Settling has nothing to do with jail time. This was a civil suit. You can't go to jail due to any decision in civil court. You go to jail for a crime. Clearly the laws are not in place to jail someone for spamming in New York.
What happens when the same technology is put into marketing? Can adware be designed to engage the user to the point practically gauranteeing a purchase?
These technologies have already been applied to marketing, and no, they cannot guarantee a purchase.
Consider that very few people have killed themselves with gaming sessions. There is no computer program that can cause people to play for 50 hours with any likelyhood.
I know, but the guy you responded to wasn't. And I was referring to both together: VHS was the better open standard. The whole technical superiority thing is a myth anyway. There were tradeoffs. Betamax might have been higher quality or less susceptible to degradation, but it took two tapes to play most feature length movies.
If you're talking about whether better open standards float to the top, Betamax is not a good counterexample.
Seriously, though. They used wireless. The implication was that you couldn't fit the high bandwidth transmitter inside your body, so you needed a fat cable coming out of your brain. The ship then moved to "broadcast depth" like a submarine so that they could use their giant antennae to plug into the matrix.
Once inside the matrix, the implication was that there were special software characteristics of certain wired telephones. It had nothing to do with whether they used copper or 900 mHz, just that they were flagged and connected properly to some Matrix program.
Break each Baby Bell into two units.
One being a regulated company that owns the outside plant. It would be required to sell access to everyone equally at requlated, cost-based rates. Take the switching and retail side of the company and put it into another, un-regulated unit. This company would buy loops from the regulated company just like every other CLEC does.
I'm totally down with regulation, but I don't see why this would necessarily help. Depending on how the access company was regulated, it would have no reason to improve service speed, coverage, or other quality. Yes, that would encourage the actual vendors to compete, but they would no longer be the problem.
I can't stand it when liberals make the "how can Republicans want the death penalty, but not abortion." It's easy. Unborn children haven't committed crimes. Criminals have.
grandparent:
I discovered that I am totally alright with abortion, but against the death penalty
You, you inveterate moron:
This doesn't make sense. I can see being against the death penalty, but how is a known criminal's life... worth more than a unborn baby's?
I was somewhat annoyed by great-great grandparent, hardcore liberal, leaving out the opposite issue: fundie conservatives make an identically idiotic accusation of contradiction. They just make their accusation in the other direction. In fact, until this thread, I'd only ever heard your above conservative version of this bullshit. Both are equally transparent. Anyway, your question:
Those pro death penalty, against abortion, use the innocent argument. That clearly cannot apply. Yet you are not against abortion, so you can't claim you consider life sacred. (and there are a lot of people against both abortion and the death penalty). Those for both abortion and the death penalty are consistant. I do not understand what your position is, please enlighten me.
There are a pile of reasons. Some believe that there is only one extant, human life in both cases: In one case, there is an convicted criminal. In the other case, there is a pregnant woman.
Some believe that the choice should be kept as far from the government as possible: The government is not trustworthy enough to be given the option to execute people, nor is it trustworthy enough to choose whether a woman should be able to carry out an abortion.
The real point is that the two issues are different. There are independant reasons to hold either position on either issue. Conservatives and liberals alike are only occasionally swayed by their one (debatable) similarity. Conservatives and liberals alike occasionally accuse their opposition of self-contradiction due to this one (debatable) similarity. They (and you) should fucking quit it.
It was his hardcover short story collection that first made me aware of his beliefs. In his explication he described one of his short stories as an allegory for "self-destructive behaviors like drug addiction and homosexuality".
I think his misunderstanding of humanity is on a deep enough level that it pervades all of his writing. I see it in every single book of his that I've read, the Ender Wiggin Saga included. It's more subtle than as you describe in "Magic Mirror". No, he doesn't specify that homosexuality is morally wrong.
That said, I can understand being able to look at the art and ignore a bit of the artist. I certainly enjoyed his work enough to bore through seven or eight novels and a behemoth short story collection while only thinking it was a little screwy. When I finally realized, "oh, it's not screwy, it's fucked", all the magic smoke was gone. Plus Shadow of the Hegemon came out.
I don't see anything wrong with restricting certain places from demonstration for security reasons
Me neither. But that's not what "free speech zones" are anyway. They're just making sure to avoid the embarrassment of GW's 2001 innauguration. They might not have been able to excuse it before September 11th, but it's not about security.
Is it still free speech when you have to go to a "free speech zone" to do it? That is absolutely restricting people's freedom of speech and freedom to peaceably assemble. "Provably". Admit it.
The only difference between the current US administration and Mubarak is that Mubarak hasn't yet figured out what's tasteful and what's not. Arresting Immortal Technique for making a cartoon of GW with a bullet in his head wouldn't look very good. You stop the demonstrators before they get to the demonstration. You don't arrest your political oponents, you just make sure the contested election is decided by a political body that swings your way. And no, I'm not trying to say that the Democrats are above this.
