Mostly Republicans heaped indignation on Gingrich. (I think, I was kinda of young when he last held office), He sure didn't resign because of what Democrats thought.
Also it is one thing to cheat on your wife. Its another to cheat on your sick wife.
Do not judge so that you will not be judged” Matthew 7:1
“Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye? “You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye. Matthew 7:3-5
Ohh, I'm sure respectable people are running. Maybe even people who had more experience than Barack Obama did in 2008. But normal, respectable, and dependable doesn't get viewers. The media is going to focus on clowns till a straw poll or a primary cuts them out. Then they are going to make shit up.
The candidates the press is focusing on are really weak so far. The last important thing Gingrich did was resign in disgrace from office. Its cool that he likes to read and has shown a minimum level of skill with computers. At least he doesn't have his wife print out his email. (John McCain)... But Gingrich has a slim chance of winning the primary.
I respect Gingrich for what he has done but I can't trust a man who betrays his family like he did. I also don't respect quitters and cable news personalities. (You too Sarah Palin)
That $1000 is a stand in for work. In an economy full of theft you have high unemployment. Or high underemployment. Instead of $1000 you earned writing software for your local market you have $5 selling imported shoes.
Bastiat himself, apply the parable of the broken window in a different way. Suppose it was discovered that the little boy was actually hired by the glazier, and paid a franc for every window he broke. Suddenly the same act would be regarded as theft: the glazier was breaking windows in order to force people to hire his services. Yet the facts observed by the onlookers remain true: the glazier benefits from the business at the expense of the baker, the cobbler, and so on.
Bastiat argues that people actually do endorse activities which are morally equivalent to the glazier hiring a boy to break windows for him:
Whence we arrive at this unexpected conclusion: "Society loses the value of things which are uselessly destroyed;" and we must assent to a maxim which will make the hair of protectionists stand on end—To break, to spoil, to waste, is not to encourage national labour; or, more briefly, "destruction is not profit." What will you say, Moniteur Industriel[5]—what will you say, disciples of good M. F. Chamans, who has calculated with so much precision how much trade would gain by the burning of Paris, from the number of houses it would be necessary to rebuild?
There is no wholesale price in the Agency Model that the Publishers switched too. Publishers want at minimum 70% of the retail price. Apple wants 30% of retail.
0% left for anyone else.
They weren't competing with Apple. There app was in the App Store before Apple announced IOS. There plan was to be the number 2 eBook seller. But yeah once Barnes And Noble, Kobo, Sony, Smashwords, and then Apple came into the market they were fucked. What Apple did just sped up their demise a few years.
Nah Amazon will do the same thing Google did when Apple tried to ban Google Voice. There will be a Kindle HTML 5 ebook reader for phones. It will run entirely in the browser.
http://mashable.com/2010/09/17/google-voice-app-store-return/
Apple banned Google Voice. Google puts out a Web App. Apple allows it back in. Apple would rather have the enemy in the App Store than a large percentage of their users using Web Apps. Or worse yet Jailbreaking their device and using the Cydia store.
I suspect one of two things.
1) Amazon already has a HTML 5 browser application. They will launch it on June 30th.
2) Amazon has secretly created a trade group with other middle men such as Facebook, Hulu, Pandora, Audacity, Comixology, and Barnes and Noble. The App Trade Group will remove their apps on June 30th and block access to existing IOS apps. They will use their combined leverage to negotiate better terms with Apple.
They could sue for Defamation or Libel
They could claim that the defendants made false claims about who they were and their relationship to the the Corporation.
Showing injury would be hard. You would have to show that people didn't understand that the message was satire.
All satire tries to redirect the spectator to a competing product. There is always an implicit message of don't buy from these guys, buy from someone else.
Satire becomes slander when a significant number of the spectators don't get that satire is what they are seeing. If the joke goes over too many peoples head then you have slandered someone. It doesn't even matter if what you said is true. You can't make statements for other people.
No The commercial part comes into you pretending to sell your competitors product. The intent has to be to confuse the buyer. If your not actually selling Coke on your site its still satire and protected speech. So long as the visitors get that satire is going on.
