Not always. Plenty of times people who are not prepared can make a situation worse.
In this type of situation: probably not. If local authorities are way undermanpowered, and if you have a boat and know how to use it to help someone in dire need, then USE IT. Just do Not go out and self-deploy to a scene. Make sure you have someone else coordinating and supporting your activities who knows where you are and maintains contact where you can get a call for additional resources if needed: make sure you have a backup plan, and understand the risks for each situation before going into it, so you don't suddenly put yourself in need of rescue too.
If you don't want that that happen, self publish, and then deal with the fact that your papers won't be easily findable in any research or library
MAYBE, but it is total rubbish that this happens. After all copyright is for "securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
That's Authors and Inventors, not Publishers or distribution companies
Selling your work or licenses to use your work are cool, but allowing middlemen that are near-monopolies for articles on certain topics to steal away the authors' rights or force authors to relinquish by holding their work hostage against publication or sale beyond the specific publication venue desired ought to be illegal.
is that they have strict drug check programs where if marijuana is in your blood you are an automatic fail
Required policy mandated by their workers' comp. insurance carrier. Not companies' choice. I think that's typically where these policies come from..... we had no drug testing for many years, until we became a slightly larger company, and were required by the state to provide workers comp, and the insurers mandated that we put the testing in place as part of the requirements for us to be insured. They also had some other requirements they imposed like regular inspections and monthly safety meetings for everyone even office workers (low-risk jobs), that we always leave laughing about, because they have to cover and quiz us on specific topics chosen by the insurer, and it's all stupid shit that high-school students should answer correctly.
Vermont mandated that the newspaper you wanted to circulate in Burlington had to offer daily home delivery in Montpelier in order to operate in the state.
That's not analogous to the current situation... It's more like Vermont mandated the installation and maintenance of 550 new Newspaper stands in unserved areas, in order to sign a 11-year contract providing the exclusive monopoly right to continue to operate a few hundred stands which are in the city on public property.
See... Vermont is not telling them WHAT content can or can't be sent over their cables; only effectively what they must do to get to retain their special treatment -- and continue leveraging public property for their own profit.
You are always free to assemble on property that you own, with whomever you wish as long as their rights are not restricted in some legal way
Yes... with the minor caveat that your land is still subject to zoning and land-use regulation (E.g. amount of Car and Foot traffic), plus the people in your assemblies may not violate any laws regarding safety, fire code (maximum number of people in a place), or cause noise complaints, or create a disturbance of the peace --- the assembly itself can become unlawful with shared guilt if it becomes disruptive to people not on your property.
For example: You can't invite 100 people into your front yard at 3:00 AM, and have a screaming-fest that prevents any of your neighbors from sleeping.
To TRULY secure your assembly rights to make as much noise as you want, then you need to own enough land to create a secluded venue in the middle of a large-enough fenced-in area outside any HOA land-use restrictions or "planned"/zoned development area, that nobody outside the assembly will have be able to see or have a complaint about what is happening.
If I'm not mistaken, in most areas you require a permit to hold a rally, protest, etc.
You have the right to rally, protest, etc, ONLY if it is your property or with permission of the property owner, and if the owner of the property you use will allow it they get to decide WHEN and WHERE you may do so.
If your intended venue for any rally/protest-related activities is a public street or park, then the property owner is the public, and the process by which you secure that permission is a PERMIT.
You DON'T have a constitutional right to rally or protest on public property; However, in most cases, the city, local authority will give you permission. They can choose to allow or NOT allow you to have your protest or rally on their property.
They could deny you, because the time is inconvenient, OR you had a protest that ended violently, OR they could deny you because you've had too many rallies, or the proposed duration is too long.
What they cannot do is only allow certain groups but not others to hold similar events, or discriminate against your message or control lawful content of your speech during the permitted event. For public grounds open to events, they generally can't tell you "NO, NEVER", but they can tell you "NO, NOT AT THE REQUESTED TIME or Duration", provided they would tell the same to any group requesting that time or duration.
amount to undue speaker-based burdens on Comcast's protected speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution
Sorry.... no "Speaker-based burdens". Deciding where to install cabling is business, not speech.
