The other other thing to remember is that we're not talking about a scarce good here. It really is pretty viable to log onto the internet and get any of these games at next to no cost. If you're priced out of the market anyway, what reason is there not to pirate?
If you charge more, you move fewer units. Charge less and you move more units. Depending on exactly where you are in the supply/demand curve, you can actually increase revenues by dropping prices.
I think you misunderstand what evil is. It's banal. The only thing required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. These are not good men, and they are not passively letting evil win. They are actively creating it.
Consider the usual gold standard for evil, Adolph Hitler. Now Hitler was pretty evil, but he wouldn't have accomplished anything if he wasn't assised by millions of "good germans". That's the true source of evil in this world. It's the people who don't care about right or wrong, but conformity to authority that create evil.
If falling deaths are so preventable, why are they so prevalent? People make mistakes, and there's nothing you can do to prevent that. So no, deaths by falls are not any more preventable than death by radiation.
This isn't a joke. The disrespect Brewer shows for our most cherished rights offends me far, far more than anything I've ever seen on the internet. Yes, even more than goatse.
I'd rather live in a world where goatse was plastered on every billboard than in a world where our ostensibly most respectable citizens can propose something like this and not be run out of office with torches and pitchforks.
This is not merely offensive, it's the deepest level of obscenity I can imagine. This is depravity writ large.
Another useless slashvertisement. People don't use the granular permissions that exist already (e.g. ACLs), no one's going to bother with even finer grained control. The problem isn't granularity, it's a completely understandable dislike of spending time managing permissions.
I don't think I'd really qualify a noncontact search as "sexual abuse".
So it's OK if I have your wife/daughter/mother strip for me and shine a flashlight in her tender bits against her will, as long as I don't touch her?
Again, they didn't address whether someone who is thought to have not paid a fine should be put in jail because that wasn't the point that was appealed.
In order to determine whether people accused of minor crimes should suffer strip searches it's necessary to first determine whether they should go to jail. If they shouldn't go to jail, they obviously shouldn't be strip searched. You can't answer the one question without considering the other. The SC failed to do that, and they failed to do their jobs.
The question brought before the SC was "can a person accused of a minor crime be strip searched" The answer comes in two parts:
1) Does everyone entering jail have to be strip searched? 2) Does everyone accused of a minor crime have to go to jail?
If the answer to either question is no, then people accused of minor crimes shouldn't be strip searched. The SC only answered question 1, ignoring question 2 entirely.
The issue is whether the strip search was appropriate given the crime. If going into jail requires a strip search, then it's necessary to consider whether going to jail is appropriate in order to determine whether the strip search was appropriate. They assumed that jail for minor offences was approprate, thereby begging the original question.
Still no moral justification for the malicious handling of the data innocent MegaUpload customers? The fact that the US won WWII is kind of beside the point.
The strip search is unreasonable. There is absolutely nothing that could possibly justify the sexual abuse of someone who is falsely accused of paying a fine.
See, the SC didn't even address that. They only addressed whether it was reasonable to strip search someone going to jail. That was never the question at all.
The Supreme Court is engaging in egregious question begging here. They argue that every inmate going into general population requires a strip search, but they ignored whether it was apprpriate for this fellow to go into general population at all.
If every inmane in jail requires a strip search, and strip searches for minor crimes are unreasonable, then it's unreasonable to send people accused of minor crimes to jail at all.
There are people I know who are so cheap that they attempted to use a slice of PVC pipe for their wedding ring because they feel jewelry industry is a racket to sell shiny stones.
The weird thing is, they're right. The jewelry industry is a racket to sell shiny stones. How is it that they're smart enough to figure that out, but not smart enough to realize that replacing it with plastic is even stupider?
Slashdot Mirror
The other other thing to remember is that we're not talking about a scarce good here. It really is pretty viable to log onto the internet and get any of these games at next to no cost. If you're priced out of the market anyway, what reason is there not to pirate?
If you charge more, you move fewer units. Charge less and you move more units. Depending on exactly where you are in the supply/demand curve, you can actually increase revenues by dropping prices.
Boohoo for Yahoo.
I think you misunderstand what evil is. It's banal. The only thing required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. These are not good men, and they are not passively letting evil win. They are actively creating it.
