Is the requirement to pay your bills really a contract? Is it just implicit acceptance of a contract that when you are found almost dead on the side of the road and unable to respond and you have medical bills? Are you speaking as a doctor or a lawyer, because it sounds like you're talking as an idiot. I guess if you want to be pedantic about the word "any" then fine, let me rephrase.
Any contract with clauses not related to payment in the form of cash that are inline with standard prices for similar services, liability of the doctor for damage done during procedures or permission for providing the services requested would most likely not be enforceable in court due to the varying factors of duress, competency and consideration when signing a contract while bleeding from a serious wound, where serious wound is defined as a wound that is extremely painful, has potential to do further permanent damage, or is life threatening.
Funny story I was sitting with a table of girls at a bar (hard to believe, don't worry the one I knew was fat so it's still believable), one of the girls goes to a chiropractor all the time and the other works for one. Tired of hearing them talk about it I quoted, pretty much word for word, one of your posts about subluxations allowing for the conditions required for bacteria to grow, and are the real cause of ailments rather than the bacteria themselves. Of course I said it very sarcastically. All four of these girls started yelling about how I don't know anything, subluxations are real and do cause problems. That's about the time I stood up and went to another table.
In this case if you write a comment or review, by contract you give the doctor the copyright. This allows them to have the review taken down. If they know you wrote the review and they know you signed the contract, they send a DMCA takedown, maybe a copy of the signed contract to prove they have your copyright, and if you contest that in court, the court will say "yeah, that's a contract, they have copyright." There doesn't need to be a monetary clause, because the property to exchange is the copyright.
iPads, iPods and iPhones are not computer related, they're consumer electronics. iTunes is crummy software, Quicktime is crummy software. If you don't have an Apple COMPUTER you would think Apple only writes crummy software. If they write crummy software, why would you use their OS? It's probably crummy.
Not that I believe that, but to a layperson it might appear that way.
That is what I would like to know. I've never written a browser plugin, but that would be a pretty easy one to start on if there aren't already some good ones out there.
Intellectual Property laws are about controlling what someone can do with the information once you have (willingly) given it to them.
But when you willfully give give your information to a service such as Facebook and they expose the information you gave them in a way you didn't want them to, is that or is that not a violation of privacy? Of course they have a privacy policy they are bound by. How is that different from the license a creative work is sold under? If violation of a privacy policy is bad, does it not also follow that violation of a license is bad for the same reason, as essentially they serve the same purpose (regulating what can and can not be done with the information being given to another party)?
Is your position that people performing their jobs not be granted the same protection of rights as they would otherwise due to the fact that business is a public matter and (taking a bit of a leap here) that way we help to preserve the notion of the "well-informed" consumer? Do you view this as something that should only be for large corporations, or should this apply to small shops and contractors working out of their homes as well? I'm trying to figure out how your statements above would apply to your overall thoughts on economic liberty.
You're probably being a bit of a troll but that is an interesting way to look at it. I've long been anti piracy (though I used to pirate often and still do to some degree, I don't pretend I'm some kind of freedom fighter) and pro privacy. I never looked at it in the terms of the "information wants to be free" argument.
How can you be for privacy but still cling to the tired defense of piracy?
This is true if you have one window maximized, but we long ago reached the point where multiple windows can exist side-by-side. I guess they can go top-to-bottom as well, but usually I find that configuration more difficult as you have a bunch of titles and toolbars between the information you want to see, and side-by-side there is usually just a few pixels separating it.
You're right, however I don't think I really have it, I think I just have a big nose, a cleft palate and myopia. I don't have any of the other issues associated with Stickler's, and I've never been diagnosed as such, just off-hand comments from retina guys from time to time. I guess there is a chance I do have it, but not any of the major complications related to it.
Actually, now that I think about it I was diagnosed Pierre Robin Syndrome as an infant, but my parents told me they left the support group since I really didn't have anything close to the problems the other parents' children had and they felt guilty.::shrug::
Seriously, best of luck with everything. I hope once you get all the information about your condition you turn out to be as lucky as I am and it's not a constant interference with your life.
I find horizontal space to be way way more valuable, as horizontal scrolling is generally a bad thing to do, and vertical scrolling is on everything. This is also why generally there is a verticle scroll wheel on mice but no horizontal unless you click the wheel first.