Evidence: You require a PERMIT to install this cabling. If something's a constitutional or other legal right then you don't have to get a PERMIT to be authorized to do it.
If you require authorization from the public, then the public gets to negotiate the terms of that authorization to provide the public a benefit offsetting the expense of the privileges you are being granted and expected to use.
The SIZE of your existing installation is a germane topic regarding permits for operating a cable company.
Additionally, primary life support and other functions are based out of the Russian Zvezda module.
Life support and system functions are important, BUT this is fundamentally different from flight support functions, so maybe they don't have personnel ready with the Specific training to flight command systems and monitoring requirements.
Otherwise, why wouldn't they have just handed control to the backup station and sent the affected personnel home?
and there was no way to contact the person who knew the information because he was in transit.
Dang.. if only they had invented portable communications devices, that important people could carry around with them at all times so they could make or receive messages on the road....
Wouldn't that still potentially count as taxable though?
Nope... gifts less than $14K have no tax. gifts less than $5000 a year per gift giver such as parent or friend have no tax consequence.
Above $5000 in a year counts against the gift giver's $5.4 million lifetime exclusion amount against the inheritance tax; once the lifetime exclusion or $14K annual exclusion is used up it is the gift giver's estate that will owe taxes, not the recipient.
if you declare on your tax return that your annual income is $30,000 ....Bermuda, etc., as well as photos taken from your first class seat in the airplane, then they have good reason to audit you.
False.... your vacation can very well be funded from savings or by someone else. IRS audits the WAY those work is too serious an injury to inflict upon someone from some idle observation that isn't a reasonable cause to suspect a thing.
Sounds like the same logic behind mafia-style protection rackets.
You therefore derive a greater benefit from these services.
NOPE. You get essentially the same level of benefit everyone else does. Ultimately the police/firefighters do VERY LITTLE or Nothing to directly protect your individual property regardless of value. Sometimes they will delay or not even respond to situations where only property is at risk. Burglaries are a low priority compared to almost anything else --- they would rather catch speeders, drunk drivers, or marijuana dealers than burglars.
It is INSURANCE that will pay for your losses, which is a free and willing contract --- insurance is very expensive, but still much less costly than taxes, oh yeah, and it's based on the actual value of your physical possessions - not theoretically possible possessions your income could have potentially bought with such and such money coming in.
If the cops don't show up when you are robbed, you could loose more money.
That's not true; if you're talking about value of personal property and/or real property. Experience says cops/first responders care about jack shit about how much money you lose or stand to lose. Their efforts are primarily expended to protect lives or meet the mandates of their department (Catching certain types of criminals will get them bigger $$$) --- property is a low priority, and you're not going to get extra efforts for your $$$ to preserve more of it.
The only tax that the IRS is pretty much guaranteed to get is the tax on W-2 income and investment capital gains
Yes... and the W-2 Reporting and forced witholding is Unfair enforcement, because it disproportionately hurts Employees, while giving corporations, individual contractors, and "Gig" / "Odd" employees who take cash for every job an unfair advantage.
So if you give up being an employee, and go out on the street and do odd jobs on the street, you can hit the taxpayers twice ---- first because you don't report most of your cash incomes, and second, because you report income in a range that results in Earned Income Tax credit..
Come to think of it.... cryptocurrency could be a lot like cash If people accept every payment to a unique wallet AND they put their coins through a mixer service AND they SPEND their coins directly in person for services/items rather than go to an exchange, AND they make certain to exhaust bitcoin wallet addresses early and purge every trace of records of each wallet after all the coins are spent.
If you don't want to pay taxes go live in somewhere where you don't use any of the benefits of paying taxes.
