Oh yeah, because the updates are not totally useless if you don't actually own the hardware
Remember we're talking active support contracts. Once your in you can lookup the list of devices for a site get the serial numbers then open a case for RMA for some piece of equipment that it died and then to say oh yea I need this shipped to address such and such not the address on the list.
Perhaps the prophecy was really fulfilled not by Anakin destroying the Sith order, but by Luke humanizing the Jedi ethic.
I like to think of it as not Luke that humanized the Jedi ethic but Anakin himself. Isn't that were a lot of his anger came from? The Jedi counsil berating him because he let his emotions lead him, but isn't that also what made him such a formable foe. Who is the worst person to go up against, the person that has nothing to lose or the person who has has something they care about to lose?
Yes, Luke followed in the footsteps of his father (much to the fear of Yoda and Obi-Wan) in that he cared about the outcome and did things because he cared about the people involed but I also personally believe this is what the prophecy meant about balance as well, I just believe it was Anakin that did it not Luke.
I didn't think that you could mix proprietry and gpl code? How are they releasing parts of a source code tree - I thought it was all or nothing if you include GPL in your source?
Well kinda... What you do is write an abstraction layer, kinda of a hook into your proprietry software. You'll need to release the abstraction layer (The functions and routines that call GPL routines and use the variables from the GPL modules) but not the proprietry stuff.
That is perfectly legal (not neccaryly ethical) and many companies do it.
It would look something like this (assume code sprinkled in different source files
I am sick of Tivo trying to exloit its subscribers with ads for the sake of profit. I know better ways. Make a better product. Enhance the service. Listen to the customers.
I don't see, what TiVO has evolved into, as much as trying to make a couple of bucks, as it's more of trying to applease the Media companies. Look at what happened to ReplayTV, some say their product and service was much better than TiVO, were are they today? ReplayTV was basically sued out of existance within 18 months of trying to defend itself. Yes the product still lives, barely, but the company itself is long gone.
I think that was the writing on the wall for TiVO, going up against any one of them is suicide in itself, but do something that makes them come together, and you'll be a speck on the wall. The ads, moving into a media marketing company, I don't think this was the direction they envisioned when they started the company.
Lets face it, yes the business is failing and they are running around with their heads cut off, but not by choice, Disney, ABC, Viacom, and etc are what's doing it.
Wait a minute. Where are all the libertairian kooks declaring the the free market is the perfect solution to every problem??
I know. They are in a silenced awe at the stem cell kooks who have convinced everyone that stem cells are the solution to every problem.
To date, stem cells seem to be cold fusion with better marketing.
Actually your only talking about Emrbyonic Stem Cells, which have shown to date pretty close to zip in the usefullness category.
Adult Stem Cells on the other hand, has already been used successfully in regrowth of spinal cord injuries, (Read the testimony of Dr. Jean D. Peduzzi-Nelson to a United States Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space at Here ) and many other injuries and diseases.
What seems to be a very well written article on the whole thing (Adult vs Embryonic) that I found while tracking down the above link is over here.
And can you believe, one of the most vocal person I've heard about this was Michael Reagan, son of the late President Ronald Reagan, who died of Alzheimer's Disease, a disease who's name is being thrown around as one of the many that can be cured by "stem cells". Which I whole heartly agree with, just not that it would be Embryonic Stem Cells.
The cable cards require either an external or internal tuner that is card compatible. And as the internals suck, an external box (cable or otherwise) you are stuck with if you want good picture.
At least you should (hopefully) be able to use a V.2.0 cable card in a DVR.
This is exactly how I envision things "should be". I want to by a DTV monitor. No tuner should be needed, and let the DVR act as a tuner. That way if something new and nifty comes out (such as lets say I went out and bought a CableCard generation 1 and CableCard generation 2 comes out, I don't want to buy yet another TV that will cost my thousands of dollars (as anything just on the market does). A new DVR that supports the newer features is a whole lot less than a new TV with a built in tuner.
I would support your regressive tax that takes a greater percentage of income from the poor and middle-class (before you start spouting BS about how taxes up to the poverty level are covered, please try living at that level for a month or two...)
Yes and no, it's not that it would take a greater percentage of income from poor and middle-class, because they would get it back in the form of a tax refund, but it does put an undo burden on these people. Since these people are already having problems making ends meet as it is already, forcing them to pay more now would be determintal. Also the thought that it would wipe out the IRS department is a complete falicy, since someone will need to be in charge of making sure the poor and middle-class get that refund. Not to mention, you make enough and won't get a refundm, guess you don't need to spend the time and money needed to do the paperwork needed to get that refund, so again unfair burden on the people that need it the most.
