This is actually an interesting thought. Especially in a gay divorce dealing with children.
As a side thought...is there any precedent for a gay divorce? Now that I am thinking about it, I cannot recall ever hearing about a gay divorce, and how some of our current laws that assume a marriage is between two parties of opposing genders are interpreted...
They demand you stay seated. They demand you don't speak without raising your hands. And if you break either of those rules, then you're a troublemaker.
Means your view of whomever is that they are of immature mind. I am not making excuses or publicly taking sides, as I really don't have the time or energy to argue with/. either way, but in my view, if Manning is found guilty, shouldn't there be at least some consideration for the fact that at 19 or 20 or however old he was at the time he may not have understood fully the implications of his actions?
Perhaps securing or shielding such sensitive information from these "arrogant children" until a more appropriate age and maturity is reached is a good start.
I'll gladly pay if I know it's actually supporting the artist. But what I WON'T do is pay mony that I know will go towards suing their fans. Or pay the same price as a physical CD for an online download. Or pay $20 for a five track EP.
Agreed. Why should I give my hard earned money to a label, that honestly serves less and less of a purpose every day, who in turn leaves a pittance to the actual artist.
Of course, how many bands/singers that are signed by these labels are truly 'artists' anymore? I wouldn't define an artist as someone who sings songs written by someone else to music composed and played by someone else, all through auto-tune.
Now, a band like MAYDAY, or an indy musician like Dan Bull, those are true artists, and deserve to be compensated accordingly.
As for the last part of your comment - you are spot on. Digital media should be cheaper than physical media, and a five-track 'album' is just another ploy by the label to get more money out of the fans.
Although it definitely lacks some content, I too use Netflix for this reason.
It has actually reduced the amount of stuff I have to pirate, because it gives me a moderate collection of mostly-HD TV shows and movies available for $8/month on my Wii, Xbox, computer, and phone.
Rather than waiting for a torrent to download, I can boot up the Xbox, find something interesting, and within 10 seconds I'm watching it in full HD.
I am happy to pay the negligible $8 each month to legally do this.
I will NOT pay $20+ for a DVD full of DRM/malware. If I purchase something, it is mine. I will not subject myself to corporate restrictions on what I can do with my own property. I have gladly paid for DRM-free songs and movies, and will continue to do so as long as my rights to my own property are not encroached upon.
I have even donated more than asked to independent artists, simply because I feel that they deserved to be compensated for producing something I enjoyed.
The typical pirate's attitude is not "yay, everything's free!".
Should $CORPORATION decide to release their movies for a reasonable price and allow me to download it immediately via BitTorrent, here's my Visa.
I was going to mod up, but then finished reading your post....
I am so tired of this argument, let me make it a little easier for your obviously-limited intellect...
This 'private property' is required to be open to the PUBLIC, 24/7. An agreement between the developer and the City lays these terms out - the developer was permitted to exceed the maximum height of a structure as defined in CITY ORDINANCES by creating and maintaining A PUBLIC PARK.
So, you'd firehose everyone away? If that happens, does that mean it is OK to blow the top floors off their building? I mean, if the park is no longer public, they shouldn't be permitted to maintain a building THAT IS TALLER THAN THE VOTERS LAID OUT IN CITY ORDINANCES, should they?
They (the building owners/developers) are already a special case, and are now trying to infringe on the rights of American citizens. They should have done more research into what opening a 'public place' means before signing on the dotted-line. They were happy to build up taller, funny how unhappy they become when forced to abide by the terms of the agreement that ALLOWED them to build taller.
Breaking the law by restricting public access doesn't seem so fucking smart now, does it?
Has it ever been tested in court whether an employer can lay claim to work done off company time on non-company resources, assuming the program has nothing to do with the company's operations (or even if it does)? Failing all else, can't the coder just release the program anonymously?
I would be interested in the answer to this as well.
Legalize marijuana? Marijuana is a dangerous drug that will make you freak out and jump out a third-story window.
I really hope that you are joking/trolling...
Anyone who still holds the belief that marijuana is either a) dangerous or b) a gateway drug needs to seriously read up on the FACTS...
And before the flaming begins, smoking is not the only way to ingest marijuana, so don't start spouting off crap about lung cancer - show me a scientific link between ingesting marijuana through mastication and any kind of cancer or illness. Oh, no luck? I can show you plenty of first hand reports of the BENEFITS. I will concede that science is lacking on both ends of the argument, but my point is still valid.
