Main Entry: indefinite Pronunciation: (")in-'def-n&t, -'de-f&- Function: adjective
: not definite: as a : typically designating an unidentified, generic, or unfamiliar person or thing b : not precise : VAGUE c : having no exact limits
I'd also not say it is a drone. when activated the thing turns the plane 180 degrees from its current heading as measured by a magnetic compass.
Which is beyond useless if there is any wind at all. If the plane is crabbing into the wind, and you flip the heading 180*, you'll be flying in the wrong direction.
Which is exactly what Viacom says they didn't do. So Viacom says they didn't comply, Google says they did. What does the resolution have to do with the validity of the safe-harbor provisions? And why would Google question the validity? Without safe harbor, they automatically lose.
"Ominous" and "rotating" are not coordinate adjectives, so you do not need a comma between them. You wouldn't say, "Rotating, ominous chair," would you?
There are many grammatically correct ways to punctuate your.sig, all of which have different meanings. You have not chosen any of them.
I doubt they are suing for a nice round number, and I'm sure whatever number it is, they have a basis for it. The press release simply says, "More than a billion dollars." Because press releases need to use round numbers. And whatever they are actually awarded if they win won't necessarily be based on what's alleged in the complaint, it will be based on whatever damages the jury or court finds they are entitled to.
Isn't Gates just toeing the Libertrian Party line? What happened to all the anarchists on/.? Bill Gates should be the hero of anarcho-libertarians and capitalists alike. What the hell business did the government have going and taking away his monopoly anyway?
I'm confused. Did you not get insurance because you believe it is worthless, or because they didn't offer it? Of course if you think it's worthless, then you know it exists, and whether or not they offered it is moot isn't it? Of course insurance is worthless 99% of the time. That's why they call it insurance. Most of the people in New Orleans didn't think they needed flood insurance, because it had never helped them before. Look how well that worked out.
Either buy the insurance (and the right to bitch), or don't and accept the risk of damage. It really is that simple.
There's an easy answer to this. All big public companies have an ethics or compliance hotline that you can call and anonymously report stuff like this. It usually goes directly to the audit committee of the BoD or similar. Call, and then youcan feel comfortable knowing that you've done your part, and the people who need to know are informed.
So you don't own the right to use the software -- you've rented it for a period of time to be determined by Microsoft.
That's correct. But the period of time is not limited as you imply. The retail version of Vista is good for as long as I don't pirate it.
Doesn't that bother you?
Absolutely not. Because I wouldn't be able to afford to compensate MS for the right to make unlimited copies of Vista. Have you ever rented a car? Did it bother you that in exchange for $20/day you didn't get the right to repaint it whatever color you like?
And you've obviously never been involved with license management in any size organization. There's no such thing as volume licensing that requires "no management".
Huh? How can the websites be designed to run with any browser that will ever exist in the future? Isn't it up to the browser designers to make their browsers backwards compatible (or not)? How could anyone possibly know what new standards there will be before IE 8 comes out, or what new brilliant security measures will be implemented?
There probably aren't many well informed 'L'ibertarians, but there are certainly many well informed libertarians. Most of them don't call themselves that anymore to avoid associations with the LP.
Free speech has killed more people than all the "assault weapons" in America. Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, The LIttel Red Book, etc. Where did McVeigh learn to make bombs?
No more unconstitutional than requiring video games, TV shows, and CDs to carry ratings. And you can thank Tipper Gore for leading the charge on that. The right to speak has never equalled the right to be heard. If people don't want to see your obsecnity, what do you gain by publishing it under the guise of something else?
What does the Tenth Ammendment have to do with anything? The Constitution specifically grants Congress the exclusive power to regulate interstate commerce. While I think that recent commerce clause jurisprudence is way past the mark, I'm eagerly awaiting someone's explanation of why the Internet would be covered.