I was at one point all for a national sales tax to replace the income tax til it hit me what would people who check for change in the sofa just to make sure that the kids have milk this week do in this type of situation (Yes I've been there before). Now I'm leaning towards just a basic flat income tax. It still doesn't ring out a sound of best solution, but it's at least better than what we have now. I think that another addition to that would be the states need to collect the money and pay the federal government, based on the amount of money collected. This would stop the need of having to file twice or, and in some cases, three times (Think of living near the border of two states, living in one while working in another). Think about it for a second, you first compute the federal tax, then usually based on that amount you do your state, wouldn't that be taxed twice (my income has already been taxed by the federal now it's being taxed by the state). Let the state just take the single tax and give the federal what they are owned.
They have a policy that allows anyone to have their stuff removed if they don't want links to torrents of it hosted on their site. If someone submits a request to have something taken down, they put it in a "banned files" area and after that if anyone posts a torrent to any of those files they are banned from the site.
To me that sounds like a very good defense for them. All they would need to do is establish that they had a way for the copyright owners to control distribution on their site, and in fact Microsoft had even used it and was ok with the results. Why file suit in court, and not go through the procedure already established, unless all they want is to play the courts and the judge. Paint the case as a chance to create a media circus with the Judge as one of the clowns and the MPAA as the ringleader and it'll get thrown out pretty fast and any future cases the MPAA will have a rough time having to show it's not another circus.
"To know where you can find anything, that in short is the largest part of learning." Three years of Latin + a confirmation by Google.;)
And the answer to the question is of course "Google" (where you can find anything, that is). Guess that's why Google didn't exist til I was already out of school.
You can't prove such a formula because it has to do with people(irritatingly inconsistant systems), not math(nicely consistant- 2+2 always = 5 ).
Math is unfortunally not constant. Stats which is a form of math could be said to say, the study of the inconsistancy. Flip a coin and watch the outcome, it's not heads all the time.
Yes, that's one reason why the score in Gulf War I was something like UN Forces 50,000 Iraq 400. They had no ability to wage an offensive war against American military might then and none in 2003.
I'm sorry, I guess I didn't state it very well. The point wasn't that it was pitiful ratio or even remotely capible to put up much of a unified restistance to the American lead forces.
The point was that during the time between Gulf War I and the Iraq war (Gulf War II), during a time that Saddam was given to sell vast amounts of oil purely for the purpose of getting his people food and medical supplies, for some reason they didn't get very much of it but his miltary was built up again to the same levels as before the sactions where put into place
And now things are getting even more stomach turning with all the investigations into the Oil-for-Food program (remember there's somewhere around US$50Billion missing from the oil-for-food account. If you haven't read much about it, I suggest you google around. There's a few different seperate investigations so you should be able to get a good range of coverage about it. And while no allegations have come out, yet, it's enough to make one invest in some tin-foil hats for a while
I'm sure we can both agree that Saddam was not a nice person and cared very little, if at all, for his people
I get frustrated too, when people bring up bogus points like this while conveniently forgetting the fact that Donald Rumsfeld shook hands with the guy not that long ago.
And should we also forget that Stalin was an ally of the United States during WWII? The reason the United states helped Saddam come to power weighs heavily in the fact that the United States had two issues. One the US was very scared of what was happening in the region with Khomeini at the helm in Teheran. Two the US was in the midst of the Cold War and was afraid of the Soviets gaining control over the oil in the Gulf.
That does not excuse the fact that we were not watching Saddam closely enough to avert the tragities that came as a result.
And before you go quoting the lie that Saddam had ties to Al Queda you should Google for the fact that almost all of the terrorists who hijacked the planes on September 11th were Saudi.
I don't have to google for that info, I know it, and while a majority of the hijackers where Saudi not all of them where. There was an Egyptian, a Lebanese, and two from United Arab Emirates, you google it. The tragity of 9/11 wasn't because of Saudi Arabia or Lebanon or the United Arab Emirates, it was a direct result of mentially unstable individuals that thought their chances with virgins where more important than thousands of innocent people. Al Queda seems to be a haven for individuals like that. They aren't fighting for independance, or to free themselves of oppression or slavery, the majority of them fight because they are told that it is a war between people who are like them against people that are against them.
