Bush-- or more precisely, Cheney*-- knows an educated populace is a huge disadvantage to the neoconservative vision. Bringing in more knowledgeable people, whether through expanding H1-B visas or prioritizing education, only helps people realize that the Bush administration is only a Republican-branded campaign masquerading as a presidency.
* In the weightiest of matters that great men have decided alone, George W. Bush simply consults his veep and says "OK". Kind of reminds me of Sméagol under the sway of Gollum.
Notice: Parent poster specifically mentions welfare, which was hated by conservatives since its inception.
Notice: Parent poster crudely baits the Slashdot crowd by appealing to their egos and painting everyone on welfare as appalling creatures who don't deserve to procreate. Such bigotry is appallingly disgusting, and it is shameful that any libertarian would take this bait.
This is why progressives are so vilified and insulted in right-wing media. Progressives think in lofty terms and detailed arguments, whereas neoconservatives and evangelicals prefer sound bites and one-liners-- so-called "straight talk" and "decisiveness", never mind that they are wasting what precious mental resources they have by foregoing the former for the latter. Had Obama said that mouthful, he would've lost the audience after the first sentence, and they would have branded him a baby-slayer.
"Vote for Nader, and we'll vote for Gore in the red states!" the Greens said.
Please, third parties, get this through your thick skulls: there simply isn't enough of you guys to vote in 5% of the national electorate, let alone take the White House. If there were, that would be phenomenal, as it would be a chip in the ages-old 2-party system, but this is reality. Campaign local, campaign state, and you will have much more reasonable targets, as well as powerful bargaining chips against the establishment parties.
Let's put it this way: bringing in disgruntled people who abandon the mainstream parties will likely only get you strife and infighting-- that's what ultimately brought Jesse Ventura's political career to a standstill.
"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."
- They sued all the free services into oblivion because they undercut paid services. - They figure 10 years is long enough for the lazy downloader and internet newbie to not know how they used the lawyer nukes on Napster and KaZaA. - They're in the process of destroying Internet radio using a financial nuke (increase the size of the tribute to the record companies). - By decimating the playing field, they hope to be the only viable competitor on the market. iTunes? Once their service gains some traction*, they'll drop Apple and Amazon like dead skunks. - Finally, there's nothing to indicate that there will be enough paying users to sustain the record companies' desire for ever-growing profit.
* Yes, wishful thinking. But dropping iTunes and Amazon will destroy these competing stores.
While it is disingenuous to ignore the demerits of one side to discredit the other, the fallacy you're looking for is probably "poisoning the well". But dismissing the demerits of both sides won't do, either: for solar, we need better processes to extract silicon and doping, and more sustainable materials and processes for its supporting structures and lenses. Nuclear still faces the same disposal and mining problems if politics or economics favor unsustainable methods and reactors. Someone already mentioned the destructive effects of irresponsibly constructed hydro dams.
All great advances come at a cost. The challenge to us is to find a way to mitigate, minimize, or eliminate that cost.
Stampers are a nice idea, but use of one may in and of itself be grounds for dismissal under confidentiality agreements that employers commonly require the little guys to sign (transmission of confidential information, including internal communications, to a third party.)
If he's taken to court by his employer, dismissal by breach of confidentiality agreement would be the least of his concerns there. Now, if the company manages to leave "breaks confidentiality agreements" on his permanent record, that will kill many jobs based on information exchange or security.
If he can surreptitiously archive and timestamp emails to an external device (USB key or microSD card) without getting caught by the PTBs, he wouldn't have to face that threat.
People still play the Jaguar? Was there as many Jaguars in use as the Wii is now?
I say you're comparing apples to mangosteens*. The market and positioning of Atari and Nintendo then and now is very different. Atari's scenario is a quickly-fading pioneer of the video game industry struggling against the dominant SNES and Genesis, so if there was a problem with 3rd-party titles for the Jag, I doubt anyone other than Jag fans would even bat an eye.
Contrast with the current generation. The Nintendo Wii is at least dominant in terms of units sold and distributed, which means that the 3rd-party developers barely had a chance to glance at the system's dev kit before they realized the huge market potential. The rest is just generally bad timing and PHB-ishness of the development/publishing houses, flooding the market with cheap knockoffs and poor gimmicks instead of taking the time to think of small ideas like Nintendo did with Wii Sports, Wii Play, and Warioware.
