The gold wasn't to bribe other countries (though I do remember something dealing with the underwater hardlines), it served several purposes, including giving Epiphyte II hard assets--thus preventing The Dentist from recouping the entirety of the corporation in litigation for corporate negligence, and/or reducing the equity share he would receive if he did win in court [I can't remember])--and also creating a solid basis for digital currency without requiring them to deal with some of the shadier sorts in the earlier Kinakutan meeting, and finally there was some mention of along the theme of holocaust prevention, since the money came from the blood of others to begin with.
Err..while I have no readon to believe you're lying, you don't really have much of a leg to stand on, posting anonymously. Who's to say you aren't a big-7 HR manager, astroturfing salaries well below the current rate just so new hires come in with the bar set that much lower..or a disgruntled, displaced employee overinflating salaries, so you can undercut everyone else in interviews. It's hard to rally the troops behind a veil of anonymity.
hardware makers and Congress aren't in bed with the FSF. That statement is analogous to, "If you don't like the PATRIOT act so much, move!" Granted, not supporting MPAA companies is a great start, but enough people still do support them that they're going to have clout with both lawmakers and hardware manufacturers for quite some time; both of those have affect the world around us, even if we are boycotting the MPAA.
For one, you can't get diabetes from wiping up someone's blood or having intimate contact with someone who either doesn't know they have it, or doesn't tell you.
If Sony, Universal, et al, directly sue the people who are making the works they invested in to the public for free on this massive scale, they have to be enormously careful not to sully their image in doing so. Yet the entire point of suing is to create a deterence. Looking like nice guys does not gel with getting people afraid of you. If the RIAA does it on their behalf, the RIAA takes the "bad rap" and can "descend" to pretty much any (legal) level without it hurting Sony, Universal, et al.
Yeah uh, that'd work great, except for the fact that Universal Music Group is the actual plaintiff, and are thus the ones doing the suing. The RIAA hasn't itself seen any harm from the alleged infringement, UMG has. That's the way industry associations work; they represent their constituent members in court (among other things), although the actual members are the ones suing. However, you are right that we're doing the bidding of the RIAA by conflating the two in our blogs and posts and independent media outlets. All members of the RIAA stand to gain or lose by its actions, and thus a relatively benign corporation may sit in the corner and quietly reap the "benefits" of the voracious litigatious actions of larger, more agressive labels such as Warner Bros, Universal, etc.
I was going to say the same thing after reading the article, actually. While XSS may very well be a critical threat, the example relies heavily on man-in-the-middle-type attacks, which a naive web application is going to be prone to, anyway. Nothing to see here, move along. Also, I haven't seen an unjustified anonymous RTFA comment get modded up that high since 99, what gives?
Whoa, whoa, whoa...you're talking about two very different things. The MS antitrust had to do with Microsoft packaging their products, which compete with other products in the markteplace, for 'free' (read: cost of production is hidden in the license price of Windows), which degraded competition in the market. The iPod and iTMS are obviously cornerstones of Apple's current earnings, but the iPod simply requires that you use proprietary software to transfer music onto it--not uncommon for peripheral devices, and not anticompetitive--and iTMS is just a media download service that happens to have some DRM with it--again, not uncommon for media download service, and not anticompetitive. What exactly are you asking for?
Are you using the default Sun HotSpot JVM? If so, you're not following the criteria provided by the parent poster. Lots of people can write their own C compilers, but they're not going to be as time- or space-optimized as gcc or Intel's compilers.
Eureka, you've got it. Suck it up. Side with the Man. The Man would never use a benign word like 'Urban' to describe a Black/Of African Descent culture in marketing. In fact, the Man's market demographics don't even take colour into account, because the Man knows the real truth that race doesn't have any correlation to environment, culture, or income bracket here in the United States of Git'R'Done. Outstanding work, gumshoe.
Even without degrading the signal by having [nearly] any analog signal chain, you're still using your crappy consumer audio card's DAC (and subsequently, ADC) in that process, then recompressing it at a different sample rate. Groooooooooss! I'll stick with buying the vinyl and downloading the audio from [semi-] illicit services, thanks.
Due to his untimely demise, an important point is that he was never given the opportunity to exhaust his appeals options (which would have begun after his sentencing in September), and thus, the conviction will be abated. The unfortunate thing is that he died prior to the conclusion of this process, and it's terrible that his estate probably won't suffer monetary consequences--at least from criminal proceedings--because of this, but I'd rather live in a country where that's the case than the alternative, in which there is no appeals process.
