This bill will sail through with bipartisan support. Point me to the privacy-invading bill that was unilaterally forced through. The worst and biggest ones were bipartisan, namely the DMCA, which no one would even sign their name to, and the PATRIOT Act, which very few voted against.
I'm not sure that actually works. My understanding is that if the claim is made that a product made under prior art in public domain infringes on a patent, then the claimant is admitting that their own patent is invalid. I believe it's called the Gillette defense. Maybe Spotify would actually benefit to go to court and lose, thus there is even a court ruling to support what the patent is.
Yes, that's exactly what I use. After 15 minutes it irritatingly forces me to enter a password, and after 5 failures the device wipes itself. The same is true for anyone trying to download the information through USB. I assume there is some way to make an Android device or iPhone similarly secure, but it seems like every few months some new hack comes out for those devices. The only hack I can recall reading regarding a BlackBerry device was some sort of Java exploit on the latest browser, which BlackBerry took like a day or something to fix.
The research proves only that they are able to track transactions in a public database. It would be conjecture to state that an identity will be revealed through the system proposed by the researchers, and it would be obtuse to state that their incomplete research is evidence.
"There is no such thing as bad press" is something I generally agree with, but it is not true in all cases. Reporting that using BitCoin exposes every purchase you make to the world would be considered a bad thing. Additionally, given the false sensationally negative headline, it would be difficult to conclude that there is a conflict of interest. Besides, aren't sites legally required to report when they have a conflict of interest?
"If you want the government to intervene domestically you're a liberal, if you want the government to intervene abroad you're a conservative, if you want the government to intervene both domestically and abroad you're a moderate, and if you don't want the government to intervene either domestically or abroad you're an extremist." - Joe Sobran
The Nixon Shock was a series of economic measures taken by U.S. President Richard Nixon in 1971 including unilaterally cancelling the direct convertibility of the United States dollar to gold that essentially ended the existing Bretton Woods system of international financial exchange.
I thought the Keynesians were predicting that with the stimulus we wouldn't see more than 8.5% unemployment? Weren't the Keynesians through the 2000s saying that housing was a good deal and everyone should get a house? Didn't the Austrians predict throughout the 2000s that the enormous bubble in housing, caused by Government intrusion into the marketplace, would bring down the entire U.S. economy?
It also all these irritating numbers after sentences and is a ripoff because a bunch of pages in the back just list other things to read with page numbers and some kind of other garbage.
How is it the most uninformative posts in this whole discussion are (Score:5, Informative)? mybecq is Spewing random bullshit. Fuck that PR crap on the friendly pages, dig down to the real info and you find that every Federal Reserve is a corporation and its shares are owned by member banks. Who do you think they are scared of, the special interest bought and paid for Congress or the shareholders? Here, right out of the act, is how to buy shares of a Federal Reserve Bank:
Section 5. Stock Issues; Increase and Decrease of Capital
1. Amount of Shares; Increase and Decrease of Capital; Surrender and Cancellation of Stock
The capital stock of each Federal reserve bank shall be divided into shares of $100 each. The outstanding capital stock shall be increased from time to time as member banks increase their capital stock and surplus or as additional banks become members, and may be decreased as member banks reduce their capital stock or surplus or cease to be members. Shares of the capital stock of Federal reserve banks owned by member banks shall not be transferred or hypothecated. When a member bank increases its capital stock or surplus, it shall thereupon subscribe for an additional amount of capital stock of the Federal reserve bank of its district equal to 6 per centum of the said increase, one-half of said subscription to be paid in the manner hereinbefore provided for original subscription, and one-half subject to call of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. A bank applying for stock in a Federal reserve bank at any time after the organization thereof must subscribe for an amount of the capital stock of the Federal reserve bank equal to 6 per centum of the paid-up capital stock and surplus of said applicant bank, paying therefor its par value plus one-half of 1 per centum a month from the period of the last dividend. When a member bank reduces its capital stock or surplus it shall surrender a proportionate amount of its holdings in the capital stock of said Federal Reserve bank. Any member bank which holds capital stock of a Federal Reserve bank in excess of the amount required on the basis of 6 per centum of its paid-up capital stock and surplus shall surrender such excess stock. When a member bank voluntarily liquidates it shall surrender all of its holdings of the capital stock of said Federal Reserve bank and be released from its stock subscription not previously called. In any such case the shares surrendered shall be canceled and the member bank shall receive in payment therefor, under regulations to be prescribed by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, a sum equal to its cash-paid subscriptions on the shares surrendered and one-half of 1 per centum a month from the period of the last dividend, not to exceed the book value thereof, less any liability of such member bank to the Federal Reserve bank.
[12 USC 287. As amended by act of Aug. 23, 1935 (49 Stat. 713).]
Congress controls the Federal Reserve only if it passes acts to amend the Federal Reserve Act (and the acts that amend that act). They cannot subpoena nor otherwise influence the Fed.
Prior to this act, if anyone asked the Federal Reserve about these loans, they would say that it is not appropriate for them to comment on the inner workings of the Fed. I would classify that in the secret category.
Slashdot Mirror
This bill will sail through with bipartisan support. Point me to the privacy-invading bill that was unilaterally forced through. The worst and biggest ones were bipartisan, namely the DMCA, which no one would even sign their name to, and the PATRIOT Act, which very few voted against.
I'm not sure that actually works. My understanding is that if the claim is made that a product made under prior art in public domain infringes on a patent, then the claimant is admitting that their own patent is invalid. I believe it's called the Gillette defense. Maybe Spotify would actually benefit to go to court and lose, thus there is even a court ruling to support what the patent is.
