who came up with the idea that shoving a knitting needle through your cheeks was a proof of "holiness." Pay attention to modern knowledge of anatomy and ergonomics. The spine isn't supposed to bend backwards. The Cat is the proper back stretch.
KFG
Trying to correct that is like trying to find a cure for the neurotic cat.
http://www.shotgunworld.com/
KFG
How many fingers can you fit into your ass?
None, if you don't mind, and even if you do.
KFG
Heck, most human beings wont recognize what you are talking about if you just said "\circle \circle*"
I might not know what he was talking about, but I could match it literally with other instances.
The real problem though, in this particular instance, is that he did not properly identify to himself what he wanted to search for on the web
Your search, by the way, is obtuse and relies on specific knowledge that only results in false hits.
Try something as simple as "latex+circle command". This one'll give you the answer in the first hit:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools/latex/ltx-210.html
KFG
Why is Wikipedia any less trustworthy than any other encyclopedia?
Because the article in Britannica on Maxwell's Theory was written by some dude named James Clerk Maxwell?
*Well, they didn't KNOW the facts were from Wikipedia, but they didn't question them.
We can't blame it all on the web. The quality of our professional academics isn't exactly at its apex either.
KFG
I was thinking of stores like Circuit City as being agents of the publisher, as they often do enter into special publicity deals.
Yes, even small mom and pops can enter into these deals. It's called co-op marketing. A sharing of local promotional efforts and expenses for the mutual benefit of both parties, but this does not create legal agency in the reseller, although it can create a shared liability in the specific marketing scheme. A form of very limited partnership.
Except for promotional giveaways the software is still purchased outright from the publisher (although usually on credit). The promotional giveaways are given to the retailer and become the retailer's property.
Only the largest of retailers even purchase from the publisher at all, but acquire the software from a third party who purchased it from either the publisher or a fourth party. In fact it's not at all unheard of for retailers to purchase from other retailers just like any other "consumer." I used to do this all the time if I could get a better price from one of my competitors (say, WD-40 from K-Mart) than I could from my wholesalers, as was sometimes the case given their large orders and my small ones. The local independant computer store that I usually deal with these days often "shops" at Newegg.
I'm not terribly familiar with USA law, but isn't it against the law to present something as a valid contract when you should know that it isn't?
We have invented standard contract disclaimers to deal with situations like that. In mass marketed things like boxed software it isn't even practical to insure the EULA is actually valid as written everywhere the software is sold (we have, at minimum, fifty one seperate legal jurisdictions in the US, Federal plus each state) so every possible term under the sun is thrown in with an implict acknowledgement that they might not all be binding in any particular jurisdiction or specific case.
Pure boilerplate license/contract and the courts get to sort it all out if a complaint is filed, starting with argument over just what court has the jurisdiction to hear the argument. Fun and games.
Many things are very obviously illegal, but ignored.
And that's the truth.
KFG
What sets the US apart from many other nations is our willingness to fund science in all its forms, whether or not a given research projects produces something whose value can be measured in dollars and cents.
0 2
http://www.improb.com/ig/ig-pastwinners.html#ig20
I'm rather partial to the improved method for estimating the surface area of Indian elephants at Kerala Agricultural University, India myself, but the belly button lint study at the University of Sydney is also good for a chuckle.
The monitoring of the brains of locusts watching Star Wars, Newcastle University, England, is something I'll have to make time to look into, as well as the whole Exploding Trousers thingy, Massey University, New Zealand.
Not really sure about the Literature Prize to Nigerian 419 scammers, but that's off the science research topic anyway.
KFG
Obviously they either need to cut funding for this project, or balance it by adding funding for a project to investigate the molecular secrets of lox.
We cannot have a cream cheese/lox molecular secrets gap at taxpayer expense.
KFG
As the agent of the software distributors, entering into a contract with the store (for sale) is nearly the same as entering into it with the distributor themselves.
Except for items taken on consignment retail stores do not contract to sell. They purchase property and resell it. I have owned a brick and mortar retail store. I acted as noone's agent and neither did my wholesalers. We bought, we sold. The software I purchased for resale became my property to do with as I pleased. When I resold it it became the property of my customer to do with as he pleased, including reselling it if he wished. No power or obligation of attorney transfered from the rights holder to me to my customer.
Business multiseat licenses are sold by contract either directly from the rights holder or their agent. These licenses do not rely on click through EULAs and are not relevant to the discussion.
Second, a license is *not* needed to use or view a copyrighted work, NOR to make ephemeral copies, as needed by the technology and intended use of the work. In other words, explicit consent has been given for text-2-speech converters, copying to ram, to framebuffer, etc. Like reading a book you find at a bus stop, using software you find in such a place is equally legal regardless of any license, or intent of the author.
Of course, this is codified in the Berne Convention Treaty, although local laws may still vary somewhat, as the Berne Convention Treaty is really a framework rather than explicitly defined code.
