Because Amazon is the *only* place you buy things online? Really?
I used overstock.com as an example, but WB could work up a deal with Apple, NewEgg, Think Geek, Bestbuy.com, or any other website. The fact that we immediately associate Amazon.com with the ONE AND ONLY online shopping solution is the whole reason for the current situation. We've given Amazon too much leverage with which to pull this crap.
If the crimes against Uber and it's ilk were such a slam dunk, then why haven't the cops been ticketing them in droves. According to a Washington Post article last month, Uber is adding close to 20,000 drivers per month. Law enforcement could generate millions by simply issuing citations to them all (plus Lyft, Sidecar, and any others). But they don't. And it's not like they're hard to spot. Uber-taxis have a neon blue U in their window
So you've gotta ask yourself, why aren't Ubers getting ticketted in droves? Do you think Law Enforcement lets them slide out of the goodness of their hearts and a true desire to see the small upstart companies battle the entrenched establishment? Or just because they can't.
Amazon is causing a ruckus with Warner/Hatchette. That ruckus is driving people to alternative (and less legal means)
Perhaps Warner should be looking into alternative distribution methods. They're a big enough company that if Amazon wants to play hardball, Warner should be able to play right back. Threaten to pull all movies from Amazon, create and promote a new partnership with (for example) Overstock.com or create their own direct distribution branch. Fire off a few commercials like "For all your Warner Brothers needs, go to WB.com" It might cost them money in the short term, but it would prevent people from pirating their movies, drive up traffic on their website, and probably save money in the long run by leveraging a better negotiating position with Amazon (or moving on to greener pastures with o.co, or whomever)
So, wait... let me see if I understand this. The argument is that "real" taxi meters read the tires (tyres) to evaluate distance, but Uber uses GPS to evaluate distance. Thus Uber is not a proper taxi and not beholden to proper taxi laws?
But Uber/Lyft doesn't offer services to passing strangers. You can't raise you arm to hail an Uber-cab. You have to call them (via phone app) and specifically request a ride to/from a location.
Similar loophole to all the craigs list prostitutes. A cop cannot respond to the ads and say "Hello, I would like to exchange money for sex," and then arrest anyone who says "OK." That would be entrapment.
Entrapment. You can't hail an uber taxi on the street. Uber will never pull up and ask if you need a lift (lyft) You have you request them specifically via their website or phone app.
If a cop calls you, asks you to perform an illegal action, and then arrests/tickets you for performing said illegal action: entrapment.
Are you operating a commercial driving service? No. But this is an Uber-car, it has the little logo.... I'm not working, just taking the car to get serviced. But you have a passenger in the back... Just a friend of mine, giving him a lift. It's on the way.
Politicians have been, for years, systematically altering their districts so that their particular flavor of nutjob are all in the same district. Be it birthers, gun nuts, 9/11 conspiracy folks, or whatever. Pick your favorite flavor, wrangle up enough people, wherever they may be, and reelections will take care of themselves. We can sprinkle the sane/moderate people around so that their votes are barely heard. Certainly not enough to cause a ruckus
The real problem, however, is just now starting to surface. If you wrangle up enough staunch believers of any one type in a particular area, a crazier candidate will surface and take advantage of that. We no longer get anyone with a hint of "moderate" in a general election, because they get destroyed in the Primaries by someone even crazier than they are.
Not quite as good as retail VHS copies. I'd put them on par with recording VHS from your cable stream. Definitely watchable, and WAY better than any other cams I've seen.
Pulp fiction wasn't too bad, but Emperor's New Groove about gave me a heart attack.
In the middle of the movie, there's a scene where a character starts talking directly to the audience. This scene starts with a VERY convincing visual effect that looks like the reels jumped off the spokes and started to melt through. Convincing enough to cause me to catapult from my seat and fly out of the theatre.
A median family could afford that $500 TV in the 50s. Could a median family afford a $5000 TV today? I don't think so. Ergo, buying power of the median family has decreased.
Fun little story: back when I worked at a theatre, films came on several reels and the projectionist was in charge of assembling them into a complete movie (and splicing porn into that assembly, if you're Tyler Durden) Not sure how things work in today's digital age.
Once everything was assembled, you had to watch the movie through once, just to make sure none of the reels were damaged, assembled upside-down or anything. This usually took place around 2 or 3 in the morning, to have enough time to fix any problems, and be ready for the theatre to open with those new movies Friday morning. So if, hypothetically, someone wanted to get a halfway decent recording, they could setup a tripod during these test runs, while no patrons were in the seats
Step 1: Connect to "external SSID"
Step 2: Download illegal music/movies/pr0n/etc
Step 3: Deny responsibility, as the "culprit" was connected to the external SSID and clearly not YOU, connected to the internal SSID.
Add a step for MAC spoofing, if you really want to go that extra mile.
Why? The Super-chargers are currently free to use. Allegedly they will always be free.
So Musk isn't loosing any money "at the pump." Anyone who makes their own super-charger stations can't really undercut his price.
