No, the other option we had slept though the 3AM phone call and 4 people including a US ambassador died because nobody got sent help...
For the sake of our diplomats I think I'll take a chance with Trump sending me a 3AM text myself, at least he's up and paying attention to something, even if the twitter wars at 3 AM were about as important as his last hang nail...
Well there is a "common law" argument here too. Not all (in fact very little) of contract law actually is derived from Constitutional rights. Most of it comes from English "common law" which we inherited from being a colony.
Where I believe that the Federal law in this case would trump common law and pre-empt contracts as you state, the real issue, and question here, is about if the Federal government has the authority to do this given that pesky 10th amendment we so often ignore. On that argument, before the right court, I'm not sure the law would be enforceable or should be upheld. I think the STATES can do this individually, but I'm not sure it's the place for the Fed to do this.
Not for appropriations bills, they cannot be filibustered but only require majority votes... Which is how Obama Care came into being... You can do a lot in an appropriation bill... (And Undo a lot if you catch my drift.)
Then there is the whole Bully Pulpit of the president where you can hold the opposing party's feet to the fire for saying "no" in the Senate and the eventual pillaging in the press which is possible for all those Senators that face re-election in 2 years... That Filibuster thing isn't nearly as strong as one would like to think... But hey, it IS still part of the Senate rules, for now, assuming nobody pulls out the nuclear option and changes it like we've been slowly inching closer and closer to. After all, the party NOT in power has eliminated the filibuster for a number of Senate actions already, what's a few more?
Then their business model needs to be adjusted accordingly...
IF you cannot guarantee business continuity because it's too costly, then you must either adjust your business model to account for the costs, or admit to yourself that you are at risk. Data backups are a FUNDEMENTAL part of a risk management strategy for a company that makes their living selling data they collect. Surely they keep backups.... Preferably offsite ones. If that's too expensive, then they need to figure on making all the money they can now because they certainly are NOT a long term company as they claim to be, but have one foot in the grave and are just waiting to be pushed.
A data company without offsite backups? That's like a surgeon who doesn't wash his hands and reuses the same tools without sanitizing them. It's called malpractice.... Surely they know better...
Ah, yes, yet another reason why I'm thinking this press release is much ado about attention and nothing else.
Likely just a couple of snowflakes who are melting into their boots because their candidate didn't win and now somebody else will be making decisions they don't like. Calm down, it's just change, and change is good, usually.
Seriously, how much *real* affect can the president actually have on one's daily life anyway? In this country he/she is just 1/3rd of the system anyway. They are powerless to actually DO anything that congress and the courts don't approve of and EVERY member of the House must be re-elected every 2 years. If they really hose things up, we can at least stop them in 2 years by giving the house to the other party. Not to mention that the next Senate election at the same time will put 1/3rd of Senators on the chopping block. The voters will have their say soon enough if the republicans make a mess of this.
Buckle up, take a deep breath and relax... It's going to be an interesting ride and should be fun to watch no matter what side of this you are on.
I don't think the Canadians would stand for such foolishness, given they've had opportunity to join the USA with special privileges for centuries and have so far declined... I'm guessing they will be building a wall to their south myself... A big wall with nice doors, and the USA will pay for it.... (grin)
Don't let the door in that big beautiful wall hit you on the way out with all that data..
Seriously? You are doing this because you are worried Trump might make you destroy your data or what? Where do folks get such foolishness into their heads.. I get the impression that, like the pending vote recounts going on what will accomplish nothing of importance (Trump will still be president come January), this is really just a scam to get attention, funding or both...
BTW, you really SHOULD have multiple copies of your data already. If it's your company's life blood you had better have as many copies as you can afford to keep in varying geographic locations and an active program to keep said backups freshened, tested and ready to keep you in business should some natural, or man made disaster take out your primary business location. If you don't, you are stupid... More stupid than this little "Trump scares me" press release is.. Come on, you need a business continuity plan here, and not because of who's going to be president, but because the world is a dangerous place and you never know when the HQ server farm will end up a pile of ashes or spread out over a few square miles by a really strong wind.