Taxation BEYOND the value of the benefits paying taxes generates is theft. Taxation to provide benefits that are Not common goods is also theft. For example: If the government collects $100 from 1000 taxpayers, and then spends $100000 on a project or service that only benefits 100 taxpayers, for example, maybe that tax money goes to a service that only helps parents with children, and 900 taxpayers don't have kids, then that is stealing $100 from 900 taxpayers.
No rule of law, no police or other first responders, no roads, no military, no contract enforcement, no judicial system, limited health care,
In the US a TINY fraction of taxes collected go towards paying for anything substantively related to those benefits --- that is called the ACCEPTABLE/Agreeable/Necessary taxation required by the social contract, and the proper required Tax to pay for those services when properly managed are not what people are complaining about when they say Taxation is theft - you can argue about the proper amount, but it's not magically an amount that explodes with the value of your income ---- Theft is loss of taxpayer money due to corruption, personal favoritism, cronyism, nepotism, or spending tax money in excessive amounts or on unnecessary jobs or services to extract personal benefits for the decisionmakers such as political favors, power, monetary contributions, helping a friend, etc. Also, those benefits you mention are ALL provided by local governments (Not the feds), which are typically funded by Real Property taxes And Sales Taxes; None of which are affected by a person's income or bitcoin holdings -- The federal government has very little role in upholding the rule of law, only the states and cities have a meaningful role in Public Education, the Police you need are locals, Roads are built by the states, The best parks are State and City parks, not until you talk about Space Programs and Military do you get to federal services --- the Feds spend practically nothing on Space, the Military is far in excess of what is needed, Food Safety and Drug Safety programs are probably moreso detrimental than beneficial on the whole; the Internet is built by private industry, so are Vaccines..
In fact, if your income is $20k a year or $50k a year, you still receive essentially identical benefits from all government services, so there's no reasonable basis your tax (Cost) for those services should be different --- It is simply JUST a racket, AND it is theft and enslavement.
Microsoft will not download install files for new operating systems to a user system’s hard disk without a user's consent.
UPDATED EULA VERSION
By using the software you hereby consent to.... .... .... [ 25 pages later ] ....
Your computer automatically downloading and installing updates for bugfixes, security patches, and operating system upgrades with no further notification required, with no guarantee of visible a UI indication, options dialog, or other opportunity being provided defer, pause, cancel, undo, revert, or to opt-out of this process of automatic self-updating.
How about you have developers write games that connect to their OWN servers and network infrastructure: instead of depending on some game server system provided by Sony, then Sony's servers don't have a choice to refuse cross-console interoperability; the developers' servers can act as brokers behind the scenes using a protocol that is standardized regardless of endpoint.
At that point Sony can (probably) do nothing to stop without running afoul of anti-trust regulations.
The problem with restricting their use is some countries already have these things in wide use.
For example: Missiles are an autonomous weapon. You program the computer with a guidance system, load up a nuclear warhead, and you can launch and annihilate a target from a continent away.
So what exactly do they want to ban; smarter weapons that specifically target opposing forces or key individuals with lower collateral damage?
Hard-to-detect intelligence weapons that kill small targets with high precision?
Weapons that pick their own targets in the field? Well, the US already has missile/gun systems that pick their own targets in the field to shoot down potential incoming missiles....
Everything you could think to ban is already in use, so somebody's not going to agree to it.
who are calling on the United Nations to ban autonomous weapons.
Wait... Eon.... don't you remember Autopilot? What are you smoking? Your own Tesla products qualify as autonomous weapons.
Because a Car/Vehicle is definitely a weapon if operated by someone drink/incompetent, or operated when a mistake is made, or if something goes wrong mechanically causing a loss of control, or if a malfunction mistakes a pedestrian for a non-obstacle.
Or when your Autopilot fails to recognize a hazard, and the inattentive human collides --- your Autopilot was an autonomous weapon that killed the occupant.
