Sometimes the establishment goes so far overboard in restraining personal freedoms that almost any activity designed to fight back is justified. It seems to me that in the UK it may be time for people to go into some serious rebellion.
Perhaps they are trying to replicate practices of the medical community. Doctors, hospitals and labs as well as pharmaceutical firms are the uber elite of robbers.
I would tend to believe that if it can be shown that a store has an ongoing problem with techs violating peoples' privacy that a huge law suit would succeed. After all, employers are supposed to have good supervision over employees.
The crash numbers sound bad but I wonder about other activities as well. For example how many people crash while eating or drinking a soda? I know that quite a few females have crashed while putting on makeup. Maybe cell phones are not as drastic as the numbers suggest. We need some sort of comparison. How about the numbers of dead or worse motorcycle riders due to no helmets while riding?
It makes sense to correct as many things as we can but to single out one element for correction while ignoring other elements seems foolish.
Assuming that the government of Iran has some concern for the world's opinions just how do they hope to justify disallowing free speech and association?
Did Iran take lessons from Bush or something?
Forgetting completely imported religions how about statements taken to be blasphemy by Catholics from protestants and visa-versa? For example some protestants have questioned the salvation of Mary as she may never have been baptized and repented and we don't know if she accepted Christ as her personal savior. The point being that blasphemy is not clear cut and is in the eye of the beholder. And to any protestant and most Catholics suggesting that Allah is God is in itself a serious blasphemy. Even allowing non Christian forms of worship can be taken as "putting other gods before me". Some could even claim a divine command to destroy all non Christian faiths as Satanic doctrines.
Usually police function under rules that make reference to the dignity of their position or of the police department. Operating or even participating in any site that is clearly racist might be enough to terminate an officer or just about any public employee.
As a matter of fact there are laws about members of the public insulting the dignity of an officer as well. If you decide to call a cop a bloated, blue, doughnut swilling creep you can probably be arrested under a similar law in your area.
For some reason police squads seem to get completely, over the edge, stupid on an all too regular basis. And it is not just in the UK. In Miami Florida we had a police raid in which the cops simply got the wrong address. In the middle of night they knocked down the front door of a home and tossed the sleeping couple up against a wall and then one of the cops tore off the female residents top and began playing with her teats while making racial remarks. It just happens that the home owner in question was a minister in a substantial church and the naked teats that were being fondled by the cop belonged to the reverend's wife. OOOOPPPPPS!
So far the money doesn't work! Creating 100,000 gallons of alcohol equals about 50,000 gallons of gasoline. The size and complexity of the facility indicates that this will loose money unless it scales up to far greater production.
How reasonable is it to have tax payer money supporting court systems to hear such cases over and over again? The sad fact is that allowing copyright cases opens the door to thousands upon thousands of continuing copyright suits, It is exactly like porn law. Each year vast sums are spent with law enforcement and the courts chewing over whether a work is illegal or not. Each complaint generates a new public expense. The real answer is to forbid such cases from law completely. Give the tax payers a break.
Sadly we may have as many ignorant judges as ignorant juries. And we also have laws which either contradict other laws or add up in such a way that a group of laws acting in concert cause outcomes that are weird or opposite of reason.For example Wells Fargo recently ended up suing itself due to weird circumstances and laws.
The tax payers are the ones who take it in the neck while these endless court cases go on and on. How many billions in tax dollars does it take to support courts hearing copyright cases every year? It's like pornography or abortion in the courts and in congress. It just keeps running up expenses. Maybe these types of cases should not be allowed in the justice system at all.
I know that you are correct in believing that Europeans have a better grasp of science than Americans. I used to send scientific equipment to trade shows in Europe and the general public not only attended but asked rather deep questions. My market involved universities and the usual expectation in the US is that a few department heads along with some of the more privileged professors would attend but we rarely saw ordinary citizens at US shows and the depth of knowledge revealed by their questions did not imply any deep, scientific education.
Here we go again! If the materials were published in the US just how can an English court have jurisdiction? Are they claiming that because English addresses received the materials that English laws are in play? Or is this another treaty driven action in an American court? And England is a hoot compared to France. France really does want to reach out and control the world.
