Should it be illegal? It should be fine if you write down stuff on a notepad and keep it to yourself. If you publish the info or make it available to anyone else, you should spend time in jail.
The same was true (may still be) of people who used scanners to hear neighbor's wireless phone calls. It was legal to use a scanner, it was illegal to share anything you heard.
Else one could say, record every car that parked at planned parenthood and share the info, or worse, threaten to share it unless payments were made.
And no, it's not okay for police to do it either unless they're targeting a specific person for a specific crime.
Unfortunately, for both police and prosecutors, they don't get any pay raise, recognition, or good points on their record for letting innocent people get away.
When people bring up Rift I tell them this: If you like WoW you'll like Rift. Some of the things are refreshingly better such as the talent system and the public groups. But if you're bored with WoW you'll get bored with Rift quickly after you hit 50. It's just another grind.
Why is it wrong to sell your kids. People give them away all the time, and have little say in what happens to them after. What harm is done if they make some money on it?
I'm not saying, "what harm could ever possibly happen," of course anything is possible. I'm asking what harm is done merely by accepting payment? Most women who plan to give their kid up for adoption while pregnant are often well cared for by the adoptees. That's a form of payment as well, but we allow for it. It's not so different.
IMO if the only way to protect your IP is with massively unfair punishment ($80,000 per song?), then it should be illegal to try to protect your IP. What will happen? Hollywood stops making films ever again? Yeah fucking right. They will continue, and still make as much money as they always have. Lots of people still like going to the movies, still like owning the DVDs, still like iTunes and live music.
But this will never happen. Not because the legal system cares about Hollywood, but because the legal system care about lawyers. The legal profession makes too much money when anyone sues anyone else. They won't get in the way of their own paycheck. It's just another good ol' boys network.
I'll add that Virgin also charges you the advertised price. If it's $29.99, you'll pay that plus sales tax. With every other company, you pay "fees" that amount to almost $10 in addition to the advertised price.
However, the downside is they have very few phones to choose from. Like, usually less than 5.
Based on what precedent would they "destroy them in court". Even though "beyond a reasonable doubt" does not exist in civil law, you still have to convince a jury that they both downloaded the movie, and that the punishment should be thousands of dollars.
Agree. I was driving home yesterday, an accident had a major road blocked and I wasn't sure how to get around it without really going out of my way. Turned on GPS, hit the "go home" button, and as soon as I turned on a side street it calculated the correct path down some back ways, took me a few minutes longer than usual, but the other highway I would have taken would have added over 20 minutes.
Read your contract. Mine states that if they change the contract, I have 60 days to say I don't agree, and they will either keep me on the old contract (they do this sometimes) or cancel. Also, I only have to pay an early termination fee if I'm the ones who cancels. If they cancel I owe them nothing.
I've seen a lot of people grandfathered in on phone contracts because they want the new policy in place for new people but don't want to lose the old people. Especially on pricing structures. This may have happened to you and you didn't even know it.
By your logic, if you view pictures of murder victims, you are creating a demand for murder. Therefore, pictures of murder victims should be illegal, and you should receive the same punishment as someone who has actually murdered a person. Opening up rotten.com should get you 700 years in prison or more.
Glucose is the primary blood sugar. Fructose, and other sugars are made into glucose eventually (sometimes in the mouth, sometimes in the intestine, sometimes in the liver). This includes starch and glycogen, which are just long chains of glucose (or glucose analogues). Glucose and other simple sugars are 6-carbon rings. Wiki glucose for a nice diagram. The thing is, the rings open up, which means one of the bonds is weak enough that it breaks, and re-connects, often. It spends about 1/4 of 1% of its time in this configuration. Which means if you take a snapshot at any point in time, 0.25% of the molecules will be in this "open" configuration.
In the open configuration, the molecule is the biologic equivalent of a ready-strike match head. It has a free O- which really wants to bind with anything it touches (like your sister, haha, but back on topic). This is *extremely* toxic, and the primary reason why you have a system in place, regulated by insulin, to keep the total amount of glucose in the blood to a minimum. Because when it's stored in long chains, as it is in the muscle or liver, it doesn't have this toxic property.
The article however talks about another type of toxicity. That being the effect of too much of one type of sugar on the liver. Since TFA and the rest of the comments are directed at this, I'll leave that part to others.
Slashdot Mirror
Not from Korea you didn't!
Should it be illegal? It should be fine if you write down stuff on a notepad and keep it to yourself. If you publish the info or make it available to anyone else, you should spend time in jail.
The same was true (may still be) of people who used scanners to hear neighbor's wireless phone calls. It was legal to use a scanner, it was illegal to share anything you heard.
Else one could say, record every car that parked at planned parenthood and share the info, or worse, threaten to share it unless payments were made.
And no, it's not okay for police to do it either unless they're targeting a specific person for a specific crime.
New evidence = new theories.
As opposed to politics and religion, new evidence = character assassinate those who presented the evidence.