Um, I was questioning the OP comparison with 65% being the same as a 50% chance of being right by chance.
In 3 years it will be public domain to broadly distribute music in a digital form.
Yes, that's exactly what I use. After 15 minutes it irritatingly forces me to enter a password, and after 5 failures the device wipes itself. The same is true for anyone trying to download the information through USB. I assume there is some way to make an Android device or iPhone similarly secure, but it seems like every few months some new hack comes out for those devices. The only hack I can recall reading regarding a BlackBerry device was some sort of Java exploit on the latest browser, which BlackBerry took like a day or something to fix.
I dunno'. What's 1 SD worth?
I'm not a pro, so I use a BlackBerry because I haven't read about BlackBerry phones having all these various issues.
Can the Slashdot editors see IP addresses?
Because they have not revealed anyone's identity.
The research proves only that they are able to track transactions in a public database. It would be conjecture to state that an identity will be revealed through the system proposed by the researchers, and it would be obtuse to state that their incomplete research is evidence.
"There is no such thing as bad press" is something I generally agree with, but it is not true in all cases. Reporting that using BitCoin exposes every purchase you make to the world would be considered a bad thing. Additionally, given the false sensationally negative headline, it would be difficult to conclude that there is a conflict of interest. Besides, aren't sites legally required to report when they have a conflict of interest?
We still do not have an example of an identity being revealed.
The 'researchers' did not reveal the identity of anyone, so you would only be pointing to conjecture as evidence.
Until they actually reveal the identity of someone, their conclusion is false.
"If you want the government to intervene domestically you're a liberal, if you want the government to intervene abroad you're a conservative, if you want the government to intervene both domestically and abroad you're a moderate, and if you don't want the government to intervene either domestically or abroad you're an extremist." - Joe Sobran
Do you vote on stories?
It's not about changes, it's about Google+.
Nixon ended Bretton Woods, as stated in the first paragraph of the page you linked to.
The Nixon Shock was a series of economic measures taken by U.S. President Richard Nixon in 1971 including unilaterally cancelling the direct convertibility of the United States dollar to gold that essentially ended the existing Bretton Woods system of international financial exchange.
I thought the Keynesians were predicting that with the stimulus we wouldn't see more than 8.5% unemployment? Weren't the Keynesians through the 2000s saying that housing was a good deal and everyone should get a house? Didn't the Austrians predict throughout the 2000s that the enormous bubble in housing, caused by Government intrusion into the marketplace, would bring down the entire U.S. economy?
It also all these irritating numbers after sentences and is a ripoff because a bunch of pages in the back just list other things to read with page numbers and some kind of other garbage.
You're kidding, right? It's because they aren't members of the right club.
How is it the most uninformative posts in this whole discussion are (Score:5, Informative)? mybecq is Spewing random bullshit. Fuck that PR crap on the friendly pages, dig down to the real info and you find that every Federal Reserve is a corporation and its shares are owned by member banks. Who do you think they are scared of, the special interest bought and paid for Congress or the shareholders? Here, right out of the act, is how to buy shares of a Federal Reserve Bank:
Section 5. Stock Issues; Increase and Decrease of Capital
1. Amount of Shares; Increase and Decrease of Capital; Surrender and Cancellation of Stock
The capital stock of each Federal reserve bank shall be divided into shares of $100 each. The outstanding capital stock shall be increased from time to time as member banks increase their capital stock and surplus or as additional banks become members, and may be decreased as member banks reduce their capital stock or surplus or cease to be members. Shares of the capital stock of Federal reserve banks owned by member banks shall not be transferred or hypothecated. When a member bank increases its capital stock or surplus, it shall thereupon subscribe for an additional amount of capital stock of the Federal reserve bank of its district equal to 6 per centum of the said increase, one-half of said subscription to be paid in the manner hereinbefore provided for original subscription, and one-half subject to call of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. A bank applying for stock in a Federal reserve bank at any time after the organization thereof must subscribe for an amount of the capital stock of the Federal reserve bank equal to 6 per centum of the paid-up capital stock and surplus of said applicant bank, paying therefor its par value plus one-half of 1 per centum a month from the period of the last dividend. When a member bank reduces its capital stock or surplus it shall surrender a proportionate amount of its holdings in the capital stock of said Federal Reserve bank. Any member bank which holds capital stock of a Federal Reserve bank in excess of the amount required on the basis of 6 per centum of its paid-up capital stock and surplus shall surrender such excess stock. When a member bank voluntarily liquidates it shall surrender all of its holdings of the capital stock of said Federal Reserve bank and be released from its stock subscription not previously called. In any such case the shares surrendered shall be canceled and the member bank shall receive in payment therefor, under regulations to be prescribed by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, a sum equal to its cash-paid subscriptions on the shares surrendered and one-half of 1 per centum a month from the period of the last dividend, not to exceed the book value thereof, less any liability of such member bank to the Federal Reserve bank.
[12 USC 287. As amended by act of Aug. 23, 1935 (49 Stat. 713).]
Congress controls the Federal Reserve only if it passes acts to amend the Federal Reserve Act (and the acts that amend that act). They cannot subpoena nor otherwise influence the Fed.
Prior to this act, if anyone asked the Federal Reserve about these loans, they would say that it is not appropriate for them to comment on the inner workings of the Fed. I would classify that in the secret category.
I see, the standard is higher for me.