Small independent labels may, from time to time, have terms and conditions in their contracts that allow them to make modifications to those terms and conditions as they feel is necessary. When you're with the independent label, this is usually a good thing, because they do not have an army of lawyers available to them, and they can actually change conditions to protect artists and themselves from unforeseen liability issues.
There are lots of additional clauses that can be put in a contract to protect the artist, but most independent artists don't retain legal counsel, and you don't want to go in thinking that your label could collapse or sell out at any time. So, they forget to program in an escape clause. When the sales and mergers finish, you end up with a contract you don't have a legal way out of, controlled by a company that can manipulate it as they see fit because of the contract with the indie label.
I'm not blaming the indie label. But I think sell-out and merger escape clauses really need to be standard in any indie contract. If your label merges or sells out to another label, you should have the option of leaving with your creative content.
That's because Dell fell prey to the micromanagement philosophy. They stopped trusting their employees, set up operations centers that did nothing but monitor and criticize. The operable word was "If you can't measure it, you can't manage it", and they took a partial idea and shaped it into their total policy. Good people left, and still OTHER good people stayed and were bogged down in the new culture of ass-kissing micromanagers and political bullshit. It was a sad, sad thing, because we used to take such pride in topping everyones support list, year in and out. But their support began to falter, and so too did their double and triple digit growth numbers....
Then you'll sit back and sell yourself and your children away, bit by bit, all in the name of an idea that cannot be contained, a concept that cannot be "defeated", and a war that cannot be won. You cannot defeat a concept. You cannot eliminate the concept of armed resistance, especially in the name of a cause that you believe in enough to sacrifice your life for. Americans have forgotten the meaning of sacrifice and courage, and embraced the culture of feel-good and self-deception.
The world is a place of complexity. The "war on terror", the Israeli-Palestine conflict, global warming...none of these things have band-aid solutions, and all of these things require reflection and change on a scale that we no longer have the fortitude for. We'd rather be buying iPods at Wal-Mart and drowning out the cacophany that is REALITY than face an uncertain future. But that future MUST be faced, and it shows the cowardice of our populace that we are leaving the REAL challenges to be faced by those who come after, instead choosing the easy path of sacrificing LIVES instead of lifestyles. I'm not a luddite, I'm not overly liberal or conservative, I dont' believe all business is evil...but when you look around this country and you say "Everything is RIGHT", then you've joined in the deception and abdicated responsibility for your actions to your children and their children.
Any poster with brains would understand that eBay if rife with fraud, and that, as a bidder, my goal is to get the best deal for ME, not to give the seller the most money he can milk from me. Sniping actually nets you a better deal on eBay more often than not. Here's how it plays out:
Let's say I want a "Bunky Bonanza Sally Wets Herself" doll to complete my collection of dolls which tinkle on themselves. Knowing that this doll is something of a collectable among the small but ferocious base of collectors that collect pee dolls, I decide that the most I want to spend is $100, and enter this as my maximum bid. If there is genuine interest by others shown in the doll, then I will be outbid fair and square. HOWEVER, if there is not legitimate interest, and the doll hovers around 12 dollars, well, here comes Friend Of Seller. He bids against me, noting that the system autoupdates my bid. Now, his job is to push my bid up to see how high I've set my 'maximum'. Maybe the Seller has a "press-your-luck" limit, and the friend stops at 50 and lets me win at 52, $40 more than I might have HAD to pay. OR, let's say that seller just has his friend push until his high bid sticks. I'm sad that I don't get my doll, but lo and behold, what should appear in my messages?! It seems that the 'buyer' for the dollie I covet is a flake, and the seller noticed I was the bidder after that. He can sell me the doll for $95 or whatever before he puts it back onto eBay. Of course, if I'm a collector, and was WILLING to pay $100, then I feel I've scored a coup, snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. But what I really did was pay $83 more than I should have in a concerted scam to inflate the price of a doll.