Also for it to be either a reasonable reader has to understand that a Joke is being made about the New Jersey Devils. I'm not sure it needs to be a funny joke.
Ahh but your confused. What these activists did was put out a press release pretending to be a Corporation. Then they put out another saying "Just Joking."
The hope was to make a big stink with people who didn't get the second part. They hoped you wouldn't get the joke.
Corporations will do the same thing. They will put out press releases for Unions saying things that will piss off Union members.
Like "The United Auto Workers Union 848 will be raising dues" with a picture of the union president in Hawaii.
Then they put out another release a few days later saying "Just Joking".
This basically gives a free pass to dirty tricks campaigns of all sorts. So long as you say "Just Joking" later.
Corporations will use this ruling. They will use it the next time they want to break up a union or shut someone up. The ruling is a double edged sword. They don't care that you don't think this applies to them. Dumbass.
CIA is going to love this ruling It means they can pretend to be anyone they want. Now all their False Flag operations are totally legal.
Yeah if you think about it this ruling is stupid. It is only satire when the audience understands that the source is not the thing being made fun of. Anything else is deceit.
They are not comparing page views. They are comparing referrals. That only occurs when someone clicks on a link and is redirected to one of those 21 web pages. How often his page refreshes doesn't matter at all.
It should also be noted that the report is biased by the news sites they used.
Their list is full of Old Media. (newspapers and cable channels)
Here is the list:
Yahoo, MSNBC, AOLNews, Cnn, NY Daily News, Fox News, Huffington Post, Google News, Washington Post, USA Today, LA Times, ABC News, NY Times, CBS News, Examiner, Daily Mail, Topix, NY Post, Chicago Tribune, Boston.com, SF Gate
FYI SkyNet is the supercomputer made from PS3's the Air-force built. It was the PS2 Emotion Engines included in the launch PS3's that when activated caused SkyNet to turn evil.
Slashdot Mirror
Republicans heaped indignation on Bill Clinton.
Mostly Republicans heaped indignation on Gingrich. (I think, I was kinda of young when he last held office), He sure didn't resign because of what Democrats thought.
Also it is one thing to cheat on your wife. Its another to cheat on your sick wife.
Do not judge so that you will not be judged” Matthew 7:1
“Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye? “You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye. Matthew 7:3-5
It was more about hypocrisy than anything.
When asked about his favorite book Romeny stated "Battlefield Earth" by L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology.
Nah he probably just likes to read. It not as if he has a real job or anything.
Ohh, I'm sure respectable people are running. Maybe even people who had more experience than Barack Obama did in 2008. But normal, respectable, and dependable doesn't get viewers. The media is going to focus on clowns till a straw poll or a primary cuts them out. Then they are going to make shit up.
Genrich isn't a dumb. That not his weak point. His weak point is his penis.
The candidates the press is focusing on are really weak so far. The last important thing Gingrich did was resign in disgrace from office. Its cool that he likes to read and has shown a minimum level of skill with computers. At least he doesn't have his wife print out his email. (John McCain) ... But Gingrich has a slim chance of winning the primary.
I respect Gingrich for what he has done but I can't trust a man who betrays his family like he did. I also don't respect quitters and cable news personalities. (You too Sarah Palin)
That $1000 is a stand in for work. In an economy full of theft you have high unemployment. Or high underemployment. Instead of $1000 you earned writing software for your local market you have $5 selling imported shoes.
Bastiat himself, apply the parable of the broken window in a different way. Suppose it was discovered that the little boy was actually hired by the glazier, and paid a franc for every window he broke. Suddenly the same act would be regarded as theft: the glazier was breaking windows in order to force people to hire his services. Yet the facts observed by the onlookers remain true: the glazier benefits from the business at the expense of the baker, the cobbler, and so on. Bastiat argues that people actually do endorse activities which are morally equivalent to the glazier hiring a boy to break windows for him: Whence we arrive at this unexpected conclusion: "Society loses the value of things which are uselessly destroyed;" and we must assent to a maxim which will make the hair of protectionists stand on end—To break, to spoil, to waste, is not to encourage national labour; or, more briefly, "destruction is not profit." What will you say, Moniteur Industriel[5]—what will you say, disciples of good M. F. Chamans, who has calculated with so much precision how much trade would gain by the burning of Paris, from the number of houses it would be necessary to rebuild?
