"After January 1, 2008, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is hereby barred by this Act of Congress from granting any licenses for the construction of nuclear power plants within the boundaries of the United States."
There, that ought to do it. I'll throw this one in too, for pre-existing plants:
"The limitation of damages arising from a nuclear incident, which was limited to $560 million dollars, is hereby repealed. An enterprise engaging in nuclear power development is now liable for all damages arising from any nuclear incident occurring at a facility under its control. No exemption to this rule will be granted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission."
"I do intend to carry out a clear exploring exercise with the private sector... on how it is possible to use technology to prevent people from using or searching dangerous words like bomb, kill, genocide or terrorism," Frattini told Reuters.
Yep, that's how it always starts. Then pretty soon, it devolves to this:
"I do intend to carry out a clear exploring exercise with the private sector... on how it is possible to use technology to prevent people from using or searching dangerous words like free, free market, free speech or freedom," Fasctini told Reuters.
"Fear is the mind killer." --Dune
"Necessity is always the cry of tyrants." --Seneca
EC: Rapid chaotic change, it'll be going smooth for awhile, with periods of stability, and then suddenly you'll see periods of bulky but large changes.
You mean: punctuated equilibria? Why invent a clunky neonym when you can just use a scientific term that already exists?
...my little homegrown website (A2BizInfo.com) is dead.
No, your site is *lame*. (A2BizInfo.Com? Why not A2Biz.info?) You show perhaps.1% of all Ann Arbor businesses: less than 2 blocks of State Street that front the Diag. Where's the Diag party store, for example -- you didn't even make it all the way down to William St. Hovering over the too-large thumbnails doesn't pop up any labels to identify the stores. (And your "map" is a table?) Your mapSearchView page doesn't work. And, FTLOG, why have you embedded the.CSS code in your page instead of using a stylesheet? Since your pages are in PHP, why don't you just use a form to get your data and dispense with all the crufty JavaScript code? Your pages have *no* meta-keyword content, so search engines will ignore you. And I really can't believe that you didn't at least Google those few businesses you *do* have before putting "web site not available": you could have *at least* made that into a Google search. Seriously:
Kaleidoscope Books & Collectibles.
No, man, trying to rationalize that "Google killed me!" just doesn't fly in this case.
I think the true irony would have been if you had made it down to the corner of Liberty and Division, only to look up and see the new local branch -- of Google. That and the fact, that, while you're whining about GoogleStreetView -- *you're using Google's Adwords yourself*!
Little? Yup! Homegrown? Somewhat questionable,
my well-intentioned friend. Website? Um.... well, technically. I just hope that building kewl websites isn't your big post-college career move.
We need a new name that describes mature video games in more mature terms
Just as 'comic' 'books' are really "graphic novels", I'd call 'video' 'games' something like "reality simulations": rlsims. Since that's somewhat unpronounceable, I'd fast-forward the linguistic elision device and get to "realms". (It's got the 'real' and the 'sim' squashed right in there.) You know: Brealms, Grealms, Srealms and, of course, Krealms. (i.e. Business-, Game-, Shop- and, of course, Kill-...) [However, I'm overlooking that sketchy breeding-ground of milcontents, disfits, and cramkers: the Nrealms.]
These things are just going to get more immersive. I just hope that someday we won't end up 8 hours a day 'stuck in the metaverse'. ("Thank god it's Fleeday.")
Anyone know why the author would go out of his way to not hit 2K3 boxes?
Perhaps to avoid infecting government servers (and upping the ante, if he got caught)?
Perhaps 2K3 boxes *are* the final target. SKauthor may be building the biggest botnet of all time *specifically* to try and take down the government.
If that is the case, then I'll bet when we finally trace SK to its source, we'll find a foreign government behind it, like Iran... or Russia.
Seriously. Because of the tensile strength of the carbon bonding in buckyballs, it could resist gravitational collapse better than, say, silicon.
Also, what's interesting to me is that puffy planets are highly correlated with fast-burning stars; I think that's a good clue right there. Perhaps, because of the faster speed of formation of these kinds of star systems, the planetoids don't sweep up as much material as a 'regular' planet, and thus don't have as dense a central core, thus leading to less gravitational load.
Therefore, transactions where players pay real money for in-game currency or virtual items are taxable events.
First, I am not a lawyer.
Linden Lab, the company responsible for Second Life [SL] is physically located in California, therefore it seems that they would fall under that jurisdiction in taxation matters.
There are no California taxes collected on monies paid to Linden Lab, AFAIK, unless they are bundled into the cost. Neither the TOS nor the membership plan page nor the pricing plan page nor the billing policies make any reference to any included taxes.
The California Tax Service Center page says clearly that "Retail sales of tangible personal property in California are generally subject to sales tax."
