So you are arguing that it is ok for God to kill needlessly, torture people and play around like a boy with an anthill and a magnifying glass because God made people, and so can do whatever he pleases? But by that logic, would it not be just as acceptable for parents to rape and torture their children? Or for animal breeders to throw a dog into a garbage compactor just for fun? You are undermining the entire concept of morality with your argument by apparently claiming those in a position of authority are exempt - with God, the ultimate authority, naturally getting the ultimate exemption. I'm sure there are plenty of oppressive dictators who would love the notion that those in charge have free licence though.
Because the ageing pentium architecture was a mess, and they needed to redesign from scratch for the Core 2 architecture - which was a great improvement. They stopped using the pentium brand because they stopped selling chips with any pentium-based technology in.
You did miss out one part: The book was actually revised to remove the sex, but it appears that most of the complaints were from busybodies who never actually read the books they complain about, and so they continued to protest the sexual content even after it was removed.
Forceibly inpregnanting a child is one of the lesser of God's crimes according to the bible. How about several murders, numerous genocides - both direct and ordered - the creation of a realm of eternal torture... God is a nasty piece of work.
Even those ten plagues are more evil than they seem. God manipulated Pharoh into refusing his instructions purely in order to give himself an excuse to let loose the plagues upon the rest of Pharohs country - and even goes so far as to admit to Moses that he didn't *need* to kill a substantial portion of the population of Egypt, but did so simply to ensure the people of Israel would never forget their debt to him.
Police responded by sending helecopters with thermal imagers around, looking for the substantial heat put out by a pot farm.
This is the reason for one well-publicised incident in which a full armed response team was sent around to conduct a raid on a guina-pig shed, having first smashed the house door down and handcuffed the family. They did at least issue a formal apology for the mistake.
Because the existing power lines are burried under roads and hang from poles. Retrofitting would be expensive. You can send data over power lines with some signal proessing trickery, but that brings it's own EMI and licencing issues, and isn't that reliable. Power is noisy.
In the abstract ideal, this would be dealt with through reputation - if a company consistantly uses misleading advertising, they'll aquire a bad reputation that hurts in the long term. Doesn't always work out so well in the real world though, as the advertising can get a much higher viewship (via TV and print ads) than can the rants of disgruntled customers who realise they've been had.
They just call it microevolution. As far as I can tell, microevolution means 'changes fast enough for us to observe first-hand.' Mainstream biology doesn't recognise any distinction: Evolution is evolution, whether it happens over weeks in bacterial populations or over hundreds of millions of years. It's just on a different scale.
I confronted an SUV driver online about this once. He explained that he was well aware that in an accident, the SUV was the most dangerous car for occupents of the other vehicle, and that in choosing to drive one for safety he was willingly endangering others for his own protection. He went on to brand me a socialist and claim that it was his duty to protect his own family, even if that meant endangering others to whome he owed no loyalty.
I hope that if he does have a car accident, the *other* driver thought exactly the same way.
This is going to lead to copyright fun. It's currently common practice for people to use songs on their mobiles phones as ringtones - but when they are playing audio on cars, as a public performance?
It's quite possible that whatever legislation results will require only 'car-like sounds' be permitted though, to stop people from just playing 4'33".
I asked wikipedia, which says it's a yeti. I don't know on what it bases that claim though - due to the low-resolution graphics of the era, the sprite itsself is ambiguous.
It would be logistically impossible to divide the money between all artists, even the millions who just put out a track on the internet or play the odd gig down the local pub. So the only solution is to declare some point at which an artist is popular enough to matter, and just ignore anyone less popular than that. The major labels, being big enough to matter, are more than happy with this solution.
This is clearly false: If rights did come from a higher being, then they would have been there for all of history and in all places. There would have been no reason for the declaration of independance to point them out, or the bill of rights to enumerate some of the more important ones.
Brittle enough to break? Hmm... well, butane will only get you down to zero. Cold, but not cold enough. Below that.... ah! Is it that freezing spray used for removing warts? The stuff that'll leave a perminant scar if you don't do it right? That'll get very, very cold.
Look on the upside. All those third-world and developing-economy peasants putting widgets together in factories? In thirty years they'll all get replaced by robots and join the unemployed.
I know of youtube's copyright enforcement. I recently had one of my own videos pulled at the request of Shopro. It was clear fair use - 48 seconds of a 20-minute episode, for parody purposes, noncommercially, with no possibility of confusing it for something they endorsed. But that doesn't matter - the only way that video can go back up is if I expose myself to legal action, which would mean a company in Japan suing someone in the UK using a law in the US... the lawyers would have my savings emptied three times over before they even decided where the case should be heard, and the amount of time I'd have to take off work to attend court would likely result in unemployment.
If SOPA had been in place when youtube was a small startup company, they'd have been blocked and killed. That would still happen to many startups. Today, though, youtube passes the bigness test - it won't be blocked. That would produce too much of an outrage.
Enforcement will be subject to the standard Bigness Test:
1. Is this site big enough that it can make trouble with lawyers?
2. Is this site big enough that it's offended user base may alter the outcome of upcoming elections?
If the answer to either one is yes, the law will not be enforced. Youtube fits
Slashdot Mirror
So you are arguing that it is ok for God to kill needlessly, torture people and play around like a boy with an anthill and a magnifying glass because God made people, and so can do whatever he pleases? But by that logic, would it not be just as acceptable for parents to rape and torture their children? Or for animal breeders to throw a dog into a garbage compactor just for fun? You are undermining the entire concept of morality with your argument by apparently claiming those in a position of authority are exempt - with God, the ultimate authority, naturally getting the ultimate exemption. I'm sure there are plenty of oppressive dictators who would love the notion that those in charge have free licence though.