She lost to a political novice with enough negatives to make Weiner blush even though she out spent, out maneuvered and should have wiped the floor with his fake tan.. He had never run for ANYTHING, never won an election, even for dog catcher. She should have won, no questions, no chance for anything else. At leas it was close but *any* other opponent would have been dead by election day after that Access Hollywood tape. And how the 3 AM twitter wars didn't end his chances I will never know.
Clinton's unexpected losing was an absolute atrocity, of Biblical proportions. For which I am both grateful and surprised.
Didn't we try that already? Didn't it just make it harder for the poor to keep a car because it took millions of cars off the road that otherwise would have been useable on the cheap for another couple of years?
Actually, if the tax is based on the buyer's location, the responsibility for PAYING said tax to the necessary authorities should rest on the buyer, not the seller. So in this case, the UK resident buying stuff from overseas should be responsible for reporting and paying any local VAT to their government.
Of course, Given my location (in the USA) and our long ago settled issue with the Brits over Taxes (among other things), I feel strongly that I should be paying the Brits' VAT, unless I happen to be visiting their country or doing business IN their jurisdiction.
Have you tried the IRS here in the USA lately? Shesh, I'm sure they give the Brits a run for their money in the bureaucracy of collecting tax department..
But you have got to admit, that the Brits know how to fashion a useless bureaucracy because they've been doing it longer than most of the modern world, dating back from when they really did have an absolute monarch as a ruler, who invented parliament as a useless "keep the masses from rebellion" gesture of zero actual import...Second, perhaps, only to the Russians where bureaucracy has been a national pastime and source of pride for centuries too.
Personally, I don't know Donald Trump at all so there is no way I could pass such a judgment... My guess is YOU don't know him either, you just THINK you do. You are judging him on externals and appearances, not what you know for fact about the man himself. How so? Here is my guess....
1. He's rich - sort of, and we all KNOW that rich people got so though some kind of moral failings, cheating, stealing what have you. The left in this country routinely pull this false logical argument out about the right. You are doing it here... That slip is really too long for that outfit.
2. He's white and male - Which we all KNOW are the oppressors of the world. That slip might be a few sizes too big for you.
3. He's republican - at least in name, so you don't like him or his ideas because we all KNOW republicans are for all sorts of "bad" thing. We throw grandma off the cliff, want dirty air and water, and don't care about starving children. Which is all rhetoric, partisan rhetoric, which is born of the politics of the left which are largely based on division and pitting one group's perceived interests vrs another's. That slip sure is BLUE and that doesn't match you lily white outfit.
4. The press tells you to hate him. After all, they don't like him and cannot believe he won the election, so they have to do their best to destroy him before he even takes office if they can. I think the press is lying to you, or at least misleading you about what they actually KNOW. Remember their election predictions from before November 8th? Where they being honest to you then? No? Then how do you know they are now? (You don't...) Don't be stupid, try to apply a bit of critical thinking here.. Your slip is obviously dirty, have you done your laundry lately?
Put away the partisanship sir.. That slip makes you look fat and ugly and it stinks of self righteousness....
MIGHT it be possible that there are other reasons for these settlements? Something a bit more altruistic and a whole lot less than what you think? Oh, no, it cannot be that Trump just wants to do this presidency thing to the best of his ability?
I'm not saying this is the reason, only that it *could* be the reason..... Perhaps Trump is simply removing the distractions and getting these things behind him because he knows that the spectacle of him getting hauled into court to defend himself would detract from his ability to do the things he's committed himself to. So instead of letting this all drag on for years, bringing the bad press along for the ride and handing his detractors ammo to shoot him with he decided to just settle out of court and be done with it...
Believe what you want, but I'm inclined to think he did this (at no small personal cost) for the good of the country, or at least for his eventual legacy in history if nothing else. If you want to somehow make this into some kind of admission of corruption, feel free, but I think you are pushing a bit too hard...
I'm not saying all's fair because both candidates have their issues, only that right now criticizing Trump, who has yet to take office, is nothing but partisan politics.
Can we at least wait until January 20th to start demonizing Trump for self dealing and corruption? By definition he cannot be doing it until he officially becomes president anyway. Besides, where were Obama's detractors when he and his wife both launched their lucrative book deals or when he took the Nobel Prize for being the president? All I heard was crickets.... Not that there is anything wrong with any of that from my perspective... But folks want to pile on Trump already, just because he has financial interests in lots of places and he's now going to be president? Give me a break.
