Padres struck out Jeeter, he even began walking away from the plate. The ump called it foul. All video replays showed essentially a perfect pitch. Even the commentators couldn't see how it was a foul.
It essentially turned the tide of the world series as Jeter would go on to hit a home run. The Yankees had hitherto been getting their butts kicked. But when you have to pitch 4 strikes, it changes all the odds. This will eliminate a LOT of bought off umps as well.
Jeter didn't have any home runs in the 1998 World Series. Other than that, good story.
What you may be referring to is the 2-2 pitch to Tino Martinez in the 7th inning of game 1. With the bases loaded and two out, Tino took a pitch that was probably a strike. The umpire called it a ball and then Tino hit the next pitch in the the upper deck giving the Yankees a 9-5 lead. Of course at that point, the game was already tied. The Yankees ended up sweeping the Padres so it may be difficult to blame 1 pitch.
No, it wouldn't, and I really wish that the Slashdotters who spend so much time badmouthing the DMCA would actually learn what it does. The law has some serious problems, yes, but it is irrelevant here.
First of all, I did not badmouth the DMCA. I only expressed my opinion that if the developer were a big company, they would try to use the DMCA to go after him. This type of thing has happened before.
Furthermore, you make a statement but you do not back it up. Why do you feel that the DMCA would be irrelevant here? Reverse engineering could absolutely be prohibited under the DMCA, and this case would not seem to fit under the exemptions.
The courts have ruled time and again that simply providing a "wall" for someone to write on does not make you liable for what is written. The Communications Decency Act (Section 230(c)(1)), says that Internet service providers are immune from "distributor liability".
At most they may be ordered to identify who the poster was.
That's actually a good point - although it is a good GUI at that. I really like A9 - the interface is slick and the features are great. Allowing me to keep track of what sites I have seen and when is really nice. Built in bookmarks, images, movies, books search, GuruNet results - almost everything is there. I'd like to see groups and news integrated too - I'm sure it's just a matter of time.
I don't disagree with you, but what you are saying does not describe "widespread space travel" (as in "Hey kids - we're going to the moon for summer vacation")
I disagree.
The potential for making money is tremendous. In addition to faster travel from point to point on Earth, space tourism has potential too. Obviously costs will have to come down, but there is no question that it will. As technology matures, and processes are inproved, prices will go down. This is only the beginning. Your arguments could just have easily have been said about the Wright brother flight ("Great, carry one person - try carrying 100 people and luggage" - well we do that thousands of times a day - and cheaply too!)
What this event showed is that space travel is no longer the exclusive domain of governments. When Alan Shepard first went up there was a long way to go to get to the moon, but as we know it happened. Don't judge something by it's humble beginnings.
I'm not comparing this and 9/11 in any substantive way. I'm saying that as far a potential impact on the future, this is the biggest since.
"Or how about all of the Mars exploration?"
Pathfinder had already done something similar. The recent successes were great, but did not break any new ground as far a capability.
"Or mankinds unified and rekindled interest in space"
Good point, but this is the first fruit of that tree.
Basically, my thought is that today's event is the beginning of commercial space travel, which will lead to widespread space travel. That is why I see it being so signifigant. Obviously there have been greater accomplishments in space travel, but the fact that it is now moving away from government and into the private sector is extremely signifigant IMHO.
This is truly an historic day.
IMO the most historic event since 9/11.
No, it's not the beginning of commercially available space flight, but it is an important proof of concept. I think it's analagous to the Wright brothers flight. Obvioulsy a lot more time and money will have to be spent to achieve widespread space travel, but today's flight accomplishes two things:
1. It gets spcae travel into the private sector. Yes, government programs are responsible for creating many of the technologies we use today, but there's nothing like a little privateization to get things moving.
2. It shows that is can be done. This is more of a psychological thing, but important nonetheless.
Congratulations to the SpaceShipOne team, Godspeed and Thank You!