However, software delivered over the net is *not* taxed by CA under Reg. 1502of the California State Board of Equalization.
{From LinkScan(tm)}.
State of California
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
SALES AND USE TAX REGULATIONS
Regulation 1502. COMPUTERS, PROGRAMS, AND DATA PROCESSING.
Reference: Sections 995.2, 6006, 6007, 6010, 6010.9, 6011, 6012, 6015, and 6016, Revenue and Taxation Code.
(b) DEFINITIONS OF TERMS.
Prewritten Program - A program held or existing for general or repeated sale or lease. The term also includes a program developed for in-house use which is subsequently offered for sale or lease as a product.
(f) COMPUTER PROGRAMS.
(D) The sale or lease of a prewritten program is not a taxable transaction if the program is transferred by remote telecommunications from the seller's place of business, to or through the purchaser's computer and the purchaser does not obtain possession of any tangible personal property, such as storage media, in the transaction.
-----
This is certainly the case with Second Life software. The server software remains in California while the client is downloaded to your computer. This is the general business model for most MMORGs. However, not all states support this model of software taxation. This non-uniformity between states is the wedge that will be seized upon by Congress (under its interstate regulation powers (U.S. Constitution, Article I, Sec.8) to tax virtual wealth.
Of course, they *could* just as easily apply the over-the-net exemption as the state of California does. Considering how godawful-friendly they are to the business community, and how much they scream about "new taxes", you'd think that they would. Unfortunately, their second loyalty is to themselves and the "public pocketbook" (citizens, of course, are dead last), and so they are likely to grab that pie with both hands and start stuffing their faces (after assuring their corporate overlords that it is an unfortunate "necessity".)
While that may be true, copyright is not about *owning* information, it is about *organizing* information. Otherwise, someone would have already copyrighted the alphabet and we'd all be SOL.
Remember the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition? This is one of my Rules of Information:
"The organization of information is worth money." [I was thinking of computer programming at the time, but the concept is clearly extensible.]
[Caveat: some forms of information -- certain kinds of lists -- are *not* copyrightable: for example, the White Pages.]
People seem to think that they have a right to make money off of their ideas. And that is just absurd.
People do not make money "off of their ideas". They make money from the *implementations* of their ideas; this is, in fact, the basis of the patent system. And, no, it is not absurd, although it may seem that way to someone with no ideas.
...nobody else is obligated to ensure that their business model is profitable.
Well, I agree with you there. But if their idea is good and its implementation is adequate, people are going to *want to* give them money to possess the implementation, and, unless they are complete fups, they *can* be profitable. It's called the free market system".
This being the case, I don't see how he can legally suspend the elections next year to avoid a transfer of power. Even in a state of emergency, it isn't legal or even constitutional to suspend elections.
You'd *think* that the President would be bound by the Constitution. However, Presidents have come up with this little thing called "Executive Orders" which are, basically, monarchial fiats. They can't be overridden by anybody -- even Congress. "Executive orders are official documents, numbered consecutively, through which the President of the United States manages the operations of the Federal Government." (From Executive Orders FAQ's.)
Considering Bush's theory of the "Unitary Executive" and his flood of signing statements, in which he declares that he need not follow laws that Congress has passed, and his endless cries of "Executive Privilege", it would not surprise me at all to see him issue an Executive Order *suspending elections* due to some crisis or other.
Maybe that is what is needed to get the Democrats into an impeachment mood -- assuming they are not, by that time, cooling their heels in some military stockade.
Before you call me a liar, sir, let's look at the facts. I will be quoting extensively from Bush v. Gore, which, as you presumably already know, is the US Supreme Court's decision in this case. You can find it at: Bush v. Gore.
Every single recount found Bush won Florida.
I'm not arguing that the "official" version of reality is "Bush won Florida". Conversely, here's something that supports my assertion that Gore *would have* won Florida if the count had continued: Recounts Could Have Given Gore the Edge.
Besides which, the recounts, as they were happening, were illegal: the courts in Florida did not have the authority to order them, only the Secretary of State for Florida had any authority over the counting process.
The recounts were, in fact, perfectly legal. The Florida Supreme Court *did* have the authority to order them.
The court therefore ordered a hand recount of the 9,000 ballots in Miami-Dade County. Observing that the contest provisions vest broad discretion in the circuit judge to "provide any relief appropriate under such circumstances," Fla. Stat. 102.168(8) (2000), the Supreme Court further held that the Circuit Court could order "the Supervisor of Elections and the Canvassing Boards, as well as the necessary public officials, in all counties that have not conducted a manual recount or tabulation of the undervotes... to do so forthwith, said tabulation to take place in the individual counties where the ballots are located."