Now it's hip to trash the Wii and brag about selling it online. Go figure.
* Forgive a bit of creativity. I was getting tired of oranges. Silly Dutch.
Surely, if this lobbying group is actively working against Microsoft's interests, Microsoft would then find a better group to pay? If they really are for net neutrality as you claim, why would they give this group a dime to undermine their future business?
What if they are actually working to secure a 'net that favored IIS servers running Microsoft software and services through discounts and prioritized traffic? They were able to twist the arms of standards bodies across the world for a spaghetti-code mess of a document format, surely wooing a few ISPs can't be that much more difficult?
Put another way, the best way to launch an uncontested storefront and promotional service online is to lob a financial nuclear weapon on all potential competitors. The recording companies were never about maximizing profits per se, they have been all about having a tight lock on owning the rights to copy, distribute, and promote member labels' music. The only artist in the industry with the insight to realize this and the cojones to speak out about it is marginalized by the mainstream media, who treat her like a wacko crack-whore*. The end result is that no mainstream voter realizes that the media industry is running a legalized criminal organization under their very noses, and no one will pressure the relics in Washington to tell the recording industry to fuck off.
The record companies don't want the revenue from internet radio, they want it gone.
This is my suspicion as well, and if there is evidence that this is indeed their motivation or that this is the effect, the internet radio stations should file an antitrust suit against SoundExchange. The problem is that the odds are stacked overwhelmingly in the recording industry's favor. First, the plaintiff would have to demonstrate that SoundExchange or RIAA member companies/labels pressured or coerced the royalty board to hike internet rates to such a level. This is in addition to the need to prove that the record companies deliberately did this to destroy all 'net radio, or bring it to its knees and force a negotiation favorable to the member labels.
* That she was in rehab on several occasions doesn't necessarily mean that her intellectual capacities have been completely destroyed.
... even if you play ONLY indie, free music, you are still subject to SoundExchanges fees.
That, above anything the recording industry has done-- aside from possibly the litigation/extortion campaign-- gets my goat. The nerve of those people, claiming to collect royalties for people who didn't ask for compensation of any sort. The fact that Congress let them collect and pocket indie music royalties, at rates decided by a few appointed-by-RIAA judges, is one of the best examples of how truly evil the recording industry is.
I have to ask those of you who are artists, lyricists, composers, and managers trying to scrape by under the cartel labels: Seriously, what makes you think that the execs who green-lighted the driftnet lawsuits, or the suits at SoundExchange with nothing better to do than sue people who play loud boomboxes in garages, give a rat's ass about how you're struggling to make a fair living? I'm betting that in order for you to get their full promotional and distributive services, you have to sign away the copyrights to your songs and become contractually obligated to make more at a factory's pace. Meanwhile, their lobbyists continue to tell Congress that a human's lifetime plus a half is still not enough to recoup the losses-- they want the copyright term to be longer and more indefinite. They're not going to let your work go where it can be seen or heard by everyone, they want to be the gatekeepers who dictate who gets to hear your works, when, and for how much. All they have to do to keep the prominent artists on their side is to entice them with lots of money and swag, and all they have to do to keep the lesser-known artists is to handcuff them with the contract, and/or feed them the RIAA propaganda that even a fleeting reference is a stolen song.
That a judge hasn't struck down the Bono amendment to the Copyright Act as unconstitutional, or the fact that SoundExchange essentially makes money off the backs of all musicians has not been challenged in the judiciary, is appalling on many levels.
A few weeks ago, McCain said "nuclear" and the discussion here and elsewhere went nuts with people saying, "OMG He's going to give us nuclear power!!!1! Vote him! Vote him!" Another time, he mentioned a possible manned mission to Mars, and a similar geek-gasm ensued. Interesting that both of these proposals are conspicuously missing from his technology platform, which includes pro-BSA/RIAA/MPAA language.
Didn't he get the memo that he's supposed to keep hyping the promises that will get Slashdot commenters in a tizzy until he's elected? I guess Rove's hubris has infected every level of the GOP leadership-- they think that they can get away with being honest about being sold out* because they think they'll get the White House anyway. If McCain falls below 40% in the polls, I suspect Cheney will attack Iran and Russia to give the old war veteran an opportunity to give the appearance of leadership. That way, even if McCain loses, Obama is stuck with a multi-front war that he cannot win.