As for being a gateway drug, tell me...how many drug users actually started with cigarettes or alcohol, or caffeine? THOSE are the gateway drugs.
However, as technology increases, the amount of time necessary to break today's encryption schemes will be reduced, thus making the need for stronger encryption schemes.
AS Degree in Electronics and Computer Technology. 8 Years IT Experience.
I applied for a job for which I exceeded EVERY requirement, with the exception of 'Bachelors Degree or Equivalent Experience'.
Funny thing is, I know the person that they DID hire. He lasted 3 or 4 months, and the same job posting was back in the paper shortly thereafter. I was going to try again, until I realized that they now wanted to pay $10k/year LESS than their previous job posting.
I'll third that. Or fourth, or whatever. I rarely buy games, and games I want to play I can get from Gamefly. When I do buy a game, it's because I felt it was good enough to deserve my money, or I'd like to play it more than once. (ex: I purchased Fallout 3 so that I could follow the several different routes you can go on).
Now Capcom thinks I don't own a game I purchased, or have the right to replay or resell a product I legally own? This brings back memories of a certain company removing a certain feature from a certain game console.
And because of that debacle, Sony will get none of my money, ever. Now Capcom will not either.
Would you feel safer buying milk without the inspection of the farms, the FDA rules regulating what can and cannot be fed to the cows, pasteurization and homogenization?
That all came about because the FDA regulates shit like that. As much as we hate the government, regulatory bodies overall force the producers of XYZ to follow guidelines and rules for the benefit of the consumer.
Slashdot Mirror
This is actually an interesting thought. Especially in a gay divorce dealing with children.
As a side thought...is there any precedent for a gay divorce? Now that I am thinking about it, I cannot recall ever hearing about a gay divorce, and how some of our current laws that assume a marriage is between two parties of opposing genders are interpreted...
IDK why the above post is moderated funny, +5 Insightful seems much more fitting...
Goddammit, I just spent the last of my 15 mod points, and THEN I read this?!
Well said, mooingyak. Couldn't have said it better myself.
They demand you stay seated. They demand you don't speak without raising your hands. And if you break either of those rules, then you're a troublemaker.
terrorist.
FTFY.
One of the few AC posts rightfully modded as +5 Insightful!
I'm sorry, but this was pretty fucking funny.
As you so kindly pointed out....
arrogant child
Means your view of whomever is that they are of immature mind. I am not making excuses or publicly taking sides, as I really don't have the time or energy to argue with /. either way, but in my view, if Manning is found guilty, shouldn't there be at least some consideration for the fact that at 19 or 20 or however old he was at the time he may not have understood fully the implications of his actions?
Perhaps securing or shielding such sensitive information from these "arrogant children" until a more appropriate age and maturity is reached is a good start.
I'll gladly pay if I know it's actually supporting the artist. But what I WON'T do is pay mony that I know will go towards suing their fans. Or pay the same price as a physical CD for an online download. Or pay $20 for a five track EP.
Agreed. Why should I give my hard earned money to a label, that honestly serves less and less of a purpose every day, who in turn leaves a pittance to the actual artist.
Of course, how many bands/singers that are signed by these labels are truly 'artists' anymore? I wouldn't define an artist as someone who sings songs written by someone else to music composed and played by someone else, all through auto-tune.
Now, a band like MAYDAY, or an indy musician like Dan Bull, those are true artists, and deserve to be compensated accordingly.
As for the last part of your comment - you are spot on. Digital media should be cheaper than physical media, and a five-track 'album' is just another ploy by the label to get more money out of the fans.
Although it definitely lacks some content, I too use Netflix for this reason.
It has actually reduced the amount of stuff I have to pirate, because it gives me a moderate collection of mostly-HD TV shows and movies available for $8/month on my Wii, Xbox, computer, and phone.
Rather than waiting for a torrent to download, I can boot up the Xbox, find something interesting, and within 10 seconds I'm watching it in full HD.
I am happy to pay the negligible $8 each month to legally do this.
And dammit, I'm only counting 4G/LTE phones.
3g is SO last year.
Well, let me correct that...this IS /.
I've been hearing for a while now about the upcoming release of the first phone running ICS.
I've been hearing for a while now about the upcoming release of ICS.
About damn time.