The US Supreme Court did *not* stop the count based on the question of the *legality* of the intercession of the Florida Supreme Court; indeed, they accepted it, otherwise the question *could not have risen to the level of analysis by the US Supreme Court*. Here, in fact, is the basis of their finding:
The question before us, however, is whether the recount procedures the Florida Supreme Court has adopted are consistent with its obligation to avoid arbitrary and disparate treatment of the members of its electorate.
For purposes of resolving the equal protection challenge, it is not necessary to decide whether the Florida Supreme Court had the authority under the legislative scheme for resolving election disputes to define what a legal vote is and to mandate a manual recount implementing that definition.
The US Supreme Court found that, in fact, that, while the compiled law of the state of Florida, calls for "the intent of the voter" to determine the actuality of any ambiguous vote, the procedures in place were insufficient to determine that intent, and, thus, constituted a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution.
The recount mechanisms implemented in response to the decisions of the Florida Supreme Court do not satisfy the minimum requirement for non-arbitrary treatment of voters necessary to secure the fundamental right....The problem inheres in the absence of specific standards to ensure its equal application. The formulation of uniform rules to determine intent based on these recurring circumstances is practicable and, we conclude, necessary.
Upon due consideration of the difficulties identified to this point, it is obvious that the recount cannot be conducted in compliance with the requirements of equal protection and due process without substantial additional work....we reverse the judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida ordering a recount to proceed.
As you can clearly see, I have rebutted all the assertions of the first paragraph of your reply.
Moving forward, I notice that you neatly sidestepped the question of "chicanery in Ohio"
Bush was elected according to the laws of this country, both times, completely legally.
Except the first time, when the Supreme Court stepped in to *stop the counting process*, which would have, it turned out, elected Gore if it had continued to the end.
Except the second time, when there was clearly chicanery in Ohio, which could have been exposed if the Democrats had been on their toes and challenged the election there. Which they didn't, being as corrupt as the Republicans. (How *do* you explain the mathematical discrepancies between the exit polls and the actual vote, which only varied significantly in precincts that Bush won?)
This is all without challenging your assertion that Presidents have been elected without winning the popular vote. In fact, Jackson and Cleveland came back to be elected the next time around. Tilden died between elections and Gore bailed, otherwise he might have been elected in 2004.
Indeed. I am still using a Mac Classic from *1982*. It only ever had a 25-Meg drive and runs at a poky 8MHz, but it *still works fine*. (I use it for breadboarding problems before I write the final version in gcc. I use Basic 2.0, written by some guy named Bill.)
(a) Procedural Unconscionability: A contract or clause is procedurally unconscionable if it is a contract of adhesion. Comb, 218 F. Supp. 2d at 1172; Flores v. Transamerica HomeFirst, Inc., 113 Cal. Rptr. 2d 376, 381-82 (Ct. App. 2001). A contract of adhesion, in turn, is a "standardized contract, which, imposed and drafted by the party of superior bargaining strength, relegates to the subscribing party only the opportunity to adhere to the contract or reject it."
The interesting thing about this is that is being adjudicated under *Federal* law, rather than state law, because it involves interstate commerce. Any EULA -- not just Microsoft's -- is now in jeopardy, because, according to this ruling, an EULA is -- by definition -- a "contract of adhesion".
The next thing that they should go after is the concept that you don't actually *own* software that you purchase, you only "license" it. That could certainly be seen as a "contract of adhesion" ('procedurally unconscionable') imposed in a one-sided way and thus unlawful as well.
I recently wrote some interesting, novel, non-obvious software with no prior art issues. I was going to patent it (in the form of an integrated circuit, of course), but this idea of perpetual copyright sounds great to me! A mere seventeen years under patent law? Pshaw! I (and my heirs and assigns) will *never* have to relinquish control of it, and no-one can ever take it away from us.
BTW, it generates an optimal solution to the Traveling Salesman Problem. Now everyone who needs to have the best solution to this NP-hard problem (in fact, *all* NP-hard problems) will have to come to me! I'm looking at you, Mr. Internet -- you and your lame routing algorithms...
4) Profit! Lots and lots of profit!! Someday I'll pwn the world!!! Thanks, perpetual copyright -- you're all right by me!
Both sides of mouth
on
The BBC On RMT
·
· Score: 2, Funny
I was quite amused to see that the *first two ads* (via googlesyndication) at the top of the page were for *gold farming*:
WoW Gold - Quick Delivery
Low Prices on All Servers! Quick & Safe Delivery 24/7
www.XXXXXX.com
Cheapest WoW Gold
Buy Gold Directly from Gamers Prices as Low as $0.69/Units!
I remember someone on one of the SL developer lists pointing out that there is a blackjack program that cheats. It's one that you can get for free, so it is highly likely that someone is using it in their casino -- they may not even know that the game cheats.