* Granted, Democrats are no better in this regard. In my state, Nancy Pelosi and Dianne Feinstein both are corporate shills, but the Democrats keep them because they are ace fundraisers.
Did the ad end with "I'm John McCain, and I approve this message."? Even if he wasn't the one who produced and directed the ad, he may have supported or endorsed its message-- and it wouldn't be surprising, because he's been catering to GOP interests since he won the GOP nomination!
a) You're referencing a guy who was running a full-blown industrial chem lab in his home, which is hardly a "home chemistry set"-- please produce a source for an arrest or confiscation of a home chemistry set. b) "Legal" until one sets his house on fire and his neighbor's. The guy didn't bother to maintain his AC unit in the same building with piles of organic chemicals. c) This is more legit security theater if they're actually calling it "terrorism", but most cases it's to keep kids from blowing their hands off or setting their houses on fire, because today's parents don't bother to make sure they know how to handle potentially dangerous things safely. They want their babies to stay the hell away from the stuff, so the kids find the stuff and get hurt or killed because they don't know what they're doing. Parents are even more outraged, so the stuff is outlawed even though they ought to shoulder a significant portion of blame.
Kids are only piqued by things blowing up and burning? If that's so, perhaps we should encourage them all to join the military, where blowing stuff up and burning stuff is the entire point? Chemistry isn't merely about fires and bombs, and science is much more mundane and interesting* than what you are imagining it to be.
* For every spectacular chemistry demo, there's thousands of titration tests to be done in labs.
Don't forget he had Phil Gramm, who enabled Enron's outrageous business practices through deregulation-- the same deregulation law is suspected to be a major cause of the credit/subprime crises. Notice, Gramm tried to downplay "recession" hysteria because he helped draft and promote that bill! Gramm's history as far as his position in the campaign is concerned, but his overly business-friendly policies are generally still in place.
If the RIAA labels are after complete control of the production, promotion, and distribution of their media, then the best way to punish them is to release every artistic work to which the labels have claimed ownership into the public domain, and offer subsidies to the artists who came up with the works-- in addition to suspending trade and freezing/confiscating their monetary assets. In other words, force them to be open source. This would devastate their business model, while at the same time offer a way out for the artists-- the label can't sustain them, so they would have to let them go.
On top of that, the artists will get mountains of free promotion, because people everywhere would be free to play and sing their songs. If they are able to make great music (and many of them are), they would be finding more gigs and recording opportunities than they ever could under their labels.
Imagine if this was the penalty for Microsoft in the infamous DoJ trial? Sure, we'd pick Windows and Office to the bone for dunderheaded coding and design, but we would have the codebases to an OS that was remarkably flexible given the huge variety of hardware out there, and a Swiss army chainsaw/particle accelerator of an office suite.
Or how about a variation? I'm feeling creative now. How about for every song they claim is uploaded, they must release it to the public domain if they lose the case? It will really force them to reconsider their campaign and pursue better alternatives, and it will force the artists to reconsider staying with a label who is involved in the campaign.
Now, all I need is a way to hit Disney for stealing Snow White, Cinderella, The Little Mermaid and other public domain works. "But what's wrong with that," you ask? Imagine trying to publish anything with character designs, dialogue, or voices from those films. You will be sued into oblivion unless you're a critic or journalist, even if all you're talking about is the original work.
Actually, they fought against paying those fees and resisted until the judge forced them to. I'd say they care in a twisted, bizarre way. Of course, they tried to cut and run while still retaining the ability to sue her or her child.
The judge shouldn't just throw the book at them, he needs to throw a few Libraries of Congress. Hard copies, no discs, please. They're neither sharp enough, nor massive enough.
A better word for that sin would be "envy" or "lust". Whichever one it was, David effectively pulled the pin of a hand grenade in a weapons bunker. He would see three of his children die, his daughter raped, and his kingdom in chaos. After that affair with Bathsheba, he would never lead an army to victory again, and only his son Solomon would be an effective successor.
Slashdot Mirror
Bush-- or more precisely, Cheney*-- knows an educated populace is a huge disadvantage to the neoconservative vision. Bringing in more knowledgeable people, whether through expanding H1-B visas or prioritizing education, only helps people realize that the Bush administration is only a Republican-branded campaign masquerading as a presidency.