Of course, people like you like to ignore the fact that governments in North Korea, China, Cuba and Saudi Arabia treat their citizens just as bad if not worse than Saddam did his, yet we're not invading those countries
No I am not ignoring the fact that the United States isn't invading those contries. Let take the first one on the list, North Korea. Last time I heard on the news the United States still was maning the line drawn in the sand by the U.N. You want to know why the U.S. hasn't just stepped over the line? It's only approx 50 miles from Seoul, and the North Korea's side of the line is packed full of artillary. We even think of crossing that line into North Korea and Seoul is gone (btw according to this article it's looking like that may not be an issue later. Now lets take the next two, China and Cuba both of those countries have shown to react very nicely to the diplomatic channels. Iraq was talked to for lets see about what 10 years and each time they said sure sure no problem then reniged, again and again, and again and again resolutions were passed in the U.N. saying follow these rules or else, and after a decade of saying or else the U.S. used the authority given to it by one of those previous or else resolutions to give an or else. Now as for the last country you list the Saudi's I'm afraid I would not weep if the Saudi govenment where to suddenly collapsed and a democratic one sprang up over night. I have never ignored the their basic lack of decency to anyone not of the royal family (notice I do distinish the difference between the govenment and the people as I had said in the parent of your post I met and made friends with people of many nationalities, and yes Saudi is one of them) but unless you've have proof that Saudi's routinely tourture it's people (and not that I've heard or seen, I've even looked here here or you have heard the attrocities first hand from an Iraqi don't compare the two.
Why we're invading a weak, irrelevant, oil rich country like Iraq instead of any of those others is left as an exercise for the reader.
weak??? That's a laugh, guess the fact that during the years of U.N. watching them oh so closely and making sure all the oil-for-food proceeds went to humantarian causes, and some how Saddam was able rebuild his miltary to what it was before the Gulf war doesn't bother you.
> "I can't seem to find any sanctions against the United States"
Might it have any relationship with those two facts?
1/ USA can veto any proposition
2/ USA "tend" not to sign a lot of proposals that would obviously lead to sanctions (remember Kioto or Berna?)
Yes the United States can veto any proposition set before it, but remember it also must and foremost answer to it's citizens. If the United States were to veto something without a decent explanation the American media would be all over it, thus it's citizens would know. The easiest way to not have to answer to the people is to keep things very low brow so not to alert the media to the issue.
It's not the greatest, but at least there is some oversight by the people, the key thing is to get enough of the people to know about the issue and care about the issue.
I'm not even going to go into the possible pseudo-science that many have alleged the Accord was based on. The United States pulled their signature from Kyoto because we couldn't fullfil it. By that I mean, Pres. Clinton signed on the Kyoto Protocol, but in order for it to be effective the legistlator body would have to ratify it. The Senete killed it because it would effect our economy too much with little gain, and by gain I mean that there was nothing in the Accord that showed that it would make more than a minute difference. Not to mention it wasn't uniform in it's requirements. Countries such as the United States, Japan, Russia, Britian and France would have to basically pay for everything while developing nations got except status. Yes I will admit that the developed nations currently do produce the most in the amount of emissions, but it has been widely projected that countries such as India, China and Mexico will far out pass the levels in the timespan that is set in the accord.
So in the United States it was widely (not entirely) believed that because of the reasons stated above (no effect because countries excempt from the Protocol will null out any effects from those that are not excempt, plus it would cost many citizens their jobs (God I wish I didn't close out that tab that gave the number of jobs estimated lost)) Pres Bush pulled the US signature from the accord. I have found some good information about the Kyoto Protocol and the stance on it from the United States (including some measures that have been taken since we where not able to involve ourselves in it) here.
Please reply and give an URL for information about Berna as it doesn't seem to be anything I've heard of any I can't seem to find anything about it in my googling I do wish to know more.
As for your stance against Israel, I agree that Israel has much to stand for, and I for one would love to see sanctions against them. That can be said of the Palistianians. The war between them has gotten entirely out of hand and they are acting like children, dangerous children but children never the less. The bad blood between them will take a long time for each side to recover from, and I am heartened by the (relatively) small steps that each side has taken, and I know it's going to be just that a looong series of small steps. I wish I knew what the best course of action would be to help them in that direction, so that they can be comfortable with each other, sooner than later, and no longer worry about protecting themselves from each other, I want to see them working together, going to school together, eating together, well you get my point.
Every time I see this blatant troll it makes me wanna holler. If that's a good excuse, guess who we'll invade next? That's right--Israel. That is, after we finish invading the United States.
Whoops. There goes your stupid argument.
Hmmm maybe I am just sucky at googling but I can't seem to find any sanctions against the United States, and as for Israel, well I see lots of hits for countries calling for sanctions against them but nothing listing any passing.
I get so frusterated, everytime I hear or see people that seem to have the attention span of a gnat and forget everything that he has done.
Yes, I am an American. I grew up in very small rural America, before attending Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ. (Early '90s). Now I don't know exactly what it was about ERAU, but there was a very sizable number of foreigners students attending the school. By the time I left the school to go into the real world, I had an extraordinary number of friends from all over the world, including a few from Iraq.
One of my first and best friends (well actually he was my best friend since he was my Best Man at my wedding) was an Indian that live a large portion of his life in Kuwait, and his family was still there. I remember when Iraq had invaded Kuwait. I had asked him if he thought that there might be repercussions for any of the Iraqi students, and he told me that he hoped now since it wasn't their fault that their leader was an idiot. As time moved on I became friends with more and more people at the school and found out that some where from Iraq
From what I learned from my friends (both Iraqi and ones that grew up in the Mid-East) I quickly learned what kind of monster Saddam was. I also learned at that time that people where begging our government to step in and do something about him. There were a lot of people that were able to escape and seek asylum here pleading for something to happen, but at the same time the resentment because we didn't finish the job in Desert Storm.
