Ok somehow that last "/I'm sure I'm gonna get some liberal to jump on this and argue about recent appointments and such and such" was pasted to the bottom of the page. Ignore it:)
Weeeee this is fun. I generally vote libertarian, but yes your right for the most part loud liberals annoy me slightly more than loud conservative, but they both annoy me.
Let me break down the points you make.
My quote I'm sure I'm gonna get some liberal to jump on this and argue about recent appointments and such and such
Ok yea sure, I was trying to be offensive there, sorry. I was just thinking that in general judges are pretty neutral, but I was sure I was going to hear arguments that recent judges are overly conservative... Which obviously I did... And no I'm not going to argue the the point, because you're not completly wrong.. I just hear it from every side, about "activist" judges. And I get tired of it.
I think its become fairly obvious by now that "liberal" judges are ones that use the constitution to say things we've been doing all along were bad. While "conservative" judges are ones that use the constitution to say things we've just started doing are bad.
AS I already stated all that means is
"Conservative" = Likes things the way they are. "Liberal" = Likes to try new things.
You can try to deconstruct my viewpoint out of that, but its a stretch.
And NO I don't think these recent crimes are OK. Just that warcrimes arn't new, but I think the supreme court judges do have the ability to seperate their political leaning from what this "administration" wants. As it really owes nothing to this "administration". So maybe its their own opinions.. Just maybe...
Anyways don't try to label me so fast. It really pisses me off./I'm sure I'm gonna get some liberal to jump on this and argue about recent appointments and such and such
And just because you prefer "Conservative" activist judges to "liberal" ones doesn't make the Conservatives any less activist. They're more activist, and more dangerous.
I don't think I said that. I keep trying to make neutral statements, and I keep getting attacked. I guess I just learned lesson one in Internet, don't bother arguing a neutral position against someone who obviously has an axe to grind.
And you think these things are new in war??? HAHA.
I wasn't trying to make a republican democrat statement I was trying to cover the old addage of "Conservative" = Likes things the way they are. "Liberal" = Likes to try new things.
Their nickel & dime strategy has been working for decades, I'm surprised they backed down - after all, with no direct competition for users what is the recourse?
Well in a lot of the larger markets there are. And they would have had an even tougher time explaining to the FCC changing different markets different fees.
One has to ask? Is this a win for the new instant communication driven capitolism where the consumer really has a voice and can vote with their wallet due to their size in numbers. Or is this a win for regulation where with new instant communication people can voice their opinions to the FCC easier and the government can crack down on these problems. //Flame on!
You absolutly right. My thought was that many pirates are people that can't afford a game. (Been a few games I've copied that I keep telling myself.. I'll buy this when I have the money.. I promise). But no I have no RIGHT to copy the game, I am breaking the law. But I'm saying at the same time that people who can afford it and just don't give a damn are on a different level.
I think its become fairly obvious by now that "liberal" judges are ones that use the constitution to say things we've been doing all along were bad. While "conservative" judges are ones that use the constitution to say things we've just started doing are bad./Don't like any judge that tries too hard to read what they want to hear out of the constituion.//Don't think anyone really purposfully does that, its just how their mind is set.
Actually its not without caselaw. If you change then republish something you get a new copyright on it. BUT someone can still copy the old material if they can find old material that the most recent revision of has fallen out of copyright./Yes even you can take Shakespear, change of few words and copyright your publication.:)
From what I understand there is a group of lawyers who are assigned to you if you are charged with a crime and can't afford a lawyer yourself. Despite what you may see on TV these lawyers do a decent job (not always) of disagreeing with the State. And if they do a bad job you can often get a Judge (who seem to be reallly good at disagreeing with the State) to rule that your lawyer was incompetent. Sure if we went to a system of all public layers we would need some tougher checks and balances, but so far it seems the third branch of the government is pretty good at disagreeing with the first two./I'm sure I'm gonna get some liberal to jump on this and argue about recent appointments and such and such..... Flame On!!:)
I don't know, maybe I just don't expect my local newspaper to look like my highschool newspaper. Inital impressions go a long way. It may seem silly to some people, but in buisness it can mean the difference between people taking you seriously and buying your product, or not.