Took me a minute to decide to comment, or mod up.
I will NOT pay $20+ for a DVD full of DRM/malware. If I purchase something, it is mine. I will not subject myself to corporate restrictions on what I can do with my own property. I have gladly paid for DRM-free songs and movies, and will continue to do so as long as my rights to my own property are not encroached upon.
I have even donated more than asked to independent artists, simply because I feel that they deserved to be compensated for producing something I enjoyed.
The typical pirate's attitude is not "yay, everything's free!".
Should $CORPORATION decide to release their movies for a reasonable price and allow me to download it immediately via BitTorrent, here's my Visa.
+1 Insightful anyone?
Shit, I forgot to log in. If you're gonna mod, mod this one, not my AC post.
Call me pessimistic, but documentaries do tend to be biased.
I was going to mod up, but then finished reading your post....
I am so tired of this argument, let me make it a little easier for your obviously-limited intellect...
This 'private property' is required to be open to the PUBLIC, 24/7. An agreement between the developer and the City lays these terms out - the developer was permitted to exceed the maximum height of a structure as defined in CITY ORDINANCES by creating and maintaining A PUBLIC PARK.
So, you'd firehose everyone away? If that happens, does that mean it is OK to blow the top floors off their building? I mean, if the park is no longer public, they shouldn't be permitted to maintain a building THAT IS TALLER THAN THE VOTERS LAID OUT IN CITY ORDINANCES, should they?
They (the building owners/developers) are already a special case, and are now trying to infringe on the rights of American citizens. They should have done more research into what opening a 'public place' means before signing on the dotted-line. They were happy to build up taller, funny how unhappy they become when forced to abide by the terms of the agreement that ALLOWED them to build taller.
Breaking the law by restricting public access doesn't seem so fucking smart now, does it?
Has it ever been tested in court whether an employer can lay claim to work done off company time on non-company resources, assuming the program has nothing to do with the company's operations (or even if it does)? Failing all else, can't the coder just release the program anonymously?
I would be interested in the answer to this as well.
Legalize marijuana? Marijuana is a dangerous drug that will make you freak out and jump out a third-story window.
I really hope that you are joking/trolling...
Anyone who still holds the belief that marijuana is either a) dangerous or b) a gateway drug needs to seriously read up on the FACTS...
And before the flaming begins, smoking is not the only way to ingest marijuana, so don't start spouting off crap about lung cancer - show me a scientific link between ingesting marijuana through mastication and any kind of cancer or illness. Oh, no luck? I can show you plenty of first hand reports of the BENEFITS. I will concede that science is lacking on both ends of the argument, but my point is still valid.
As for being a gateway drug, tell me...how many drug users actually started with cigarettes or alcohol, or caffeine? THOSE are the gateway drugs.
Pluggable Authentication Modules?
However, as technology increases, the amount of time necessary to break today's encryption schemes will be reduced, thus making the need for stronger encryption schemes.
Same boat here.
AS Degree in Electronics and Computer Technology.
8 Years IT Experience.
I applied for a job for which I exceeded EVERY requirement, with the exception of 'Bachelors Degree or Equivalent Experience'.
Funny thing is, I know the person that they DID hire. He lasted 3 or 4 months, and the same job posting was back in the paper shortly thereafter. I was going to try again, until I realized that they now wanted to pay $10k/year LESS than their previous job posting.
I'll third that. Or fourth, or whatever. I rarely buy games, and games I want to play I can get from Gamefly. When I do buy a game, it's because I felt it was good enough to deserve my money, or I'd like to play it more than once. (ex: I purchased Fallout 3 so that I could follow the several different routes you can go on).
Now Capcom thinks I don't own a game I purchased, or have the right to replay or resell a product I legally own? This brings back memories of a certain company removing a certain feature from a certain game console.
And because of that debacle, Sony will get none of my money, ever. Now Capcom will not either.
I'm amazed that humans are able to see extra-terrestrial events with such detail.
What's even crazier is that we know more about outer space than we do about our oceans.
Oh, and, maybe...first post?
Would you feel safer buying milk without the inspection of the farms, the FDA rules regulating what can and cannot be fed to the cows, pasteurization and homogenization?
That all came about because the FDA regulates shit like that. As much as we hate the government, regulatory bodies overall force the producers of XYZ to follow guidelines and rules for the benefit of the consumer.