Who's talking about "why Trump won" here? Certainly not me..
But, being you asked... I believe it was divine intervention coupled with the democrats failing to mobilize the same voter base that got Obama elected twice. This wasn't republicans showing up to vote, this was democrats NOT showing up... Which is how I thought this election might go.
There was no way Trump could win, Clinton had to lose it. Which she did, even though she outclassed Trump in Dollars spent, experience in elections and media support. Clinton's party's base didn't show up despite all the advantages she had, and she lost to a novice who had never won an election in his life. Clinton screwed up, plain and simple. It was HER fault she lost, not some overwhelming republican turnout she couldn't overcome.
Yes, he's already making sure massive conflicts of interest are ok!
Soooooo much better!
As if the alternative candidate didn't have obvious conflicts of interest from her family's foundation already.... I'm not saying anything illegal was or would have been going on, but she apparently didn't care enough about appearances to be careful with the Foundation during her stent as Secretary Of State. She didn't care, nor did the democrats, even though there where/are some things that at least look bad on the surface.
It remains to be seen how this conflict of interest thing works out for Trump, but I expect the democrats to be howling for the next four years regardless of what Trump actually does or doesn't do with his personal business interests. This is more about politics than reality. Sure, Trump will be in a unique position to further is personal interests should he choose to do so, but the sad fact is that presidents are ALL subject to this temptation. Plus, being president tends to increase the personal wealth of all involved. Obama certainly benefited, Bill Clinton absolutely did and every president in-between these two left the White House richer than when they arrived. So, can we at least WAIT until we actually know how Trump will handle this before we decide? Then, can we please use the same standards used for past presidents?
Facebook crashed and burned and now the NTSB is investigating? How's that not interesting? An internet company catches the attention of the National TRANSPORTATION and SAFETY board seems like interesting news to me.
Oh no... Once the villagers figure out WHO was responsible and how much $$ they have, you can bet the army of ambulance chasing local lawyers will be out in force making sure Facebook pays though the legal system.... Unless they have bribed the proper local authorities to skirt the legal system.
Will get you an automated reply which once Comcast figures out you are a bot, will immediately set you up to be charged the highest rate possible.
Of course, all the information you provide the "bot" (Name, address, phone number, account number and anything else you offer up like a fool) will be sent to the nice company who is just trying to get you the best deal from Comcast possible (or more likely, just create a customer list of known Comcast customers so they can sell your information to interested parties.)
Besides, Comcast, like other carriers, only offer their *best* deals to people who are leaving (turn it off! Now!) or New Customers who are shopping around and know what questions to ask. Usually the absolute best deals come with strings, like a 24 month term with an early termination fee that would make Warren Buffett weep and a *discount* only applied to the first month so they can legally advertise the too good to be true deal.
No BOT can manage this.... Trust me.. It's a scam trying to pass itself off as a way to get around a scam.
Wasn't that the major problem with the Note 7 catching fire? Overheating the battery during a "quick charge" causing damage then poof, phone up in smoke?
Sounds like they thought there was a difference between dev seats and production seats and maybe there wasn't. A lot of developer tools only require licensing for developer seats, while allowing you to distribute the software you produce without restriction. Other software charges no fees for the developer but requires a license for each production user. Some do both.
I would guess that the Navy had devs build software around this package, and distribute it. They paid for 38 licenses for their devs and thought they were good. The German company disagrees.
EXACTLY THIS!
Often you get a development seat which entities you to develop and build an application that uses a licensed product, then distribute said application free of runtime licenses. Other times, you pay per runtime seat and they give you the development tools. Usually, they charge for development tools, then expect a per-seat royalty for runtime installs. It all depends on the exact terms of the software license..
Slashdot Mirror
No, the other option we had slept though the 3AM phone call and 4 people including a US ambassador died because nobody got sent help...
For the sake of our diplomats I think I'll take a chance with Trump sending me a 3AM text myself, at least he's up and paying attention to something, even if the twitter wars at 3 AM were about as important as his last hang nail...
Well there is a "common law" argument here too. Not all (in fact very little) of contract law actually is derived from Constitutional rights. Most of it comes from English "common law" which we inherited from being a colony.
