"consortium of obnoxious rich people (billionaires who own substantial amounts of Florida real estate are good candidates) and a low-lying country (my bet is on the Maldives)"
I recommend that you clarify your comment or else someone might mistake you for believing that the States are sovereign rather than the people.
Unlike the First Amendment, the Fourth through Sixth Amendments do not specifically constrain the federal government therefore they protect the people against the States as well. In addition, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment specifically constrains the states.
Chip and pin: You enter a pin with each transaction and the chip on the card generates a separate key for every transaction. But in the US we'll get chip and signature most of the time.
I am not assuming anything. I am relating her stated position, and refuting claims about her unstated position on the basis that no one can know because they are unstated. I do not and cannot say that she does not hold any other position but no one else can say that she does.
If the contract with the non-disparagement clause was with Universal then a) it doesn't apply since this wasn't a Universal production, and b) Red Eagle would have no standing to invoke it.
Harriet McDougal's position is not that she was unhappy with the quality. She claims that the rights were held by Universal and not Red Eagle so their production is a rip-off independent of the quality.
So a) they got to v1.7.0 of an implementation before they finished the initial protocol they were implementing, and b) they are NOW increasing their work on documentation and testing.
This is why actual engineers, including software engineers, either laugh or cry over these programmers who think they should be treated with respect.
"Did you really think you found a way to pay a reduced price for the exact same service?"
Strictly speaking, they do reduce service over AT&T... in marketing and retention. Note that I had never heard of NET10 while AT&T and ads and stores everywhere.
Second, unfortunately they're not worth it. I am currently paying $63/month to AT&T including taxes and fees and a subsidized iPhone 5s for unlimited LTE and more minutes than I ever use.
The subsidy is $450 and the contract term is 20 months, so that's $22.50 overhead for the subsidy.
I'd break even on a plan for $40.50/month with unlimited LTE, but I should allow a bit more since I would be gaining the convenience of an unlocked phone.
a) a term of "forever" would be tossed out of court immediate as a discriminatory, b) if "5 years" makes it through, there's likely something else that will happen in that period where another term could be introduced to effectively extend the same conditions if the case can be made again.
Why should they even need to lock the phone if they have a contract? That allows then to legally extract any money you owe them whether or not you use the service. If you don't use their service you're actually reducing their costs.
Because everyone talks about the great plans you can get if you bring your own phone but no one provides any examples. I can't find a BYOP plan that is sufficiently cheaper than my current plan to even make a dent in the cost of the phone so I'd actually be losing money.
I'm willing to believe that these plans exist. Why won't someone provide some evidence?
a) Vaccines make the chance of contracting the disease very low, but not exactly zero. b) Carries of the diseases increase the opportunity of the disease to mutate into a form that the vaccine doesn't protect. c) Some people are allergic to the vaccine and must depend on everyone around them being vaccinated.
No, it means committed to not discriminating against the best qualified candidate if they are not a white male.
Since no one has ever been able to even fake some data showing that white males as a whole are more qualified, having a disproportionate number of white males means that qualified candidates have been overlooked.
Slashdot Mirror
"consortium of obnoxious rich people (billionaires who own substantial amounts of Florida real estate are good candidates) and a low-lying country (my bet is on the Maldives)"
Now we know what happened to MH 370.
" it's about how much the ordinary people of Greece should suffer for borrowing excesses of it's previous government in the past."
It's about how much the ordinary people of Greece should suffer for the lending excesses of German banks.
Do you think that Bankers have Accounting degrees?
Let me just download this Windows Defender update so it can clear off the program that does MITM attacks... oh, wait...
I recommend that you clarify your comment or else someone might mistake you for believing that the States are sovereign rather than the people.
Unlike the First Amendment, the Fourth through Sixth Amendments do not specifically constrain the federal government therefore they protect the people against the States as well. In addition, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment specifically constrains the states.
"Just because they conflict with public record laws doesn't make the terms illegal."
That is *literally* what the word "illegal" means.
Your example is irrelevant because it is a conflict between to contracts, not a contract and a law.
'"It holds a smart phone in front of your eyes" isn't enough to enforce a patent.'
Luckily for Apple, that matches exactly none of the claims.
Chip and pin: You enter a pin with each transaction and the chip on the card generates a separate key for every transaction.
But in the US we'll get chip and signature most of the time.
Clearly, nothing was added in Bluetooth 2.0.
Clearly, people who are bad at extemporaneous speaking don't deserve patents.
I am not assuming anything. I am relating her stated position, and refuting claims about her unstated position on the basis that no one can know because they are unstated. I do not and cannot say that she does not hold any other position but no one else can say that she does.
If the contract with the non-disparagement clause was with Universal then a) it doesn't apply since this wasn't a Universal production, and b) Red Eagle would have no standing to invoke it.
Harriet McDougal's position is not that she was unhappy with the quality. She claims that the rights were held by Universal and not Red Eagle so their production is a rip-off independent of the quality.
So a) they got to v1.7.0 of an implementation before they finished the initial protocol they were implementing, and b) they are NOW increasing their work on documentation and testing.
This is why actual engineers, including software engineers, either laugh or cry over these programmers who think they should be treated with respect.
"Did you really think you found a way to pay a reduced price for the exact same service?"
Strictly speaking, they do reduce service over AT&T... in marketing and retention. Note that I had never heard of NET10 while AT&T and ads and stores everywhere.
First, thank you for actually providing examples!
Second, unfortunately they're not worth it.
I am currently paying $63/month to AT&T including taxes and fees and a subsidized iPhone 5s for unlimited LTE and more minutes than I ever use.
The subsidy is $450 and the contract term is 20 months, so that's $22.50 overhead for the subsidy.
I'd break even on a plan for $40.50/month with unlimited LTE, but I should allow a bit more since I would be gaining the convenience of an unlocked phone.
a) a term of "forever" would be tossed out of court immediate as a discriminatory,
b) if "5 years" makes it through, there's likely something else that will happen in that period where another term could be introduced to effectively extend the same conditions if the case can be made again.
Why should they even need to lock the phone if they have a contract? That allows then to legally extract any money you owe them whether or not you use the service. If you don't use their service you're actually reducing their costs.
Because everyone talks about the great plans you can get if you bring your own phone but no one provides any examples. I can't find a BYOP plan that is sufficiently cheaper than my current plan to even make a dent in the cost of the phone so I'd actually be losing money.
I'm willing to believe that these plans exist. Why won't someone provide some evidence?
a) Vaccines make the chance of contracting the disease very low, but not exactly zero.
b) Carries of the diseases increase the opportunity of the disease to mutate into a form that the vaccine doesn't protect.
c) Some people are allergic to the vaccine and must depend on everyone around them being vaccinated.
No, it means committed to not discriminating against the best qualified candidate if they are not a white male.
Since no one has ever been able to even fake some data showing that white males as a whole are more qualified, having a disproportionate number of white males means that qualified candidates have been overlooked.
"They just use their own judgment as to whether that person's life is still worth living."
Doctors already do that. So do insurance companies.
Clearly, you are the only person commenting on Slashdot that makes programming mistakes.
Counterexample: Realtors
Is that you, Mark Twain?