It seems that every day Saddam would seem to have forgotten that he was not a soverien country, that he actually had to grovel and sign a ceasefire, and the war could resume at anytime.
U.S. pilots where fired on by surface to air missles more and more (Think it only happened while Bush was in office Read this and notice the date). So while everyone else in the world the story got old and not important enough to be in the news everyday, our soldiers where still getting shot at by the losing country. Clinton's policy was appropriate response. Bushes response was a little more severe to remind Saddam that he was the one that got his butt kicked.
I myself think that he should of been taken out a long time ago, but then again that me, looks like I'm not as patient and kind as Bush is, but then again I have friends and people that I consider as family in the area too, so it's a little more personal to me.
SCO had access to the original BSD depositions, where these same two officials testified to exactly the opposite "fact".
Actually re-read the excerts. They are very very careful about their wording in the BSD depositions to stay away from stating original works that a licensee adds to their "UNIX", but instead that anything that was derived from SysV.
I'm sure it's because back then they had a pretty good idea that the virii derivative theory wasn't going to fly and it didn't. In fact it was struck down pretty hard, didn't work then doesn't work now.
...there is a special tax on tapes, CD, DVD, hard disc and maybe other media I've forget. This tax is originaly made to send some money to the artists to balance the effect of music and video piracy.
This is the same in many countries. I don't know why people brought up in court, for piracy, as a defense. How can it be piracy to copy something when, by just purchasing the medium to copy to is in effect paying the copyright holders?
I don't see any place in that entire article that mentions outlawing P2P entirely. It only states that pentalities can be given to creators of software that induce software piracy. It will also allow owners of the distributed material to sue those involved. P2P can still be used for legal purposes. For example the current beta test of World of Warcraft uses bittorrent to distribute the 2 gig installation program. This new bill will not make the legal use of P2P illegal.
It makes the developer responsible for the use of the program. If I were to develope a P2P program and someone uses it to distibute copyrighted material, I would be held liable for their actions and can be sued.
I doubt anytime soon it will be developed to a functional status, not because of technological reasons, but because of economical reasons.
Imagine destroying MOST of the current energy corporations
Now imagine new energy companies replacing the current ones.
Just because one factor of the economy is taken out doesn't mean that it will leave a void, something else will take it's place.
The GPL cannot be made to apply to code without to copyright owner's consent, regardless of whether or not non-GPL'd software has contaminated a GPL'd work.
Now that's a interesting issue. Lets say a commerical product outsources some of the coding to another firm. That firm cuts corners and knowingly uses code from a GPL project. Now the first company is in violation of the GPL without knowing about, they are distributing software with GPL code. Can they be made liable and did the outsourcing company accept the terms of the GPL by proxy for the orignal company?
IANAL and I don't know the answer to that. Once the violation is found, the easiest path would be to ripe out the code in violation and do a re-write of those sections. But lets say as well they don't want to do that for some reason and continue to distribute the software while knowingly violating the GPL. Have they accepted the terms of the GPL now? They know it's there and they continue to use it. Would they have to GPL the rest of the tainted software now?
But SCO supposely has proof of SysV code that has been put int Linux. For how long has SCO been spreading falsehoods about this, only to pump up their stock and get those 4 profitable quarters.
So if the case is just dismissed then SCO will just be allowed to keep talking trash and be able to send invoices to people for nothing.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to bash the GPL. I'm just saying it's never been tried in court. That could be a good thing, a testiment on how good it is that no one has never tried to get it ruled invalid. But just look back in the comments on slashdot over the years and you'll see a lot of people and situations where it's come up and FUD spread that it's not enforcable. I myself would much rather see those people shutup and the FUD stop.
Also it's my opinion that code from GPL projects are making their way into commerical projects. As you say even if the GPL isn't valid then you stil have copyright law to prevent this but the jaws of the GPL is that if a project becomes tainted like this then the tainted software must be GPL'd as well.
That is exactly what IBM was trying to do. The case is in discovery and IBM had asked for exactly what lines of code SCO is saying they stole from SysV and put into Linux. When SCO wouldn't show the code IBM filed a motion to force them to submit it. This is SCO's reponse to that motion saying the motion needs to be denied because they are waiting for IBM to show them what parts of Linux came from SysV.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh yeah, because the updates are not totally useless if you don't actually own the hardware
Remember we're talking active support contracts. Once your in you can lookup the list of devices for a site get the serial numbers then open a case for RMA for some piece of equipment that it died and then to say oh yea I need this shipped to address such and such not the address on the list.So how useless are the updates now?