On the flip side, the more super-charger stations that spring up, the more comfortable people are in buying his car, which is where he's actually making money.
Sure, eventually another electric car company might spring up and make use of his Super-chargers... but balance that potential loss against the gain above, and he's probably still coming out in the black.
Equip every officer with a Go-Pro, or something similar, and you won't have to worry about things taken out of context. The good police officer will have a full, unaltered recording of the events.
Not sure if teaching institutions are notorious in this manner, but my company couldn't care less if I buy some lattes on my corporate card
If you are on business travel, you are allowed a per diem rate. Any lattes, omelettes, steaks, clothes, etc that you buy are automatically covered, up to the per diem limit (that limit is based on the cost of living at your travel destination). All big purchases (airline, rental car, hotel) are also purchased with the corporate card, and covered automatically
If you decide to spend more than your per diem limit, the company pays the max. daily limit, and you're on the hook for the difference. Same goes with the big purchases. If I book a ritzy hotel, or rent a super-luxury car, the company will pay for the "normal" price, and I pay the difference
While I agree with the concept, practice is drastically different
If the government wanted to get out of the way and let private enterprise determine the best method to provide internet service, then why are they signing monopoly-creating agreements, even against themselves? That goes completely against finding an optimal solution. Though, I suppose it depends on your definition of "optimal." The current setup is definitely the optimal revenue generator for the ISPs.
But if we want optimal usability and affordability for the customers/constituents, well, the popularity of Google fiber should be an early indication. But for even better results, the cities need to allow these already-existing fiber cables to be utilized... ideally by an ISP that doesn't yet exist in the market area, and has no non-compete arrangements with the current providers (and is blocked from creating any such arrangements)
Slashdot Mirror
Do I have to be licensed for chauffeur work if I drop my friends off at the airport?
What about if they pay me for it? Maybe they're just covering gas money, but cash exchanged hands for rides? Have I run an illegal taxi service?
On behalf of Canada: That's our line.
Because Amazon is the *only* place you buy things online? Really?
I used overstock.com as an example, but WB could work up a deal with Apple, NewEgg, Think Geek, Bestbuy.com, or any other website. The fact that we immediately associate Amazon.com with the ONE AND ONLY online shopping solution is the whole reason for the current situation. We've given Amazon too much leverage with which to pull this crap.
If the crimes against Uber and it's ilk were such a slam dunk, then why haven't the cops been ticketing them in droves. According to a Washington Post article last month, Uber is adding close to 20,000 drivers per month. Law enforcement could generate millions by simply issuing citations to them all (plus Lyft, Sidecar, and any others). But they don't. And it's not like they're hard to spot. Uber-taxis have a neon blue U in their window
So you've gotta ask yourself, why aren't Ubers getting ticketted in droves? Do you think Law Enforcement lets them slide out of the goodness of their hearts and a true desire to see the small upstart companies battle the entrenched establishment? Or just because they can't.
Well, if I were an uber driver, I would be unlikely to drive a cop somewhere.
By showing up in plain clothes and not disclosing his intentions, he's induced me to the above offense which I would otherwise be unlikely to commit.
They're simply guilty by association.
Amazon is causing a ruckus with Warner/Hatchette. That ruckus is driving people to alternative (and less legal means)
Perhaps Warner should be looking into alternative distribution methods. They're a big enough company that if Amazon wants to play hardball, Warner should be able to play right back. Threaten to pull all movies from Amazon, create and promote a new partnership with (for example) Overstock.com or create their own direct distribution branch. Fire off a few commercials like "For all your Warner Brothers needs, go to WB.com" It might cost them money in the short term, but it would prevent people from pirating their movies, drive up traffic on their website, and probably save money in the long run by leveraging a better negotiating position with Amazon (or moving on to greener pastures with o.co, or whomever)
So, wait ... let me see if I understand this. The argument is that "real" taxi meters read the tires (tyres) to evaluate distance, but Uber uses GPS to evaluate distance. Thus Uber is not a proper taxi and not beholden to proper taxi laws?
But Uber/Lyft doesn't offer services to passing strangers. You can't raise you arm to hail an Uber-cab. You have to call them (via phone app) and specifically request a ride to/from a location.
Similar loophole to all the craigs list prostitutes. A cop cannot respond to the ads and say "Hello, I would like to exchange money for sex," and then arrest anyone who says "OK." That would be entrapment.
Entrapment. You can't hail an uber taxi on the street. Uber will never pull up and ask if you need a lift (lyft) You have you request them specifically via their website or phone app.
If a cop calls you, asks you to perform an illegal action, and then arrests/tickets you for performing said illegal action: entrapment.
True, but that's a tough charge to make stick.
Are you operating a commercial driving service? No.
But this is an Uber-car, it has the little logo.... I'm not working, just taking the car to get serviced.
But you have a passenger in the back... Just a friend of mine, giving him a lift. It's on the way.
Increase pub density!