I'm sure future versions of Autopilot will have even more dangers where they could potentially turn a car into a weapon accidentally or intentionally. A perfect autonomous car would be something evil terrorists could tweak, ya know --- Perfectly save autonomous devices can be turned to weapons without the manufacturer's knowledge.
in this case, it is absolutely the right of every person and business to refuse patronage to any organization/business which offers services
So what you are basically saying is that it should be no problem for Domain Registrars and Hosting providers to terminate any internet access or service in the middle of the month without warning because the intermediary disagrees with something in the message. It seems to me like you rent an apartment, and the landlord disagrees with something you wrote on Facebook, so they give you 1 hour notice and kick you out on the street: you come home to find you're locked out of the apartment, and all your possessions were taken away after being thrown in the dumpster -- without any chance to setup new housing, and it's basically the same thing.
Perhaps I'm tired of Anti-Trump websites cropping up, and i'd like to start a fund to pay a bounty to Network Solutions in exchange for cancelling such domains. Maybe for a few million $$ bounty payment, I can persuade them to cancel CNN.COM without warning, because Free Market reasons.....
Are you claiming that is reasonable and just, and consistent with the values of a free society?
Just because you have the right to say it, doesn't mean people have to actually give you the time, place, or attention.
That's true, but saying it on your own website SHOULD be equivalent to saying it on the doorstep of your house.
No intermediary required for you to to get your internet access should be judging you, because FREE and OPEN communication is the primary value of the internet.
We played cat and mouse with one for awhile... eventually, they emailed a generic address with our client and said they weren't going to give up
This is when you get your attorney to write up a Cease and Decist letter and reply back to the scraper's E-mail, AND now they have been warned and ordered by the owner of the property to stop, and further actions can result in a lawsuit or criminal charges regarding Unauthorized Access/Access In Excess of Authorization.
LinkedIn are.... HiQ's use of the data is scary and ADVERSIVE to the users of the website. They're essentially a surveillance service to help employers spy on workers to suggest when certain people might be a risk.
This is very big-brotherish, and should not be allowed in a more civilized society......
Slashdot Mirror
Not always. Plenty of times people who are not prepared can make a situation worse.
In this type of situation: probably not. If local authorities are way undermanpowered, and if you have a boat and know how to use it to help someone in dire need, then USE IT. Just do Not go out and self-deploy to a scene. Make sure you have someone else coordinating and supporting your activities who knows where you are and maintains contact where you can get a call for additional resources if needed: make sure you have a backup plan, and understand the risks for each situation before going into it, so you don't suddenly put yourself in need of rescue too.
If you don't want that that happen, self publish, and then deal with the fact that your papers won't be easily findable in any research or library
MAYBE, but it is total rubbish that this happens. After all copyright is for "securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
That's Authors and Inventors, not Publishers or distribution companies
Selling your work or licenses to use your work are cool, but allowing middlemen that are near-monopolies for articles on certain topics to steal away the authors' rights or force authors to relinquish by holding their work hostage against publication or sale beyond the specific publication venue desired ought to be illegal.
I hope they looked over the data and backed up anything important first.
is that they have strict drug check programs where if marijuana is in your blood you are an automatic fail
Required policy mandated by their workers' comp. insurance carrier. Not companies' choice. I think that's typically where these policies come from..... we had no drug testing for many years, until we became a slightly larger company, and were required by the state to provide workers comp, and the insurers mandated that we put the testing in place as part of the requirements for us to be insured. They also had some other requirements they imposed like regular inspections and monthly safety meetings for everyone even office workers (low-risk jobs), that we always leave laughing about, because they have to cover and quiz us on specific topics chosen by the insurer, and it's all stupid shit that high-school students should answer correctly.
Vermont mandated that the newspaper you wanted to circulate in Burlington had to offer daily home delivery in Montpelier in order to operate in the state.
That's not analogous to the current situation... It's more like Vermont mandated the installation and maintenance of 550 new Newspaper stands in unserved areas, in order to sign a 11-year contract providing the exclusive monopoly right to continue to operate a few hundred stands which are in the city on public property.
See... Vermont is not telling them WHAT content can or can't be sent over their cables; only effectively what they must do to get to retain their special treatment -- and continue leveraging public property for their own profit.