Perhaps the prophecy was really fulfilled not by Anakin destroying the Sith order, but by Luke humanizing the Jedi ethic.
I like to think of it as not Luke that humanized the Jedi ethic but Anakin himself. Isn't that were a lot of his anger came from? The Jedi counsil berating him because he let his emotions lead him, but isn't that also what made him such a formable foe. Who is the worst person to go up against, the person that has nothing to lose or the person who has has something they care about to lose?
Yes, Luke followed in the footsteps of his father (much to the fear of Yoda and Obi-Wan) in that he cared about the outcome and did things because he cared about the people involed but I also personally believe this is what the prophecy meant about balance as well, I just believe it was Anakin that did it not Luke.
My 2 centsI didn't think that you could mix proprietry and gpl code? How are they releasing parts of a source code tree - I thought it was all or nothing if you include GPL in your source?
Well kinda... What you do is write an abstraction layer, kinda of a hook into your proprietry software. You'll need to release the abstraction layer (The functions and routines that call GPL routines and use the variables from the GPL modules) but not the proprietry stuff.That is perfectly legal (not neccaryly ethical) and many companies do it.
It would look something like this (assume code sprinkled in different source files
This is so that their commands will wrap to the next line when put in small windows
What's the problem?!?!? The only way to make small windows is small fonts right. Doesn't EVERYONE use the standard 80 columns?
Never had a problem.
I am sick of Tivo trying to exloit its subscribers with ads for the sake of profit. I know better ways. Make a better product. Enhance the service. Listen to the customers.
I don't see, what TiVO has evolved into, as much as trying to make a couple of bucks, as it's more of trying to applease the Media companies. Look at what happened to ReplayTV, some say their product and service was much better than TiVO, were are they today? ReplayTV was basically sued out of existance within 18 months of trying to defend itself. Yes the product still lives, barely, but the company itself is long gone.
I think that was the writing on the wall for TiVO, going up against any one of them is suicide in itself, but do something that makes them come together, and you'll be a speck on the wall. The ads, moving into a media marketing company, I don't think this was the direction they envisioned when they started the company.
Lets face it, yes the business is failing and they are running around with their heads cut off, but not by choice, Disney, ABC, Viacom, and etc are what's doing it.
When we're ready (not paranoid) we'll say, "hello," and send out a pie. If we're lucky we'll get back a recipe for german chocolate cake.
Been there, done that, got the t-shirt.Back in 1974 SETI sent out a message from the Arecibo radio observatory, towards a star cluster something like 25,000 light years away.
It's what 30 years later, guess we'll have to way another 24,970 years for them to dig out that recipie to send us.
Wait a minute. Where are all the libertairian kooks declaring the the free market is the perfect solution to every problem??
Actually your only talking about Emrbyonic Stem Cells, which have shown to date pretty close to zip in the usefullness category.I know. They are in a silenced awe at the stem cell kooks who have convinced everyone that stem cells are the solution to every problem.
To date, stem cells seem to be cold fusion with better marketing.
Adult Stem Cells on the other hand, has already been used successfully in regrowth of spinal cord injuries, (Read the testimony of Dr. Jean D. Peduzzi-Nelson to a United States Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space at Here ) and many other injuries and diseases.
What seems to be a very well written article on the whole thing (Adult vs Embryonic) that I found while tracking down the above link is over here.
And can you believe, one of the most vocal person I've heard about this was Michael Reagan, son of the late President Ronald Reagan, who died of Alzheimer's Disease, a disease who's name is being thrown around as one of the many that can be cured by "stem cells". Which I whole heartly agree with, just not that it would be Embryonic Stem Cells.
The cable cards require either an external or internal tuner that is card compatible. And as the internals suck, an external box (cable or otherwise) you are stuck with if you want good picture.
This is exactly how I envision things "should be". I want to by a DTV monitor. No tuner should be needed, and let the DVR act as a tuner.At least you should (hopefully) be able to use a V.2.0 cable card in a DVR.
That way if something new and nifty comes out (such as lets say I went out and bought a CableCard generation 1 and CableCard generation 2 comes out, I don't want to buy yet another TV that will cost my thousands of dollars (as anything just on the market does). A new DVR that supports the newer features is a whole lot less than a new TV with a built in tuner.
I would support your regressive tax that takes a greater percentage of income from the poor and middle-class (before you start spouting BS about how taxes up to the poverty level are covered, please try living at that level for a month or two...)
Yes and no, it's not that it would take a greater percentage of income from poor and middle-class, because they would get it back in the form of a tax refund, but it does put an undo burden on these people. Since these people are already having problems making ends meet as it is already, forcing them to pay more now would be determintal. Also the thought that it would wipe out the IRS department is a complete falicy, since someone will need to be in charge of making sure the poor and middle-class get that refund. Not to mention, you make enough and won't get a refundm, guess you don't need to spend the time and money needed to do the paperwork needed to get that refund, so again unfair burden on the people that need it the most.