In the sniping scenario, I can get outbid, if my final bid is not enough in the last moments. But if there genuinely is little movement on the items, I might get away with the doll for $18 instead (and there's a high likelihood of that).
Let's not pretend that perfect markets exist on eBay. The RESERVE is a tool that lets a seller ensure that he recoups what he believes is fair for an item. Sniping is a tool that protects you from fraudulent item inflation, and often wins you more auctions in the long run.
But your argument falls flat here. There is nothing in the WORLD that prevents people from openly distributing their own works on the net, or self-publishing. However, if all books were published on the internet, I would probably read about 1/100th of the amount I do. I despise reading large texts on the web, and I *like* nicely bound, nicely printed books, with covers. I don't want to order a cheaply bound copy. However, print-on-demand can't print the same quality as your standard hardback book yet, and keep the costs as low as a publisher, who prints a high run and is willing to eat the losses for that one big fish that banks.
I disagree with this, and it comes right down to the misconception (is it?) of Open source as software by geeks FOR geeks, and damn the 'ignorant' masses (ie, those who fall under the 95th percentile for intelligence. You know, MOST of the population).
Feedback from non-OSS, non-programming individuals is the feedback you should be looking for MOST. These are the people who are going to tell you how you should evolve and develop your applications to maximize the user experience, and get your software recognized. In fact, these complaints should be handled with MORE interested than those who participate and support OSS, since most of those folks are OSS developers in their own right, and have different wants and needs in applications (what do you mean it doesn't have a CLI?!).
Ah, see, I'm afraid I'm going to have to say "fuck you" at this point. People seem to assume that all 'programmers' are the same as 'enthusiast/programmers'. Most of the programmers I worked with wouldn't know their motherboard from their asshole. They are niche programmers who rarely know much about their systems, or about the operating system itself. They program Lotus Notes or FoxPro or Visual Basic or Oracle or any other application that doesn't require you to know squat about the actual operation of the machine. Don't assume that just because someone is a programmer, that they automatically know better than IT. It's not unusual for some Senior IT staff to have electrical engineering degrees, because the job pays better than a starting EE job.
First of all, it's not hidden. It is, in fact, MORE accessible. By default, "My Computer" is moved to the Start menu, where it can be easily accessed without minimizing your applications. This is a much better location than the desktop.
The only thing better would be fully configurable docks, so you could detach those desktop items from the start menu and attach them to some other side or corner or hover them as a group of always on top buttons.
Are you fucking KIDDING me? What are you, a fucking anarchist? Or have you just never taken a minute to think about anything you say before just VOMITING it on my screen? And not just you, but the rest of the whiny slashdot users posting responses to this..
Did you want police to solve crimes using the incredible psychic abilities. Perhaps they should politely ask..."Pardon me, did you rob this store or rape this woman? No? Drat. Well, our job here is done." You're trying to change the right to not incriminate yourself to the right to never be incriminated. Once you've had the judge strike the surveillance video, would you like permission to have all evidence of your fingerprints, hair, and dna expunged from the scene, too, since you didn't give them permission to use it to identify you? Maybe we should let you carry around a brain scrubber, since you didn't give people legal permission to carry copies of your face in their memory.
Of course, you're not the prime target of my rampage. You were just the last straw. You people make me sick, when you live every day, taking for granted the dedication and sacrifice of a LOT of people who put their lives on the line, and not only do you point to the MINORITY and demonize them all, but you want to take away all the tools of their job, remove every power they might have, and then complain because they don't do their jobs. Which, according to you, should be the eqiuvalent of handing out flowers on the street corner, because they certainly wouldn't want to question anyone about anything ever at all, and if someone cops an attitude, why, they should just get in their car and drive away.
My question to you and parents like you is always the same: What exactly do you hope to gain? THere is no proof that children who grow up exposed to less violence or sexual activity have healthier relationships. It would seem that exposure combined with explanation, openness, and understanding would result in a better combination than shielding them from the outside world.