This is a standard severability statement. You'll find it in every contract. Basically, just because one part is found to be invalid, it doens't invalidate the whole contract - and really, why should it.
What?!?
Why would the default be to delete the Microsoft partition if a non-Microsoft option is picked. You're being blinded by your/. drive anti-Microsoft thinking too much.
The Citadel and Mens Only Gyms are two VERY differnt issues. The Citadel is a Government run institution. A gym is not. A school run by the US is subject to very different rules that a business run by a citizen. That's not to say that one can discriminate, but the rules are different.
As a side note, if you want to read someting brilliant, read Scalia's dissent in the Citadel case (and in the Casey Martin case for that matter) say what you want about his ideas and politics... but he is brilliant.
Borders can absolutely NOT discriminate based on race religion etc... Borders is not a private orginazation (a Church for example probably could discriminate) they a retail store. Once they open for business, they must be open for all. The issue has nothing to do with the constitution, the constitution only regulate government (for the most part) however federal laws prohibit most orginazaitions from discrimination.
You are right however about the fact that Borders is a private company and has more flexibility when it comes to sometihg like this. However, Tampa is probably not breaking any law by doing the face scanning (after all, they are not searching anyone, and if you are in the public street, your expectation of privacy drops signifigantly) It would be interesting to see a case that arises from this.
Remember Borders is NOT a private orginazation.
It's amazing how much/. poster *think* they know about law.
Slashdot Mirror
Padres struck out Jeeter, he even began walking away from the plate. The ump called it foul. All video replays showed essentially a perfect pitch. Even the commentators couldn't see how it was a foul.
It essentially turned the tide of the world series as Jeter would go on to hit a home run. The Yankees had hitherto been getting their butts kicked. But when you have to pitch 4 strikes, it changes all the odds. This will eliminate a LOT of bought off umps as well.
Jeter didn't have any home runs in the 1998 World Series. Other than that, good story.
What you may be referring to is the 2-2 pitch to Tino Martinez in the 7th inning of game 1. With the bases loaded and two out, Tino took a pitch that was probably a strike. The umpire called it a ball and then Tino hit the next pitch in the the upper deck giving the Yankees a 9-5 lead. Of course at that point, the game was already tied. The Yankees ended up sweeping the Padres so it may be difficult to blame 1 pitch.
How does the Civil Rights Act violate the constitutional ban on illegal search an seizures?
First of all, I did not badmouth the DMCA. I only expressed my opinion that if the developer were a big company, they would try to use the DMCA to go after him. This type of thing has happened before.
Furthermore, you make a statement but you do not back it up. Why do you feel that the DMCA would be irrelevant here? Reverse engineering could absolutely be prohibited under the DMCA, and this case would not seem to fit under the exemptions.
He reversed engineered the program, that would probably be banned under the DMCA. http://www.chillingeffects.org/reverse/
If this was a big company, they would have denied it and gone after him under the DMCA. At least the admitted to something and pulled to product.
They could not sue Amazon.
The courts have ruled time and again that simply providing a "wall" for someone to write on does not make you liable for what is written. The Communications Decency Act (Section 230(c)(1)), says that Internet service providers are immune from "distributor liability". At most they may be ordered to identify who the poster was.
The person posting however, may be liable.
That's actually a good point - although it is a good GUI at that. I really like A9 - the interface is slick and the features are great. Allowing me to keep track of what sites I have seen and when is really nice. Built in bookmarks, images, movies, books search, GuruNet results - almost everything is there. I'd like to see groups and news integrated too - I'm sure it's just a matter of time.
Huh? I haven't made any films. However if I did, it would not be anything like the garbage Moore puts out.
"Needless to say, he's not my friend anymore."
Isn't that a little harsh?
Considering that this is an AP article, not something written by Fox your criticism is about as accurate as Michael Moore films.
I don't disagree with you, but what you are saying does not describe "widespread space travel" (as in "Hey kids - we're going to the moon for summer vacation")
I disagree.