Where I believe that the Federal law in this case would trump common law and pre-empt contracts as you state, the real issue, and question here, is about if the Federal government has the authority to do this given that pesky 10th amendment we so often ignore. On that argument, before the right court, I'm not sure the law would be enforceable or should be upheld. I think the STATES can do this individually, but I'm not sure it's the place for the Fed to do this.
Not for appropriations bills, they cannot be filibustered but only require majority votes... Which is how Obama Care came into being... You can do a lot in an appropriation bill... (And Undo a lot if you catch my drift.)
Then there is the whole Bully Pulpit of the president where you can hold the opposing party's feet to the fire for saying "no" in the Senate and the eventual pillaging in the press which is possible for all those Senators that face re-election in 2 years... That Filibuster thing isn't nearly as strong as one would like to think... But hey, it IS still part of the Senate rules, for now, assuming nobody pulls out the nuclear option and changes it like we've been slowly inching closer and closer to. After all, the party NOT in power has eliminated the filibuster for a number of Senate actions already, what's a few more?
Then their business model needs to be adjusted accordingly...
IF you cannot guarantee business continuity because it's too costly, then you must either adjust your business model to account for the costs, or admit to yourself that you are at risk. Data backups are a FUNDEMENTAL part of a risk management strategy for a company that makes their living selling data they collect. Surely they keep backups.... Preferably offsite ones. If that's too expensive, then they need to figure on making all the money they can now because they certainly are NOT a long term company as they claim to be, but have one foot in the grave and are just waiting to be pushed.
A data company without offsite backups? That's like a surgeon who doesn't wash his hands and reuses the same tools without sanitizing them. It's called malpractice.... Surely they know better...
Ah, yes, yet another reason why I'm thinking this press release is much ado about attention and nothing else.
Likely just a couple of snowflakes who are melting into their boots because their candidate didn't win and now somebody else will be making decisions they don't like. Calm down, it's just change, and change is good, usually.
Seriously, how much *real* affect can the president actually have on one's daily life anyway? In this country he/she is just 1/3rd of the system anyway. They are powerless to actually DO anything that congress and the courts don't approve of and EVERY member of the House must be re-elected every 2 years. If they really hose things up, we can at least stop them in 2 years by giving the house to the other party. Not to mention that the next Senate election at the same time will put 1/3rd of Senators on the chopping block. The voters will have their say soon enough if the republicans make a mess of this.
Buckle up, take a deep breath and relax... It's going to be an interesting ride and should be fun to watch no matter what side of this you are on.
I don't think the Canadians would stand for such foolishness, given they've had opportunity to join the USA with special privileges for centuries and have so far declined... I'm guessing they will be building a wall to their south myself... A big wall with nice doors, and the USA will pay for it.... (grin)
Don't let the door in that big beautiful wall hit you on the way out with all that data..
Seriously? You are doing this because you are worried Trump might make you destroy your data or what? Where do folks get such foolishness into their heads.. I get the impression that, like the pending vote recounts going on what will accomplish nothing of importance (Trump will still be president come January), this is really just a scam to get attention, funding or both...
BTW, you really SHOULD have multiple copies of your data already. If it's your company's life blood you had better have as many copies as you can afford to keep in varying geographic locations and an active program to keep said backups freshened, tested and ready to keep you in business should some natural, or man made disaster take out your primary business location. If you don't, you are stupid... More stupid than this little "Trump scares me" press release is.. Come on, you need a business continuity plan here, and not because of who's going to be president, but because the world is a dangerous place and you never know when the HQ server farm will end up a pile of ashes or spread out over a few square miles by a really strong wind.
Ah, be fair now..
She lost to a political novice with enough negatives to make Weiner blush even though she out spent, out maneuvered and should have wiped the floor with his fake tan.. He had never run for ANYTHING, never won an election, even for dog catcher. She should have won, no questions, no chance for anything else. At leas it was close but *any* other opponent would have been dead by election day after that Access Hollywood tape. And how the 3 AM twitter wars didn't end his chances I will never know.
Clinton's unexpected losing was an absolute atrocity, of Biblical proportions. For which I am both grateful and surprised.