I cannot believe how fundamentally wrong you are. It's almost SHOCKING.
Your view of "racism" might be closer to the truth, except that many racist do not believe that blacks are actually the same as them. They are not "human" to them. If you've noted, there are inconsequential physiological differences, but these are grasped on to as conclusive proof that the white race and the black race are not the same, as though evolution favored the white man.
Decentralization of power will not produce the results you desire, because we are by nature a social,alpha-dominated society. We are not only a society of have's and have not's, but of think and think not's. Decentralizing power completely would be thinking that all men and women are equally capable, or even that all men and women are born with identical potential. This is untrue, as there are genetic dispositions to intelligence, good looks, health...
In your miracle decentralized society, someone has to make sure the factories keep running. Will the unintelligent do that? Perhaps each person should be assigned a job equivalent to their skills and abilities and natural aptitudes, but who decides what those are? And who says that the shit-shovelers will not envy the factory runners? How does your society become better than the capitalist system, except that instead of a society ruled by money, it is ruled by the more intelligent, who are more qualified for these sort of endeavors. You've traded one chain for another.
True socialism can never succeed until technology has advanced to the point where it eliminates not only basic human need, but all human wants and the need for human work. Otherwise, there will always be envy or desire, because there will either be groups who have more, or groups who believe they should have more, and have the means to provide it to themselves. (See: Every communist ruler in history).
Technology for the sake of technology is called 'progress'. First we make the prototype, which is too big and/or too expensive, then we make it smaller and cheaper and smaller and cheaper, until it becomes consumable.
The second paragraph, "60% of the rock listenership" should be "60% of rock programming", indicating actual station ownership. It's listenership percentage in the rock markets is higher than the 60% of stations it owns. Since I can't edit, I'm correcting myself, so it's not contradictory.
Your argument here falls flat. When dealing with these issues, it's not as simple as a fraction, and you know it. You're dancing around the issue like a plant, but I won't call you one directly.
Clear Channel owns 1200 radio stations. It's CLOSEST competitor owns ~250 stations. It has very systematically carved out those radio stations, so while it own "6%" of the radio stations in the US, it "owns" over 25% of the revenue and listenership in the country, and 60% of the rock radio listenership. A vast majority of it's listenership is in the most coveted 18-to-34 age category.
With the purchase of SFX, it became the largest concert promoter in the country, and controls COMPLETELY the advertising for it's venues. This allows it to make deals and pressure artist into their terms, or else disallow it usage of larger venues AND make advertising on appropriate music stations impossible. If you're a rock band touring, and one company owns 60% of all the stations you'd adverstise on, and the TOP 60% of stations, which meant more than 60% of the listeners, you'd have a hard time launching a successful tour without them.
You feed the monster. You can say what you like, but NO ONE likes ClearChannel except ClearChannel and ClearChannel stockholders. The RIAA, the artists, the concert promoters, they seem to maintain a universal loathing for a company that, since it's purchasing spree, has driven down radio listenership while simultaneously buying up as many alternate means of distribution as they can. Artists are lost no matter what they do.
Does the Patent Office have a process for filing an invention as Prior Art, so that a company that invents something and wishes it to be public domain can prevent it from being taken and patented by someone else? It seems to me that if a company wished to create things so it could allow them to benefit society as a whole, there would have to be some way to protect that item from patent without having to patent it yourself.
This will be dependent upon the MP3 Player. The MP3 player that I have can be set to repeat a single track over and over again, but the Next Track button DOES move it to the next track.
SO, if you have one track of the audio, and one track of silence (only has to be a few seconds long, as it just repeats), set to single track repeat, then hitting the button would alternately play silence or the audio.