The specific cheat was this: when a player got a face card that gave them 21, the dealer then got *that very same card* as his first card. This clearly gives the advantage to the house. Once the developer pointed it out, it was easy to find in the code.
I don't doubt that there are other cheats, both more and less sophisticated than that, in other games: roulette wheels that "peek" at the player's bet, so that they can lower the odds of landing on the player's color; games that goose the odds in your favor if you are "camping" at a chair in that casino, etc.
The fact is that, since there is no review of code, anything goes. Hmmm, I just thought of a new career...Code Certifier.
...such as using easily accessible GIS to examine voting patterns and election districts to catch gerrymandering and, potentially, election fraud.
You do realize, don't you, that *every time the political maps are redrawn* (i.e. every ten years) that gerrymandering is extensively used by every local state legislature? Gerrymandering is, after all, the process of redrawing the Districts so as to maximize partisan advantage. You don't need this tool to catch gerrymandering -- it's ubiquitous!
Rant aside, this app could certainly be a useful tool. The ideal -- nonpartisan -- political map would be drawn in such a way as to have the *sum of the sides* of *all* the districts to be a *minimum* while having the population of *each* district be within 1% of the average District population size for that state. (The Supreme Court has held that *some* variance in the population of districts is OK; I think that >1%, though, is *too much*.)
For example, say a state has 6.5 million people and 10 Congressional districts. Then each District must contain 650,000 +/- 1% (i.e. 1% here equals 6,500 people) and the sum of the sides of all the districts together must be a minimum. This leads to roundish districts and no possibility of gerrymandering (which, because of the torturous way districts are drawn, tends to *maximize* the length of the sides of districts).
The 'drawback' of this method, of course, is that only population -- and not historical voting patterns -- is taken into account, thus making it impossible to ensure that all the Democrats or Republicans or minorities are concentrated into just a few districts, as is done now by partisan legislatures. On the plus side, this would make more Congressional districts *unsafe* -- Congresspeople would actually have to get out there and *earn* their seats, instead of just sitting back and taking it for granted that their particular seat is safe because of the way that the Districts are drawn.
However, this scheme is unimplementable at the present time, due to the recent reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act (for the next 25 years), which actually *requires* gerrymandering when it comes to creating so-called "minority majority" Districts. (This ensures that minorities have adequate representation in Congress, rather than having their power diluted by being split among a number of other districts.)
For example, here in Michigan, blacks constitute about 12% of the population, but are highly concentrated in Detroit. If the above Voting Rights Act stricture was *not* in place, unscrupulous politicians could redraw the Congressional Districts in such a way (for example as long thin areas that had one end in Detroit and the other end outstate) as to ensure that blacks had *no* majority districts, and were a minority in *every* District that they were in -- clearly a violation of the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution.
So my logical plan for nonpartisan redistricting is -- unfortunately -- unlikely to come to fruition anytime soon -- for Congressional Districts anyway. However, since the case that was adjudicated by the Supreme Court *only* addressed issues of *Federal* redistricting, it might be possible for individual states to implement this plan as a way of making elections more contested and, hence, more democratic.
A quick search shows that mock theta functions are a special case of Jacobi theta functions which are a form of Jacobi Elliptic Functions which are a type of elliptic function.
This might lead to even better cryptographic encoding functions. See the relationship between elliptic functions and cryptography here.
You can't patent math equations. All software is just a huge math equation. Therefore, software should not be patentable.
I beg to differ with the poster:
I=I+1
Software. Uses math symbology. This statement is *not* an equation. Therefore: "All software is just a huge math equation." is a false statement. Therefore, the conclusion: "software should not be patentable" is also incorrect, as it is based on a false assumption.
What type of digital items can I sell?
Provided that the item complies with the above policy, all types of digital items can be sold, from songs to recipes to images to written documents. To sell a digital item, the seller must be the owner of the underlying intellectual property or authorized to distribute it by the intellectual property owner.
[snip/]
Examples of items that sellers are permitted to list on eBay:
* An MP3 file of a song a seller wrote and recorded (and owns all rights to)
* An eBook of recipes created by the seller
* A home-made movie, in which the seller owns all rights
* Computer software created by the seller, in which the seller owns all rights
* Software listed by an authorized software reseller who has online distribution rights
* A digital picture of the Golden Gate bridge taken by the seller
While in Second Life, you may not be able to sell your *character*:
2.4 Account registrations are limited per unique person. Transfers of accounts are generally not permitted.
under Second Life TOS, you can sell what you create:
3.2 You retain copyright and other intellectual property rights with respect to Content you create in Second Life, to the extent that you have such rights under applicable law. However, you must make certain representations and warranties, and provide certain license rights, forbearances and indemnification, to Linden Lab and to other users of Second Life.