As the Navy is also turning a blind eye, it makes me think its more of an issue of the Navy wanting to cut corners and Lockheed unwilling to tell them no. Lockheed makes many high quality planes and other vehicles. No reason to think they can't succed at this.. IF we keep politics out of it and don't think the media and NASA won't look this thing over carefully.
Two more things, 1. Greater concerns for safty 2. Goal isn't just to land on the moon, but create a system where moon landing, and moon bases are commonplace.
Nope, but restricted online play has helped a LOT. There are many games that have been bought not out of the goodness of a gamers heart, but for the right to play on official server.:)
Otherwise no... People with money to burn will continue to buy games, people without will continue to pirate. People with money to burn that pirate for anything other than a trial deserve a special place in hell:)
What about my financial information for almost every single bank, credit cards, bill I have. And there is little I can do about it. It might be fairly secure... But its on the web. Point is everything will eventually be on the web, its only a matter of do you trust the security of the site. Should you trust the security of myspace? No..
Its not just the sysadmin, its mainly about the teachers. If the teachers know nothing about computers, and there isn't a curriculum based around them. While you may be able to add protections, what are the children really going to learn? How to surf the web?
dmoz was only unsuccessful because they did very little to promote themselves, and they refused to have a consistant easy to remember url (well they do now, but not at the beginning). It could still resurface.. If people knew about it.
Currently there is nothing to determine anyone who post information credit. What I gather this whole admin approval thing will do is simply the admins will scan changes and note for obvious errors or vandalism. People will be able to see these changes according to the articles update, before admins approve them. The thing I want to know is will regular users be able to see what was rejected. Then users should then be able to report abuse by an admin.
Slashdot Mirror
So you disagree with'"Liberal" = Likes to try new things.'.
Have you taken a civics class? Ever??
Alright, I took the flame-bait hook line and sinker. You win! /Arguing on the internet is... you know the rest
Ok somehow that last "/I'm sure I'm gonna get some liberal to jump on this and argue about recent appointments and such and such" was pasted to the bottom of the page. Ignore it :)
Weeeee this is fun. I generally vote libertarian, but yes your right for the most part loud liberals annoy me slightly more than loud conservative, but they both annoy me.
/I'm sure I'm gonna get some liberal to jump on this and argue about recent appointments and such and such
Let me break down the points you make.
My quote I'm sure I'm gonna get some liberal to jump on this and argue about recent appointments and such and such
Ok yea sure, I was trying to be offensive there, sorry. I was just thinking that in general judges are pretty neutral, but I was sure I was going to hear arguments that recent judges are overly conservative... Which obviously I did... And no I'm not going to argue the the point, because you're not completly wrong.. I just hear it from every side, about "activist" judges. And I get tired of it.
I think its become fairly obvious by now that "liberal" judges are ones that use the constitution to say things we've been doing all along were bad. While "conservative" judges are ones that use the constitution to say things we've just started doing are bad.
AS I already stated all that means is
"Conservative" = Likes things the way they are.
"Liberal" = Likes to try new things.
You can try to deconstruct my viewpoint out of that, but its a stretch.
And NO I don't think these recent crimes are OK. Just that warcrimes arn't new, but I think the supreme court judges do have the ability to seperate their political leaning from what this "administration" wants. As it really owes nothing to this "administration". So maybe its their own opinions.. Just maybe...
Anyways don't try to label me so fast. It really pisses me off.
And just because you prefer "Conservative" activist judges to "liberal" ones doesn't make the Conservatives any less activist. They're more activist, and more dangerous.
I don't think I said that. I keep trying to make neutral statements, and I keep getting attacked.
I guess I just learned lesson one in Internet, don't bother arguing a neutral position against someone who obviously has an axe to grind.
I wasn't speaking of legality so much as the level of hell you deserve. God does punish based on your intent.
/God may not be valid in all mindsets, replace with Budda, or the nature sprite of your choice.
And you think these things are new in war??? HAHA.
I wasn't trying to make a republican democrat statement I was trying to cover the old addage of
"Conservative" = Likes things the way they are.
"Liberal" = Likes to try new things.
Their nickel & dime strategy has been working for decades, I'm surprised they backed down - after all, with no direct competition for users what is the recourse?