The potential for making money is tremendous. In addition to faster travel from point to point on Earth, space tourism has potential too. Obviously costs will have to come down, but there is no question that it will. As technology matures, and processes are inproved, prices will go down. This is only the beginning. Your arguments could just have easily have been said about the Wright brother flight ("Great, carry one person - try carrying 100 people and luggage" - well we do that thousands of times a day - and cheaply too!)
What this event showed is that space travel is no longer the exclusive domain of governments. When Alan Shepard first went up there was a long way to go to get to the moon, but as we know it happened. Don't judge something by it's humble beginnings.
I'm not comparing this and 9/11 in any substantive way. I'm saying that as far a potential impact on the future, this is the biggest since.
"Or how about all of the Mars exploration?" Pathfinder had already done something similar. The recent successes were great, but did not break any new ground as far a capability.
"Or mankinds unified and rekindled interest in space" Good point, but this is the first fruit of that tree.
Basically, my thought is that today's event is the beginning of commercial space travel, which will lead to widespread space travel. That is why I see it being so signifigant. Obviously there have been greater accomplishments in space travel, but the fact that it is now moving away from government and into the private sector is extremely signifigant IMHO.
This is truly an historic day.
IMO the most historic event since 9/11.
No, it's not the beginning of commercially available space flight, but it is an important proof of concept. I think it's analagous to the Wright brothers flight. Obvioulsy a lot more time and money will have to be spent to achieve widespread space travel, but today's flight accomplishes two things:
1. It gets spcae travel into the private sector. Yes, government programs are responsible for creating many of the technologies we use today, but there's nothing like a little privateization to get things moving.
2. It shows that is can be done. This is more of a psychological thing, but important nonetheless.
Congratulations to the SpaceShipOne team, Godspeed and Thank You!
Craigslist worked for me on my recent job search. In less than two weeks I got 3 interviews and an offer (which I took) from the job section.
Not exactly, once they get a hold of your computer, they can figure it all out.
This is a standard severability statement. You'll find it in every contract. Basically, just because one part is found to be invalid, it doens't invalidate the whole contract - and really, why should it.
That might be little strong. They didn't do any damage. Get over it.
Using every legal, market, technology and political process for its own ends is the definition of M$ current business practices.
And this is a bad thing?
Chuck Schumer - an avowed members of the ultra conservative christian right? What!... he is a liberal democrat from a liberal state (NY)
Thank you for pointing this out.
/. about the role of the constitution as far as regulating business vs. regulating governemnt is astounding.
The confusion (or ignorance) displayed on
Not necessarily, it's also illegal to illegally protect a monopoly that you currently have.
What?!? /. drive anti-Microsoft thinking too much.
Why would the default be to delete the Microsoft partition if a non-Microsoft option is picked. You're being blinded by your
The Citadel and Mens Only Gyms are two VERY differnt issues. The Citadel is a Government run institution. A gym is not. A school run by the US is subject to very different rules that a business run by a citizen. That's not to say that one can discriminate, but the rules are different.
As a side note, if you want to read someting brilliant, read Scalia's dissent in the Citadel case (and in the Casey Martin case for that matter) say what you want about his ideas and politics... but he is brilliant.
Borders can absolutely NOT discriminate based on race religion etc... Borders is not a private orginazation (a Church for example probably could discriminate) they a retail store. Once they open for business, they must be open for all. The issue has nothing to do with the constitution, the constitution only regulate government (for the most part) however federal laws prohibit most orginazaitions from discrimination.
/. poster *think* they know about law.
You are right however about the fact that Borders is a private company and has more flexibility when it comes to sometihg like this. However, Tampa is probably not breaking any law by doing the face scanning (after all, they are not searching anyone, and if you are in the public street, your expectation of privacy drops signifigantly) It would be interesting to see a case that arises from this.
Remember Borders is NOT a private orginazation.
It's amazing how much