Maybe it's that I live in New York, where the dot com revolution was happening up until about this past Thursday.
Girls I know code more than just HTML. My girlfriend codes about as much Perl as I do, and she is doing CS come fall. Several of my close friends do more than "pretty html" and make a ton of money doing it.
I see very few female sysadmins, but ummm, no offense guys, I'd feel uncomfortable too if I were in a setting where all days guys spoke about the size of their drive, the build that they did last night, and had poor personal hygene. That last one, to me, is the clincher.
Geeks! Unite! Smarten your image up! You can afford it, while the dot com thing is in its death throws, vest your options! Join a gym! Get a nice wardrobe! Brush your teeth!
And, umm, tell your younger brothers to do the same. Then, you'll start to see girl geeks.
My guess, as a JD but not an ESQ (and thereore IANAL but I'm studying for the bar) is that it would depend on what the jurisdiction defines murder as. If he intended to kill the person, that's murder.
Also: it would probably be murder under the "felony murder" rule (again, depending on jurisdiction) where anyone dies as a direct result of the commission of a felony (varies state to state) then the death is considered murder. Here, computer hacking is a felony (and a federal one, in the case of NASA) so it would be murder.
Bill Clinton just said that Federal sites can't use cookies anymore. What stops them from using these bugs? Not persistent, but so what?
And frankly, I don't understand the value of this to doubleclick. Everyone knows that watching girl-girl porn is the only reason to upgrade to DSL. Where's the new information?
This case is almost definitely a loser, which is sad, because AOL subscribers were paying for Ads to be thrown at them.
The reason it is a loser is that if AOL argues that part of their cost structure was a factor in the price that these users DID pay per hour. After the switch to the unlimited plan, the concommensurate change to "turn off this option" occured, in recognition that their cost structure was misaligned. If the class that's suing were to win, the closest parallel I can think of would be suing Wired for its increased Ad content while retaining the same cover price. It's part of the service that you're subscribing to.
Or suing a cable operator for that spare channel that lists the coming shows and runs previews over and over.
It's just part of the ToS. The users are not losing anything, because it's part of the bargained for exchange. Even the poor schmuck with the 2400 modem, the 8088 and no mouse is still getting what he paid for, because it was part of the bargain he made with AOL. If he didn't like it, exit was possible at any time.
I would love to see the brief for the class on this one. "They made me watch ads that I didn't want to watch!" which applies as much to the superbowl as it does to the side of your local buses.
There are two silly little things working against you: 1) Reciprocal treaties between those islands you live on, and the United States. Think: GATT, TRIPS, and the various WIPO treaties of which you are a citizen of a signatory country. Good idea, but you lose there.
2) By using their service and agreeing to their ToS, you are purposefully availing yourself of their service and thus they have personal jurisdiction over you, see your local copyright laws written subject to the above mentioned treaties.
Actually, in terms of pardons, the President can only pardon Federal crimes. He's the chief executive of the Federal government, not of all the state governments. That's why you see George W. pardoning Texas inmates, and not Clinton.
Paula Jones case was a state case, not federal (I believe) meaning that the next president can't pardon him.
As to a mushroom cloud, isn't that mostly fire? Doesn't fire need oxygen? Doesn't the moon not, you know, have that?
A dust cloud, sure. Interesting question, what happens when you blow up a nuke in outer space. How much of the reaction is dependant on local atmospherics (I have no clue, I'm no scientist)
Sounds like a bad Star Wars plot idea - "That's no moon... that use to be Alderaan."
It's actually one of the most well thought out and reasonable statutes out there.
Unless you want to steal someone elses idea. If John Williams wants to give away the theme to Star Wars [assuming he still retained the copyright, which I assume he assigned over the 20th C fox] he could transfer it irrevocably to the public domain. If he doesn't want to, he's entitled to fair payment for his work, right? Or you think that there should be a cap on how much money someone can earn on any one of their ideas?
The Federalists didn't like the concepts of EITHER copyright OR patents. Monopolies are abhorrent to a market system. But what impetus do you have to create if you're not going to receive compensation? You can't eat your friends admiration. And don't start with me about the open source revolution - how do you pay for your dinner?