Exactly [sort of]. All the while I was reading this article, I couldn't shake the feeling of: this faces some of the exact same [hard] problems faced by the Semantic Web. This is a great way to get computers to understand the semantics of scientific experiments...when everyone's using the format, which probably isn't as expressive as is necessary in all cases, and invariably isn't bulletproof yet. It's that same chicken-and-egg problem, where the only benefits to using this system are seen when a large number of people use the system, which many people won't simply because there are no software tools available yet (or probably for a long while), and it's a time-intensive process.
The best data has shown that warming is a poor term and ultimately has caused those who use it to lose credibility with much of the scientific community who is not politically motivated.
Hah! Hahaha! By, "not politically-motivated", you mean the part that doesn't require funding, right?
I absolutely agree that the defense in question does not in any way shape or form absolve someone from wrongdoing. However, in this case you just latched onto a catchphrase, and continued to decry the defense, disregarding the fact that the original poster--as well as several other people--explain that no defense is necessary, as the above was a moral, and not legal, defense. If you're not committing a crime of some sort but feel like you're causing someone else harm or slighting someone, there's no law that requires you to feel guilty; nevertheless, this guy does. That's why he was justifying.
...the joke was that Mozilla itself is a full Internet suite, and Firefox was their answer to users' complaints that it was heavily-bloated when they would primarily use it for one or two things.
...no, it's called "Obstruction of Justice." The Fifth Amendment protects you against incriminating yourself on the witness stand (and other such niceties), it doesn't give you blanket coverage to thwart an ongoing criminal investigation.
Yes, because once other parties--say, the Bull Moose--fell by the wayside, and D/R party lines were drawn, both realized it would be in their collective interest to heavily legislate and regulate the electoral system (note the little 'e', not the big 'E' Electoral College), such that it would, at any future point, be an unlikelihood at best for another party to win more than a trivial number of federal seats, given the obstacles set in place thereby.
Slashdot Mirror
The gold wasn't to bribe other countries (though I do remember something dealing with the underwater hardlines), it served several purposes, including giving Epiphyte II hard assets--thus preventing The Dentist from recouping the entirety of the corporation in litigation for corporate negligence, and/or reducing the equity share he would receive if he did win in court [I can't remember])--and also creating a solid basis for digital currency without requiring them to deal with some of the shadier sorts in the earlier Kinakutan meeting, and finally there was some mention of along the theme of holocaust prevention, since the money came from the blood of others to begin with.
Err..while I have no readon to believe you're lying, you don't really have much of a leg to stand on, posting anonymously. Who's to say you aren't a big-7 HR manager, astroturfing salaries well below the current rate just so new hires come in with the bar set that much lower..or a disgruntled, displaced employee overinflating salaries, so you can undercut everyone else in interviews. It's hard to rally the troops behind a veil of anonymity.
Purchasing a lifetime @hell.com address seems like a poor life choice to me..
hardware makers and Congress aren't in bed with the FSF. That statement is analogous to, "If you don't like the PATRIOT act so much, move!" Granted, not supporting MPAA companies is a great start, but enough people still do support them that they're going to have clout with both lawmakers and hardware manufacturers for quite some time; both of those have affect the world around us, even if we are boycotting the MPAA.
For one, you can't get diabetes from wiping up someone's blood or having intimate contact with someone who either doesn't know they have it, or doesn't tell you.
These are all basic principles of economics. Nothing for you to see here, move along.
If Sony, Universal, et al, directly sue the people who are making the works they invested in to the public for free on this massive scale, they have to be enormously careful not to sully their image in doing so. Yet the entire point of suing is to create a deterence. Looking like nice guys does not gel with getting people afraid of you. If the RIAA does it on their behalf, the RIAA takes the "bad rap" and can "descend" to pretty much any (legal) level without it hurting Sony, Universal, et al.
Yeah uh, that'd work great, except for the fact that Universal Music Group is the actual plaintiff, and are thus the ones doing the suing. The RIAA hasn't itself seen any harm from the alleged infringement, UMG has. That's the way industry associations work; they represent their constituent members in court (among other things), although the actual members are the ones suing.
However, you are right that we're doing the bidding of the RIAA by conflating the two in our blogs and posts and independent media outlets. All members of the RIAA stand to gain or lose by its actions, and thus a relatively benign corporation may sit in the corner and quietly reap the "benefits" of the voracious litigatious actions of larger, more agressive labels such as Warner Bros, Universal, etc.
..you're making the mistake of conflating AOL users with legitimate users.
