Yeah, French music is contrived, but their culture is so superior. Maybe they just don't have to throw themselves into music. Maybe they're just happy with their society and don't have enough angst to churn out the most emotive music. It takes real misery to make good music, as almost any artist's life will show you. France has a lot less misery than the US, so their music is flat...And they can just buy ours, so who cares really?
See, folks?? THIS is why we can't have universal healthcare in the US: It would kill our creativity!!!
I must admit, I'm finding the seemingly never ending stream of hipsters aching for the chance to lambast my musical preference (by expounding their own) quite hilarious.
If musical nationalism is your hot button topic, perhaps it's time to move out of mom's basement and get a life.
I couldn't give a shit less about lyrics; my musical preference is based on what the music sounds like and how it makes me feel. In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida is practically incomprehensible lyrically, but I still dig it for the emotion it invokes.
The only emotion Daft Punk has ever invoked in me is a powerful urge to drill out my eardrums.
And aside the fact they respond to every single inquiry with "We don't keep records of that," I found the final paragraph quite telling:
In addition to our response that we do not collect or retain lists that state if and
when cell phone records were obtained during an investigation, none of your inquiries
are for an "arrest report," an "incident report," or an "investigative report," pursuant
to Missouri Statute Section 610.100, and therefore are not open records pursuant to
the Sunshine Law.
In other words, you were vague enough in your request that we can legally tell you to fuck off, so... fuck off. Continued:
Further, your inquiries contain no time frames or specific cases.
If you were able to more narrowly tailor your inquiries to a specific case(s) during a
specific time frame(s), I would be able to research whether cell phone location
records were utilized in one or more specific cases. As it stands, your requests are
limitless and we possess no mechanism to search our entire data base for the presence
of cell phone location records.
Really? "no mechanism" to search a database? Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of building a damn database in the first place?
Because I can tail a guy, or "shadow" him walking down the street. Anyone can do those activities in public. Not anyone can eavesdrop on a cell phone which is being used in someone's home, car, etc. Warrants are when the police want to do something an ordinary citizen cannot.
Not exactly; the reason it's illegal is not because "ordinary citizens cannot" track cell phones (especially considering that with deep enough pockets, an 'ordinary citizen' very much can track any cell phone), but rather because a cell phone, being a privately owned, personal communication device, falls under the category of "personal effects" and possibly "papers" (as both are used for communication) and thus is subject to protection under the 4th Amendment.
I think pretty much everyone who buys gasoline (which, consequently, is pretty much everyone) is fully aware of how the oil cartels collude to fix prices and get away with it.
Boy, are you naive. Republicans apparently believe that there is a free market in oil, and that the free market is not a global market. Otherwise, they would be laughed off stage when it's suggested that increasing domestic production of oil would affect gas prices in the US.
Another example: the oil industry. In fact, I don't even really have to go into detail on that one; I think pretty much everyone who buys gasoline (which, consequently, is pretty much everyone) is fully aware of how the oil cartels collude to fix prices and get away with it.
ARE they colluding, though? Or just responding to price rises/drops very quickly and economically efficiently?
I mean, take a common situation of two gas stations at opposite corners at an intersection.
Gas stations != oil companies, so... non sequitur.
We ARE primarily composed of greedy, narcissistic, psychopathic assholes, so letting anyone broadcast anything anywhere is really a bad idea.
Agreed, although I do admit it's interesting to ponder what communications would be like without regulation... Sounds like a sci-fi novella is in order!
Well, thanks there, Capt. Obvious... hard to recognize you without the cape, lol.
In all seriousness, collusion is only illegal if A) someone notices, and B) the government decides to prosecute. For example, prior to the repeal of Glass-Steagall, it was illegal for a holdings bank to operate as an investment bank (and vice versa); yet that did not prevent Goldman Sachs from requesting (and receiving) a pass from the SEC to do just that.
Another example: the oil industry. In fact, I don't even really have to go into detail on that one; I think pretty much everyone who buys gasoline (which, consequently, is pretty much everyone) is fully aware of how the oil cartels collude to fix prices and get away with it.
In short, while you are 100% correct in principle, the reality of our economic situation is that those who can afford to circumvent the law, do.
The alternative would be to close down the FCC and let people broadcast whatever they want wherever they want at whatever power pleases them. There are probably people who think this is a good idea, and won't believe otherwise until Anonymous gets a hold of a transmitter.
Correction: it would be a good idea, if humanity wasn't primarily comprised of greedy, narcissistic assholes.
It's not as if the app is accessing information that isn't already publicly available. Newsflash, ladies: if you're checking in to every shop you visit on foursquare, your stalker (the real one, not the guy in the office building across the street looking for a date) already knows. No app needed.
Slashdot Mirror
You're using logic and reason, which is expressly forbidden in public schools.
French music sucks. NEXT!
Yeah, French music is contrived, but their culture is so superior. Maybe they just don't have to throw themselves into music. Maybe they're just happy with their society and don't have enough angst to churn out the most emotive music. It takes real misery to make good music, as almost any artist's life will show you. France has a lot less misery than the US, so their music is flat...And they can just buy ours, so who cares really?
See, folks?? THIS is why we can't have universal healthcare in the US: It would kill our creativity!!!