P.S. In order to trample free speech, it has to be the government. Your link is partisan PR.
Yes, it will linger in your mind and perhaps taint your ability to appreciate the books.
It's different from that. Now that I am aware of his beliefs, I am aware of new parts of his novels. For example, I thought little of a homosexual character in The Homecoming Saga until I discovered his beliefs, when I thought: No, that doesn't make sense. That character was a hero... oh... wait... he was a hero because he had a family with a woman because it was what he was meant to do and men can fuck anything "warm, wet, and concave."
I first heard of his beliefs in an explication of one of his short stories, which he said was an allegory for people with self destructive behaviors, like drug addiction and homosexuality. It doesn't just "taint" his work. He is a worthless asshole. You can disagree with me, but I'm not just saying this because I read one of his essays once.
I find it hard to believe that a popular writer could be "worthless."
Seriously? OSC isn't Hitler, but Mein Kampf was more popular. Sure OSC could be worthless.
Ultimately you seem to be missing a key element of Card's beliefs: that they're his beliefs. Big shock: he wrote an article for Mormons about why Mormons should remain true to their beliefs.
No no no. I couldn't care less what Mormons require of other Mormons. That is absolutely their (inane) business. I bolded the middle paragraph for a reason. He advocates governmental persecution of non-Mormon homosexuals. There is an important distinction between being a member of an anti-gay religion and advocating governmental "discouragement" of homosexuality. He is an antagonist in this matter.
In fact I've been surprised how questioning or agnostic the Ender books are, and they leave a lot of room for interpretations and different religious viewpoints.
I disagree. His fictional characters behave according to his phenomenally disturbed understanding of personality and society. They do not require a Mormon audience, but since sixth grade I have acquired a higher standard of insight for the fiction I read.
However, this point got me worrying a little:
That point? Jiminy Cricket. You're upset by a suggestion that the Mormon church should punish what they call sin but but not that the government should punish homosexuals? The only surprising element of that statement is that he may think adolescent homosexuality is as simple as "experimentation". It shouldn't surprise anyone that some Mormons are opposed to progressive values.
I want to say this generally, not specifically to homosexuality, but it got me thinking: what if homosexuality is simply nature's way of dealing with population explosion? (I wonder if Slashdot is the place to discuss this seriously, but what the heck. Cue the trolls.)
There is plenty of scholarly investigation into the physical and societal explanation for different kinds of sexuality. There is also discussion of potential evolutionary advantages of every imaginable variation. Slashdot is a fine place to discuss it, but you might have better luck in a science article.
uh oh! He has one opinion you disagree with! Everything else he has ever done must be worthless and wrong!
If only it were as little as one opinion. I've read enough of his nonfiction that my understanding of his fiction is colored by what I know about him personally. You might be better able to ignore what you know of an artist when considering an artwork, but that doesn't make your perspective more accurate or preferable to mine.
Dunno what grandparent was talking about, but my understanding is that he wrote the novel version of Ender's Game only because he wanted to set up the character for Speaker For The Dead. Dunno if that means he's unhappy that people liked Ender's Game so much.
Within the Church, the young person who experiments with homosexual behavior should be counseled with, not excommunicated. But as the adolescent moves into adulthood and continues to engage in sinful practices far beyond the level of experimentation, then the consequences within the Church must grow more severe and more long-lasting; unfortunately, they may also be more public as well.
This applies also to the polity, the citizens at large. Laws against homosexual behavior should remain on the books, not to be indiscriminately enforced against anyone who happens to be caught violating them, but to be used when necessary to send a clear message that those who flagrantly violate society's regulation of sexual behavior cannot be permitted to remain as acceptable, equal citizens within that society.
The goal of the polity is not to put homosexuals in jail. The goal is to discourage people from engaging in homosexual practices in the first place, and, when they nevertheless proceed in their homosexual behavior, to encourage them to do so discreetly, so as not to shake the confidence of the community in the polity's ability to provide rules for safe, stable, dependable marriage and family relationships.
His anti-gay backwards bullshit is illustrated in his novels as well. For whatever reason I am no longer able to appreciate his work on any other level.
Would you mind posting your examples on a web site so that others may check whether successive versions of IE and other browsers comply with those W3C standards?
They'd just throw out that particular "non-compete" clause because it violates your right to work. It wouldn't make it past the very first court because such contracts have already been ruled on and deemed unenforceable.
Slashdot Mirror
No and no and Google isn't helping much.
Care to fill me in?
Settling has nothing to do with jail time. This was a civil suit. You can't go to jail due to any decision in civil court. You go to jail for a crime. Clearly the laws are not in place to jail someone for spamming in New York.
Consider that very few people have killed themselves with gaming sessions. There is no computer program that can cause people to play for 50 hours with any likelyhood.