* In the weightiest of matters that great men have decided alone, George W. Bush simply consults his veep and says "OK". Kind of reminds me of Sméagol under the sway of Gollum.
Notice: Parent poster specifically mentions welfare, which was hated by conservatives since its inception.
Notice: Parent poster crudely baits the Slashdot crowd by appealing to their egos and painting everyone on welfare as appalling creatures who don't deserve to procreate. Such bigotry is appallingly disgusting, and it is shameful that any libertarian would take this bait.
This is why progressives are so vilified and insulted in right-wing media. Progressives think in lofty terms and detailed arguments, whereas neoconservatives and evangelicals prefer sound bites and one-liners-- so-called "straight talk" and "decisiveness", never mind that they are wasting what precious mental resources they have by foregoing the former for the latter. Had Obama said that mouthful, he would've lost the audience after the first sentence, and they would have branded him a baby-slayer.
"Vote for Nader, and we'll vote for Gore in the red states!" the Greens said.
Please, third parties, get this through your thick skulls: there simply isn't enough of you guys to vote in 5% of the national electorate, let alone take the White House. If there were, that would be phenomenal, as it would be a chip in the ages-old 2-party system, but this is reality. Campaign local, campaign state, and you will have much more reasonable targets, as well as powerful bargaining chips against the establishment parties.
Let's put it this way: bringing in disgruntled people who abandon the mainstream parties will likely only get you strife and infighting-- that's what ultimately brought Jesse Ventura's political career to a standstill.
"Borrowing" Obama's slogan design notwithstanding, that reads like a lolcat.
I can has internetz?
Of course, he may be targeting the casual youtube viewer who's considering McCain, who is a poor choice in terms of technology and liberty.
Wake me when an appellate court or the Supreme Court rules this way.
One wonders if kdawson is actually on vacation and left a rubber-stamping bot in his place, to see if we can tell the difference.
"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."
Notice:
- They sued all the free services into oblivion because they undercut paid services.
- They figure 10 years is long enough for the lazy downloader and internet newbie to not know how they used the lawyer nukes on Napster and KaZaA.
- They're in the process of destroying Internet radio using a financial nuke (increase the size of the tribute to the record companies).
- By decimating the playing field, they hope to be the only viable competitor on the market. iTunes? Once their service gains some traction*, they'll drop Apple and Amazon like dead skunks.
- Finally, there's nothing to indicate that there will be enough paying users to sustain the record companies' desire for ever-growing profit.
* Yes, wishful thinking. But dropping iTunes and Amazon will destroy these competing stores.
While it is disingenuous to ignore the demerits of one side to discredit the other, the fallacy you're looking for is probably "poisoning the well". But dismissing the demerits of both sides won't do, either: for solar, we need better processes to extract silicon and doping, and more sustainable materials and processes for its supporting structures and lenses. Nuclear still faces the same disposal and mining problems if politics or economics favor unsustainable methods and reactors. Someone already mentioned the destructive effects of irresponsibly constructed hydro dams.
All great advances come at a cost. The challenge to us is to find a way to mitigate, minimize, or eliminate that cost.
If he's taken to court by his employer, dismissal by breach of confidentiality agreement would be the least of his concerns there. Now, if the company manages to leave "breaks confidentiality agreements" on his permanent record, that will kill many jobs based on information exchange or security.
If he can surreptitiously archive and timestamp emails to an external device (USB key or microSD card) without getting caught by the PTBs, he wouldn't have to face that threat.
People still play the Jaguar? Was there as many Jaguars in use as the Wii is now?
I say you're comparing apples to mangosteens*. The market and positioning of Atari and Nintendo then and now is very different. Atari's scenario is a quickly-fading pioneer of the video game industry struggling against the dominant SNES and Genesis, so if there was a problem with 3rd-party titles for the Jag, I doubt anyone other than Jag fans would even bat an eye.
Contrast with the current generation. The Nintendo Wii is at least dominant in terms of units sold and distributed, which means that the 3rd-party developers barely had a chance to glance at the system's dev kit before they realized the huge market potential. The rest is just generally bad timing and PHB-ishness of the development/publishing houses, flooding the market with cheap knockoffs and poor gimmicks instead of taking the time to think of small ideas like Nintendo did with Wii Sports, Wii Play, and Warioware.
Now it's hip to trash the Wii and brag about selling it online. Go figure.