Didn't we try that already? Didn't it just make it harder for the poor to keep a car because it took millions of cars off the road that otherwise would have been useable on the cheap for another couple of years?
Actually, if the tax is based on the buyer's location, the responsibility for PAYING said tax to the necessary authorities should rest on the buyer, not the seller. So in this case, the UK resident buying stuff from overseas should be responsible for reporting and paying any local VAT to their government.
Of course, Given my location (in the USA) and our long ago settled issue with the Brits over Taxes (among other things), I feel strongly that I should be paying the Brits' VAT, unless I happen to be visiting their country or doing business IN their jurisdiction.
Have you tried the IRS here in the USA lately? Shesh, I'm sure they give the Brits a run for their money in the bureaucracy of collecting tax department..
But you have got to admit, that the Brits know how to fashion a useless bureaucracy because they've been doing it longer than most of the modern world, dating back from when they really did have an absolute monarch as a ruler, who invented parliament as a useless "keep the masses from rebellion" gesture of zero actual import...Second, perhaps, only to the Russians where bureaucracy has been a national pastime and source of pride for centuries too.
And I live in Texas where I don't pay ANY income tax... (Just don't get me started on PROPERTY taxes)
Thank You, now get off my lawn, out of my county and don't choose to live in my state...
Losing the argument? Don't like it much? No need to cuss about it...
Which reminds me of a somewhat true joke...
What is a "racist"? What a liberal calls you when they are losing the policy argument.
Only in this case, what does it mean when someone starts cussing during a debate? They are losing, and deep down they know it.
Keep trying to hide that stinky, dirty slip.... This "I'm rubber and you are glue..." tactic isn't working with me..
Psst... Your partisan slip is showing....
Personally, I don't know Donald Trump at all so there is no way I could pass such a judgment... My guess is YOU don't know him either, you just THINK you do. You are judging him on externals and appearances, not what you know for fact about the man himself. How so? Here is my guess....
1. He's rich - sort of, and we all KNOW that rich people got so though some kind of moral failings, cheating, stealing what have you. The left in this country routinely pull this false logical argument out about the right. You are doing it here... That slip is really too long for that outfit.
2. He's white and male - Which we all KNOW are the oppressors of the world. That slip might be a few sizes too big for you.
3. He's republican - at least in name, so you don't like him or his ideas because we all KNOW republicans are for all sorts of "bad" thing. We throw grandma off the cliff, want dirty air and water, and don't care about starving children. Which is all rhetoric, partisan rhetoric, which is born of the politics of the left which are largely based on division and pitting one group's perceived interests vrs another's. That slip sure is BLUE and that doesn't match you lily white outfit.
4. The press tells you to hate him. After all, they don't like him and cannot believe he won the election, so they have to do their best to destroy him before he even takes office if they can. I think the press is lying to you, or at least misleading you about what they actually KNOW. Remember their election predictions from before November 8th? Where they being honest to you then? No? Then how do you know they are now? (You don't...) Don't be stupid, try to apply a bit of critical thinking here.. Your slip is obviously dirty, have you done your laundry lately?
Put away the partisanship sir.. That slip makes you look fat and ugly and it stinks of self righteousness....
You are a partisan hack....
MIGHT it be possible that there are other reasons for these settlements? Something a bit more altruistic and a whole lot less than what you think? Oh, no, it cannot be that Trump just wants to do this presidency thing to the best of his ability?
I'm not saying this is the reason, only that it *could* be the reason..... Perhaps Trump is simply removing the distractions and getting these things behind him because he knows that the spectacle of him getting hauled into court to defend himself would detract from his ability to do the things he's committed himself to. So instead of letting this all drag on for years, bringing the bad press along for the ride and handing his detractors ammo to shoot him with he decided to just settle out of court and be done with it...
Believe what you want, but I'm inclined to think he did this (at no small personal cost) for the good of the country, or at least for his eventual legacy in history if nothing else. If you want to somehow make this into some kind of admission of corruption, feel free, but I think you are pushing a bit too hard...
Way to spin this....
I'm not saying all's fair because both candidates have their issues, only that right now criticizing Trump, who has yet to take office, is nothing but partisan politics.