I was at one point all for a national sales tax to replace the income tax til it hit me what would people who check for change in the sofa just to make sure that the kids have milk this week do in this type of situation (Yes I've been there before). Now I'm leaning towards just a basic flat income tax. It still doesn't ring out a sound of best solution, but it's at least better than what we have now. I think that another addition to that would be the states need to collect the money and pay the federal government, based on the amount of money collected. This would stop the need of having to file twice or, and in some cases, three times (Think of living near the border of two states, living in one while working in another). Think about it for a second, you first compute the federal tax, then usually based on that amount you do your state, wouldn't that be taxed twice (my income has already been taxed by the federal now it's being taxed by the state). Let the state just take the single tax and give the federal what they are owned.
They have a policy that allows anyone to have their stuff removed if they don't want links to torrents of it hosted on their site. If someone submits a request to have something taken down, they put it in a "banned files" area and after that if anyone posts a torrent to any of those files they are banned from the site.
To me that sounds like a very good defense for them. All they would need to do is establish that they had a way for the copyright owners to control distribution on their site, and in fact Microsoft had even used it and was ok with the results. Why file suit in court, and not go through the procedure already established, unless all they want is to play the courts and the judge. Paint the case as a chance to create a media circus with the Judge as one of the clowns and the MPAA as the ringleader and it'll get thrown out pretty fast and any future cases the MPAA will have a rough time having to show it's not another circus."To know where you can find anything, that in short is the largest part of learning." ;)
Three years of Latin + a confirmation by Google.
And the answer to the question is of course "Google" (where you can find anything, that is). Guess that's why Google didn't exist til I was already out of school.
You can't prove such a formula because it has to do with people(irritatingly inconsistant systems), not math(nicely consistant- 2+2 always = 5 ).
Math is unfortunally not constant. Stats which is a form of math could be said to say, the study of the inconsistancy. Flip a coin and watch the outcome, it's not heads all the time.
Directly after a decade-long war with Iran?
Yes, that's one reason why the score in Gulf War I was something like UN Forces 50,000 Iraq 400. They had no ability to wage an offensive war against American military might then and none in 2003.
I'm sorry, I guess I didn't state it very well. The point wasn't that it was pitiful ratio or even remotely capible to put up much of a unified restistance to the American lead forces.The point was that during the time between Gulf War I and the Iraq war (Gulf War II), during a time that Saddam was given to sell vast amounts of oil purely for the purpose of getting his people food and medical supplies, for some reason they didn't get very much of it but his miltary was built up again to the same levels as before the sactions where put into place
And now things are getting even more stomach turning with all the investigations into the Oil-for-Food program (remember there's somewhere around US$50Billion missing from the oil-for-food account. If you haven't read much about it, I suggest you google around. There's a few different seperate investigations so you should be able to get a good range of coverage about it. And while no allegations have come out, yet, it's enough to make one invest in some tin-foil hats for a while
I'm sure we can both agree that Saddam was not a nice person and cared very little, if at all, for his people
And should we also forget that Stalin was an ally of the United States during WWII? The reason the United states helped Saddam come to power weighs heavily in the fact that the United States had two issues. One the US was very scared of what was happening in the region with Khomeini at the helm in Teheran. Two the US was in the midst of the Cold War and was afraid of the Soviets gaining control over the oil in the Gulf.
That does not excuse the fact that we were not watching Saddam closely enough to avert the tragities that came as a result.
And before you go quoting the lie that Saddam had ties to Al Queda you should Google for the fact that almost all of the terrorists who hijacked the planes on September 11th were Saudi.I don't have to google for that info, I know it, and while a majority of the hijackers where Saudi not all of them where. There was an Egyptian, a Lebanese, and two from United Arab Emirates, you google it. The tragity of 9/11 wasn't because of Saudi Arabia or Lebanon or the United Arab Emirates, it was a direct result of mentially unstable individuals that thought their chances with virgins where more important than thousands of innocent people. Al Queda seems to be a haven for individuals like that. They aren't fighting for independance, or to free themselves of oppression or slavery, the majority of them fight because they are told that it is a war between people who are like them against people that are against them.
