Fine tidbit: The fire in a theater quote was originally from a Supreme Court ruling (and now considered one of the worst of all time) that went on to do a lot more than outlaw stirring up a stampede needlessly, and uphold a law making it illegal to publish pamphlets that urged people to "resist the draft using all legal means", during WW I.
The ruling argued it interfered with Congress' power to raise armies via recruitment. The judge who authored it soon changed his mind, but it was not overturned until freaking 1969.
A much more interesting statistic would be what percent of the Netflix $9/mo. spent by Comcast subscribers is redirected to Comcast. On top of the mucb more massive direct Comcast bill.
Comcast demanding a cut is fraud as far as I am concerned, as they do not tell me they will be claiming a part of my Netflix fee as well.
This is no joke. High level politicians all are experts, literally, at lying convincingly. They are a kind of sociopath in literally not caring what others think of them.
There was a recent study that showed outgoing people, far from being sensitive to others' feelings, were actually insensitive. It was the shy people who cared, too much, what others thought.
Politicians can lie convincingly because they don't care what you think. But they are awesome at telling you you and your feelings matter to them.
Private generally doesn't invest in things with low chance of profit. Space and military are just such things.
Government can increase the risk by threatening tax increases, spending out of control such that increases may be inevitable, and running around trying to get elected promising to bash evil big business on the head.
Whether this particular incident is a hoax, the goal is computer-controlled versions which can indeed act like Jetsons stuff, AKA jet-powered big drone type things you can ride.
The rent-seeking was built into the Constitution by design.
In this case, merely offering up the relevant passage someone searched for did not violate copyright law, as it was akin to a catalog. They wanted a cut of Google's deep pockets just for searching their books. The court declined to entertain this.
It allows them to run their own ads, as the First Amendment guarantees, and Congress may pass no law stripping them of this right because they are participating in a Congress-created group called a "corporation".
"So are you saying the government could ban a 500 page book from being published 30 days before an election because it contained one sentence at the end saying to vote for a particular candidate?"
The whole idea behind safe harbor is that your site is not originating content. But there are many ways that "managing" the content supplied by others becomes de facto your own speech... which safe harbor is not intended to protect.
Productivity is work done per person. The virtual computer world has skyrocketted productivity as you can create much more complicated things (software) and mass produce them (copy) and distribute them (download) almost for free.
This is a gigantic, quantum leap of productivity. They measure it wrong.
What is the point of such things? Originally it seemed to be to let people type in such things from a magazine, without causing a half hour, error-prone headache.
That is no longer the case. It is all web magazines and articles and hyperlinks with labels instead of the actual URL. So what is the point?
One wonders if they set up a little fake company so they could use some technique buried deep inside the NSA, so they could hide it from court examination. There is no plausible parallel construction lie.
As the guy is dead, there is no trial, and thus no defense lawyers to force the issue.
The fix should not just be prevent the user from setting the problematic time, but fixing the issue directly should the time become the bogus time by any means.
If the battery can catch fire, then you really, really, really need to fix it properly.
And the testers need a slap, too. One test case should have been setting the time by force to see what happens, and not just testing the time set lockout.
Whatever, dude. Some question whether anything needs to be done at all regardless. The current state of humanity is no friend to human life -- it is advancement and industrial activity that saves and extends lives and increases quality of life.
Your kind of hyperbole no doubt, in your mind, deserves complete command and control of the economy.
If someone assaults you and breaks your leg, should your health insurance pay to find and arrest the guy who did it? If a serial arsonist is going around torching homes, should individual victims pay for the police to track him down?
You can pay for a private investigation of crimes. You can't interfere with the police though.
So, with a lot of money on the line, yes, an insurance company might do that. And check out and mandate certain security features first, etc.
That does, however, mean shifting planning, pushing costs onto other people.
The US went through this when someone sued Social Security for paying less per month to women because they lived 7 years longer. This was declared a violation.
Fair enough, but the actuarial tables don't lie, regardless of social norms of the decade or century.
The textalyzer allegedly would keep conversations, contacts, numbers, photos, and application data private in an effort to get around the Fourth Amendment right to privacy
This already violates it. They can take the phone and hold it pending a warrant to search it, but they cannot violate it this way. "Trust us, we ain't actually looking yet."
Slashdot Mirror
Computers listening for keywords is fine, but it is supposed to just flag a human review.
I actually went to school with a girl who was named Isis. Guess she's going to have a hard time accepting money from anyone!
I used to watch Isis as a kid -- she hung with Shazam. I would watch Isis while sneaking my mom's Ayds weight loss chocolates.
It was a heady time.
Fine tidbit: The fire in a theater quote was originally from a Supreme Court ruling (and now considered one of the worst of all time) that went on to do a lot more than outlaw stirring up a stampede needlessly, and uphold a law making it illegal to publish pamphlets that urged people to "resist the draft using all legal means", during WW I.
The ruling argued it interfered with Congress' power to raise armies via recruitment. The judge who authored it soon changed his mind, but it was not overturned until freaking 1969.