I must admit, I'm finding the seemingly never ending stream of hipsters aching for the chance to lambast my musical preference (by expounding their own) quite hilarious.
If musical nationalism is your hot button topic, perhaps it's time to move out of mom's basement and get a life.
Just listened to their track 1901. I stand... confirmed.
Bloody awful.
I couldn't give a shit less about lyrics; my musical preference is based on what the music sounds like and how it makes me feel. In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida is practically incomprehensible lyrically, but I still dig it for the emotion it invokes.
The only emotion Daft Punk has ever invoked in me is a powerful urge to drill out my eardrums.
You just made my day, friend.
Viva La Revolucion! Viva La Sneakernet!!!
Ok, maybe not your style, but you have to admit, that the French have some excellent music.
Incorrect: I don't have to admit to a damn thing.
IMO, France hasn't made a decent contribution to the musical world since Debussy (and some would debate that, even).
French music sucks.
NEXT!
In other words, you were vague enough in your request that we can legally tell you to fuck off, so... fuck off.
Continued:
Really? "no mechanism" to search a database? Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of building a damn database in the first place?
Because I can tail a guy, or "shadow" him walking down the street. Anyone can do those activities in public. Not anyone can eavesdrop on a cell phone which is being used in someone's home, car, etc. Warrants are when the police want to do something an ordinary citizen cannot.
Not exactly; the reason it's illegal is not because "ordinary citizens cannot" track cell phones (especially considering that with deep enough pockets, an 'ordinary citizen' very much can track any cell phone), but rather because a cell phone, being a privately owned, personal communication device, falls under the category of "personal effects" and possibly "papers" (as both are used for communication) and thus is subject to protection under the 4th Amendment.
I think pretty much everyone who buys gasoline (which, consequently, is pretty much everyone) is fully aware of how the oil cartels collude to fix prices and get away with it.
Boy, are you naive. Republicans apparently believe that there is a free market in oil, and that the free market is not a global market. Otherwise, they would be laughed off stage when it's suggested that increasing domestic production of oil would affect gas prices in the US.
touche, mon amie, touche.
ARE they colluding, though? Or just responding to price rises/drops very quickly and economically efficiently?
I mean, take a common situation of two gas stations at opposite corners at an intersection.
Gas stations != oil companies, so... non sequitur.
The reality of our economic situation is that those who can afford to circumvent the law, do.
Then how did it work back in '93?
Well, since you're the one who claims it did, why not tell us yourself how a 16-bit OS runs natively on an 8-bit system?
We ARE primarily composed of greedy, narcissistic, psychopathic assholes, so letting anyone broadcast anything anywhere is really a bad idea.
Agreed, although I do admit it's interesting to ponder what communications would be like without regulation... Sounds like a sci-fi novella is in order!
Collusion is illegal.
Well, thanks there, Capt. Obvious... hard to recognize you without the cape, lol.
In all seriousness, collusion is only illegal if A) someone notices, and B) the government decides to prosecute. For example, prior to the repeal of Glass-Steagall, it was illegal for a holdings bank to operate as an investment bank (and vice versa); yet that did not prevent Goldman Sachs from requesting (and receiving) a pass from the SEC to do just that.
Another example: the oil industry. In fact, I don't even really have to go into detail on that one; I think pretty much everyone who buys gasoline (which, consequently, is pretty much everyone) is fully aware of how the oil cartels collude to fix prices and get away with it.
In short, while you are 100% correct in principle, the reality of our economic situation is that those who can afford to circumvent the law, do.
The alternative would be to close down the FCC and let people broadcast whatever they want wherever they want at whatever power pleases them. There are probably people who think this is a good idea, and won't believe otherwise until Anonymous gets a hold of a transmitter.
Correction: it would be a good idea, if humanity wasn't primarily comprised of greedy, narcissistic assholes.
In business having a poor product might allow you to gain in the short term but is a huge detriment in the long term.
That is, of course, until you and your competitors collude to keep prices high; then everybody (who isn't a customer) wins!
So you have to do it yourself?
Oh, NOW I get it!
You would think that someone who cracks wise as often as I do would be a little faster at catching when someone else does it...
Funny, coming from someone who goes by CanHasDIY;
self-whoosh..? I don't get it. I thought it was funny period.
no step-sister, I take it?
Several, but sadly no hot ones.
So you have to do it yourself?
Hey, I'm a married man!
So... yes.
Creepy, but also convenient.
That's what step-sisters are for.
Convenience without the creep.
... for the US having a government not basing its policies on adages, witticisms and one-liners.
You sure about that bro?
Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?
A " girl " is like "your mom", but younger and not genetically related to you.
... unless that girl is your sister. Then you're heading right back into 'creepy' territory.
It's not as if the app is accessing information that isn't already publicly available. Newsflash, ladies: if you're checking in to every shop you visit on foursquare, your stalker (the real one, not the guy in the office building across the street looking for a date) already knows. No app needed.
Creepy to me would be, say, an app that is secretly installed on your phone, cannot be removed or turned off, that transmits all sorts of private usage data to clandestine third-party servers without the user's permission.
Now all someone has to do is invent drivers who aren't complete morons and we'll be in business!