Of course, people like you like to ignore the fact that governments in North Korea, China, Cuba and Saudi Arabia treat their citizens just as bad if not worse than Saddam did his, yet we're not invading those countries
No I am not ignoring the fact that the United States isn't invading those contries. Let take the first one on the list, North Korea. Last time I heard on the news the United States still was maning the line drawn in the sand by the U.N. You want to know why the U.S. hasn't just stepped over the line? It's only approx 50 miles from Seoul, and the North Korea's side of the line is packed full of artillary. We even think of crossing that line into North Korea and Seoul is gone (btw according to this article it's looking like that may not be an issue later. Now lets take the next two, China and Cuba both of those countries have shown to react very nicely to the diplomatic channels. Iraq was talked to for lets see about what 10 years and each time they said sure sure no problem then reniged, again and again, and again and again resolutions were passed in the U.N. saying follow these rules or else, and after a decade of saying or else the U.S. used the authority given to it by one of those previous or else resolutions to give an or else. Now as for the last country you list the Saudi's I'm afraid I would not weep if the Saudi govenment where to suddenly collapsed and a democratic one sprang up over night. I have never ignored the their basic lack of decency to anyone not of the royal family (notice I do distinish the difference between the govenment and the people as I had said in the parent of your post I met and made friends with people of many nationalities, and yes Saudi is one of them) but unless you've have proof that Saudi's routinely tourture it's people (and not that I've heard or seen, I've even looked here here or you have heard the attrocities first hand from an Iraqi don't compare the two.
Why we're invading a weak, irrelevant, oil rich country like Iraq instead of any of those others is left as an exercise for the reader.weak??? That's a laugh, guess the fact that during the years of U.N. watching them oh so closely and making sure all the oil-for-food proceeds went to humantarian causes, and some how Saddam was able rebuild his miltary to what it was before the Gulf war doesn't bother you.
Might it have any relationship with those two facts?
1/ USA can veto any proposition
2/ USA "tend" not to sign a lot of proposals that would obviously lead to sanctions (remember Kioto or Berna?)
Yes the United States can veto any proposition set before it, but remember it also must and foremost answer to it's citizens. If the United States were to veto something without a decent explanation the American media would be all over it, thus it's citizens would know. The easiest way to not have to answer to the people is to keep things very low brow so not to alert the media to the issue.
It's not the greatest, but at least there is some oversight by the people, the key thing is to get enough of the people to know about the issue and care about the issue.
I'm not even going to go into the possible pseudo-science that many have alleged the Accord was based on. The United States pulled their signature from Kyoto because we couldn't fullfil it. By that I mean, Pres. Clinton signed on the Kyoto Protocol, but in order for it to be effective the legistlator body would have to ratify it. The Senete killed it because it would effect our economy too much with little gain, and by gain I mean that there was nothing in the Accord that showed that it would make more than a minute difference. Not to mention it wasn't uniform in it's requirements. Countries such as the United States, Japan, Russia, Britian and France would have to basically pay for everything while developing nations got except status. Yes I will admit that the developed nations currently do produce the most in the amount of emissions, but it has been widely projected that countries such as India, China and Mexico will far out pass the levels in the timespan that is set in the accord.
So in the United States it was widely (not entirely) believed that because of the reasons stated above (no effect because countries excempt from the Protocol will null out any effects from those that are not excempt, plus it would cost many citizens their jobs (God I wish I didn't close out that tab that gave the number of jobs estimated lost)) Pres Bush pulled the US signature from the accord. I have found some good information about the Kyoto Protocol and the stance on it from the United States (including some measures that have been taken since we where not able to involve ourselves in it) here.
Please reply and give an URL for information about Berna as it doesn't seem to be anything I've heard of any I can't seem to find anything about it in my googling I do wish to know more.
As for your stance against Israel, I agree that Israel has much to stand for, and I for one would love to see sanctions against them. That can be said of the Palistianians. The war between them has gotten entirely out of hand and they are acting like children, dangerous children but children never the less. The bad blood between them will take a long time for each side to recover from, and I am heartened by the (relatively) small steps that each side has taken, and I know it's going to be just that a looong series of small steps. I wish I knew what the best course of action would be to help them in that direction, so that they can be comfortable with each other, sooner than later, and no longer worry about protecting themselves from each other, I want to see them working together, going to school together, eating together, well you get my point.
Every time I see this blatant troll it makes me wanna holler. If that's a good excuse, guess who we'll invade next? That's right--Israel. That is, after we finish invading the United States.
Whoops. There goes your stupid argument.
Hmmm maybe I am just sucky at googling but I can't seem to find any sanctions against the United States, and as for Israel, well I see lots of hits for countries calling for sanctions against them but nothing listing any passing.
I get so frusterated, everytime I hear or see people that seem to have the attention span of a gnat and forget everything that he has done.
Yes, I am an American. I grew up in very small rural America, before attending Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ. (Early '90s). Now I don't know exactly what it was about ERAU, but there was a very sizable number of foreigners students attending the school. By the time I left the school to go into the real world, I had an extraordinary number of friends from all over the world, including a few from Iraq.