A much more interesting statistic would be what percent of the Netflix $9/mo. spent by Comcast subscribers is redirected to Comcast. On top of the mucb more massive direct Comcast bill.
Comcast demanding a cut is fraud as far as I am concerned, as they do not tell me they will be claiming a part of my Netflix fee as well.
This is no joke. High level politicians all are experts, literally, at lying convincingly. They are a kind of sociopath in literally not caring what others think of them.
There was a recent study that showed outgoing people, far from being sensitive to others' feelings, were actually insensitive. It was the shy people who cared, too much, what others thought.
Politicians can lie convincingly because they don't care what you think. But they are awesome at telling you you and your feelings matter to them.
Riiiiiight. They went on strike over concerns of metal fatigue.
Every union lists tons of things, but only one is the real reason. The rest are negotiating gambits.
Private generally doesn't invest in things with low chance of profit. Space and military are just such things.
Government can increase the risk by threatening tax increases, spending out of control such that increases may be inevitable, and running around trying to get elected promising to bash evil big business on the head.
Whether this particular incident is a hoax, the goal is computer-controlled versions which can indeed act like Jetsons stuff, AKA jet-powered big drone type things you can ride.
The rent-seeking was built into the Constitution by design.
In this case, merely offering up the relevant passage someone searched for did not violate copyright law, as it was akin to a catalog. They wanted a cut of Google's deep pockets just for searching their books. The court declined to entertain this.
Earthquakes are man-made disasters, not natural ones. The vast majority of deaths are caused by collapsing buildings.
We know to, and how to, make the buildings stronger.
It allows them to run their own ads, as the First Amendment guarantees, and Congress may pass no law stripping them of this right because they are participating in a Congress-created group called a "corporation".
"So are you saying the government could ban a 500 page book from being published 30 days before an election because it contained one sentence at the end saying to vote for a particular candidate?"
Government lawyer: "Yes."
The whole idea behind safe harbor is that your site is not originating content. But there are many ways that "managing" the content supplied by others becomes de facto your own speech... which safe harbor is not intended to protect.
dot dot dot but the First Amendment is.
Productivity is work done per person. The virtual computer world has skyrocketted productivity as you can create much more complicated things (software) and mass produce them (copy) and distribute them (download) almost for free.
This is a gigantic, quantum leap of productivity. They measure it wrong.
What is the point of such things? Originally it seemed to be to let people type in such things from a magazine, without causing a half hour, error-prone headache.
That is no longer the case. It is all web magazines and articles and hyperlinks with labels instead of the actual URL. So what is the point?
One wonders if they set up a little fake company so they could use some technique buried deep inside the NSA, so they could hide it from court examination. There is no plausible parallel construction lie.
As the guy is dead, there is no trial, and thus no defense lawyers to force the issue.
Fire the engineers who "fixed" this.
The fix should not just be prevent the user from setting the problematic time, but fixing the issue directly should the time become the bogus time by any means.
If the battery can catch fire, then you really, really, really need to fix it properly.
And the testers need a slap, too. One test case should have been setting the time by force to see what happens, and not just testing the time set lockout.
"Everything is gonna die"
Whatever, dude. Some question whether anything needs to be done at all regardless. The current state of humanity is no friend to human life -- it is advancement and industrial activity that saves and extends lives and increases quality of life.
Your kind of hyperbole no doubt, in your mind, deserves complete command and control of the economy.
"But what about...?"
"I'd try it out on a hot dog first."
So he tried to amend the bill to point out it will not prevent the FCC from doing the things the OP worries about. Did that amendment succeed?
If so, there is no issue here. You just won't have the govenmemt communistically, central planningly setting rates for things.
I agree that this is posturing for a likely "decline to prosecute", just the beginning of the spin cycle.
Equal prosecution under the law isn't in the constitution. (but, maybe it should be)
Pretty much. It is an admission of violation of the law and they are spreading words to minimize it.
This crossed my mind, too. Built on scamming porn from the copyright holders, all of a sudden they are a paragon of rights.
They need to make sure they can receive hundreds of thousands of transmissions at once in case it is more successful than they imagine.
If someone assaults you and breaks your leg, should your health insurance pay to find and arrest the guy who did it? If a serial arsonist is going around torching homes, should individual victims pay for the police to track him down?
You can pay for a private investigation of crimes. You can't interfere with the police though.
So, with a lot of money on the line, yes, an insurance company might do that. And check out and mandate certain security features first, etc.
That does, however, mean shifting planning, pushing costs onto other people.
The US went through this when someone sued Social Security for paying less per month to women because they lived 7 years longer. This was declared a violation.
Fair enough, but the actuarial tables don't lie, regardless of social norms of the decade or century.
The textalyzer allegedly would keep conversations, contacts, numbers, photos, and application data private in an effort to get around the Fourth Amendment right to privacy
This already violates it. They can take the phone and hold it pending a warrant to search it, but they cannot violate it this way. "Trust us, we ain't actually looking yet."