I was going to say the same thing after reading the article, actually. While XSS may very well be a critical threat, the example relies heavily on man-in-the-middle-type attacks, which a naive web application is going to be prone to, anyway. Nothing to see here, move along.
Also, I haven't seen an unjustified anonymous RTFA comment get modded up that high since 99, what gives?
Whoa, whoa, whoa...you're talking about two very different things. The MS antitrust had to do with Microsoft packaging their products, which compete with other products in the markteplace, for 'free' (read: cost of production is hidden in the license price of Windows), which degraded competition in the market.
The iPod and iTMS are obviously cornerstones of Apple's current earnings, but the iPod simply requires that you use proprietary software to transfer music onto it--not uncommon for peripheral devices, and not anticompetitive--and iTMS is just a media download service that happens to have some DRM with it--again, not uncommon for media download service, and not anticompetitive.
What exactly are you asking for?
Are you using the default Sun HotSpot JVM? If so, you're not following the criteria provided by the parent poster. Lots of people can write their own C compilers, but they're not going to be as time- or space-optimized as gcc or Intel's compilers.
Eureka, you've got it. Suck it up. Side with the Man. The Man would never use a benign word like 'Urban' to describe a Black/Of African Descent culture in marketing. In fact, the Man's market demographics don't even take colour into account, because the Man knows the real truth that race doesn't have any correlation to environment, culture, or income bracket here in the United States of Git'R'Done. Outstanding work, gumshoe.
Or listen to Grand Buffet. They rap about Nintendo, Mike & Ikes, and Lazer Tag with a working vocabulary bigger than Fat Joe.
Even without degrading the signal by having [nearly] any analog signal chain, you're still using your crappy consumer audio card's DAC (and subsequently, ADC) in that process, then recompressing it at a different sample rate. Groooooooooss! I'll stick with buying the vinyl and downloading the audio from [semi-] illicit services, thanks.
Citation here
Due to his untimely demise, an important point is that he was never given the opportunity to exhaust his appeals options (which would have begun after his sentencing in September), and thus, the conviction will be abated. The unfortunate thing is that he died prior to the conclusion of this process, and it's terrible that his estate probably won't suffer monetary consequences--at least from criminal proceedings--because of this, but I'd rather live in a country where that's the case than the alternative, in which there is no appeals process.
With a total of 1.3 Billion people, I think they've got that covered.
Generally, one can read the subject of a comment for extra context! When you mix the two together, you've got a concept! Fucking incredible!
Did you miss the fact that the subject of the comment was "OpenOffice"?
Exactly [sort of]. All the while I was reading this article, I couldn't shake the feeling of: this faces some of the exact same [hard] problems faced by the Semantic Web. This is a great way to get computers to understand the semantics of scientific experiments...when everyone's using the format, which probably isn't as expressive as is necessary in all cases, and invariably isn't bulletproof yet. It's that same chicken-and-egg problem, where the only benefits to using this system are seen when a large number of people use the system, which many people won't simply because there are no software tools available yet (or probably for a long while), and it's a time-intensive process.
The best data has shown that warming is a poor term and ultimately has caused those who use it to lose credibility with much of the scientific community who is not politically motivated.
Hah! Hahaha! By, "not politically-motivated", you mean the part that doesn't require funding, right?
Hi, Poor Graduate Student here,
I absolutely agree that the defense in question does not in any way shape or form absolve someone from wrongdoing. However, in this case you just latched onto a catchphrase, and continued to decry the defense, disregarding the fact that the original poster--as well as several other people--explain that no defense is necessary, as the above was a moral, and not legal, defense. If you're not committing a crime of some sort but feel like you're causing someone else harm or slighting someone, there's no law that requires you to feel guilty; nevertheless, this guy does. That's why he was justifying.
Quit it.
Also, a high school kid knows that your first 'sentence' isn't a 'sentence', you forgot the word 'quit' or 'stop'.
...the joke was that Mozilla itself is a full Internet suite, and Firefox was their answer to users' complaints that it was heavily-bloated when they would primarily use it for one or two things.
...no, it's called "Obstruction of Justice." The Fifth Amendment protects you against incriminating yourself on the witness stand (and other such niceties), it doesn't give you blanket coverage to thwart an ongoing criminal investigation.
This country has two parties for a reason
Yes, because once other parties--say, the Bull Moose--fell by the wayside, and D/R party lines were drawn, both realized it would be in their collective interest to heavily legislate and regulate the electoral system (note the little 'e', not the big 'E' Electoral College), such that it would, at any future point, be an unlikelihood at best for another party to win more than a trivial number of federal seats, given the obstacles set in place thereby.
Excellent deductive work.