The American DMCA, for instance, is not part of the Berne Convention Treaty.
You can contract to the contrary, but if you don't realize you're doing it, it likely isn't binding anyways, so unless you did so in a room with a bunch of lawyers and IBM salesmen, likely none of the software you use is licensed in this fashion.
I explictly limited my comments to retail boxed software with a click through EULA.A EULA is not typically a contract. It is merely a license, some of the terms of which may not even be legally binding. As I have written before and alluded to here the main function of a EULA is to give the licensee the impression of a legally binding agreement, because the impressionable will believe it is.
The inherent rights and obligations of the rights holder and the retail purchaser are defined by law, not the EULA and the courts have been known to reject EULAs that are in contravention to the law.
This does not, however, mean that certain terms of the EULA are not enforceable if they are in accord with the law (in fact they may be nothing more than a statement of the law) and the courts have been know to enforce them.
KFG
Look at this page . . .
The scary part is that that one is aimed at college students.
The scariest part is that it was probably written by a committie of college graduates.
KFG
I could construct many scenarios that logically would be consistent but have no relationship to the desired end of the application. . .
Bingo! In fact, unless you are working at the very cutting edge of science and/or technology, going where no man has gone before, the really hard part of program design is figuring out just what the heck that desired end really is.
The rest is just a programming exercise.
Computers may be able to prove a program correct, logically consistent and even generate algorithms, but these have nothing to do with design. They're the mere implimentation of design.
A computer will never be able to design a program until you can clearly and explicitly tell it what you want the program to do, at which point, you have already designed the program.
When did "design" become a dirty word in programming anyway? And how about giving programmers a solid foundation in analytical logic?
Show of hands. How many of you out there who claim that you learned everything you ever needed to know about programming from the web spent the first few months, at least, ignoring code and studying design?
Not meaning to unduly ruffle any feathers, really, but maybe that's why so much software sucks.
KFG
Terry has a peculiar definition of intelligence. Sheep have to be coerced into being herded. Goats will sign up voluntarily.
Cats cannot be herded at all, although, if in the mood, they can be bribed.
KFG
I vaguely remember the days when culture had something to do with people, not just competing marketing departments...
You should come sign up for my online social network. We're much cooler than the dorks on MySpace, because we'd never sign up for something dorky like MySpace.
KFG
. . .anyone who changes their mind based on this stupid marketing campaign really is a sheep.
Nah. They're signing you up to be a goat.
KFG
Flavour must be aligned with convenience, but you have to be careful how you synergise solutions.
Blender manufacturers should be held liable for the banana-orange smoothie all over your ceiling.
KFG
I would think a simple "yes" or "no" answer would be enough evidence and also keep the classified information concealed.
I'm sorry, but that information is classified.
KFG
In most legal jurisdictions you are required to have license to engage in sexual intercourse, but are forbidden to contract it.
KFG
I'm of the belief that EULAs are considered contracts. . .
.just what law gives EULAs force?
If and when actual legally contractual terms are involved in the EULA document.
. .
Copyright law. The DMCA. The law as it exists. EULAs are a license. The license is required because the law restricts your rights. The rights holder grants you those rights, under license, as is his right. No contractual obligation need be invoked. It's simply a question of permission.
Contractual obligations only need be invoked when consideration is demanded for license rights. The contract spells out those obligations. These may be bundled into the document granting license, but the license and the contract are not the same thing, despite sharing a document.
License is about rights. Contract is about obligation. The average EULA says nothing about the obligations of either the licensee or the licensor. In fact, most of the commercial variety only mention obligations in the context of denying that the licensor has any! That is not enforcable contract.
What law makes the copyright on a book enforcable, even though no license is required for you to possess, read, burn, eat, lend or sell it?
What gives the RIAA the right prosecute copyright violations when no contract or license is involved?
Copyright law. The Law. The fact that said law innately forbids you to perform certain actions with regard to that book; unless you have license from the rights holder.
If you violate The Law you may be prosecuted.
Do not confuse the lack of an enforcable contract with the lack of enforcability of The Law.
The correct button label on most EULAs would be not "I Accept," but "I Understand."
Except that most EULAs want to leave you with the impression that you really have "signed" away your right to redress of grievance, or entered into an obligation to have your grievance heard in Botswana.
KFG
"Chatting" around the water cooler is often an advisable first step; before going into the boss's office.
KFG
There is a certain amount of "venting" going on as well.
KFG
Are there really any reasons (yet) for an average user to pay the money to upgrade from Microsoft Windows XP Pro to Microsoft Windows Vista?
Bill wants a jacuzzi in his stretch Corvette?
KFG
We all know it's going to suck, but at least let them release it first before you criticize . . . They're looking for feedback to make improvements . . .
?
KFG
Clearly you are not ranking giving Microsoft money a high enough priority in your desired OS feature set.
Don't worry, they're working on that; and you vill like it!
KFG