There is no wholesale price in the Agency Model that the Publishers switched too. Publishers want at minimum 70% of the retail price. Apple wants 30% of retail. 0% left for anyone else.
Fuck Me. ^ They were in the store before they Apple announced IBooks. I got to learn to read my post when it says Preview.
They weren't competing with Apple. There app was in the App Store before Apple announced IOS. There plan was to be the number 2 eBook seller. But yeah once Barnes And Noble, Kobo, Sony, Smashwords, and then Apple came into the market they were fucked. What Apple did just sped up their demise a few years.
Nah Amazon will do the same thing Google did when Apple tried to ban Google Voice. There will be a Kindle HTML 5 ebook reader for phones. It will run entirely in the browser. http://mashable.com/2010/09/17/google-voice-app-store-return/ Apple banned Google Voice. Google puts out a Web App. Apple allows it back in. Apple would rather have the enemy in the App Store than a large percentage of their users using Web Apps. Or worse yet Jailbreaking their device and using the Cydia store.
I suspect one of two things. 1) Amazon already has a HTML 5 browser application. They will launch it on June 30th. 2) Amazon has secretly created a trade group with other middle men such as Facebook, Hulu, Pandora, Audacity, Comixology, and Barnes and Noble. The App Trade Group will remove their apps on June 30th and block access to existing IOS apps. They will use their combined leverage to negotiate better terms with Apple.
They could sue for Defamation or Libel They could claim that the defendants made false claims about who they were and their relationship to the the Corporation. Showing injury would be hard. You would have to show that people didn't understand that the message was satire.
All satire tries to redirect the spectator to a competing product. There is always an implicit message of don't buy from these guys, buy from someone else. Satire becomes slander when a significant number of the spectators don't get that satire is what they are seeing. If the joke goes over too many peoples head then you have slandered someone. It doesn't even matter if what you said is true. You can't make statements for other people.
No The commercial part comes into you pretending to sell your competitors product. The intent has to be to confuse the buyer. If your not actually selling Coke on your site its still satire and protected speech. So long as the visitors get that satire is going on.
Also for it to be either a reasonable reader has to understand that a Joke is being made about the New Jersey Devils. I'm not sure it needs to be a funny joke.
Ahh but your confused. What these activists did was put out a press release pretending to be a Corporation. Then they put out another saying "Just Joking." The hope was to make a big stink with people who didn't get the second part. They hoped you wouldn't get the joke. Corporations will do the same thing. They will put out press releases for Unions saying things that will piss off Union members. Like "The United Auto Workers Union 848 will be raising dues" with a picture of the union president in Hawaii. Then they put out another release a few days later saying "Just Joking". This basically gives a free pass to dirty tricks campaigns of all sorts. So long as you say "Just Joking" later.
Corporations will use this ruling. They will use it the next time they want to break up a union or shut someone up. The ruling is a double edged sword. They don't care that you don't think this applies to them. Dumbass.
Although honestly I don't know the facts of this. It could be that is was obvious. If so good ruling.
CIA is going to love this ruling It means they can pretend to be anyone they want. Now all their False Flag operations are totally legal. Yeah if you think about it this ruling is stupid. It is only satire when the audience understands that the source is not the thing being made fun of. Anything else is deceit.
They are not comparing page views. They are comparing referrals. That only occurs when someone clicks on a link and is redirected to one of those 21 web pages. How often his page refreshes doesn't matter at all.
It should also be noted that the report is biased by the news sites they used. Their list is full of Old Media. (newspapers and cable channels) Here is the list: Yahoo, MSNBC, AOLNews, Cnn, NY Daily News, Fox News, Huffington Post, Google News, Washington Post, USA Today, LA Times, ABC News, NY Times, CBS News, Examiner, Daily Mail, Topix, NY Post, Chicago Tribune, Boston.com, SF Gate
FYI SkyNet is the supercomputer made from PS3's the Air-force built. It was the PS2 Emotion Engines included in the launch PS3's that when activated caused SkyNet to turn evil.