Users of the Service can create Content on Linden Lab's servers in various forms. Linden Lab acknowledges and agrees that, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, you will retain any and all applicable copyright and other intellectual property rights with respect to any Content you create using the Service, to the extent you have such rights under applicable law.
Frankly, it is, from a certain standpoint, a libertarian dream come true (well, sort of: all marketplace, no democracy.) However, a) SL content is only useful within the game, and b) there already exists, with the confines of SL itself, a mechanism of exchange, (the Linden), the ability to create and build 'things', the ability to sell things that you create *and* a default computer mechanism to be engaged in the 'marketplace' (free accounts). So there is no reason to go outside the game to engage in commercial exchange.
Here in Michigan we recently got net metering after some back and forth between the Public Service Commission and the utilities. However, the utilities pulled a fast one: residential users can only cancel out the amount they use *for the year*, but not beyond; that is, the meter can roll down to zero but no further. Thus, even if you have the capacity to generate, say, as much as you use in a year and a half, during the year, you can't sell that extra half-year back to the utility. You can't sell it to your neighbors either. This is good for the utility but bad for the public good.
When State Representative Chris Kolb (D, Ann Arbor) first introduced the idea of net metering back in 2001, no limit was placed on the amount that a residential generator could sell back to the utility. This opened up the possibility that, in theory, residential generation could completely replace all the utility's generation using the utility's own lines. Yet the utilities would still carry the burden of maintaining the lines.
By engineering this little back-room deal, that now becomes a possibility only ifevery residence generates as much energy in a year as it uses. That, of course, will never happen -- the utilities are now assured of always having customers.
Once again, we have been screwed by the corporations. Do other./ers know if this particular deal -- or similar utility trickery -- has happened in their state?
Slashdot Mirror
There, that ought to do it. I'll throw this one in too, for pre-existing plants:
"The limitation of damages arising from a nuclear incident, which was limited to $560 million dollars, is hereby repealed. An enterprise engaging in nuclear power development is now liable for all damages arising from any nuclear incident occurring at a facility under its control. No exemption to this rule will be granted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission."
Yep, that's how it always starts. Then pretty soon, it devolves to this:
"I do intend to carry out a clear exploring exercise with the private sector ... on how it is possible to use technology to prevent people from using or searching dangerous words like free, free market, free speech or freedom," Fasctini told Reuters.
"Fear is the mind killer." --Dune
"Necessity is always the cry of tyrants." --Seneca
EC: Rapid chaotic change, it'll be going smooth for awhile, with periods of stability, and then suddenly you'll see periods of bulky but large changes.
You mean: punctuated equilibria? Why invent a clunky neonym when you can just use a scientific term that already exists?
I didn't know Hakim Bey was a mathematician too. Geez, that guy can do *everything*!
No, your site is *lame*. (A2BizInfo.Com? Why not A2Biz.info?) You show perhaps .1% of all Ann Arbor businesses: less than 2 blocks of State Street that front the Diag. Where's the Diag party store, for example -- you didn't even make it all the way down to William St. Hovering over the too-large thumbnails doesn't pop up any labels to identify the stores. (And your "map" is a table?) Your mapSearchView page doesn't work. And, FTLOG, why have you embedded the .CSS code in your page instead of using a stylesheet? Since your pages are in PHP, why don't you just use a form to get your data and dispense with all the crufty JavaScript code? Your pages have *no* meta-keyword content, so search engines will ignore you. And I really can't believe that you didn't at least Google those few businesses you *do* have before putting "web site not available": you could have *at least* made that into a Google search. Seriously:
Kaleidoscope Books & Collectibles.
No, man, trying to rationalize that "Google killed me!" just doesn't fly in this case.
I think the true irony would have been if you had made it down to the corner of Liberty and Division, only to look up and see the new local branch -- of Google. That and the fact, that, while you're whining about GoogleStreetView -- *you're using Google's Adwords yourself*!
Little? Yup! Homegrown? Somewhat questionable, my well-intentioned friend. Website? Um.... well, technically. I just hope that building kewl websites isn't your big post-college career move.
Just as 'comic' 'books' are really "graphic novels", I'd call 'video' 'games' something like "reality simulations": rlsims. Since that's somewhat unpronounceable, I'd fast-forward the linguistic elision device and get to "realms". (It's got the 'real' and the 'sim' squashed right in there.) You know: Brealms, Grealms, Srealms and, of course, Krealms. (i.e. Business-, Game-, Shop- and, of course, Kill-...) [However, I'm overlooking that sketchy breeding-ground of milcontents, disfits, and cramkers: the Nrealms.]
These things are just going to get more immersive. I just hope that someday we won't end up 8 hours a day 'stuck in the metaverse'. ("Thank god it's Fleeday.")