Ahh, but there you've run into the crux. If you paid the workers a standard salary, the amount that you would raise their pay to replace their tips would then need to be rolled into your pricing. And there is something ingrained in the standard American psyche that will balk at paying high prices for an ITEM, but would pay more for the ITEM plus TIP combined then they would have for the more expensive item in the first place. If you suddenly raised the prices of entrees by $2, but told people they didn't have to tip, even people who would normally tip $4 would balk, because Americans like that the tip is OPTIONAL. Trust me, I don't understand them either, and I'm one of them.
You know, it must be an ignorant individual who regarded this as a TROLL post? How exactly is helping to expand on someone's viewpoint by pointing out exact examples of their point considered "trolling"? You may not like my political opinion, but that doesn't make me a troll.
Ah, yes. Let me expand, and point to some wonderful bits of information.
Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad vs. Beckwith In which it was ruled that corporations are indeed natural persons.
There are other great ones. Louis K Liggett Co. vs Lee, Connecticut General Life Ins vs. Johnson, Wheeling Steel Corp vs. Glander.
Also wonderful to note are Dodge vs. Ford Motor Co, which established the notion that corporations exist solely for the enrichment of their shareholders, and Buckley vs. Valeo, which declared political CASH MONEY as a form of free speech, and thus protected by the constitution.
I hate to break it to you, but people in serious business only admire balls in themselves. They want the companies they deal with to do whatever it takes to make THEIR lives easier. You're not going to see these people saying,"Ra! Stick it to SCO! We're right behind you, even if they force you to shut down all your Linux boxes!" No, sir. Those words aren't coming out of anyones mouths. And are YOU going to pay their legal bills? Do you honestly think that they will lose a chunk of business that would equal the money they'd have to pour into litigation?
I'm sorry, sometimes I don't understand the Slashdroid community.
Slashdot Mirror
Sooooort of...
Small independent labels may, from time to time, have terms and conditions in their contracts that allow them to make modifications to those terms and conditions as they feel is necessary. When you're with the independent label, this is usually a good thing, because they do not have an army of lawyers available to them, and they can actually change conditions to protect artists and themselves from unforeseen liability issues.
There are lots of additional clauses that can be put in a contract to protect the artist, but most independent artists don't retain legal counsel, and you don't want to go in thinking that your label could collapse or sell out at any time. So, they forget to program in an escape clause. When the sales and mergers finish, you end up with a contract you don't have a legal way out of, controlled by a company that can manipulate it as they see fit because of the contract with the indie label.
I'm not blaming the indie label. But I think sell-out and merger escape clauses really need to be standard in any indie contract. If your label merges or sells out to another label, you should have the option of leaving with your creative content.
That's because Dell fell prey to the micromanagement philosophy. They stopped trusting their employees, set up operations centers that did nothing but monitor and criticize. The operable word was "If you can't measure it, you can't manage it", and they took a partial idea and shaped it into their total policy. Good people left, and still OTHER good people stayed and were bogged down in the new culture of ass-kissing micromanagers and political bullshit. It was a sad, sad thing, because we used to take such pride in topping everyones support list, year in and out. But their support began to falter, and so too did their double and triple digit growth numbers....
You have to wonder at the coincidence of that.
Then you'll sit back and sell yourself and your children away, bit by bit, all in the name of an idea that cannot be contained, a concept that cannot be "defeated", and a war that cannot be won. You cannot defeat a concept. You cannot eliminate the concept of armed resistance, especially in the name of a cause that you believe in enough to sacrifice your life for. Americans have forgotten the meaning of sacrifice and courage, and embraced the culture of feel-good and self-deception.
The world is a place of complexity. The "war on terror", the Israeli-Palestine conflict, global warming...none of these things have band-aid solutions, and all of these things require reflection and change on a scale that we no longer have the fortitude for. We'd rather be buying iPods at Wal-Mart and drowning out the cacophany that is REALITY than face an uncertain future. But that future MUST be faced, and it shows the cowardice of our populace that we are leaving the REAL challenges to be faced by those who come after, instead choosing the easy path of sacrificing LIVES instead of lifestyles. I'm not a luddite, I'm not overly liberal or conservative, I dont' believe all business is evil...but when you look around this country and you say "Everything is RIGHT", then you've joined in the deception and abdicated responsibility for your actions to your children and their children.