Fair enough. Misunderstandings and all. I interpretted his "Why is google watching my clicks not 'private'" subject to mean he viewed that as the online equivalent of offline location tracking. I'm probably mistaken.
Just because a phrase becomes idiomatic and loses its full context when spoken or written does not mean you need to get on the internet and "correct" people for using the idiom simply because you do not understand where it came from.
In other news, when people say they "literally" did something when obviously they didn't, they don't misunderstand what the word "literally" means, they are just exaggerating. By correcting them you either come off as a jackass, or you come off as somebody that really struggles with the meaning of the word yourself.
What, the point that publishing names and data is the same as publishing data? He makes a huge leap. It's one thing to say "9 out of 10 teenagers are having sex right this second, mostly in cars." and another to say "Mary is having sex right now in a volkswagen behind a Taco Bell". To equate Google's privacy violations with this is counter-productive as anybody can say "the data has been scrubbed, it's totally different. Therefore you have nothing to complain about." He does himself an injustice by implying a searchable database of what people are doing is similar to what Google and other internet market research companies do.
Oh, where is the form I go to where I can enter your name and see everything you've done online. Oh, wait, there isn't one? Well shit. It's almost like you made a terrible comparison.
Are you an idiot? Of couse God had to move the fucking nerve so it wouldn't get hit when Reagan was shot. If he can't speak, how can he be the Great Communicator?
No, actually I was extremely nearsighted which strains the retina. By extremely nearsighted I mean my prescription used to be -15 in both eyes. Various doctors have told me I have Stickler Syndrome or Pierre Robin, but while I have symptoms of both, I personally don't think either is accurate.
Slashdot Mirror
Is the requirement to pay your bills really a contract? Is it just implicit acceptance of a contract that when you are found almost dead on the side of the road and unable to respond and you have medical bills? Are you speaking as a doctor or a lawyer, because it sounds like you're talking as an idiot. I guess if you want to be pedantic about the word "any" then fine, let me rephrase.
Any contract with clauses not related to payment in the form of cash that are inline with standard prices for similar services, liability of the doctor for damage done during procedures or permission for providing the services requested would most likely not be enforceable in court due to the varying factors of duress, competency and consideration when signing a contract while bleeding from a serious wound, where serious wound is defined as a wound that is extremely painful, has potential to do further permanent damage, or is life threatening.
If we go proportional representation in the house, can we repeal the 17th amendment?
Funny story I was sitting with a table of girls at a bar (hard to believe, don't worry the one I knew was fat so it's still believable), one of the girls goes to a chiropractor all the time and the other works for one. Tired of hearing them talk about it I quoted, pretty much word for word, one of your posts about subluxations allowing for the conditions required for bacteria to grow, and are the real cause of ailments rather than the bacteria themselves. Of course I said it very sarcastically. All four of these girls started yelling about how I don't know anything, subluxations are real and do cause problems. That's about the time I stood up and went to another table.
If you are judging your doctor based on the comfort of the chairs you are an idiot or know two very good doctors at comparable, affordable rates.
In this case if you write a comment or review, by contract you give the doctor the copyright. This allows them to have the review taken down. If they know you wrote the review and they know you signed the contract, they send a DMCA takedown, maybe a copy of the signed contract to prove they have your copyright, and if you contest that in court, the court will say "yeah, that's a contract, they have copyright." There doesn't need to be a monetary clause, because the property to exchange is the copyright.
Didn't you know that in this day and age even disagreeing with somebody is hampering somebody's rights?
We must supress the freedom to enter in to contracts! It's the only way to protect our freedom!
I'm pretty sure any contract signed while bleeding from a serious injury would not be upheld in court. Duress, competancy, etc.
iPads, iPods and iPhones are not computer related, they're consumer electronics. iTunes is crummy software, Quicktime is crummy software. If you don't have an Apple COMPUTER you would think Apple only writes crummy software. If they write crummy software, why would you use their OS? It's probably crummy.
Not that I believe that, but to a layperson it might appear that way.
That is what I would like to know. I've never written a browser plugin, but that would be a pretty easy one to start on if there aren't already some good ones out there.
Are there any plugins to auto-expand the shortened URLs?
You mean incubators for babies aren't the same as the incubators in Jurassic Park?