Perhaps 2K3 boxes *are* the final target. SKauthor may be building the biggest botnet of all time *specifically* to try and take down the government.
If that is the case, then I'll bet when we finally trace SK to its source, we'll find a foreign government behind it, like Iran ... or Russia.
Also, what's interesting to me is that puffy planets are highly correlated with fast-burning stars; I think that's a good clue right there. Perhaps, because of the faster speed of formation of these kinds of star systems, the planetoids don't sweep up as much material as a 'regular' planet, and thus don't have as dense a central core, thus leading to less gravitational load.
First, I am not a lawyer.
Linden Lab, the company responsible for Second Life [SL] is physically located in California, therefore it seems that they would fall under that jurisdiction in taxation matters.
There are no California taxes collected on monies paid to Linden Lab, AFAIK, unless they are bundled into the cost. Neither the TOS nor the membership plan page nor the pricing plan page nor the billing policies make any reference to any included taxes.
The California Tax Service Center page says clearly that "Retail sales of tangible personal property in California are generally subject to sales tax." However, software delivered over the net is *not* taxed by CA under Reg. 1502of the California State Board of Equalization. {From LinkScan(tm)}.
State of California
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
SALES AND USE TAX REGULATIONS
Regulation 1502. COMPUTERS, PROGRAMS, AND DATA PROCESSING.
Reference: Sections 995.2, 6006, 6007, 6010, 6010.9, 6011, 6012, 6015, and 6016, Revenue and Taxation Code.
(b) DEFINITIONS OF TERMS.
Prewritten Program - A program held or existing for general or repeated sale or lease. The term also includes a program developed for in-house use which is subsequently offered for sale or lease as a product.
(f) COMPUTER PROGRAMS.
(D) The sale or lease of a prewritten program is not a taxable transaction if the program is transferred by remote telecommunications from the seller's place of business, to or through the purchaser's computer and the purchaser does not obtain possession of any tangible personal property, such as storage media, in the transaction.
-----
This is certainly the case with Second Life software. The server software remains in California while the client is downloaded to your computer. This is the general business model for most MMORGs. However, not all states support this model of software taxation. This non-uniformity between states is the wedge that will be seized upon by Congress (under its interstate regulation powers (U.S. Constitution, Article I, Sec.8) to tax virtual wealth.
Of course, they *could* just as easily apply the over-the-net exemption as the state of California does. Considering how godawful-friendly they are to the business community, and how much they scream about "new taxes", you'd think that they would. Unfortunately, their second loyalty is to themselves and the "public pocketbook" (citizens, of course, are dead last), and so they are likely to grab that pie with both hands and start stuffing their faces (after assuring their corporate overlords that it is an unfortunate "necessity".)
You can't own information.
While that may be true, copyright is not about *owning* information, it is about *organizing* information. Otherwise, someone would have already copyrighted the alphabet and we'd all be SOL.
Remember the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition? This is one of my Rules of Information:
"The organization of information is worth money." [I was thinking of computer programming at the time, but the concept is clearly extensible.]
[Caveat: some forms of information -- certain kinds of lists -- are *not* copyrightable: for example, the White Pages.]
People seem to think that they have a right to make money off of their ideas. And that is just absurd.
People do not make money "off of their ideas". They make money from the *implementations* of their ideas; this is, in fact, the basis of the patent system. And, no, it is not absurd, although it may seem that way to someone with no ideas.
Well, I agree with you there. But if their idea is good and its implementation is adequate, people are going to *want to* give them money to possess the implementation, and, unless they are complete fups, they *can* be profitable. It's called the free market system".
This being the case, I don't see how he can legally suspend the elections next year to avoid a transfer of power. Even in a state of emergency, it isn't legal or even constitutional to suspend elections.
You'd *think* that the President would be bound by the Constitution. However, Presidents have come up with this little thing called "Executive Orders" which are, basically, monarchial fiats. They can't be overridden by anybody -- even Congress. "Executive orders are official documents, numbered consecutively, through which the President of the United States manages the operations of the Federal Government." (From Executive Orders FAQ's.)
Considering Bush's theory of the "Unitary Executive" and his flood of signing statements, in which he declares that he need not follow laws that Congress has passed, and his endless cries of "Executive Privilege", it would not surprise me at all to see him issue an Executive Order *suspending elections* due to some crisis or other.
Maybe that is what is needed to get the Democrats into an impeachment mood -- assuming they are not, by that time, cooling their heels in some military stockade.
Short form: Gress. As in: "You gresser! Gress you! You mothergresser! Son of a gress! Gresshole! That's just bullgress!"
Let's see them try to censor that one!