One of my first and best friends (well actually he was my best friend since he was my Best Man at my wedding) was an Indian that live a large portion of his life in Kuwait, and his family was still there. I remember when Iraq had invaded Kuwait. I had asked him if he thought that there might be repercussions for any of the Iraqi students, and he told me that he hoped now since it wasn't their fault that their leader was an idiot. As time moved on I became friends with more and more people at the school and found out that some where from Iraq
From what I learned from my friends (both Iraqi and ones that grew up in the Mid-East) I quickly learned what kind of monster Saddam was. I also learned at that time that people where begging our government to step in and do something about him. There were a lot of people that were able to escape and seek asylum here pleading for something to happen, but at the same time the resentment because we didn't finish the job in Desert Storm.
It seems that every day Saddam would seem to have forgotten that he was not a soverien country, that he actually had to grovel and sign a ceasefire, and the war could resume at anytime.
U.S. pilots where fired on by surface to air missles more and more (Think it only happened while Bush was in office Read this and notice the date). So while everyone else in the world the story got old and not important enough to be in the news everyday, our soldiers where still getting shot at by the losing country. Clinton's policy was appropriate response. Bushes response was a little more severe to remind Saddam that he was the one that got his butt kicked.
I myself think that he should of been taken out a long time ago, but then again that me, looks like I'm not as patient and kind as Bush is, but then again I have friends and people that I consider as family in the area too, so it's a little more personal to me.
Actually re-read the excerts. They are very very careful about their wording in the BSD depositions to stay away from stating original works that a licensee adds to their "UNIX", but instead that anything that was derived from SysV.
I'm sure it's because back then they had a pretty good idea that the virii derivative theory wasn't going to fly and it didn't. In fact it was struck down pretty hard, didn't work then doesn't work now.
...there is a special tax on tapes, CD, DVD, hard disc and maybe other media I've forget. This tax is originaly made to send some money to the artists to balance the effect of music and video piracy.
This is the same in many countries. I don't know why people brought up in court, for piracy, as a defense. How can it be piracy to copy something when, by just purchasing the medium to copy to is in effect paying the copyright holders?
I don't see any place in that entire article that mentions outlawing P2P entirely. It only states that pentalities can be given to creators of software that induce software piracy. It will also allow owners of the distributed material to sue those involved. P2P can still be used for legal purposes. For example the current beta test of World of Warcraft uses bittorrent to distribute the 2 gig installation program. This new bill will not make the legal use of P2P illegal.
It makes the developer responsible for the use of the program. If I were to develope a P2P program and someone uses it to distibute copyrighted material, I would be held liable for their actions and can be sued.
I doubt anytime soon it will be developed to a functional status, not because of technological reasons, but because of economical reasons.
Imagine destroying MOST of the current energy corporations
Now imagine new energy companies replacing the current ones.
Just because one factor of the economy is taken out doesn't mean that it will leave a void, something else will take it's place.
First Energy runs it on AIXs. Been there seen it, played wumpus on it.
The GPL cannot be made to apply to code without to copyright owner's consent, regardless of whether or not non-GPL'd software has contaminated a GPL'd work.
Now that's a interesting issue. Lets say a commerical product outsources some of the coding to another firm. That firm cuts corners and knowingly uses code from a GPL project. Now the first company is in violation of the GPL without knowing about, they are distributing software with GPL code. Can they be made liable and did the outsourcing company accept the terms of the GPL by proxy for the orignal company?
IANAL and I don't know the answer to that. Once the violation is found, the easiest path would be to ripe out the code in violation and do a re-write of those sections. But lets say as well they don't want to do that for some reason and continue to distribute the software while knowingly violating the GPL. Have they accepted the terms of the GPL now? They know it's there and they continue to use it. Would they have to GPL the rest of the tainted software now?
But SCO supposely has proof of SysV code that has been put int Linux. For how long has SCO been spreading falsehoods about this, only to pump up their stock and get those 4 profitable quarters.
So if the case is just dismissed then SCO will just be allowed to keep talking trash and be able to send invoices to people for nothing.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to bash the GPL. I'm just saying it's never been tried in court. That could be a good thing, a testiment on how good it is that no one has never tried to get it ruled invalid. But just look back in the comments on slashdot over the years and you'll see a lot of people and situations where it's come up and FUD spread that it's not enforcable. I myself would much rather see those people shutup and the FUD stop.
Also it's my opinion that code from GPL projects are making their way into commerical projects. As you say even if the GPL isn't valid then you stil have copyright law to prevent this but the jaws of the GPL is that if a project becomes tainted like this then the tainted software must be GPL'd as well.
That is exactly what IBM was trying to do. The case is in discovery and IBM had asked for exactly what lines of code SCO is saying they stole from SysV and put into Linux. When SCO wouldn't show the code IBM filed a motion to force them to submit it. This is SCO's reponse to that motion saying the motion needs to be denied because they are waiting for IBM to show them what parts of Linux came from SysV.
Nifty eh?