You are always free to assemble on property that you own, with whomever you wish as long as their rights are not restricted in some legal way
Yes... with the minor caveat that your land is still subject to zoning and land-use regulation (E.g. amount of Car and Foot traffic), plus the people in your assemblies may not violate any laws regarding safety, fire code (maximum number of people in a place), or cause noise complaints, or create a disturbance of the peace --- the assembly itself can become unlawful with shared guilt if it becomes disruptive to people not on your property.
For example: You can't invite 100 people into your front yard at 3:00 AM, and have a screaming-fest that prevents any of your neighbors from sleeping.
To TRULY secure your assembly rights to make as much noise as you want, then you need to own enough land to create a secluded venue in the middle of a large-enough fenced-in area outside any HOA land-use restrictions or "planned"/zoned development area, that nobody outside the assembly will have be able to see or have a complaint about what is happening.
If I'm not mistaken, in most areas you require a permit to hold a rally, protest, etc.
You have the right to rally, protest, etc, ONLY if it is your property or with permission of the property owner, and if the owner of the property you use will allow it they get to decide WHEN and WHERE you may do so.
If your intended venue for any rally/protest-related activities is a public street or park, then the property owner is the public, and the process by which you
secure that permission is a PERMIT.
You DON'T have a constitutional right to rally or protest on public property; However, in most cases, the city, local
authority will give you permission. They can choose to allow or NOT allow you to have your protest or rally on their property.
They could deny you, because the time is inconvenient, OR you had a protest that ended violently, OR they could deny you because you've
had too many rallies, or the proposed duration is too long.
What they cannot do is only allow certain groups but not others to hold similar events, or discriminate against your message or control lawful content of your speech during the permitted event.
For public grounds open to events, they generally can't tell you "NO, NEVER", but they can tell you "NO, NOT AT THE REQUESTED TIME or Duration", provided they would tell the same to any group requesting that time or duration.
amount to undue speaker-based burdens on Comcast's protected speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution
Sorry.... no "Speaker-based burdens". Deciding where to install cabling is business, not speech.
Evidence: You require a PERMIT to install this cabling. If something's a constitutional or other legal right then you don't have to get a PERMIT to be authorized to do it.
If you require authorization from the public, then the public gets to negotiate the terms of that authorization to provide the public a benefit offsetting the expense of the privileges you are being granted and expected to use.
The SIZE of your existing installation is a germane topic regarding permits for operating a cable company.
Additionally, primary life support and other functions are based out of the Russian Zvezda module.
Life support and system functions are important, BUT this is fundamentally different from flight support functions,
so maybe they don't have personnel ready with the Specific training to flight command systems and monitoring requirements.
Otherwise, why wouldn't they have just handed control to the backup station and sent the affected personnel home?
They may have the facilities, but do they have the People and required information specific to the ISS?
and there was no way to contact the person who knew the information because he was in transit.
Dang.. if only they had invented portable communications devices, that important people could carry around with them at all times so they could make or receive messages on the road....
Wouldn't that still potentially count as taxable though?
Nope... gifts less than $14K have no tax. gifts less than $5000 a year per gift giver such as parent or friend have no tax consequence.
Above $5000 in a year counts against the gift giver's $5.4 million lifetime exclusion amount against the inheritance tax; once the lifetime exclusion or $14K annual exclusion is used up it is the gift giver's estate that will owe taxes, not the recipient.
if you declare on your tax return that your annual income is $30,000
....Bermuda, etc., as well as photos taken from your first class seat in the airplane, then they have good reason to audit you.
False.... your vacation can very well be funded from savings or by someone else. IRS audits the WAY those work is too serious an injury to inflict upon someone from some idle observation that isn't a reasonable cause to suspect a thing.
Someone at IRS reached out to the DHS/FBI/NSA to figure out who's the owner of billions of dollars and not paying taxes on them
There's no tax due on any BTC, unless he goes to transact with them.
Quite simply you have more to loose.