Before you call me a liar, sir, let's look at the facts. I will be quoting extensively from Bush v. Gore, which, as you presumably already know, is the US Supreme Court's decision in this case. You can find it at: Bush v. Gore.
Every single recount found Bush won Florida.
I'm not arguing that the "official" version of reality is "Bush won Florida". Conversely, here's something that supports my assertion that Gore *would have* won Florida if the count had continued:
Recounts Could Have Given Gore the Edge.
Besides which, the recounts, as they were happening, were illegal: the courts in Florida did not have the authority to order them, only the Secretary of State for Florida had any authority over the counting process.
The recounts were, in fact, perfectly legal. The Florida Supreme Court *did* have the authority to order them.
The court therefore ordered a hand recount of the 9,000 ballots in Miami-Dade County. Observing that the contest provisions vest broad discretion in the circuit judge to "provide any relief appropriate under such circumstances," Fla. Stat. 102.168(8) (2000), the Supreme Court further held that the Circuit Court could order "the Supervisor of Elections and the Canvassing Boards, as well as the necessary public officials, in all counties that have not conducted a manual recount or tabulation of the undervotes ... to do so forthwith, said tabulation to take place in the individual counties where the ballots are located."
The US Supreme Court did *not* stop the count based on the question of the *legality* of the intercession of the Florida Supreme Court; indeed, they accepted it, otherwise the question *could not have risen to the level of analysis by the US Supreme Court*. Here, in fact, is the basis of their finding:
The question before us, however, is whether the recount procedures the Florida Supreme Court has adopted are consistent with its obligation to avoid arbitrary and disparate treatment of the members of its electorate.
For purposes of resolving the equal protection challenge, it is not necessary to decide whether the Florida Supreme Court had the authority under the legislative scheme for resolving election disputes to define what a legal vote is and to mandate a manual recount implementing that definition.
The US Supreme Court found that, in fact, that, while the compiled law of the state of Florida, calls for "the intent of the voter" to determine the actuality of any ambiguous vote, the procedures in place were insufficient to determine that intent, and, thus, constituted a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution.
The recount mechanisms implemented in response to the decisions of the Florida Supreme Court do not satisfy the minimum requirement for non-arbitrary treatment of voters necessary to secure the fundamental right....The problem inheres in the absence of specific standards to ensure its equal application. The formulation of uniform rules to determine intent based on these recurring circumstances is practicable and, we conclude, necessary.
Upon due consideration of the difficulties identified to this point, it is obvious that the recount cannot be conducted in compliance with the requirements of equal protection and due process without substantial additional work....we reverse the judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida ordering a recount to proceed.
As you can clearly see, I have rebutted all the assertions of the first paragraph of your reply.
Moving forward, I notice that you neatly sidestepped the question of "chicanery in Ohio"
Except the first time, when the Supreme Court stepped in to *stop the counting process*, which would have, it turned out, elected Gore if it had continued to the end.
Except the second time, when there was clearly chicanery in Ohio, which could have been exposed if the Democrats had been on their toes and challenged the election there. Which they didn't, being as corrupt as the Republicans. (How *do* you explain the mathematical discrepancies between the exit polls and the actual vote, which only varied significantly in precincts that Bush won?)
This is all without challenging your assertion that Presidents have been elected without winning the popular vote. In fact, Jackson and Cleveland came back to be elected the next time around. Tilden died between elections and Gore bailed, otherwise he might have been elected in 2004.
You would be amazed at how long an Mac can last.
Indeed. I am still using a Mac Classic from *1982*. It only ever had a 25-Meg drive and runs at a poky 8MHz, but it *still works fine*. (I use it for breadboarding problems before I write the final version in gcc. I use Basic 2.0, written by some guy named Bill.)
The interesting thing about this is that is being adjudicated under *Federal* law, rather than state law, because it involves interstate commerce. Any EULA -- not just Microsoft's -- is now in jeopardy, because, according to this ruling, an EULA is -- by definition -- a "contract of adhesion".
The next thing that they should go after is the concept that you don't actually *own* software that you purchase, you only "license" it. That could certainly be seen as a "contract of adhesion" ('procedurally unconscionable') imposed in a one-sided way and thus unlawful as well.
BTW, it generates an optimal solution to the Traveling Salesman Problem. Now everyone who needs to have the best solution to this NP-hard problem (in fact, *all* NP-hard problems) will have to come to me! I'm looking at you, Mr. Internet -- you and your lame routing algorithms...
4) Profit! Lots and lots of profit!! Someday I'll pwn the world!!! Thanks, perpetual copyright -- you're all right by me!
WoW Gold - Quick Delivery
Low Prices on All Servers! Quick & Safe Delivery 24/7
www.XXXXXX.com
Cheapest WoW Gold
Buy Gold Directly from Gamers Prices as Low as $0.69/Units!
