I guarantee you, if this was a redirect from your favorite pr0n site to the Assemby of God website
If the Assembly of God did exactly the same thing as this site (featured a disclaimer in bold red font and a link to a pr0n site), I'd do a screen capture and see if I could get a free t-shirt or something from one of those "funny things seen on the web" featurettes. (Bonus points if the page gave their name as "Assemby" of God.).)
but really, how is this "fallwell.com" site any different from any other "cyber-misspelling" trap sites?
Er, because actual "cyber-misspelling" trap sites don't have disclaimers in bold red lettering right at the top of the page with a link to the correctly-spelled site?
there's nothing saying that a timber company, a GM crops company, or a nuclear power plant company can't have positive environmental practices or make use of the environment without abusing it
The contrary view expressed by some dogmatic leftists (not to be confused with rational liberals) reminds me of the description of the evil enemy from some kid's cartoon: "M.A.D.: A group of mad scientists out to destroy the world for their own gain!"
Yes, there is. The telcos have statedrepeatedly that their agenda is to collect an extra toll for simply providing the same service they are already selling to their end-user customers.
All they want, right now, is a business model that allows them to get revenues from both content providers and consumers.
In other words, they want to double-dip and charge twice for providing the same service.
Right now, they have to claw back pretty much all revenues from consumers.
Businesses need to get their revenue from their customers? What a shockingly outre concept!
It's not that I object to the principle that, if the user pays for a service of quality X, they should get X across the board
Well, then your argument isn't with me; it's with the AT&T, Verizon, etc executives who do object to the notion that they are obligated to provide X even though they've only been paid for it once, not twice.
I like all the subtle little messages in this article, further reinforcing the fundamentalist Christian conservative stereotype and implying that the Christians are the ones feeding fuel to the ICANN vs. Europe dispute.
Well, then, who is? The pretzel bakers?
Or (even more implausibly), has this administration suddenly started listening to expert opinion?
Ever since I heard a CATO "expert" explain that gas prices were so high because a lot of people were topping off their tanks at the gas station, I kinda take whatever they say with a grain of salt.
You slept through the Economics 101 class where they explained "supply and demand", right?
Communism fails because it expects people to work without much incentive. Libertarianism fails because it expects people not to do harm to each other.
Both philosophies allow the use of force when people fail to behave. The difference is that Communism requires constant use of force (to make people produce without getting individual reward for themselves and their loved ones), but Libertarianism requires only occasional use of force (to deter and/or punish people who start conflicts by engaging in theft, assault, and fraud). The latter is much less trouble, and it's something that every society has to do anyway (even in an anarchy, the use of force in self-defense exists; it just isn't centralized under one umbrella called "the government").
The series will be set between episodes three and four of the film saga. It would cover the 20 years in the life of Luke Skywalker growing up that remains a mystery to most film-goers.
The life of Luke Skywalker growing up was boooooring. Retconning that pretty much invalidates the whole "Hero's Journey" story, thus damaging the story on a far more fundamental level than any of the other stupid fiddlings (up to and including Who Shot First in the cantina).
I filled out the parts that are necessary for the Constitutional purpose of the census. For the rest, I amused myself by figuring out the most misleading possible technically true answer.
I suppose the entire slashdot crowd has forgotten that funding for scientific research has been SEVERLY decreased over the last several years.
Yes -- in part, because the money was diverted into pseudoscientific twaddle. Clinton and Liebermann propose to divert more than $90,000,000 more away from good science down this rat hole.
The original version of the bill earmarked $90 million for the study, but Lieberman press secretary Rob Sawicki said that the committee had approved the measure without any dollar figure and that such a figure would be added later during the appropriations process."
Meaning: These clowns intend to waste MORE THAN $90,000,000 on this idiocy.
This is also why many Police Officers might personally believe in decriminalizing marijuana in the US, but their unions all give heavily to preventing that from ever happening: Because if there wasn't a huge underground economy thriving around marijuana, there'd be no need for the marijuana enforcement squad, would there? This would mean fewer Police Officers, thus fewer union members paying dues from salaries.
Also, the remaining officers would have to spend a greater fraction of their work time chasing real criminals, which is too much like work.