And you should be ashamed.
Any poster with brains would understand that eBay if rife with fraud, and that, as a bidder, my goal is to get the best deal for ME, not to give the seller the most money he can milk from me. Sniping actually nets you a better deal on eBay more often than not. Here's how it plays out:
Let's say I want a "Bunky Bonanza Sally Wets Herself" doll to complete my collection of dolls which tinkle on themselves. Knowing that this doll is something of a collectable among the small but ferocious base of collectors that collect pee dolls, I decide that the most I want to spend is $100, and enter this as my maximum bid. If there is genuine interest by others shown in the doll, then I will be outbid fair and square. HOWEVER, if there is not legitimate interest, and the doll hovers around 12 dollars, well, here comes Friend Of Seller. He bids against me, noting that the system autoupdates my bid. Now, his job is to push my bid up to see how high I've set my 'maximum'. Maybe the Seller has a "press-your-luck" limit, and the friend stops at 50 and lets me win at 52, $40 more than I might have HAD to pay. OR, let's say that seller just has his friend push until his high bid sticks. I'm sad that I don't get my doll, but lo and behold, what should appear in my messages?! It seems that the 'buyer' for the dollie I covet is a flake, and the seller noticed I was the bidder after that. He can sell me the doll for $95 or whatever before he puts it back onto eBay. Of course, if I'm a collector, and was WILLING to pay $100, then I feel I've scored a coup, snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. But what I really did was pay $83 more than I should have in a concerted scam to inflate the price of a doll.
In the sniping scenario, I can get outbid, if my final bid is not enough in the last moments. But if there genuinely is little movement on the items, I might get away with the doll for $18 instead (and there's a high likelihood of that).
Let's not pretend that perfect markets exist on eBay. The RESERVE is a tool that lets a seller ensure that he recoups what he believes is fair for an item. Sniping is a tool that protects you from fraudulent item inflation, and often wins you more auctions in the long run.
OMG. That's like $4.37 American. But I hear the Canadian system kicks you a free kidney transplant.
But your argument falls flat here. There is nothing in the WORLD that prevents people from openly distributing their own works on the net, or self-publishing. However, if all books were published on the internet, I would probably read about 1/100th of the amount I do. I despise reading large texts on the web, and I *like* nicely bound, nicely printed books, with covers. I don't want to order a cheaply bound copy. However, print-on-demand can't print the same quality as your standard hardback book yet, and keep the costs as low as a publisher, who prints a high run and is willing to eat the losses for that one big fish that banks.
I disagree with this, and it comes right down to the misconception (is it?) of Open source as software by geeks FOR geeks, and damn the 'ignorant' masses (ie, those who fall under the 95th percentile for intelligence. You know, MOST of the population).
Feedback from non-OSS, non-programming individuals is the feedback you should be looking for MOST. These are the people who are going to tell you how you should evolve and develop your applications to maximize the user experience, and get your software recognized. In fact, these complaints should be handled with MORE interested than those who participate and support OSS, since most of those folks are OSS developers in their own right, and have different wants and needs in applications (what do you mean it doesn't have a CLI?!).
Ah, see, I'm afraid I'm going to have to say "fuck you" at this point. People seem to assume that all 'programmers' are the same as 'enthusiast/programmers'. Most of the programmers I worked with wouldn't know their motherboard from their asshole. They are niche programmers who rarely know much about their systems, or about the operating system itself. They program Lotus Notes or FoxPro or Visual Basic or Oracle or any other application that doesn't require you to know squat about the actual operation of the machine. Don't assume that just because someone is a programmer, that they automatically know better than IT. It's not unusual for some Senior IT staff to have electrical engineering degrees, because the job pays better than a starting EE job.
"Grounds for dismissal" my ass.