Sadly the nightmare that we call law is in a certain frame where we have legal treaties and people who commit so-called crimes in one nation can be forced into custody and sent to the nation whose laws they supposedly broke. Certain nations with which we have treaties have laws that are about one hundred and eighty degrees in opposition to what we consider moral or legal.
I am getting to the point of believing that any laws we allow will usually be so twisted and distorted by courts and lawyers that we might be better off if we had no laws at all.
Perhaps that will add a bit of interpretation to whether one is governed by where one is at or by the jurisdiction that pumps the data down the net. If one is downloading from Spain, in such a way that all laws of Spain are satisfied then perhaps a person in the US might be protected by downloading from such a site.
And then if one's hard drive is searched how can it be known whether that drive received the supposed offending material while in Spain or back home in the US. Perhaps we could fill flash drives with popular tunes in Spain and then sell those drives all over the world.
Talk about ambiguous wording. Does the author include human urine as animal urine? And if human as well as animal urine are included in his reference then what is ruled out? As far as I know only animals urinate and humans are just another form of animal although probably not the nicest form of animal. Maybe it's like that old Exxon ad about putting a tiger in your tank. Tiger urine is probably nasty enough to run an engine without altering it in any way.
You forgot drug addict and race traitor. Not only was Jackson trying to turn white he only married white girls. Frankly he was effeminate, a child molester a drug addict and all around creep.
That just goes to show us all what can happen in life as he was one of the cutest little kids I've ever seen when he was a boy with the Jackson Five.
I'm not certain that McNamara's views on the Vietnam war mean a thing. Underneath that war was one simple fact and that is that we absolutely guaranteed that France would not be allowed back into Vietnam following WWII. America lied and broke that promise. The entire flow of events rests upon that simple fact. Vietnam supported the US during WWII and that guarantee was the promised payment for the services that Vietnam provided.
Vietnam concluded that the US was not trustworthy and that treaties and agreements could not exist with the US due to our dishonesty. So that formed allegiances with the Soviet Union. That led to a nasty and pointless war.
Slashdot Mirror
Sometimes the establishment goes so far overboard in restraining personal freedoms that almost any activity designed to fight back is justified. It seems to me that in the UK it may be time for people to go into some serious rebellion.
Perhaps they are trying to replicate practices of the medical community. Doctors, hospitals and labs as well as pharmaceutical firms are the uber elite of robbers.
I would tend to believe that if it can be shown that a store has an ongoing problem with techs violating peoples' privacy that a huge law suit would succeed. After all, employers are supposed to have good supervision over employees.
The crash numbers sound bad but I wonder about other activities as well. For example how many people crash while eating or drinking a soda? I know that quite a few females have crashed while putting on makeup. Maybe cell phones are not as drastic as the numbers suggest. We need some sort of comparison. How about the numbers of dead or worse motorcycle riders due to no helmets while riding?
It makes sense to correct as many things as we can but to single out one element for correction while ignoring other elements seems foolish.
Assuming that the government of Iran has some concern for the world's opinions just how do they hope to justify disallowing free speech and association?
Did Iran take lessons from Bush or something?
Forgetting completely imported religions how about statements taken to be blasphemy by Catholics from protestants and visa-versa? For example some protestants have questioned the salvation of Mary as she may never have been baptized and repented and we don't know if she accepted Christ as her personal savior. The point being that blasphemy is not clear cut and is in the eye of the beholder. And to any protestant and most Catholics suggesting that Allah is God is in itself a serious blasphemy. Even allowing non Christian forms of worship can be taken as "putting other gods before me". Some could even claim a divine command to destroy all non Christian faiths as Satanic doctrines.
Debian! Isn't that Ubuntu Lite?
In my area we feed algae to the talapia and other exotic, food fish. There are lots of good fresh water fish that love gobbling up weeds an algae.
Usually police function under rules that make reference to the dignity of their position or of the police department. Operating or even participating in any site that is clearly racist might be enough to terminate an officer or just about any public employee.
As a matter of fact there are laws about members of the public insulting the dignity of an officer as well. If you decide to call a cop a bloated, blue, doughnut swilling creep you can probably be arrested under a similar law in your area.
For some reason police squads seem to get completely, over the edge, stupid on an all too regular basis. And it is not just in the UK. In Miami Florida we had a police raid in which the cops simply got the wrong address. In the middle of night they knocked down the front door of a home and tossed the sleeping couple up against a wall and then one of the cops tore off the female residents top and began playing with her teats while making racial remarks. It just happens that the home owner in question was a minister in a substantial church and the naked teats that were being fondled by the cop belonged to the reverend's wife. OOOOPPPPPS!
