You wouldn't even have learned words like corona or chromoSPHERE, or even eclipse, if what you're trying to convince us were true. You're just a troll. And not a very good one at that.
Haven't been to Detroit for close to 30 years, but three decades ago, no one in Detroit walked anywhere except from the house/office/store to/from their car. The chances of hitting a pedestrian are quite likely higher in the middle of the Gobi Desert than in Detroit. Especially during a snowstorm when everyone will be huddled around the TV seeking news of when the terrible calamity will come to an end.
Thanks for the timely critique. And for several clues that you have no idea what you're talking about. Or what you were talking about 30 years ago.
Tell us all next how climate scientists are wrong in other ways, such as global warming, or that northerly England is colder than Southern tropical Toronto.
Well, most of them think that Turkeys are the best things to eat during Thanksgiving. And that's definitely not the case. A nice rib roast is always a winner.
Oh, and then a kid puts a snowman in the street and builds a ramp too. And slides into the street lying down on the toboggan out of sight and below observation level.
Well, when I lived in Detroit, it wasn't a matter of simply ice, snow and cold. It was all of those things on narrow urban sidestreets with cars parked on both sides and a single pair of eight inch ruts down the middle - on a two-way street.
I'd really would like to see a computer deal with that - and the oncoming drivers.
Yes, by all means, let's 86 the whole concept of insurance because future tech might do something useful. After all, health insurance is exactly like a car warranty.
And it turns out they were wrong about alot of stuff. The constitution is hardly immutable nor the people that crafted it 'divine' in any way.
That's why they made it amendable. And we've changed it according to their rules.
"And in the process they established intellectual property rights."
Yes, after much debate and disagreement.
If something is adopted following debate or disagreement? Is that to say it is necessarily wrong?
It should be noted that the people arguing for it were hardly the "small guys".
Citation needed.
There's nothing whatsoever about this being the reason for copyright in the constitution. You made that up.
No, sorry, I didn't. Yes, it's true that the constitution does not spell out all of the debate and disagreement that would lead you to ignore the entire agreement, but there really are many more historical resources available to you if you'd like to learn more from this discussion,
I think copyright was always longer than that, but in essence, you're right. It's for the original author.
I think we can all agree that over the years the terms of copyright protection has been extended too far beyond this goal. This needs a serious looking at.
But if we're to be totally honest here, we're not talking about Marx Brothers movies or Mickey Mouse shorts, are we? It's about new movies. Ones that no one would argue the copyright has expired on.
The current copyright system is exactly the same as the old one. We just might need to fix the duration. But I don't see how that applies here.
You need to read some more and not just call the constitution stupid. The people who wrote it were dealing with some shit way more serious than your panty waist-ed X-men addiction. And in the process they established intellectual property rights.
Do you know why copyrights and patents were put in place? To allow people to make a profit before the majors simply copied their ideas.
You DO own your ideas. At least for a period of time. That's what was done. But you don't own my idea. And if you can't even read a history book, much less learn from it, please do not start claiming ownership or control over what I may or may not have done.
> The device in question searches the internet So does google.
You do know that the law doesn't just cut shit off in the middle like you just did, don't you? You may think it does, but that only means about as much as your post.
Slashdot Mirror
You wouldn't even have learned words like corona or chromoSPHERE, or even eclipse, if what you're trying to convince us were true. You're just a troll. And not a very good one at that.
Swim? English not your first language?
That's how science works, after all.
I think the Chinese are pretty much made of time and money.
How can this be if CHIIIINA is also-doing all this good stuff?
But it clearly also launched.
I predict that their also launching capabilities will be unsurpassed.
Tax credit is not what you "get back". Tax credit is just a deduction from your income to get into a lower tax bracket.
Well, you titled your post "Wrong" and indeed you were.
Well done.
Haven't been to Detroit for close to 30 years, but three decades ago, no one in Detroit walked anywhere except from the house/office/store to/from their car. The chances of hitting a pedestrian are quite likely higher in the middle of the Gobi Desert than in Detroit. Especially during a snowstorm when everyone will be huddled around the TV seeking news of when the terrible calamity will come to an end.
Thanks for the timely critique. And for several clues that you have no idea what you're talking about. Or what you were talking about 30 years ago.
A fine retort Motard. Very convincing.
Thank you.
Tell us all next how climate scientists are wrong in other ways, such as global warming, or that northerly England is colder than Southern tropical Toronto.
Well, most of them think that Turkeys are the best things to eat during Thanksgiving. And that's definitely not the case. A nice rib roast is always a winner.
Being a thousand miles North means nothing.
Well, yeah, it sorta' does.
Oh, and then a kid puts a snowman in the street and builds a ramp too. And slides into the street lying down on the toboggan out of sight and below observation level.
There are none of those kids left in Detroit.
Shit. Oh well, I guess they should've asked an AC how Detroit compares to SF.
Detroit used to have people who thought that. ;)
Well, when I lived in Detroit, it wasn't a matter of simply ice, snow and cold. It was all of those things on narrow urban sidestreets with cars parked on both sides and a single pair of eight inch ruts down the middle - on a two-way street.
I'd really would like to see a computer deal with that - and the oncoming drivers.
Yes, by all means, let's 86 the whole concept of insurance because future tech might do something useful. After all, health insurance is exactly like a car warranty.
My God, why didn't we think of this before?
It is true that the protections would be for a limited time. But that's not what we're talking about here, is it?
Is TickBox serving up Marx Brothers movies? Three Stooges?
C'Mon, man.
And it turns out they were wrong about alot of stuff. The constitution is hardly immutable nor the people that crafted it 'divine' in any way.
That's why they made it amendable. And we've changed it according to their rules.
"And in the process they established intellectual property rights."
Yes, after much debate and disagreement.
If something is adopted following debate or disagreement? Is that to say it is necessarily wrong?
It should be noted that the people arguing for it were hardly the "small guys".
Citation needed.
There's nothing whatsoever about this being the reason for copyright in the constitution. You made that up.
No, sorry, I didn't. Yes, it's true that the constitution does not spell out all of the debate and disagreement that would lead you to ignore the entire agreement, but there really are many more historical resources available to you if you'd like to learn more from this discussion,
I think copyright was always longer than that, but in essence, you're right. It's for the original author.
I think we can all agree that over the years the terms of copyright protection has been extended too far beyond this goal. This needs a serious looking at.
But if we're to be totally honest here, we're not talking about Marx Brothers movies or Mickey Mouse shorts, are we? It's about new movies. Ones that no one would argue the copyright has expired on.
The current copyright system is exactly the same as the old one. We just might need to fix the duration. But I don't see how that applies here.
Do you really think that if they do lose, that there will be any new movies, er, content?
But that's not to say there's only one class of thing.
Steven Spielberg and Cracked are not in the same league.
As it should.
You need to read some more and not just call the constitution stupid. The people who wrote it were dealing with some shit way more serious than your panty waist-ed X-men addiction. And in the process they established intellectual property rights.
Do you know why copyrights and patents were put in place? To allow people to make a profit before the majors simply copied their ideas.
You DO own your ideas. At least for a period of time. That's what was done. But you don't own my idea. And if you can't even read a history book, much less learn from it, please do not start claiming ownership or control over what I may or may not have done.
Thank You.
To think this might be understandable. To take the time to type it...? Hilarious.
> The device in question searches the internet
So does google.
You do know that the law doesn't just cut shit off in the middle like you just did, don't you? You may think it does, but that only means about as much as your post.