* Forgive a bit of creativity. I was getting tired of oranges. Silly Dutch.
Surely, if this lobbying group is actively working against Microsoft's interests, Microsoft would then find a better group to pay? If they really are for net neutrality as you claim, why would they give this group a dime to undermine their future business?
What if they are actually working to secure a 'net that favored IIS servers running Microsoft software and services through discounts and prioritized traffic? They were able to twist the arms of standards bodies across the world for a spaghetti-code mess of a document format, surely wooing a few ISPs can't be that much more difficult?
Put another way, the best way to launch an uncontested storefront and promotional service online is to lob a financial nuclear weapon on all potential competitors. The recording companies were never about maximizing profits per se, they have been all about having a tight lock on owning the rights to copy, distribute, and promote member labels' music. The only artist in the industry with the insight to realize this and the cojones to speak out about it is marginalized by the mainstream media, who treat her like a wacko crack-whore*. The end result is that no mainstream voter realizes that the media industry is running a legalized criminal organization under their very noses, and no one will pressure the relics in Washington to tell the recording industry to fuck off.
The record companies don't want the revenue from internet radio, they want it gone.
This is my suspicion as well, and if there is evidence that this is indeed their motivation or that this is the effect, the internet radio stations should file an antitrust suit against SoundExchange. The problem is that the odds are stacked overwhelmingly in the recording industry's favor. First, the plaintiff would have to demonstrate that SoundExchange or RIAA member companies/labels pressured or coerced the royalty board to hike internet rates to such a level. This is in addition to the need to prove that the record companies deliberately did this to destroy all 'net radio, or bring it to its knees and force a negotiation favorable to the member labels.
* That she was in rehab on several occasions doesn't necessarily mean that her intellectual capacities have been completely destroyed.
... even if you play ONLY indie, free music, you are still subject to SoundExchanges fees.
That, above anything the recording industry has done-- aside from possibly the litigation/extortion campaign-- gets my goat. The nerve of those people, claiming to collect royalties for people who didn't ask for compensation of any sort. The fact that Congress let them collect and pocket indie music royalties, at rates decided by a few appointed-by-RIAA judges, is one of the best examples of how truly evil the recording industry is.
I have to ask those of you who are artists, lyricists, composers, and managers trying to scrape by under the cartel labels: Seriously, what makes you think that the execs who green-lighted the driftnet lawsuits, or the suits at SoundExchange with nothing better to do than sue people who play loud boomboxes in garages, give a rat's ass about how you're struggling to make a fair living? I'm betting that in order for you to get their full promotional and distributive services, you have to sign away the copyrights to your songs and become contractually obligated to make more at a factory's pace. Meanwhile, their lobbyists continue to tell Congress that a human's lifetime plus a half is still not enough to recoup the losses-- they want the copyright term to be longer and more indefinite. They're not going to let your work go where it can be seen or heard by everyone, they want to be the gatekeepers who dictate who gets to hear your works, when, and for how much. All they have to do to keep the prominent artists on their side is to entice them with lots of money and swag, and all they have to do to keep the lesser-known artists is to handcuff them with the contract, and/or feed them the RIAA propaganda that even a fleeting reference is a stolen song.
That a judge hasn't struck down the Bono amendment to the Copyright Act as unconstitutional, or the fact that SoundExchange essentially makes money off the backs of all musicians has not been challenged in the judiciary, is appalling on many levels.
A few weeks ago, McCain said "nuclear" and the discussion here and elsewhere went nuts with people saying, "OMG He's going to give us nuclear power!!!1! Vote him! Vote him!" Another time, he mentioned a possible manned mission to Mars, and a similar geek-gasm ensued. Interesting that both of these proposals are conspicuously missing from his technology platform, which includes pro-BSA/RIAA/MPAA language.
Didn't he get the memo that he's supposed to keep hyping the promises that will get Slashdot commenters in a tizzy until he's elected? I guess Rove's hubris has infected every level of the GOP leadership-- they think that they can get away with being honest about being sold out* because they think they'll get the White House anyway. If McCain falls below 40% in the polls, I suspect Cheney will attack Iran and Russia to give the old war veteran an opportunity to give the appearance of leadership. That way, even if McCain loses, Obama is stuck with a multi-front war that he cannot win.