People learn spelling by reading, not by writing. They certainly don't learn spelling better with a pen and paper than with a keyboard.
There are a billion reasons not to give a kid a laptop, but yours is not one.
I know, but the guy you responded to wasn't. And I was referring to both together: VHS was the better open standard. The whole technical superiority thing is a myth anyway. There were tradeoffs. Betamax might have been higher quality or less susceptible to degradation, but it took two tapes to play most feature length movies.
If you're talking about whether better open standards float to the top, Betamax is not a good counterexample.
Seriously, though. They used wireless. The implication was that you couldn't fit the high bandwidth transmitter inside your body, so you needed a fat cable coming out of your brain. The ship then moved to "broadcast depth" like a submarine so that they could use their giant antennae to plug into the matrix.
Once inside the matrix, the implication was that there were special software characteristics of certain wired telephones. It had nothing to do with whether they used copper or 900 mHz, just that they were flagged and connected properly to some Matrix program.
Sometimes it is. Betamax wasn't an open standard. Bad example.
Great great grandparent poster:
grandparent:You, you inveterate moron:I was somewhat annoyed by great-great grandparent, hardcore liberal, leaving out the opposite issue: fundie conservatives make an identically idiotic accusation of contradiction. They just make their accusation in the other direction. In fact, until this thread, I'd only ever heard your above conservative version of this bullshit. Both are equally transparent. Anyway, your question:There are a pile of reasons. Some believe that there is only one extant, human life in both cases: In one case, there is an convicted criminal. In the other case, there is a pregnant woman.Some believe that the choice should be kept as far from the government as possible: The government is not trustworthy enough to be given the option to execute people, nor is it trustworthy enough to choose whether a woman should be able to carry out an abortion.
The real point is that the two issues are different. There are independant reasons to hold either position on either issue. Conservatives and liberals alike are only occasionally swayed by their one (debatable) similarity. Conservatives and liberals alike occasionally accuse their opposition of self-contradiction due to this one (debatable) similarity. They (and you) should fucking quit it.
I hope this helps. Really.
Seriously. Send healthy older astronauts. Wouldn't their slower metabolism mean that they may never suffer any ill effects from the radiation?
It was his hardcover short story collection that first made me aware of his beliefs. In his explication he described one of his short stories as an allegory for "self-destructive behaviors like drug addiction and homosexuality".
I think his misunderstanding of humanity is on a deep enough level that it pervades all of his writing. I see it in every single book of his that I've read, the Ender Wiggin Saga included. It's more subtle than as you describe in "Magic Mirror". No, he doesn't specify that homosexuality is morally wrong.
That said, I can understand being able to look at the art and ignore a bit of the artist. I certainly enjoyed his work enough to bore through seven or eight novels and a behemoth short story collection while only thinking it was a little screwy. When I finally realized, "oh, it's not screwy, it's fucked", all the magic smoke was gone. Plus Shadow of the Hegemon came out.
Are you kidding?
Is it still free speech when you have to go to a "free speech zone" to do it? That is absolutely restricting people's freedom of speech and freedom to peaceably assemble. "Provably". Admit it.
The only difference between the current US administration and Mubarak is that Mubarak hasn't yet figured out what's tasteful and what's not. Arresting Immortal Technique for making a cartoon of GW with a bullet in his head wouldn't look very good. You stop the demonstrators before they get to the demonstration. You don't arrest your political oponents, you just make sure the contested election is decided by a political body that swings your way. And no, I'm not trying to say that the Democrats are above this.
P.S. In order to trample free speech, it has to be the government. Your link is partisan PR.
I'll be fine.
I first heard of his beliefs in an explication of one of his short stories, which he said was an allegory for people with self destructive behaviors, like drug addiction and homosexuality. It doesn't just "taint" his work. He is a worthless asshole. You can disagree with me, but I'm not just saying this because I read one of his essays once.Seriously? OSC isn't Hitler, but Mein Kampf was more popular. Sure OSC could be worthless.No no no. I couldn't care less what Mormons require of other Mormons. That is absolutely their (inane) business. I bolded the middle paragraph for a reason. He advocates governmental persecution of non-Mormon homosexuals. There is an important distinction between being a member of an anti-gay religion and advocating governmental "discouragement" of homosexuality. He is an antagonist in this matter.
Dunno what grandparent was talking about, but my understanding is that he wrote the novel version of Ender's Game only because he wanted to set up the character for Speaker For The Dead. Dunno if that means he's unhappy that people liked Ender's Game so much.
I'd like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that Orson Scott Card is a worthless asshole:
His anti-gay backwards bullshit is illustrated in his novels as well. For whatever reason I am no longer able to appreciate his work on any other level.They'd just throw out that particular "non-compete" clause because it violates your right to work. It wouldn't make it past the very first court because such contracts have already been ruled on and deemed unenforceable.
Shut up, Dave.
Yes. That is the question.