Sounds like a great new technology but I get frustrated when product seems to take forever to get to market.
So far the money doesn't work! Creating 100,000 gallons of alcohol equals about 50,000 gallons of gasoline. The size and complexity of the facility indicates that this will loose money unless it scales up to far greater production.
How reasonable is it to have tax payer money supporting court systems to hear such cases over and over again? The sad fact is that allowing copyright cases opens the door to thousands upon thousands of continuing copyright suits, It is exactly like porn law. Each year vast sums are spent with law enforcement and the courts chewing over whether a work is illegal or not. Each complaint generates a new public expense. The real answer is to forbid such cases from law completely. Give the tax payers a break.
Sadly we may have as many ignorant judges as ignorant juries. And we also have laws which either contradict other laws or add up in such a way that a group of laws acting in concert cause outcomes that are weird or opposite of reason.For example Wells Fargo recently ended up suing itself due to weird circumstances and laws.
The tax payers are the ones who take it in the neck while these endless court cases go on and on. How many billions in tax dollars does it take to support courts hearing copyright cases every year? It's like pornography or abortion in the courts and in congress. It just keeps running up expenses. Maybe these types of cases should not be allowed in the justice system at all.
I know that you are correct in believing that Europeans have a better grasp of science than Americans. I used to send scientific equipment to trade shows in Europe and the general public not only attended but asked rather deep questions. My market involved universities and the usual expectation in the US is that a few department heads along with some of the more privileged professors would attend but we rarely saw ordinary citizens at US shows and the depth of knowledge revealed by their questions did not imply any deep, scientific education.
Here we go again! If the materials were published in the US just how can an English court have jurisdiction? Are they claiming that because English addresses received the materials that English laws are in play? Or is this another treaty driven action in an American court? And England is a hoot compared to France. France really does want to reach out and control the world.
Sadly the nightmare that we call law is in a certain frame where we have legal treaties and people who commit so-called crimes in one nation can be forced into custody and sent to the nation whose laws they supposedly broke. Certain nations with which we have treaties have laws that are about one hundred and eighty degrees in opposition to what we consider moral or legal.
I am getting to the point of believing that any laws we allow will usually be so twisted and distorted by courts and lawyers that we might be better off if we had no laws at all.
Perhaps that will add a bit of interpretation to whether one is governed by where one is at or by the jurisdiction that pumps the data down the net. If one is downloading from Spain, in such a way that all laws of Spain are satisfied then perhaps a person in the US might be protected by downloading from such a site.
And then if one's hard drive is searched how can it be known whether that drive received the supposed offending material while in Spain or back home in the US. Perhaps we could fill flash drives with popular tunes in Spain and then sell those drives all over the world.
This fellow wants a USB connected floppy drive on that old machine. That is asking for a miracle indeed.
It will take me a while but committing all that data to my memory won't add any measurable weight to me at all.
Talk about ambiguous wording. Does the author include human urine as animal urine? And if human as well as animal urine are included in his reference then what is ruled out? As far as I know only animals urinate and humans are just another form of animal although probably not the nicest form of animal. Maybe it's like that old Exxon ad about putting a tiger in your tank. Tiger urine is probably nasty enough to run an engine without altering it in any way.
You forgot drug addict and race traitor. Not only was Jackson trying to turn white he only married white girls. Frankly he was effeminate, a child molester a drug addict and all around creep.
That just goes to show us all what can happen in life as he was one of the cutest little kids I've ever seen when he was a boy with the Jackson Five.
I'm not certain that McNamara's views on the Vietnam war mean a thing. Underneath that war was one simple fact and that is that we absolutely guaranteed that France would not be allowed back into Vietnam following WWII. America lied and broke that promise. The entire flow of events rests upon that simple fact. Vietnam supported the US during WWII and that guarantee was the promised payment for the services that Vietnam provided.
Vietnam concluded that the US was not trustworthy and that treaties and agreements could not exist with the US due to our dishonesty. So that formed allegiances with the Soviet Union. That led to a nasty and pointless war.
This thing sounds worse than a Republican to me.