Sounds like the same logic behind mafia-style protection rackets.
You therefore derive a greater benefit from these services.
NOPE. You get essentially the same level of benefit everyone else does.
Ultimately the police/firefighters do VERY LITTLE or Nothing to directly protect your individual property regardless of value.
Sometimes they will delay or not even respond to situations where only property is at risk.
Burglaries are a low priority compared to almost anything else --- they would rather catch speeders, drunk drivers, or
marijuana dealers than burglars.
It is INSURANCE that will pay for your losses, which is a free and willing contract --- insurance is very expensive,
but still much less costly than taxes, oh yeah, and it's based on the actual value of your physical possessions - not theoretically possible
possessions your income could have potentially bought with such and such money coming in.
If the cops don't show up when you are robbed, you could loose more money.
That's not true; if you're talking about value of personal property and/or real property.
Experience says cops/first responders care about jack shit about how much money you lose or stand to lose.
Their efforts are primarily expended to protect lives or meet the mandates of their department (Catching certain types of criminals will get them bigger $$$) --- property is a low priority, and you're not going to get extra efforts
for your $$$ to preserve more of it.
The only tax that the IRS is pretty much guaranteed to get is the tax on W-2 income and investment capital gains
Yes... and the W-2 Reporting and forced witholding is Unfair enforcement, because it disproportionately hurts Employees, while giving corporations, individual contractors, and "Gig" / "Odd" employees who take cash for every job an unfair advantage.
So if you give up being an employee, and go out on the street and do odd jobs on the street, you can hit the taxpayers twice ---- first because you don't report most of your cash incomes, and second, because you report income in a range that results in Earned Income Tax credit..
Come to think of it.... cryptocurrency could be a lot like cash If people accept every payment to a unique wallet AND they put their coins through a mixer service AND they SPEND their coins directly in person for services/items rather than go to an exchange, AND they make certain to exhaust bitcoin wallet addresses early and purge every trace of records of each wallet after all the coins are spent.
If you don't want to pay taxes go live in somewhere where you don't use any of the benefits of paying taxes.
Taxation BEYOND the value of the benefits paying taxes generates is theft.
Taxation to provide benefits that are Not common goods is also theft.
For example: If the government collects $100 from 1000 taxpayers, and then spends $100000 on a project or service that
only benefits 100 taxpayers, for example, maybe that tax money goes to a service that only helps parents with children,
and 900 taxpayers don't have kids, then that is stealing $100 from 900 taxpayers.
No rule of law, no police or other first responders, no roads, no military, no contract enforcement, no judicial system, limited health care,
In the US a TINY fraction of taxes collected go towards paying for anything substantively related to those benefits --- that is called the ACCEPTABLE/Agreeable/Necessary taxation required by the social contract, and the proper required Tax to pay for those services when properly managed are not what people are complaining about when they say Taxation is theft - you can argue about the proper amount, but it's not magically an amount that explodes with the value of your income ---- Theft is loss of taxpayer money due to corruption, personal favoritism, cronyism, nepotism, or spending tax money in excessive amounts or on unnecessary jobs or services to extract personal benefits for the decisionmakers such as political favors, power, monetary contributions, helping a friend, etc. Also, those benefits you mention are ALL provided by local governments (Not the feds), which are typically funded by Real Property taxes And Sales Taxes; None of which are affected by a person's income or bitcoin holdings -- The federal government has very little role in upholding the rule of law, only the states and cities have a meaningful role in Public Education, the Police you need are locals, Roads are built by the states, The best parks are State and City parks, not until you talk about Space Programs and Military do you get to federal services --- the Feds spend practically nothing on Space, the Military is far in excess of what is needed, Food Safety and Drug Safety programs are probably moreso detrimental than beneficial on the whole; the Internet is built by private industry, so are Vaccines..
In fact, if your income is $20k a year or $50k a year, you still receive essentially identical benefits from all government services, so there's no reasonable basis your tax (Cost) for those services should be different --- It is simply JUST a racket, AND it is theft and enslavement.