* Granted, Democrats are no better in this regard. In my state, Nancy Pelosi and Dianne Feinstein both are corporate shills, but the Democrats keep them because they are ace fundraisers.
Did the ad end with "I'm John McCain, and I approve this message."? Even if he wasn't the one who produced and directed the ad, he may have supported or endorsed its message-- and it wouldn't be surprising, because he's been catering to GOP interests since he won the GOP nomination!
a) You're referencing a guy who was running a full-blown industrial chem lab in his home, which is hardly a "home chemistry set"-- please produce a source for an arrest or confiscation of a home chemistry set.
b) "Legal" until one sets his house on fire and his neighbor's. The guy didn't bother to maintain his AC unit in the same building with piles of organic chemicals.
c) This is more legit security theater if they're actually calling it "terrorism", but most cases it's to keep kids from blowing their hands off or setting their houses on fire, because today's parents don't bother to make sure they know how to handle potentially dangerous things safely. They want their babies to stay the hell away from the stuff, so the kids find the stuff and get hurt or killed because they don't know what they're doing. Parents are even more outraged, so the stuff is outlawed even though they ought to shoulder a significant portion of blame.
Kids are only piqued by things blowing up and burning? If that's so, perhaps we should encourage them all to join the military, where blowing stuff up and burning stuff is the entire point? Chemistry isn't merely about fires and bombs, and science is much more mundane and interesting* than what you are imagining it to be.
* For every spectacular chemistry demo, there's thousands of titration tests to be done in labs.
Nah, it's proof that McCain's web developers are ASP monkeys who couldn't code themselves out of a paper bag.
Don't forget he had Phil Gramm, who enabled Enron's outrageous business practices through deregulation-- the same deregulation law is suspected to be a major cause of the credit/subprime crises. Notice, Gramm tried to downplay "recession" hysteria because he helped draft and promote that bill! Gramm's history as far as his position in the campaign is concerned, but his overly business-friendly policies are generally still in place.
If the RIAA labels are after complete control of the production, promotion, and distribution of their media, then the best way to punish them is to release every artistic work to which the labels have claimed ownership into the public domain, and offer subsidies to the artists who came up with the works-- in addition to suspending trade and freezing/confiscating their monetary assets. In other words, force them to be open source. This would devastate their business model, while at the same time offer a way out for the artists-- the label can't sustain them, so they would have to let them go.
On top of that, the artists will get mountains of free promotion, because people everywhere would be free to play and sing their songs. If they are able to make great music (and many of them are), they would be finding more gigs and recording opportunities than they ever could under their labels.
Imagine if this was the penalty for Microsoft in the infamous DoJ trial? Sure, we'd pick Windows and Office to the bone for dunderheaded coding and design, but we would have the codebases to an OS that was remarkably flexible given the huge variety of hardware out there, and a Swiss army chainsaw/particle accelerator of an office suite.
Or how about a variation? I'm feeling creative now. How about for every song they claim is uploaded, they must release it to the public domain if they lose the case? It will really force them to reconsider their campaign and pursue better alternatives, and it will force the artists to reconsider staying with a label who is involved in the campaign.
Now, all I need is a way to hit Disney for stealing Snow White, Cinderella, The Little Mermaid and other public domain works. "But what's wrong with that," you ask? Imagine trying to publish anything with character designs, dialogue, or voices from those films. You will be sued into oblivion unless you're a critic or journalist, even if all you're talking about is the original work.
Actually, they fought against paying those fees and resisted until the judge forced them to. I'd say they care in a twisted, bizarre way. Of course, they tried to cut and run while still retaining the ability to sue her or her child.
The judge shouldn't just throw the book at them, he needs to throw a few Libraries of Congress. Hard copies, no discs, please. They're neither sharp enough, nor massive enough.
A better word for that sin would be "envy" or "lust". Whichever one it was, David effectively pulled the pin of a hand grenade in a weapons bunker. He would see three of his children die, his daughter raped, and his kingdom in chaos. After that affair with Bathsheba, he would never lead an army to victory again, and only his son Solomon would be an effective successor.
Good, but weren't those directed to judges?
But I guess you're trying to say, "bring these points up whenever you're a target of an RIAA member company lawsuit!"
Surely, there were a few people in your graduating class that were in it for the wealth/power, as cliché as it sounds for lawyers?
Thankfully, your decision was ultimately a sound one.