Consider the usual gold standard for evil, Adolph Hitler. Now Hitler was pretty evil, but he wouldn't have accomplished anything if he wasn't assised by millions of "good germans". That's the true source of evil in this world. It's the people who don't care about right or wrong, but conformity to authority that create evil.
If falling deaths are so preventable, why are they so prevalent? People make mistakes, and there's nothing you can do to prevent that. So no, deaths by falls are not any more preventable than death by radiation.
Radiation is scary even if it is -safe-.
Only if you're stupid.
My own opinion is that solar, wind, and hydroelectric power are almost certainly the three cleanest and safest sources we have at present
Nuclear kills fewer people per kWh than any of those. People are just more afraid of invisible radiation than they are of falling off of rooftops.
This isn't a joke. The disrespect Brewer shows for our most cherished rights offends me far, far more than anything I've ever seen on the internet. Yes, even more than goatse.
I'd rather live in a world where goatse was plastered on every billboard than in a world where our ostensibly most respectable citizens can propose something like this and not be run out of office with torches and pitchforks.
This is not merely offensive, it's the deepest level of obscenity I can imagine. This is depravity writ large.
Another useless slashvertisement. People don't use the granular permissions that exist already (e.g. ACLs), no one's going to bother with even finer grained control. The problem isn't granularity, it's a completely understandable dislike of spending time managing permissions.
I don't think I'd really qualify a noncontact search as "sexual abuse".
So it's OK if I have your wife/daughter/mother strip for me and shine a flashlight in her tender bits against her will, as long as I don't touch her?
Again, they didn't address whether someone who is thought to have not paid a fine should be put in jail because that wasn't the point that was appealed.
In order to determine whether people accused of minor crimes should suffer strip searches it's necessary to first determine whether they should go to jail. If they shouldn't go to jail, they obviously shouldn't be strip searched. You can't answer the one question without considering the other. The SC failed to do that, and they failed to do their jobs.
The question brought before the SC was "can a person accused of a minor crime be strip searched" The answer comes in two parts:
1) Does everyone entering jail have to be strip searched?
2) Does everyone accused of a minor crime have to go to jail?
If the answer to either question is no, then people accused of minor crimes shouldn't be strip searched. The SC only answered question 1, ignoring question 2 entirely.
The Court did say that deference to the judgment of jail administrators is needed in cases where they're not clearly in the wrong
Strip searching someone falsely accused of failing to pay a small fine is clearly in the wrong.
The issue is whether the strip search was appropriate given the crime. If going into jail requires a strip search, then it's necessary to consider whether going to jail is appropriate in order to determine whether the strip search was appropriate. They assumed that jail for minor offences was approprate, thereby begging the original question.
Still no moral justification for the malicious handling of the data innocent MegaUpload customers? The fact that the US won WWII is kind of beside the point.
Well sure, but I didn't want to hazard a guess as to the compression ratio they got.
I would like to submit exhibit A: The PC game industry.
OK, go ahead. Submit your evidence that killing used PC game sales did not hurt developer profits. Let's see the data.
Assuming 8 bits per pixel, a 150,000,000,000 pixel image would be 419GB.
Because others are evil the US government cannot be? Is that your argument?
Come back when you have some reasoning that actually attempts to justify this morally.
The strip search is unreasonable. There is absolutely nothing that could possibly justify the sexual abuse of someone who is falsely accused of paying a fine.
See, the SC didn't even address that. They only addressed whether it was reasonable to strip search someone going to jail. That was never the question at all.
The Supreme Court is engaging in egregious question begging here. They argue that every inmate going into general population requires a strip search, but they ignored whether it was apprpriate for this fellow to go into general population at all.
If every inmane in jail requires a strip search, and strip searches for minor crimes are unreasonable, then it's unreasonable to send people accused of minor crimes to jail at all.
This is what Torchlight II is for.
There are people I know who are so cheap that they attempted to use a slice of PVC pipe for their wedding ring because they feel jewelry industry is a racket to sell shiny stones.
The weird thing is, they're right. The jewelry industry is a racket to sell shiny stones. How is it that they're smart enough to figure that out, but not smart enough to realize that replacing it with plastic is even stupider?
I could make an honest rational argument if I tried. I'm not sure the same is true for our government's lawyers.
Name one.
Jesus fucking christ the US government and its excuse for a "justice" system is evil. Evil fucking pieces of shit.
Frankly, all of them.
You are absolutely out of touch with reality. Even solar and wind kill people at a higher rate then nuclear does.