That's a good thing. This way, no matter how many ads you see you're not going to spend any extra money. If they had better ads, you'd be more likely to be conned into spending money that you didn't need to.
How do you know which elements are ads unless they're hosted on well known ad servers or obviously named sub directories? Host your ads in the same path as your content and there's no way to automate ad removal.
Oh, so like the US crack down on Occupy Wall Street, the journalists arrested during the crackdown, and the US confiscation of domain names they have no jurisdiction over?
Nmap is distributed with clarifications to the GPL that explicitly define bundling the software as a "derivative work". Since the bundled software was not also GPL licensed, this was in fact contrary to the license.
They distributed nmap in a manner inconsistent with its licensing, running afoul of copyright law. They should be forced to pay applicable statutory damages.
They know that this bacteria lives in an environment of Arsenic and may use it in its cell process. So any Spectrometric study will show Arsenic as contamination.
What matters is whether the arsenic is covalently bound to functional groups like adenosine, which mass spectrometry is able to detect.
The press is an item. Everyone who owns one has freedom of the press. Computers are the modern equivalent of the press, they serve the same fundamental purpose, disseminating information. So everyone who owns a computer has freedom of the press.
This blogger does not rise to the level of journalist, because she fails to meet this list of qualifications we expect traditional journalists to have. Very few other bloggers have those same qualifications, so they can expect to not be treated as journalists by this court.
Defendant fails to bring forth any evidence suggestive of her status as a journalist. For example, there is no evidence of (1) any education in journalism; (2) any credentials or proof of any affiliation with any recognized news entity; (3) proof of adherence to journalistic standards such as editing, fact-checking, or disclosures of conflicts of interest; (4) keeping notes of conversations and interviews conducted; (5) mutual understanding or agreement of confidentiality between the defendant and his/her sources; (6) creation of an independent product rather than assembling writings and postings of others; or (7) contacting "the other side" to get both sides of a story. Without evidence of this nature, defendant is not "media."
It could be fair that developers are barred from using real armies in games branded as realistic if they do not take into account the doctrine of these armies.
No it could not, as that would violate free speech.
That could be considered as slander Fiction cannot be slanderous.
I am not sure what my opinions are on this one but I think that it shouldn't be dismissed as a silly one.
No, it absolutely should be dismissed as silly. There are no worthwhile issues to be discussed here.
Slashdot Mirror
Affordable capitalist health care is a pipe dream.
It takes a very long time to effect change.
Only if that change would increase the power of the people.
That's a good thing. This way, no matter how many ads you see you're not going to spend any extra money. If they had better ads, you'd be more likely to be conned into spending money that you didn't need to.
Such as a digital watch. Status symbols are for tools.
How do you know which elements are ads unless they're hosted on well known ad servers or obviously named sub directories? Host your ads in the same path as your content and there's no way to automate ad removal.
You have a point. But in that case, how bad are Java programmers that they need TWO sets of training wheels?
No, it has not. Not yet.
So in other words, nothing?
And what have your letters accomplished? You probably get a warm fuzzie from writing them. What else?
Oh, so like the US crack down on Occupy Wall Street, the journalists arrested during the crackdown, and the US confiscation of domain names they have no jurisdiction over?
Nmap is distributed with clarifications to the GPL that explicitly define bundling the software as a "derivative work". Since the bundled software was not also GPL licensed, this was in fact contrary to the license.
They distributed nmap in a manner inconsistent with its licensing, running afoul of copyright law. They should be forced to pay applicable statutory damages.
So it's about as socialist as Obama is then?
You can legislate all you want, you can't change the nature of property. Non-rivalrous goods are not property, period.
The fact of the matter is that no information is "your information". Information simply cannot be owned.
They know that this bacteria lives in an environment of Arsenic and may use it in its cell process. So any Spectrometric study will show Arsenic as contamination.
What matters is whether the arsenic is covalently bound to functional groups like adenosine, which mass spectrometry is able to detect.
Indeed. It's "Freedom of the Press", not "Freedom of Journalists". The Press is used for tabloids and fiction as well as journalism.
The press is an item. Everyone who owns one has freedom of the press. Computers are the modern equivalent of the press, they serve the same fundamental purpose, disseminating information. So everyone who owns a computer has freedom of the press.
This blogger does not rise to the level of journalist, because she fails to meet this list of qualifications we expect traditional journalists to have. Very few other bloggers have those same qualifications, so they can expect to not be treated as journalists by this court.
Slashdot is a geek tabloid. Don't expect journalistic integrity. Do expect entertaining discussion.
Defamation requires a reasonable explanation that the statements are intended to be taken factually. No such expectation exists in fictional works.
Sorry, we passed that bar a long time ago. There is no limit to the ignorance and malfeasance of the SCOTUS.
I think a shooting game in which one has to choose who to shoot would tend to be a better game than one in which you shoot everything that moves
You might think that, but there still hasn't been a better first person shooter than Doom.
It could be fair that developers are barred from using real armies in games branded as realistic if they do not take into account the doctrine of these armies.
No it could not, as that would violate free speech.
That could be considered as slander
Fiction cannot be slanderous.
I am not sure what my opinions are on this one but I think that it shouldn't be dismissed as a silly one.
No, it absolutely should be dismissed as silly. There are no worthwhile issues to be discussed here.
We should send more.