XXXXXX.com
(actual sites X'd out by me)
The specific cheat was this: when a player got a face card that gave them 21, the dealer then got *that very same card* as his first card. This clearly gives the advantage to the house. Once the developer pointed it out, it was easy to find in the code.
I don't doubt that there are other cheats, both more and less sophisticated than that, in other games: roulette wheels that "peek" at the player's bet, so that they can lower the odds of landing on the player's color; games that goose the odds in your favor if you are "camping" at a chair in that casino, etc.
The fact is that, since there is no review of code, anything goes. Hmmm, I just thought of a new career...Code Certifier.
You do realize, don't you, that *every time the political maps are redrawn* (i.e. every ten years) that gerrymandering is extensively used by every local state legislature? Gerrymandering is, after all, the process of redrawing the Districts so as to maximize partisan advantage. You don't need this tool to catch gerrymandering -- it's ubiquitous!
Rant aside, this app could certainly be a useful tool. The ideal -- nonpartisan -- political map would be drawn in such a way as to have the *sum of the sides* of *all* the districts to be a *minimum* while having the population of *each* district be within 1% of the average District population size for that state. (The Supreme Court has held that *some* variance in the population of districts is OK; I think that >1%, though, is *too much*.)
For example, say a state has 6.5 million people and 10 Congressional districts. Then each District must contain 650,000 +/- 1% (i.e. 1% here equals 6,500 people) and the sum of the sides of all the districts together must be a minimum. This leads to roundish districts and no possibility of gerrymandering (which, because of the torturous way districts are drawn, tends to *maximize* the length of the sides of districts).
The 'drawback' of this method, of course, is that only population -- and not historical voting patterns -- is taken into account, thus making it impossible to ensure that all the Democrats or Republicans or minorities are concentrated into just a few districts, as is done now by partisan legislatures. On the plus side, this would make more Congressional districts *unsafe* -- Congresspeople would actually have to get out there and *earn* their seats, instead of just sitting back and taking it for granted that their particular seat is safe because of the way that the Districts are drawn.
However, this scheme is unimplementable at the present time, due to the recent reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act (for the next 25 years), which actually *requires* gerrymandering when it comes to creating so-called "minority majority" Districts. (This ensures that minorities have adequate representation in Congress, rather than having their power diluted by being split among a number of other districts.)
For example, here in Michigan, blacks constitute about 12% of the population, but are highly concentrated in Detroit. If the above Voting Rights Act stricture was *not* in place, unscrupulous politicians could redraw the Congressional Districts in such a way (for example as long thin areas that had one end in Detroit and the other end outstate) as to ensure that blacks had *no* majority districts, and were a minority in *every* District that they were in -- clearly a violation of the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution.
So my logical plan for nonpartisan redistricting is -- unfortunately -- unlikely to come to fruition anytime soon -- for Congressional Districts anyway. However, since the case that was adjudicated by the Supreme Court *only* addressed issues of *Federal* redistricting, it might be possible for individual states to implement this plan as a way of making elections more contested and, hence, more democratic.
This might lead to even better cryptographic encoding functions. See the relationship between elliptic functions and cryptography here.
I beg to differ with the poster:
I=I+1
Software. Uses math symbology. This statement is *not* an equation. Therefore: "All software is just a huge math equation." is a false statement. Therefore, the conclusion: "software should not be patentable" is also incorrect, as it is based on a false assumption.
under Second Life TOS, you can sell what you create:
Frankly, it is, from a certain standpoint, a libertarian dream come true (well, sort of: all marketplace, no democracy.) However, a) SL content is only useful within the game, and b) there already exists, with the confines of SL itself, a mechanism of exchange, (the Linden), the ability to create and build 'things', the ability to sell things that you create *and* a default computer mechanism to be engaged in the 'marketplace' (free accounts). So there is no reason to go outside the game to engage in commercial exchange.The trick to making money in SL is sell *experiences*, not objects. Experiences are unique to the avatar experiencing them, and can be re-experienced.
How many clothes have you bought in SL? vs. How many times have you played Tringo? I rest my case.
When State Representative Chris Kolb (D, Ann Arbor) first introduced the idea of net metering back in 2001, no limit was placed on the amount that a residential generator could sell back to the utility. This opened up the possibility that, in theory, residential generation could completely replace all the utility's generation using the utility's own lines. Yet the utilities would still carry the burden of maintaining the lines.
By engineering this little back-room deal, that now becomes a possibility only if every residence generates as much energy in a year as it uses. That, of course, will never happen -- the utilities are now assured of always having customers.
Once again, we have been screwed by the corporations. Do other ./ers know if this particular deal -- or similar utility trickery -- has happened in their state?