You know -- at an agency like NASA which presumably has a large number of career scientists who have spent decades in their field (some of whom have spent over a decade on a single project like Stardust) -- a 24-year old, politically appointed, non-college graduate who tries to put Bush's political spin on science doesn't deserve anything better than kid.
The point is that Deutsch is an adult who deserves to bear the full consequences of his dishonesty.
Slashdot Mirror
Is that one of the hitherto-unknown Rules of Acquisition?
Sure they can, the same way politicians I never voted for can claim to act in my name.
Sounds like you need better antivirus protection.
How, exactly, is their "This ain't really Bank of America; if you want them, use THIS LINK" message worded?
Oh? They don't have one?
Another invalid comparison bites the dust....
If the Assembly of God did exactly the same thing as this site (featured a disclaimer in bold red font and a link to a pr0n site), I'd do a screen capture and see if I could get a free t-shirt or something from one of those "funny things seen on the web" featurettes. (Bonus points if the page gave their name as "Assemby" of God.) .)
Er, because actual "cyber-misspelling" trap sites don't have disclaimers in bold red lettering right at the top of the page with a link to the correctly-spelled site?
The contrary view expressed by some dogmatic leftists (not to be confused with rational liberals) reminds me of the description of the evil enemy from some kid's cartoon: "M.A.D.: A group of mad scientists out to destroy the world for their own gain!"
1. We need the money for something.
Accuracy corrections in boldface:
Which is precisely why a government-franchised monopoly gives up the privilege of using that business model.
Yes, there is. The telcos have stated repeatedly that their agenda is to collect an extra toll for simply providing the same service they are already selling to their end-user customers.
All they want, right now, is a business model that allows them to get revenues from both content providers and consumers.
In other words, they want to double-dip and charge twice for providing the same service.
Right now, they have to claw back pretty much all revenues from consumers.
Businesses need to get their revenue from their customers? What a shockingly outre concept!
It's not that I object to the principle that, if the user pays for a service of quality X, they should get X across the board
Well, then your argument isn't with me; it's with the AT&T, Verizon, etc executives who do object to the notion that they are obligated to provide X even though they've only been paid for it once, not twice.
Because Internet content is carried by magical elves and has nothing whatsoever to do with the transmission of packets.
Well, then, who is? The pretzel bakers?
Or (even more implausibly), has this administration suddenly started listening to expert opinion?
This must be some new definition of "about to" with which I have not been familiar....
You slept through the Economics 101 class where they explained "supply and demand", right?
Both philosophies allow the use of force when people fail to behave. The difference is that Communism requires constant use of force (to make people produce without getting individual reward for themselves and their loved ones), but Libertarianism requires only occasional use of force (to deter and/or punish people who start conflicts by engaging in theft, assault, and fraud). The latter is much less trouble, and it's something that every society has to do anyway (even in an anarchy, the use of force in self-defense exists; it just isn't centralized under one umbrella called "the government").
The life of Luke Skywalker growing up was boooooring. Retconning that pretty much invalidates the whole "Hero's Journey" story, thus damaging the story on a far more fundamental level than any of the other stupid fiddlings (up to and including Who Shot First in the cantina).
I filled out the parts that are necessary for the Constitutional purpose of the census. For the rest, I amused myself by figuring out the most misleading possible technically true answer.
Yes -- in part, because the money was diverted into pseudoscientific twaddle. Clinton and Liebermann propose to divert more than $90,000,000 more away from good science down this rat hole.
Meaning: These clowns intend to waste MORE THAN $90,000,000 on this idiocy.
Where do you want to go today?
Also, the remaining officers would have to spend a greater fraction of their work time chasing real criminals, which is too much like work.
Pssssttt... the inner sanctum of the RIAA central office is decorated with cartoons of Mohammed done in pig blood. Pass it on.
The point is that Deutsch is an adult who deserves to bear the full consequences of his dishonesty.
Yeah -- if you lie to the FBI and they decide to make an issue of it, you're gonna be the Bride of Bubba for a few years....
Sure, if the MPAA asserts a fair use defense, they'll almost certainly win.
I hope that they are in fact called to do so, under oath and for the record.