It's absolutely not illegal to save a legal download, at least where I live.
I don't know, I managed to run World of Warcraft off of a Dell 10v. And I regularly watch 1080p video on it.
Right? We powered locomotion by burning wood long before we powered it by burning oil.
Is that even a thing? The tabloids make money off of celebrities all the time, and surely without their consent. What makes a website different?
I'm curious what kind of bubble you live in to think that owning a gun to protect yourself from looters is even a remotely bad idea.
Unfortunately, for both police and prosecutors, they don't get any pay raise, recognition, or good points on their record for letting innocent people get away.
So, you've never complained to a company when you were unhappy with their service? And no company has ever changed a policy due to public outcry?
When people bring up Rift I tell them this: If you like WoW you'll like Rift. Some of the things are refreshingly better such as the talent system and the public groups. But if you're bored with WoW you'll get bored with Rift quickly after you hit 50. It's just another grind.
Or just run the cheap stuff through a Brita filter (courtesy of Mythbusters).
Why is it wrong to sell your kids. People give them away all the time, and have little say in what happens to them after. What harm is done if they make some money on it?
I'm not saying, "what harm could ever possibly happen," of course anything is possible. I'm asking what harm is done merely by accepting payment? Most women who plan to give their kid up for adoption while pregnant are often well cared for by the adoptees. That's a form of payment as well, but we allow for it. It's not so different.
I don't know. It's illegal for me to hit you, but if I said "someone ought to hit that asshole" it's not illegal.
Take it further. If I said those words, and someone (not me) hit you, would I be in trouble? Unlikely.
The FBI used to keep tabs on gays as well. And it turned out, there actually were gay people in the U.S.
In the words of the late George Carlin: Fuck the children.
IMO if the only way to protect your IP is with massively unfair punishment ($80,000 per song?), then it should be illegal to try to protect your IP. What will happen? Hollywood stops making films ever again? Yeah fucking right. They will continue, and still make as much money as they always have. Lots of people still like going to the movies, still like owning the DVDs, still like iTunes and live music.
But this will never happen. Not because the legal system cares about Hollywood, but because the legal system care about lawyers. The legal profession makes too much money when anyone sues anyone else. They won't get in the way of their own paycheck. It's just another good ol' boys network.
I'll add that Virgin also charges you the advertised price. If it's $29.99, you'll pay that plus sales tax. With every other company, you pay "fees" that amount to almost $10 in addition to the advertised price.
However, the downside is they have very few phones to choose from. Like, usually less than 5.
The basis for most of what is believed in both realms.
I liked Wesley, but I would have fed Troi's mum to the Klingons.
Based on what precedent would they "destroy them in court". Even though "beyond a reasonable doubt" does not exist in civil law, you still have to convince a jury that they both downloaded the movie, and that the punishment should be thousands of dollars.
Agree. I was driving home yesterday, an accident had a major road blocked and I wasn't sure how to get around it without really going out of my way. Turned on GPS, hit the "go home" button, and as soon as I turned on a side street it calculated the correct path down some back ways, took me a few minutes longer than usual, but the other highway I would have taken would have added over 20 minutes.
Read your contract. Mine states that if they change the contract, I have 60 days to say I don't agree, and they will either keep me on the old contract (they do this sometimes) or cancel. Also, I only have to pay an early termination fee if I'm the ones who cancels. If they cancel I owe them nothing. I've seen a lot of people grandfathered in on phone contracts because they want the new policy in place for new people but don't want to lose the old people. Especially on pricing structures. This may have happened to you and you didn't even know it.
By your logic, if you view pictures of murder victims, you are creating a demand for murder. Therefore, pictures of murder victims should be illegal, and you should receive the same punishment as someone who has actually murdered a person. Opening up rotten.com should get you 700 years in prison or more.
Some basics.
Glucose is the primary blood sugar. Fructose, and other sugars are made into glucose eventually (sometimes in the mouth, sometimes in the intestine, sometimes in the liver). This includes starch and glycogen, which are just long chains of glucose (or glucose analogues). Glucose and other simple sugars are 6-carbon rings. Wiki glucose for a nice diagram. The thing is, the rings open up, which means one of the bonds is weak enough that it breaks, and re-connects, often. It spends about 1/4 of 1% of its time in this configuration. Which means if you take a snapshot at any point in time, 0.25% of the molecules will be in this "open" configuration.
In the open configuration, the molecule is the biologic equivalent of a ready-strike match head. It has a free O- which really wants to bind with anything it touches (like your sister, haha, but back on topic). This is *extremely* toxic, and the primary reason why you have a system in place, regulated by insulin, to keep the total amount of glucose in the blood to a minimum. Because when it's stored in long chains, as it is in the muscle or liver, it doesn't have this toxic property.
The article however talks about another type of toxicity. That being the effect of too much of one type of sugar on the liver. Since TFA and the rest of the comments are directed at this, I'll leave that part to others.