//Flame on!
Well in a lot of the larger markets there are. And they would have had an even tougher time explaining to the FCC changing different markets different fees.
One has to ask? Is this a win for the new instant communication driven capitolism where the consumer really has a voice and can vote with their wallet due to their size in numbers.
Or is this a win for regulation where with new instant communication people can voice their opinions to the FCC easier and the government can crack down on these problems.
You absolutly right. My thought was that many pirates are people that can't afford a game. (Been a few games I've copied that I keep telling myself.. I'll buy this when I have the money.. I promise). But no I have no RIGHT to copy the game, I am breaking the law. But I'm saying at the same time that people who can afford it and just don't give a damn are on a different level.
I think its become fairly obvious by now that "liberal" judges are ones that use the constitution to say things we've been doing all along were bad. While "conservative" judges are ones that use the constitution to say things we've just started doing are bad. /Don't like any judge that tries too hard to read what they want to hear out of the constituion. //Don't think anyone really purposfully does that, its just how their mind is set.
Actually its not without caselaw. If you change then republish something you get a new copyright on it. BUT someone can still copy the old material if they can find old material that the most recent revision of has fallen out of copyright. /Yes even you can take Shakespear, change of few words and copyright your publication. :)
From what I understand there is a group of lawyers who are assigned to you if you are charged with a crime and can't afford a lawyer yourself. Despite what you may see on TV these lawyers do a decent job (not always) of disagreeing with the State. And if they do a bad job you can often get a Judge (who seem to be reallly good at disagreeing with the State) to rule that your lawyer was incompetent. Sure if we went to a system of all public layers we would need some tougher checks and balances, but so far it seems the third branch of the government is pretty good at disagreeing with the first two. /I'm sure I'm gonna get some liberal to jump on this and argue about recent appointments and such and such..... Flame On!! :)
I don't know, maybe I just don't expect my local newspaper to look like my highschool newspaper.
Inital impressions go a long way. It may seem silly to some people, but in buisness it can mean the difference between people taking you seriously and buying your product, or not.
As the Navy is also turning a blind eye, it makes me think its more of an issue of the Navy wanting to cut corners and Lockheed unwilling to tell them no. Lockheed makes many high quality planes and other vehicles. No reason to think they can't succed at this.. IF we keep politics out of it and don't think the media and NASA won't look this thing over carefully.
Two more things,
1. Greater concerns for safty
2. Goal isn't just to land on the moon, but create a system where moon landing, and moon bases are commonplace.
Nope, but restricted online play has helped a LOT. There are many games that have been bought not out of the goodness of a gamers heart, but for the right to play on official server. :)
:)
Otherwise no... People with money to burn will continue to buy games, people without will continue to pirate. People with money to burn that pirate for anything other than a trial deserve a special place in hell
What about my financial information for almost every single bank, credit cards, bill I have. And there is little I can do about it.
It might be fairly secure... But its on the web. Point is everything will eventually be on the web, its only a matter of do you trust the security of the site. Should you trust the security of myspace? No..
No, nobody needs Web 2.0.
But the site doesn't even look midly professional. I could have made that page back in high school, and I SUCK at web design.
Ok I personally can handle this, but is there any news on if this option will be added to the preference menu before we reach firefox 2.0?
Its not just the sysadmin, its mainly about the teachers. If the teachers know nothing about computers, and there isn't a curriculum based around them. While you may be able to add protections, what are the children really going to learn? How to surf the web?
Too late... Sorta.
:)
The 360 in some games while online, you can press a button to make your opponents controller rumble
I'm an 27 year old oldfart who avoids myspace. But then again I've got 2 kids a job and not much time to do anything else.
Get off my lawn!
dmoz was only unsuccessful because they did very little to promote themselves, and they refused to have a consistant easy to remember url (well they do now, but not at the beginning). It could still resurface.. If people knew about it.
Currently there is nothing to determine anyone who post information credit. What I gather this whole admin approval thing will do is simply the admins will scan changes and note for obvious errors or vandalism. People will be able to see these changes according to the articles update, before admins approve them. The thing I want to know is will regular users be able to see what was rejected. Then users should then be able to report abuse by an admin.
-1 grammer