Just because you want it, doesn't mean you have a right to it. If I've got a horse that you really want, does that give you the right to my horse? What if I've got an engine design that I spent years and millions of dollars developing? Am I not entitled to reap what I've sown?
Because that's the stance of the anti-copyright lobby.
It's utterly true that megacorps own your cultural heritage. If you don't like it, don't support them. Start your own open-source music studio, where all music that you make is public domain. See how long you last.
What happens? You encode yer bird, teach it to fly to the specific place you want, and then dissect the thing?
1) The ASPCA is gonna have a FIELD day. 2) What the hell sort of critter are you going to breed for this? Homing pigeons? Teach it to go home, just once, before you slice it to ribbons? 3) High ickiness factor here.
Could this be a subtle dig by the Academy at Canada over the recent web-broadcasting of US satellite broadcasts, thus impinging their already heavily inflated bottom lines?
Obvious monitoring concerns aside [this could reek of Big Brother, if Ford tracks its families, their usage, and hires/fires based on random criteria like... oh... writing your resume...] a quick historical note.
Ford himself was sued by his shareholders. For making the price of cars too cheap. This was in a time, much like our age right now, when the newly introduced and soon to be dominating technology was rolling out and the cars were too expensive.
Instead of handing out dividends like a shortsighted corporate creature [dividends are important, don't get me wrong] every time there was an improvement in some aspect of production, Hank passed those savings on to the consumer.
During cross examination [paraphrased here] Ford explained to the court hearing the case that he would go right on dropping the price of his cars, and that he wanted to see every man in the country have a car. After all, it was the industrial age.
There were several obvious benefits to that move, echoed in this one - if everyone has a car, they'll want new cars eventually, and you've got a market. The parallel here is slightly different, but if everyone in the company has computers, they've all got access to one another, the company intranet and can brag about their new perk.
The next benefit was that the brand name FORD was suddenly linked to affordable cars - now working for Ford is linked to getting a computer and net access, the coin of the realm in this generation.
Lastly, it's easy to plow your competition underground if you can offer more value for someone than they do - there the same cars at lower costs, here, free computers to induce workers to stay.
A good move that looks altruistic on the surface, but is _very_ sound business.
Further, not only do the geographic TLDs not solve the problem, imagine the URLs:
acme.motors.11fernstreet.westhartford.ct.us
A dot com domain has massive prestige value relative to the.11fernstreet.westhartford.ct.us domains. How would you find those, anyway, unless you know that they're exactly there?
Joel Reidenberg would be proud (he wrote the article Lex Informatica, that before we go legislating solutions, someone ought to pay attention to the fact that we can code solutions...)
This still doesn't solve the fundamental problem: domain names are unique, while you can have multiple identical trademarks, assuming varying locations or products. Acme auto vs. Acme fishing tackle, but only one acme dot com.
New York City has more hot chicks per capita than any other city in the country.
Silicon alley is in New York City.
Coincidence?
Hot chicks attract hot guys, so geekboys and geekgirls, paper rich off of their IPOs, can find that fine flesh that they've been looking for all along.
Benefits to ID: 1) Train new 3d-game developers on their code 2) Reap PR benefits of joining the Open Source movement 3) Savings from attempting to protect their rights in their code.
Liabilities to ID: 1) Lowers startup cost for interested outside parties.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, it's a First Amendment issue. It's also a copyright issue (the Adcritic bit) and a trade secret issue (the MOSR bit).
Now, Copyright is expressly in the constitution, and the First Amendment was a later addition. Which has precedence? (Trick question)
is: how close did luke and leia get between finding eachother and finding out that even just kissing was incest?
Maybe it's that I live in New York, where the dot com revolution was happening up until about this past Thursday.
Girls I know code more than just HTML. My girlfriend codes about as much Perl as I do, and she is doing CS come fall. Several of my close friends do more than "pretty html" and make a ton of money doing it.
I see very few female sysadmins, but ummm, no offense guys, I'd feel uncomfortable too if I were in a setting where all days guys spoke about the size of their drive, the build that they did last night, and had poor personal hygene. That last one, to me, is the clincher.
Geeks! Unite! Smarten your image up! You can afford it, while the dot com thing is in its death throws, vest your options! Join a gym! Get a nice wardrobe! Brush your teeth!