Slashdot Mirror
Main Entry: indefinite
Pronunciation: (")in-'def-n&t, -'de-f&-
Function: adjective
: not definite: as a : typically designating an unidentified, generic, or unfamiliar person or thing b : not precise : VAGUE c : having no exact limits
I'd also not say it is a drone. when activated the thing turns the plane 180 degrees from its current heading as measured by a magnetic compass.
Which is beyond useless if there is any wind at all. If the plane is crabbing into the wind, and you flip the heading 180*, you'll be flying in the wrong direction.
Which is exactly what Viacom says they didn't do. So Viacom says they didn't comply, Google says they did. What does the resolution have to do with the validity of the safe-harbor provisions? And why would Google question the validity? Without safe harbor, they automatically lose.
"Ominous" and "rotating" are not coordinate adjectives, so you do not need a comma between them. You wouldn't say, "Rotating, ominous chair," would you?
.sig, all of which have different meanings. You have not chosen any of them.
There are many grammatically correct ways to punctuate your
Which DMCA provision are you referring to? The only safe-harbor provision I know of requires them to "expeditiously remove" infringing content.
I doubt they are suing for a nice round number, and I'm sure whatever number it is, they have a basis for it. The press release simply says, "More than a billion dollars." Because press releases need to use round numbers. And whatever they are actually awarded if they win won't necessarily be based on what's alleged in the complaint, it will be based on whatever damages the jury or court finds they are entitled to.
Isn't Gates just toeing the Libertrian Party line? What happened to all the anarchists on /.? Bill Gates should be the hero of anarcho-libertarians and capitalists alike. What the hell business did the government have going and taking away his monopoly anyway?
I'm confused. Did you not get insurance because you believe it is worthless, or because they didn't offer it? Of course if you think it's worthless, then you know it exists, and whether or not they offered it is moot isn't it? Of course insurance is worthless 99% of the time. That's why they call it insurance. Most of the people in New Orleans didn't think they needed flood insurance, because it had never helped them before. Look how well that worked out.
Either buy the insurance (and the right to bitch), or don't and accept the risk of damage. It really is that simple.
But what everybody wants to know is, "Do you insure them"?
You do know that extortion and blackmail are illegal, right?
There's an easy answer to this. All big public companies have an ethics or compliance hotline that you can call and anonymously report stuff like this. It usually goes directly to the audit committee of the BoD or similar. Call, and then youcan feel comfortable knowing that you've done your part, and the people who need to know are informed.
Did you buy additional insurance over the $100 you get by default?
You don't understand the GPL if you believe that it requires no management.
And you've obviously never been involved with license management in any size organization. There's no such thing as volume licensing that requires "no management".
Huh? How can the websites be designed to run with any browser that will ever exist in the future? Isn't it up to the browser designers to make their browsers backwards compatible (or not)? How could anyone possibly know what new standards there will be before IE 8 comes out, or what new brilliant security measures will be implemented?
According to the Wikipedia article, there was indeed a hatch.
And the gloom-and-doom industry wants to pretend that H20 vapor isn't a problem.
There's like nine unwarranted and completely unsupported assumptions in your post.
You forgot David Gale.
There probably aren't many well informed 'L'ibertarians, but there are certainly many well informed libertarians. Most of them don't call themselves that anymore to avoid associations with the LP.
And just what does he mean by "Getting our money's worth?"
"To not utilize that station the way [b]I think it ought to be utilized[/b] is just wrong," said Glenn. Thanks for clearing that up, Senator.
Free speech has killed more people than all the "assault weapons" in America. Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, The LIttel Red Book, etc. Where did McVeigh learn to make bombs?
No more unconstitutional than requiring video games, TV shows, and CDs to carry ratings. And you can thank Tipper Gore for leading the charge on that. The right to speak has never equalled the right to be heard. If people don't want to see your obsecnity, what do you gain by publishing it under the guise of something else?
What does the Tenth Ammendment have to do with anything? The Constitution specifically grants Congress the exclusive power to regulate interstate commerce. While I think that recent commerce clause jurisprudence is way past the mark, I'm eagerly awaiting someone's explanation of why the Internet would be covered.