In some jurisdictions there is a legal meaning for the word marriage.
However I don't object to such unions as you refer to being legally termed "civil unions" as you suggest;
so *we* at least have agreement I think for practical purposes; and I think there is lot of cross-divide agreement in this fashion but both sides are fighting shadows over the word "marriage".
I happen also to think that such legal advantages to those in unions should not be restricted to romantic/sexual unions but any nominated pair - there are plenty of people who forgo marriage to care for sick parents and then get taxed to hell on the "inheritance" for the home they've lived in all their life when their parent dies.
All the real arguments are about is the word "marriage".
I don't mind same-sex unions having all the rights the marriages have, in fact I think the nominal "marriage rights" (as opposed to marriage rites) should be available to any pair, even to a mother and her carer-daughter when they enjoy a regular non-sexual mother-daughter relationship. (In the UK a few years ago,. gay rights activists opposed an amendment which would extend rights to other pair relationships like mother-daughter).
I just don't think the word "marriage" applies, I think it is redefining the word marriage and that is what I am against.
Anyone can disagree with me who will, but we're arguing about the legal meaning of a word, not the equal rights or entitlements that would through any registered arrangement or union.
"but you're treating a corporate entity like it was a person. Which it isn't."
I think that you'll find that a corporation is very LIKE a person as far as law is concerned. The clue is the root "corp" meaning body, but the fact is in law and case-law.
However states governments need to realise that they operate in a free market of taxes, and people and corporations ARE free to choose in which state (or foreign country) they will pay their taxes; and whining "but you've got loads of money, and we want it" sounds just like whining.
It's like Springfield taxes the film-makers, but in real life.
Multiple times I have lost my entire rdiff-backup backup when the client didn't have exactly the same version of rdiff-backup as the server.
My advice is to just do a 3 way rsync.
That way you can find and restore your backed up files without any special tools, reducing the risk of the backup tool either trashing your data or the backups
Hard links used in a 3 way rsync (the 3rd way being a reference to the last non-incremental backup) mean you save space for unchanged files.
You won't get the space saving when large files change slightly, but that is more than made up for by not getting the space back when rdiff-backup deletes all your data.
If you want to prevent excesses like this, just start filing frivolous lawsuits against such excesses - such lawsuits have been shown to affect policy.
Many retailers mow will tell you that you should return it to the manufacturer; that you CAN return it to the retailer, who will then just return it to the manufacturer, but it will "take longer"
and then you don't need to change your apache configuration - and having apache listen on a different port to what users see can break some scripted sites if they read the port number from the apache config.
I hate the messages "do you want me to ____ [ YES ] [ NO ] [ NOT NOW ]"
I want to say "Don't ever ask me about _____ (or anything else) ever again, just stop talking to me, you wretched machine"
INFO, WARNING, ALERT message types we're really clever when they were invented. Now they are hatesome (to coin a word).
Now wonder we have a selection of non modal notice dispay-libraries these days, producing a wonderful waterfall-like cascade of notices that we can ignore.
Soon there will be a waterfall theme so we don't have to ignore them.
Hats off to CmdrTaco who was arrested at home a few moments ago as a terrorists dangerous to national security, through publishing information likely to give comfort to and support the cause of terrorists, and disseminating information likely to aid terrorists and other enemies of the state.
However I still think it doesn't come down to that.
If the seller and the purchaser aren't aware of it despite it being on the outside of the box, then in this specific case it can't be enforceable because it can't be sold subject to a condition that the parties to the sale aren't aware of...
Sometimes I buy a DVD and it says "This DVD was sold subject to the condition that...." (usually something about playing in schools and prisons) and I think: "No it wasn't" - and it wasn't.
Just because it is written down doesn't mean it is true.
* The high price of game creates the 2nd hand market.
* The high price 2nd hand market helps people afford new games, by selling their old games.
Putting up the price of new games isn't going to change those facts, in fact it will raise the price of 2nd hand games making the market more lucrative and increasing the amount of trade in 2nd hand games.
Preventing games from being sold 2nd hand will reduce what buyers can afford for new games.
Folk only have so much money to spend on games, after all!
I used to regularly spend about 1 GBP ($2) a week at charity shops buying books at 10-20 pence each. (They'd go back to charity shops to be re-sold when I'd finished with them)
Then the shops went "up market" and started selling at 50p - 1 pound each and now they don't get any of my money at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes... but I've seen David Copperfield fly, and make a train disappear.
Maybe he could change the ballot papers somehow under my nose.
Sam
In some jurisdictions there is a legal meaning for the word marriage.
However I don't object to such unions as you refer to being legally termed "civil unions" as you suggest;
so *we* at least have agreement I think for practical purposes; and I think there is lot of cross-divide agreement in this fashion but both sides are fighting shadows over the word "marriage".
I happen also to think that such legal advantages to those in unions should not be restricted to romantic/sexual unions but any nominated pair - there are plenty of people who forgo marriage to care for sick parents and then get taxed to hell on the "inheritance" for the home they've lived in all their life when their parent dies.
All the real arguments are about is the word "marriage".
I don't mind same-sex unions having all the rights the marriages have, in fact I think the nominal "marriage rights" (as opposed to marriage rites) should be available to any pair, even to a mother and her carer-daughter when they enjoy a regular non-sexual mother-daughter relationship. (In the UK a few years ago,. gay rights activists opposed an amendment which would extend rights to other pair relationships like mother-daughter).