UPDATED EULA VERSION
By using the software you hereby consent to ....
....
.... [ 25 pages later ]
....
Your computer automatically downloading and installing updates for bugfixes, security patches, and operating system upgrades with no further notification required, with no guarantee of visible a UI indication, options dialog, or other opportunity being provided defer, pause, cancel, undo, revert, or to opt-out of this process of automatic self-updating.
How about you have developers write games that connect to their OWN servers and network infrastructure: instead of depending on some game server system provided by Sony, then Sony's servers don't have a choice to refuse cross-console interoperability; the developers' servers can act as brokers behind the scenes using a protocol that is standardized regardless of endpoint.
At that point Sony can (probably) do nothing to stop without running afoul of anti-trust regulations.
The problem with restricting their use is some countries already have these things in wide use.
For example: Missiles are an autonomous weapon. You program the computer with a guidance system, load up a nuclear warhead, and you can launch and annihilate a target from a continent away.
So what exactly do they want to ban; smarter weapons that specifically target opposing forces or key individuals with lower collateral damage?
Hard-to-detect intelligence weapons that kill small targets with high precision?
Weapons that pick their own targets in the field? Well, the US already has missile/gun systems that pick their own targets in the field to shoot down potential incoming missiles....
Everything you could think to ban is already in use, so somebody's not going to agree to it.
who are calling on the United Nations to ban autonomous weapons.
Wait... Eon.... don't you remember Autopilot? What are you smoking? Your own Tesla products qualify as autonomous weapons.
Because a Car/Vehicle is definitely a weapon if operated by someone drink/incompetent, or operated when a mistake is made, or if something goes wrong mechanically causing a loss of control, or if a malfunction mistakes a pedestrian for a non-obstacle.
Or when your Autopilot fails to recognize a hazard, and the inattentive human collides --- your Autopilot was an autonomous weapon that killed the occupant.
I'm sure future versions of Autopilot will have even more dangers where they could potentially turn a car into a weapon accidentally or intentionally. A perfect autonomous car would be something evil terrorists could tweak, ya know --- Perfectly save autonomous devices can be turned to weapons without the manufacturer's knowledge.
in this case, it is absolutely the right of every person and business to refuse patronage to any organization/business which offers services
So what you are basically saying is that it should be no problem for Domain Registrars and Hosting providers to terminate any internet access or service in the middle of the month without warning because the intermediary disagrees with something in the message. It seems to me like you rent an apartment, and the landlord disagrees with something you wrote on Facebook, so they give you 1 hour notice and kick you out on the street: you come home to find you're locked out of the apartment, and all your possessions were taken away after being thrown in the dumpster -- without any chance to setup new housing, and it's basically the same thing.
Perhaps I'm tired of Anti-Trump websites cropping up, and i'd like to start a fund to pay a bounty to Network Solutions in exchange for cancelling such domains. Maybe for a few million $$ bounty payment, I can persuade them to cancel CNN.COM without warning, because Free Market reasons.....
Are you claiming that is reasonable and just, and consistent with the values of a free society?
Just because you have the right to say it, doesn't mean people have to actually give you the time, place, or attention.
That's true, but saying it on your own website SHOULD be equivalent to saying it on the doorstep of your house.
No intermediary required for you to to get your internet access should be judging you, because FREE and OPEN communication is the primary value of the internet.
We played cat and mouse with one for awhile ... eventually, they emailed a generic address with our client and said they weren't going to give up
This is when you get your attorney to write up a Cease and Decist letter and reply back to the scraper's E-mail, AND now they have been warned and ordered by the owner of the property to stop, and further actions can result in a lawsuit or criminal charges regarding Unauthorized Access/Access In Excess of Authorization.
LinkedIn are.... HiQ's use of the data is scary and ADVERSIVE to the users of the website.
They're essentially a surveillance service to help employers spy on workers to suggest when certain people might be a risk.
This is very big-brotherish, and should not be allowed in a more civilized society......