Can we at least wait until January 20th to start demonizing Trump for self dealing and corruption? By definition he cannot be doing it until he officially becomes president anyway. Besides, where were Obama's detractors when he and his wife both launched their lucrative book deals or when he took the Nobel Prize for being the president? All I heard was crickets.... Not that there is anything wrong with any of that from my perspective... But folks want to pile on Trump already, just because he has financial interests in lots of places and he's now going to be president? Give me a break.
Who's talking about "why Trump won" here? Certainly not me..
But, being you asked... I believe it was divine intervention coupled with the democrats failing to mobilize the same voter base that got Obama elected twice. This wasn't republicans showing up to vote, this was democrats NOT showing up... Which is how I thought this election might go.
There was no way Trump could win, Clinton had to lose it. Which she did, even though she outclassed Trump in Dollars spent, experience in elections and media support. Clinton's party's base didn't show up despite all the advantages she had, and she lost to a novice who had never won an election in his life. Clinton screwed up, plain and simple. It was HER fault she lost, not some overwhelming republican turnout she couldn't overcome.
Yes, he's already making sure massive conflicts of interest are ok!
Soooooo much better!
As if the alternative candidate didn't have obvious conflicts of interest from her family's foundation already.... I'm not saying anything illegal was or would have been going on, but she apparently didn't care enough about appearances to be careful with the Foundation during her stent as Secretary Of State. She didn't care, nor did the democrats, even though there where/are some things that at least look bad on the surface.
It remains to be seen how this conflict of interest thing works out for Trump, but I expect the democrats to be howling for the next four years regardless of what Trump actually does or doesn't do with his personal business interests. This is more about politics than reality. Sure, Trump will be in a unique position to further is personal interests should he choose to do so, but the sad fact is that presidents are ALL subject to this temptation. Plus, being president tends to increase the personal wealth of all involved. Obama certainly benefited, Bill Clinton absolutely did and every president in-between these two left the White House richer than when they arrived. So, can we at least WAIT until we actually know how Trump will handle this before we decide? Then, can we please use the same standards used for past presidents?
This is interesting how?
Facebook crashed and burned and now the NTSB is investigating? How's that not interesting? An internet company catches the attention of the National TRANSPORTATION and SAFETY board seems like interesting news to me.
Haven't been on Facebook lately I see...
Oh no... Once the villagers figure out WHO was responsible and how much $$ they have, you can bet the army of ambulance chasing local lawyers will be out in force making sure Facebook pays though the legal system.... Unless they have bribed the proper local authorities to skirt the legal system.
Either way, they will pay...
Except pesky physics, which still refuses to budge.
Hey, they are just laws, and we all know laws are for breaking......
Will get you an automated reply which once Comcast figures out you are a bot, will immediately set you up to be charged the highest rate possible.
Of course, all the information you provide the "bot" (Name, address, phone number, account number and anything else you offer up like a fool) will be sent to the nice company who is just trying to get you the best deal from Comcast possible (or more likely, just create a customer list of known Comcast customers so they can sell your information to interested parties.)
Besides, Comcast, like other carriers, only offer their *best* deals to people who are leaving (turn it off! Now!) or New Customers who are shopping around and know what questions to ask. Usually the absolute best deals come with strings, like a 24 month term with an early termination fee that would make Warren Buffett weep and a *discount* only applied to the first month so they can legally advertise the too good to be true deal.
No BOT can manage this.... Trust me.. It's a scam trying to pass itself off as a way to get around a scam.
Wasn't that the major problem with the Note 7 catching fire? Overheating the battery during a "quick charge" causing damage then poof, phone up in smoke?
Sounds like they thought there was a difference between dev seats and production seats and maybe there wasn't. A lot of developer tools only require licensing for developer seats, while allowing you to distribute the software you produce without restriction. Other software charges no fees for the developer but requires a license for each production user. Some do both.
I would guess that the Navy had devs build software around this package, and distribute it. They paid for 38 licenses for their devs and thought they were good. The German company disagrees.
EXACTLY THIS!
Often you get a development seat which entities you to develop and build an application that uses a licensed product, then distribute said application free of runtime licenses. Other times, you pay per runtime seat and they give you the development tools. Usually, they charge for development tools, then expect a per-seat royalty for runtime installs. It all depends on the exact terms of the software license..