First of all, it's not hidden. It is, in fact, MORE accessible. By default, "My Computer" is moved to the Start menu, where it can be easily accessed without minimizing your applications. This is a much better location than the desktop.
The only thing better would be fully configurable docks, so you could detach those desktop items from the start menu and attach them to some other side or corner or hover them as a group of always on top buttons.
Awesome. Well, how about this. We'll get you signed up on a list of folks who forfeit their police protection, and we'll cut you a tax break.
Of course, to indemnify the local police force, we'll have to make that list public...
....
Are you fucking KIDDING me? What are you, a fucking anarchist? Or have you just never taken a minute to think about anything you say before just VOMITING it on my screen? And not just you, but the rest of the whiny slashdot users posting responses to this..
Did you want police to solve crimes using the incredible psychic abilities. Perhaps they should politely ask..."Pardon me, did you rob this store or rape this woman? No? Drat. Well, our job here is done." You're trying to change the right to not incriminate yourself to the right to never be incriminated. Once you've had the judge strike the surveillance video, would you like permission to have all evidence of your fingerprints, hair, and dna expunged from the scene, too, since you didn't give them permission to use it to identify you? Maybe we should let you carry around a brain scrubber, since you didn't give people legal permission to carry copies of your face in their memory.
Of course, you're not the prime target of my rampage. You were just the last straw. You people make me sick, when you live every day, taking for granted the dedication and sacrifice of a LOT of people who put their lives on the line, and not only do you point to the MINORITY and demonize them all, but you want to take away all the tools of their job, remove every power they might have, and then complain because they don't do their jobs. Which, according to you, should be the eqiuvalent of handing out flowers on the street corner, because they certainly wouldn't want to question anyone about anything ever at all, and if someone cops an attitude, why, they should just get in their car and drive away.
My question to you and parents like you is always the same: What exactly do you hope to gain? THere is no proof that children who grow up exposed to less violence or sexual activity have healthier relationships. It would seem that exposure combined with explanation, openness, and understanding would result in a better combination than shielding them from the outside world.
I cannot believe how fundamentally wrong you are. It's almost SHOCKING.
Your view of "racism" might be closer to the truth, except that many racist do not believe that blacks are actually the same as them. They are not "human" to them. If you've noted, there are inconsequential physiological differences, but these are grasped on to as conclusive proof that the white race and the black race are not the same, as though evolution favored the white man.
Decentralization of power will not produce the results you desire, because we are by nature a social,alpha-dominated society. We are not only a society of have's and have not's, but of think and think not's. Decentralizing power completely would be thinking that all men and women are equally capable, or even that all men and women are born with identical potential. This is untrue, as there are genetic dispositions to intelligence, good looks, health...
In your miracle decentralized society, someone has to make sure the factories keep running. Will the unintelligent do that? Perhaps each person should be assigned a job equivalent to their skills and abilities and natural aptitudes, but who decides what those are? And who says that the shit-shovelers will not envy the factory runners? How does your society become better than the capitalist system, except that instead of a society ruled by money, it is ruled by the more intelligent, who are more qualified for these sort of endeavors. You've traded one chain for another.
True socialism can never succeed until technology has advanced to the point where it eliminates not only basic human need, but all human wants and the need for human work. Otherwise, there will always be envy or desire, because there will either be groups who have more, or groups who believe they should have more, and have the means to provide it to themselves. (See: Every communist ruler in history).
Technology for the sake of technology is called 'progress'. First we make the prototype, which is too big and/or too expensive, then we make it smaller and cheaper and smaller and cheaper, until it becomes consumable.
You know, this post is just a short version of the post below it. This one got a -1, and the one below it a +5.
This place never ceases to confuse the hell out of me.
The second paragraph, "60% of the rock listenership" should be "60% of rock programming", indicating actual station ownership. It's listenership percentage in the rock markets is higher than the 60% of stations it owns. Since I can't edit, I'm correcting myself, so it's not contradictory.