Yeah, well how would you like incubators for human babies to start spinning out of control and destroying themselves?
I'm not so worried about what terrorists might do in a cyber attack, I'm worried about the trolls.
Intellectual Property laws are about controlling what someone can do with the information once you have (willingly) given it to them.
But when you willfully give give your information to a service such as Facebook and they expose the information you gave them in a way you didn't want them to, is that or is that not a violation of privacy? Of course they have a privacy policy they are bound by. How is that different from the license a creative work is sold under? If violation of a privacy policy is bad, does it not also follow that violation of a license is bad for the same reason, as essentially they serve the same purpose (regulating what can and can not be done with the information being given to another party)?
And lastly, how do you feel about the GPL?
Is your position that people performing their jobs not be granted the same protection of rights as they would otherwise due to the fact that business is a public matter and (taking a bit of a leap here) that way we help to preserve the notion of the "well-informed" consumer? Do you view this as something that should only be for large corporations, or should this apply to small shops and contractors working out of their homes as well? I'm trying to figure out how your statements above would apply to your overall thoughts on economic liberty.
You're probably being a bit of a troll but that is an interesting way to look at it. I've long been anti piracy (though I used to pirate often and still do to some degree, I don't pretend I'm some kind of freedom fighter) and pro privacy. I never looked at it in the terms of the "information wants to be free" argument.
How can you be for privacy but still cling to the tired defense of piracy?
This is true if you have one window maximized, but we long ago reached the point where multiple windows can exist side-by-side. I guess they can go top-to-bottom as well, but usually I find that configuration more difficult as you have a bunch of titles and toolbars between the information you want to see, and side-by-side there is usually just a few pixels separating it.
You're right, however I don't think I really have it, I think I just have a big nose, a cleft palate and myopia. I don't have any of the other issues associated with Stickler's, and I've never been diagnosed as such, just off-hand comments from retina guys from time to time. I guess there is a chance I do have it, but not any of the major complications related to it.
::shrug::
Actually, now that I think about it I was diagnosed Pierre Robin Syndrome as an infant, but my parents told me they left the support group since I really didn't have anything close to the problems the other parents' children had and they felt guilty.
Seriously, best of luck with everything. I hope once you get all the information about your condition you turn out to be as lucky as I am and it's not a constant interference with your life.
I find horizontal space to be way way more valuable, as horizontal scrolling is generally a bad thing to do, and vertical scrolling is on everything. This is also why generally there is a verticle scroll wheel on mice but no horizontal unless you click the wheel first.
Fair enough. Misunderstandings and all. I interpretted his "Why is google watching my clicks not 'private'" subject to mean he viewed that as the online equivalent of offline location tracking. I'm probably mistaken.
Just because a phrase becomes idiomatic and loses its full context when spoken or written does not mean you need to get on the internet and "correct" people for using the idiom simply because you do not understand where it came from.
In other news, when people say they "literally" did something when obviously they didn't, they don't misunderstand what the word "literally" means, they are just exaggerating. By correcting them you either come off as a jackass, or you come off as somebody that really struggles with the meaning of the word yourself.
Nothing is worse than a know-it-all who doesn't.
What, the point that publishing names and data is the same as publishing data? He makes a huge leap. It's one thing to say "9 out of 10 teenagers are having sex right this second, mostly in cars." and another to say "Mary is having sex right now in a volkswagen behind a Taco Bell". To equate Google's privacy violations with this is counter-productive as anybody can say "the data has been scrubbed, it's totally different. Therefore you have nothing to complain about." He does himself an injustice by implying a searchable database of what people are doing is similar to what Google and other internet market research companies do.
Oh, where is the form I go to where I can enter your name and see everything you've done online. Oh, wait, there isn't one? Well shit. It's almost like you made a terrible comparison.
Are you an idiot? Of couse God had to move the fucking nerve so it wouldn't get hit when Reagan was shot. If he can't speak, how can he be the Great Communicator?
Oh yeah? Well my dad can beat up your dad!
No, actually I was extremely nearsighted which strains the retina. By extremely nearsighted I mean my prescription used to be -15 in both eyes. Various doctors have told me I have Stickler Syndrome or Pierre Robin, but while I have symptoms of both, I personally don't think either is accurate.