And, umm, tell your younger brothers to do the same. Then, you'll start to see girl geeks.
That's not scientific, though. Just a guess.
My guess, as a JD but not an ESQ (and thereore IANAL but I'm studying for the bar) is that it would depend on what the jurisdiction defines murder as. If he intended to kill the person, that's murder.
Also: it would probably be murder under the "felony murder" rule (again, depending on jurisdiction) where anyone dies as a direct result of the commission of a felony (varies state to state) then the death is considered murder. Here, computer hacking is a felony (and a federal one, in the case of NASA) so it would be murder.
That's my opinion. IANAL, BIAAJD.
Bill Clinton just said that Federal sites can't use cookies anymore. What stops them from using these bugs? Not persistent, but so what?
And frankly, I don't understand the value of this to doubleclick. Everyone knows that watching girl-girl porn is the only reason to upgrade to DSL. Where's the new information?
FTP doesn't grant unauthorized access, people get unauthorized access.
Maybe we need to hire the NRA lobbyists to protect older software?
I bet that he got this idea off the Internet. There's even bomb recipe's on that wacky Internet thing.
They say that there's a recipe for getting Uranium out of a rock by spinning it around over your head in a pail of water by a string.
The Internet is way too dangerous, we need to turn it off once and for all. There oughtta be a law.
This case is almost definitely a loser, which is sad, because AOL subscribers were paying for Ads to be thrown at them.
The reason it is a loser is that if AOL argues that part of their cost structure was a factor in the price that these users DID pay per hour. After the switch to the unlimited plan, the concommensurate change to "turn off this option" occured, in recognition that their cost structure was misaligned. If the class that's suing were to win, the closest parallel I can think of would be suing Wired for its increased Ad content while retaining the same cover price. It's part of the service that you're subscribing to.
Or suing a cable operator for that spare channel that lists the coming shows and runs previews over and over.
It's just part of the ToS. The users are not losing anything, because it's part of the bargained for exchange. Even the poor schmuck with the 2400 modem, the 8088 and no mouse is still getting what he paid for, because it was part of the bargain he made with AOL. If he didn't like it, exit was possible at any time.
I would love to see the brief for the class on this one. "They made me watch ads that I didn't want to watch!" which applies as much to the superbowl as it does to the side of your local buses.
Except that you lose on that theory.
There are two silly little things working against you:
1) Reciprocal treaties between those islands you live on, and the United States. Think: GATT, TRIPS, and the various WIPO treaties of which you are a citizen of a signatory country. Good idea, but you lose there.
2) By using their service and agreeing to their ToS, you are purposefully availing yourself of their service and thus they have personal jurisdiction over you, see your local copyright laws written subject to the above mentioned treaties.
Of course, IANAL, and this is not legal advice.
Actually, in terms of pardons, the President can only pardon Federal crimes. He's the chief executive of the Federal government, not of all the state governments. That's why you see George W. pardoning Texas inmates, and not Clinton.
Paula Jones case was a state case, not federal (I believe) meaning that the next president can't pardon him.
They're literary devices. If you take everything for granted, you have no book
Have an AI that keeps track of sports scores.
Well, that's what's selling all these damn web-enabled cell phones I keep hearing advertised.
As to a mushroom cloud, isn't that mostly fire? Doesn't fire need oxygen? Doesn't the moon not, you know, have that?
A dust cloud, sure. Interesting question, what happens when you blow up a nuke in outer space. How much of the reaction is dependant on local atmospherics (I have no clue, I'm no scientist)
Sounds like a bad Star Wars plot idea - "That's no moon... that use to be Alderaan."
Please don't hate me because I'm right, but attending MacWorld is under several hundred dollars.
That's probably not what you're looking to hear, but still, it's true.
The article itself uses spurious logic:
Trademark law is evil, it claims.
Because people have sued under trademark theories, and _LOST_ for things that are in the public domain.
Let's make a quick parallel here.
Perjury law is evil, it would claim.
It stifles your right to free speech, if you want to lie under oath.
Cripes.
It's actually one of the most well thought out and reasonable statutes out there.