Your argument here falls flat. When dealing with these issues, it's not as simple as a fraction, and you know it. You're dancing around the issue like a plant, but I won't call you one directly.
Clear Channel owns 1200 radio stations. It's CLOSEST competitor owns ~250 stations. It has very systematically carved out those radio stations, so while it own "6%" of the radio stations in the US, it "owns" over 25% of the revenue and listenership in the country, and 60% of the rock radio listenership. A vast majority of it's listenership is in the most coveted 18-to-34 age category.
With the purchase of SFX, it became the largest concert promoter in the country, and controls COMPLETELY the advertising for it's venues. This allows it to make deals and pressure artist into their terms, or else disallow it usage of larger venues AND make advertising on appropriate music stations impossible. If you're a rock band touring, and one company owns 60% of all the stations you'd adverstise on, and the TOP 60% of stations, which meant more than 60% of the listeners, you'd have a hard time launching a successful tour without them.
You feed the monster. You can say what you like, but NO ONE likes ClearChannel except ClearChannel and ClearChannel stockholders. The RIAA, the artists, the concert promoters, they seem to maintain a universal loathing for a company that, since it's purchasing spree, has driven down radio listenership while simultaneously buying up as many alternate means of distribution as they can. Artists are lost no matter what they do.
Now I have a question:
Does the Patent Office have a process for filing an invention as Prior Art, so that a company that invents something and wishes it to be public domain can prevent it from being taken and patented by someone else? It seems to me that if a company wished to create things so it could allow them to benefit society as a whole, there would have to be some way to protect that item from patent without having to patent it yourself.
This will be dependent upon the MP3 Player. The MP3 player that I have can be set to repeat a single track over and over again, but the Next Track button DOES move it to the next track.
SO, if you have one track of the audio, and one track of silence (only has to be a few seconds long, as it just repeats), set to single track repeat, then hitting the button would alternately play silence or the audio.
Ahh, but there you've run into the crux. If you paid the workers a standard salary, the amount that you would raise their pay to replace their tips would then need to be rolled into your pricing. And there is something ingrained in the standard American psyche that will balk at paying high prices for an ITEM, but would pay more for the ITEM plus TIP combined then they would have for the more expensive item in the first place. If you suddenly raised the prices of entrees by $2, but told people they didn't have to tip, even people who would normally tip $4 would balk, because Americans like that the tip is OPTIONAL. Trust me, I don't understand them either, and I'm one of them.
H4x0r5 really DID stoeled their MEGAHURTZ!!11!
You know, it must be an ignorant individual who regarded this as a TROLL post? How exactly is helping to expand on someone's viewpoint by pointing out exact examples of their point considered "trolling"? You may not like my political opinion, but that doesn't make me a troll.
Ah, yes. Let me expand, and point to some wonderful bits of information.
Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad vs. Beckwith
In which it was ruled that corporations are indeed natural persons.
There are other great ones. Louis K Liggett Co. vs Lee, Connecticut General Life Ins vs. Johnson, Wheeling Steel Corp vs. Glander.
Also wonderful to note are Dodge vs. Ford Motor Co, which established the notion that corporations exist solely for the enrichment of their shareholders, and Buckley vs. Valeo, which declared political CASH MONEY as a form of free speech, and thus protected by the constitution.
I hate to break it to you, but people in serious business only admire balls in themselves. They want the companies they deal with to do whatever it takes to make THEIR lives easier. You're not going to see these people saying,"Ra! Stick it to SCO! We're right behind you, even if they force you to shut down all your Linux boxes!" No, sir. Those words aren't coming out of anyones mouths. And are YOU going to pay their legal bills? Do you honestly think that they will lose a chunk of business that would equal the money they'd have to pour into litigation?
I'm sorry, sometimes I don't understand the Slashdroid community.
Indeed! And that begs the ques..*ow...ow...stop it...OW*