Because the ageing pentium architecture was a mess, and they needed to redesign from scratch for the Core 2 architecture - which was a great improvement. They stopped using the pentium brand because they stopped selling chips with any pentium-based technology in.
You did miss out one part: The book was actually revised to remove the sex, but it appears that most of the complaints were from busybodies who never actually read the books they complain about, and so they continued to protest the sexual content even after it was removed.
Eze 23:20.
Forceibly inpregnanting a child is one of the lesser of God's crimes according to the bible. How about several murders, numerous genocides - both direct and ordered - the creation of a realm of eternal torture... God is a nasty piece of work.
Even those ten plagues are more evil than they seem. God manipulated Pharoh into refusing his instructions purely in order to give himself an excuse to let loose the plagues upon the rest of Pharohs country - and even goes so far as to admit to Moses that he didn't *need* to kill a substantial portion of the population of Egypt, but did so simply to ensure the people of Israel would never forget their debt to him.
So growers took to bypassing the meters.
Police responded by sending helecopters with thermal imagers around, looking for the substantial heat put out by a pot farm.
This is the reason for one well-publicised incident in which a full armed response team was sent around to conduct a raid on a guina-pig shed, having first smashed the house door down and handcuffed the family. They did at least issue a formal apology for the mistake.
Because the existing power lines are burried under roads and hang from poles. Retrofitting would be expensive. You can send data over power lines with some signal proessing trickery, but that brings it's own EMI and licencing issues, and isn't that reliable. Power is noisy.
In the abstract ideal, this would be dealt with through reputation - if a company consistantly uses misleading advertising, they'll aquire a bad reputation that hurts in the long term. Doesn't always work out so well in the real world though, as the advertising can get a much higher viewship (via TV and print ads) than can the rants of disgruntled customers who realise they've been had.
I've seen DC++ hubs for books. Lots and lots of books. Also comics.
If digital books ever become lendable, publishers and distributors will sue to make them unlendable again.
Only if you consider private property rights to be inherently good.
They just call it microevolution. As far as I can tell, microevolution means 'changes fast enough for us to observe first-hand.' Mainstream biology doesn't recognise any distinction: Evolution is evolution, whether it happens over weeks in bacterial populations or over hundreds of millions of years. It's just on a different scale.
I confronted an SUV driver online about this once. He explained that he was well aware that in an accident, the SUV was the most dangerous car for occupents of the other vehicle, and that in choosing to drive one for safety he was willingly endangering others for his own protection. He went on to brand me a socialist and claim that it was his duty to protect his own family, even if that meant endangering others to whome he owed no loyalty.
I hope that if he does have a car accident, the *other* driver thought exactly the same way.
This is going to lead to copyright fun. It's currently common practice for people to use songs on their mobiles phones as ringtones - but when they are playing audio on cars, as a public performance?
It's quite possible that whatever legislation results will require only 'car-like sounds' be permitted though, to stop people from just playing 4'33".
Would the computers be a little cheaper without all the ornate decorative racks? Though I must admit TERA-100 looks quite stylish.
I asked wikipedia, which says it's a yeti. I don't know on what it bases that claim though - due to the low-resolution graphics of the era, the sprite itsself is ambiguous.
China is just tightening their laws on paper, but it remains to be seen how willing they will be to enforce those laws.
It would be logistically impossible to divide the money between all artists, even the millions who just put out a track on the internet or play the odd gig down the local pub. So the only solution is to declare some point at which an artist is popular enough to matter, and just ignore anyone less popular than that. The major labels, being big enough to matter, are more than happy with this solution.
I remember escaping the bear a few times. Nothing happens afterwards though.
This is clearly false: If rights did come from a higher being, then they would have been there for all of history and in all places. There would have been no reason for the declaration of independance to point them out, or the bill of rights to enumerate some of the more important ones.
Actually, we never had that one.
Brittle enough to break? Hmm... well, butane will only get you down to zero. Cold, but not cold enough. Below that.... ah! Is it that freezing spray used for removing warts? The stuff that'll leave a perminant scar if you don't do it right? That'll get very, very cold.
Look on the upside. All those third-world and developing-economy peasants putting widgets together in factories? In thirty years they'll all get replaced by robots and join the unemployed.
I know of youtube's copyright enforcement. I recently had one of my own videos pulled at the request of Shopro. It was clear fair use - 48 seconds of a 20-minute episode, for parody purposes, noncommercially, with no possibility of confusing it for something they endorsed. But that doesn't matter - the only way that video can go back up is if I expose myself to legal action, which would mean a company in Japan suing someone in the UK using a law in the US... the lawyers would have my savings emptied three times over before they even decided where the case should be heard, and the amount of time I'd have to take off work to attend court would likely result in unemployment.
If SOPA had been in place when youtube was a small startup company, they'd have been blocked and killed. That would still happen to many startups. Today, though, youtube passes the bigness test - it won't be blocked. That would produce too much of an outrage.
Enforcement will be subject to the standard Bigness Test:
1. Is this site big enough that it can make trouble with lawyers?
2. Is this site big enough that it's offended user base may alter the outcome of upcoming elections?
If the answer to either one is yes, the law will not be enforced. Youtube fits