It's the only sensible solution. Make sure everyone has a pub (or two) within walking distance, to combat drunk driving.
And as a bonus side effect, you combat obesity by encouraging people to walk more when they've been drinking (beer has a LOT of carbs)
This, but only because of rampant gerrymandering.
"Just find me enough people that like me, and call that my district. I don't care if they're spread out all over creation. Just draw a line around everyone who voted for me last time, and call it done."
Politicians have been, for years, systematically altering their districts so that their particular flavor of nutjob are all in the same district. Be it birthers, gun nuts, 9/11 conspiracy folks, or whatever. Pick your favorite flavor, wrangle up enough people, wherever they may be, and reelections will take care of themselves. We can sprinkle the sane/moderate people around so that their votes are barely heard. Certainly not enough to cause a ruckus
The real problem, however, is just now starting to surface. If you wrangle up enough staunch believers of any one type in a particular area, a crazier candidate will surface and take advantage of that. We no longer get anyone with a hint of "moderate" in a general election, because they get destroyed in the Primaries by someone even crazier than they are.
Not quite as good as retail VHS copies. I'd put them on par with recording VHS from your cable stream. Definitely watchable, and WAY better than any other cams I've seen.
Pulp fiction wasn't too bad, but Emperor's New Groove about gave me a heart attack.
In the middle of the movie, there's a scene where a character starts talking directly to the audience. This scene starts with a VERY convincing visual effect that looks like the reels jumped off the spokes and started to melt through. Convincing enough to cause me to catapult from my seat and fly out of the theatre.
Good times. Good times.
This was back in the late 90s, so internet leaks weren't as prevalent.
Mostly it was just sneaker-net sharing amongst a few friends. Copies made in the high school AV room.
whoops. yeah. Meant to reply to limecat, above. C'est la vie.
You missed the point entirely.
$500 in the 50s equates to roughly $5000 today.
A median family could afford that $500 TV in the 50s. Could a median family afford a $5000 TV today? I don't think so. Ergo, buying power of the median family has decreased.
Fun little story: back when I worked at a theatre, films came on several reels and the projectionist was in charge of assembling them into a complete movie (and splicing porn into that assembly, if you're Tyler Durden) Not sure how things work in today's digital age.
Once everything was assembled, you had to watch the movie through once, just to make sure none of the reels were damaged, assembled upside-down or anything. This usually took place around 2 or 3 in the morning, to have enough time to fix any problems, and be ready for the theatre to open with those new movies Friday morning. So if, hypothetically, someone wanted to get a halfway decent recording, they could setup a tripod during these test runs, while no patrons were in the seats
Hypothetically.
Step 1: Connect to "external SSID"
Step 2: Download illegal music/movies/pr0n/etc
Step 3: Deny responsibility, as the "culprit" was connected to the external SSID and clearly not YOU, connected to the internal SSID.
Add a step for MAC spoofing, if you really want to go that extra mile.
I'd start with overage charges or throttling..
If some other comcast customer exceeds some preset data limit on my router, do I get billed? Does my bandwidth get restricted?
Why? The Super-chargers are currently free to use. Allegedly they will always be free.
So Musk isn't loosing any money "at the pump." Anyone who makes their own super-charger stations can't really undercut his price.
On the flip side, the more super-charger stations that spring up, the more comfortable people are in buying his car, which is where he's actually making money.
Sure, eventually another electric car company might spring up and make use of his Super-chargers ... but balance that potential loss against the gain above, and he's probably still coming out in the black.
Equip every officer with a Go-Pro, or something similar, and you won't have to worry about things taken out of context. The good police officer will have a full, unaltered recording of the events.
Not sure if teaching institutions are notorious in this manner, but my company couldn't care less if I buy some lattes on my corporate card
If you are on business travel, you are allowed a per diem rate. Any lattes, omelettes, steaks, clothes, etc that you buy are automatically covered, up to the per diem limit (that limit is based on the cost of living at your travel destination). All big purchases (airline, rental car, hotel) are also purchased with the corporate card, and covered automatically
If you decide to spend more than your per diem limit, the company pays the max. daily limit, and you're on the hook for the difference. Same goes with the big purchases. If I book a ritzy hotel, or rent a super-luxury car, the company will pay for the "normal" price, and I pay the difference
While I agree with the concept, practice is drastically different
If the government wanted to get out of the way and let private enterprise determine the best method to provide internet service, then why are they signing monopoly-creating agreements, even against themselves? That goes completely against finding an optimal solution. Though, I suppose it depends on your definition of "optimal." The current setup is definitely the optimal revenue generator for the ISPs.
But if we want optimal usability and affordability for the customers/constituents, well, the popularity of Google fiber should be an early indication. But for even better results, the cities need to allow these already-existing fiber cables to be utilized... ideally by an ISP that doesn't yet exist in the market area, and has no non-compete arrangements with the current providers (and is blocked from creating any such arrangements)
If only there was a modern day precedent for the US military having a hard time dealing with some low tech insurgents.