I just don't think the word "marriage" applies, I think it is redefining the word marriage and that is what I am against.
Anyone can disagree with me who will, but we're arguing about the legal meaning of a word, not the equal rights or entitlements that would through any registered arrangement or union.
"but you're treating a corporate entity like it was a person. Which it isn't."
I think that you'll find that a corporation is very LIKE a person as far as law is concerned. The clue is the root "corp" meaning body, but the fact is in law and case-law.
However states governments need to realise that they operate in a free market of taxes, and people and corporations ARE free to choose in which state (or foreign country) they will pay their taxes; and whining "but you've got loads of money, and we want it" sounds just like whining.
It's like Springfield taxes the film-makers, but in real life.
Sam
Multiple times I have lost my entire rdiff-backup backup when the client didn't have exactly the same version of rdiff-backup as the server.
My advice is to just do a 3 way rsync.
That way you can find and restore your backed up files without any special
tools, reducing the risk of the backup tool either trashing your data or the
backups
Hard links used in a 3 way rsync (the 3rd way being a reference to the last
non-incremental backup) mean you save space for unchanged files.
You won't get the space saving when large files change slightly, but that is
more than made up for by not getting the space back when rdiff-backup deletes
all your data.
If you want to prevent excesses like this, just start filing frivolous lawsuits against such excesses - such lawsuits have been shown to affect policy.
There is some debate over whether or not the product was defective.
Is it expected to explode violently when dropped? If so are there warnings? If not, perhaps it was a defect?
Sam
Many retailers mow will tell you that you should return it to the manufacturer; that you CAN return it to the retailer, who will then just return it to the manufacturer, but it will "take longer"
Drag and drop is little more than copy and paste which shares all of the associated problems.
Use OKAD, it's commercial quality and will fit on a floppy disk.
Seriously: http://www.colorforth.com/vlsi.html
Don't let the old-school lack of whizz-bang on the website fool you, this real stuff
http://www.ultratechnology.com/color4th.html
You're probably not smart enough for it.
http://www.c2.com/cgi/wiki?ColorForth
I'm not. I can't even find a download link or a sales page.
http://modest-proposals.com/colorForth.htm
Sam
My shame, I think I got the port numbers for dport and to-port the wrong way around....
sam
You can have perlbal or any reverse proxy on the same machine but listening on a different port and then use iptables to redirect like this
# iptables -t nat -A -PREROUTING -d ! 127.0.0.1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8080 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 80
and then you don't need to change your apache configuration - and having apache listen on a different port to what users see can break some scripted sites if they read the port number from the apache config.
For me the [x] means "Don't even ask"
I hate the messages "do you want me to ____ [ YES ] [ NO ] [ NOT NOW ]"
I want to say "Don't ever ask me about _____ (or anything else) ever again, just stop talking to me, you wretched machine"
INFO, WARNING, ALERT message types we're really clever when they were invented. Now they are hatesome (to coin a word).
Now wonder we have a selection of non modal notice dispay-libraries these days, producing a wonderful waterfall-like cascade of notices that we can ignore.
Soon there will be a waterfall theme so we don't have to ignore them.
Hats off to CmdrTaco who was arrested at home a few moments ago as a terrorists dangerous to national security, through publishing information likely to give comfort to and support the cause of terrorists, and disseminating information likely to aid terrorists and other enemies of the state.
Yes but did you read the thread?
strlcat was the salvation for those who have already been punished by legacy applications abominable use of strcat.
Sam
And if she hadn't she'd be still claiming state benefits and stealing from you?
yeah, sorry, I misunderstood your point.
However I still think it doesn't come down to that.
If the seller and the purchaser aren't aware of it despite it being on the outside of the box, then in this specific case it can't be enforceable because it can't be sold subject to a condition that the parties to the sale aren't aware of...
heh in fact I would hope for a refund - then it would count as a "free hire" - how many times will I watch the same DVD?
Sam
Nonsense.
Sometimes I buy a DVD and it says "This DVD was sold subject to the condition that...." (usually something about playing in schools and prisons) and I think: "No it wasn't" - and it wasn't.
Just because it is written down doesn't mean it is true.
Sam
(at least when I last tried) you can't even view someone's facebook page without signing up to facebook.
Stupid private-internet.
Yes, firstly because the ignorance is not willful, and secondly the individual may *THINK* that they understand it, and thirdly it's not reasonable.
In many cases the individual will turn out to have been agreeing to something else, and thus there will be no contract.
Most users won't even know what the EULA was talking about and so are not capable of agreeing to it; and so I doubt there is actually a contract.
The RIAA is, among other things, a joint venture formed by a bunch of FORMER music companies
true, but it was at the time I was talking about; and I feel that $2 represents the value of the spend in terms of disposable income
Two facts:
* The high price of game creates the 2nd hand market.
* The high price 2nd hand market helps people afford new games, by selling their old games.
Putting up the price of new games isn't going to change those facts, in fact it will raise the price of 2nd hand games making the market more lucrative and increasing the amount of trade in 2nd hand games.
Preventing games from being sold 2nd hand will reduce what buyers can afford for new games.
Folk only have so much money to spend on games, after all!
I used to regularly spend about 1 GBP ($2) a week at charity shops buying books at 10-20 pence each. (They'd go back to charity shops to be re-sold when I'd finished with them)
Then the shops went "up market" and started selling at 50p - 1 pound each and now they don't get any of my money at all.
Games industry is going the same way.
Sam