Unless you want to steal someone elses idea. If John Williams wants to give away the theme to Star Wars [assuming he still retained the copyright, which I assume he assigned over the 20th C fox] he could transfer it irrevocably to the public domain. If he doesn't want to, he's entitled to fair payment for his work, right? Or you think that there should be a cap on how much money someone can earn on any one of their ideas?
The Federalists didn't like the concepts of EITHER copyright OR patents. Monopolies are abhorrent to a market system. But what impetus do you have to create if you're not going to receive compensation? You can't eat your friends admiration. And don't start with me about the open source revolution - how do you pay for your dinner?
Just because you want it, doesn't mean you have a right to it. If I've got a horse that you really want, does that give you the right to my horse? What if I've got an engine design that I spent years and millions of dollars developing? Am I not entitled to reap what I've sown?
Because that's the stance of the anti-copyright lobby.
It's utterly true that megacorps own your cultural heritage. If you don't like it, don't support them. Start your own open-source music studio, where all music that you make is public domain. See how long you last.
Can we get Whoopie to do Uncle Fucker instead?
What happens? You encode yer bird, teach it to fly to the specific place you want, and then dissect the thing?
1) The ASPCA is gonna have a FIELD day.
2) What the hell sort of critter are you going to breed for this? Homing pigeons? Teach it to go home, just once, before you slice it to ribbons?
3) High ickiness factor here.
Could this be a subtle dig by the Academy at Canada over the recent web-broadcasting of US satellite broadcasts, thus impinging their already heavily inflated bottom lines?
Obvious monitoring concerns aside [this could reek of Big Brother, if Ford tracks its families, their usage, and hires/fires based on random criteria like... oh... writing your resume...] a quick historical note.
Ford himself was sued by his shareholders. For making the price of cars too cheap. This was in a time, much like our age right now, when the newly introduced and soon to be dominating technology was rolling out and the cars were too expensive.
Instead of handing out dividends like a shortsighted corporate creature [dividends are important, don't get me wrong] every time there was an improvement in some aspect of production, Hank passed those savings on to the consumer.
During cross examination [paraphrased here] Ford explained to the court hearing the case that he would go right on dropping the price of his cars, and that he wanted to see every man in the country have a car. After all, it was the industrial age.
There were several obvious benefits to that move, echoed in this one - if everyone has a car, they'll want new cars eventually, and you've got a market. The parallel here is slightly different, but if everyone in the company has computers, they've all got access to one another, the company intranet and can brag about their new perk.
The next benefit was that the brand name FORD was suddenly linked to affordable cars - now working for Ford is linked to getting a computer and net access, the coin of the realm in this generation.
Lastly, it's easy to plow your competition underground if you can offer more value for someone than they do - there the same cars at lower costs, here, free computers to induce workers to stay.
A good move that looks altruistic on the surface, but is _very_ sound business.
Further, not only do the geographic TLDs not solve the problem, imagine the URLs:
.11fernstreet.westhartford.ct.us domains. How would you find those, anyway, unless you know that they're exactly there?
acme.motors.11fernstreet.westhartford.ct.us
A dot com domain has massive prestige value relative to the
And multinational corporations?
Joel Reidenberg would be proud (he wrote the article Lex Informatica, that before we go legislating solutions, someone ought to pay attention to the fact that we can code solutions...)
This still doesn't solve the fundamental problem: domain names are unique, while you can have multiple identical trademarks, assuming varying locations or products. Acme auto vs. Acme fishing tackle, but only one acme dot com.
A start, but not a good enough one.
New York City has more hot chicks per capita than any other city in the country.
Silicon alley is in New York City.
Coincidence?
Hot chicks attract hot guys, so geekboys and geekgirls, paper rich off of their IPOs, can find that fine flesh that they've been looking for all along.
Tell Pittsburgh to get more hot people.
Let's see.
The pro's and cons of Hitch-hiking, solo album 1 -
Sixties and Seventies entertainment: drug use and sex.
Radio Kaos:
Radio and the Cold War
Amused to Death:
Television and consumerism.
Next As Yet Unnamed Album:
The Internet & something else?
Formerly proprietary good, now free.
Benefits to ID:
1) Train new 3d-game developers on their code
2) Reap PR benefits of joining the Open Source movement
3) Savings from attempting to protect their rights in their code.
Liabilities to ID:
1) Lowers startup cost for interested outside parties.