Sitting on their asses and cheering on the "Drug" war they used to expand federal powers to include what you do on your own property and in your own home and to make the seizure of property trivial. The Drug was was the test case for massive interdiction by the fed and most of the country cheered the damn thing on.
The two "ObamaCare" initiatives that go into effect this year, elimination of the pre-existing condition and elimination on caps on total care (1 million in the case of my health plan) are the only two items that affect the cost of health care in your yearly increase. My company is member owned (in other words the employees own the company) and every year they come around and explain what's going up and why along with the quarterly financial presentation. Our yearly health care increase this year is 7-8%, 1% of which is the two ObamaCare requirements. The only thing that went through my mind when I found that out is, if it only costs 1% to get rid of those two onerous requirements, why the hell have they been in place in the first place!
You might find this hard to believe but the insurance companies see Obamacare as an excuse to raise prices for political reasons (in that they have someone to blame). This is no different than the insurance company in California that was going to raise rates 38% and when the government demanded justification they backed off completely.
According to the NYT Time article, Ms. Rodriguez was using T-Mobile and attempted to get them to do something but was told by T-Mobile they could do nothing because he was calling from a blocked number. All utter bullshit from the T-Mobile rep and a very good reason to NEVER use T-Mobile.
I agree he won't go to jail for 50 years. But he was denied bail and has a public defender. Given the wait to trail that the PD will need to build a defense the guy will be in Rikers for at LEAST a year till the trail.
Even if the court slap his hands after a conviction he going to be incarcerated for year. If he's lucky his wife will wait for him, chances are she won't. So by the time he gets out he'll be homeless, broke and divorced with child support due. I don't have a lot of sympathy for him after reading the times article and just how threatening he got.
By all accounts by the time this all over he's going to be starting his life over with a felony conviction, no job prospects, probation terms that bar computer use, a large fine to pay and very little education or experience. Given the raw fear he put so many people through I can't say he doesn't deserve it. He threatened to kill people, their children, rape customers and burn peoples homes down. He needs counseling and probably to be put on a permanent watch list because he appears to be a sociopath to me.
They tear most meth homes down these days because it costs more than the home is worth to really decontaminate it. Who knows what this guy has stored in the house, it could literally be as toxic as a meth production home. Secondly, for those concerned about the real owners. The owners should be happy getting off not having to pay for the cleanup. No where has it said the local authorities will charge them for the cleanup (which they CAN do). Given the cost of this cleanup, having the house burned down is a minuscule loss in equity given what they could be hit with. The clean-up costs are probably several million dollars at this point and the controlled burn will probably push it over 10 million. The loss of a few hundred thousand dollars in structure while retaining the land is a godsend to them cause the local authorities could go after every asset of the owner to pay for the cleanup.
A judge declared the house a public nuisance. (Under Cali law that gives them the right to demolish without payment) The owner could sue for the cost of the house, then the county could counter-sue for the cost of the disposal. Having the house burned down is going to be far cheaper than a several million dollars the county spends burning it down and if the current owner is smart they will take their lumps for not doing regular tenant inspections. If they are stupid they will sue and end up responsible for all the cleanup costs.
Boy that's gonna cost you Karma. Even if the US government does filter out potential employees that break US law (such as smoking Dope) the rabid support around here is going to make sure you get down-ranked.
When Assange was asked a legitimate question about how diplomatic cables being secret helps get good work get done (such as freeing political prisoners), and that destroying that secrecy will prevent that good work from happening (because sources can't be protected) Assange replied that he wouldn't respond to the question with the "editorial" comments about how secrecy can actually help good works happen. Not only that, but he's now blaming everything that happens on the US (and ignoring that EasyDNS said they dumped them because of the DDOS) and has threatened to release the everything to the public if he's arrested by InterPOL (not wiki-leaks, him personally). The guy is showing as much nut-job as Perot did. Every time he speaks I see more and more evidence of what kind of person he is and I'm not impressed. In fact he's convincing me that the Swedish charges against him are probably accurate as I sense a lot of egotistical madness that would lead to behavior that would elicit such charges.
I think the more appropriate question is what person believe they aren't being tracked when downloading images from some server?
Every Web transaction is tracked and when it loads images it downloads those images from a website which is tracking downloads. But the main question is who in their right mind doesn't realize that happens? I thought this was common knowledge. There is simply no way for a website not to know you are downloading images unless they turn off all tracking and that would make bug reporting and troubleshooting impossible so it's not going to happen. I know people like to load the images and don't like dealing with the garbled text emails but I really did think it was common knowledge that everyone knew loading the images tells them you opened the email.
The outrage you sense is that Diplomatic Cables are restricted by international agreement. They are the single communication all nations agree are private (even if they try to snoop each other). Releasing the diplomatic cables will be the end of wiki-leaks IMO. Everything else they could get away with, but the diplomatic cables every nation supports them remaining private and it's the cheese the US is going to be able to use to get the computer systems shut down and the people associated with the network arrested. It was terribly ill-advised to release them.
Direct Democracy has always resulted in two very bad things.
Majority rule and minority repression.
The whole point of a representative democracy is to give minority voices power and protection. You put majority rule in place and things like the Yugoslavian war happen because the minorities are suppressed and targeted by the majority. It's a common theme in human relations to blame minorities for all your problems. It's been the basis for the majority of wars and leads to more unrest and death than just about any cause besides direct religious conflict (which is indirectly a majority/minority issue). Look at almost any conflict in the world today and you will find a majority repressing a minority to the point where violence is considered the only option by the minority. Direct democracy is BAD in any situation where the population isn't one big homogeneous group of like minded people from the same culture (in other words never). Direct democracy almost always leads to minority repression and the only time it's ever been successful was 2000+ years ago in the very small communities of Greeks that all had the same religion, enterprise, background and world views.
If the following is true they've already killed at least one person with this leak:
"Toby Harnden of the Telegraph notes that one of the released documents names a U.S. informant in the region. The document identifies him as a U.K.-educated engineer from a prominent pre-revolution Isfahan family who once owned a large factory in Iran and is a former national fencing champion of Iran, a former president of the Iran Fencing Association and a former vice president of an Azerbaijan sports association. Harnden aptly asks: How many such persons do you think are out there?"
I supported wiki-leaks with the war info releases because I felt there was a right to know for the public. On the other hand leaking diplomatic cables does nothing to help anyone. IMO there is no press-freedom or public interest in releasing private diplomatic assessments to the world. By agreement of nations these communications are private, to have these published does nothing but damage wiki-leaks. There is so little public value in these communications and so much damage to international relations that almost every country is going to see this release as damaging diplomacy and an internationally agreed institution where privacy is guaranteed. (Diplomatic satchels and communications are privileged by international agreement)
My guess is Assange is going to be charged with something for this by Australia (the only country he holds citizenship in) and the US will be able to convince it's allies that wiki-leaks threatens them all and as a result get cooperation in shutting it down by seizing servers and domain names. I can't help but believe with all my heart that this release was terribly ill advised and it's going to result in wiki-leaks ceasing to exist because Assange has a hard-on for attacking the US and getting publicity that he didn't get exposing small totalitarian governments. IMO this release is going to be the end of Wiki-Leaks, all reports indicate Europe and others are as upset about this release as the US is. Assange forgets that his only protection from the US right now rides on Denmark and Sweden supporting him and Australia not wanting to prosecute him and they all reacted negatively to this release. He should be very worried, if the US gets his hands on him he's going to be looking at life in prison and Australia is talking actively about finding something to prosecute him on. There is simply no public value in diplomatic cables and 100% of countries would be abhorred to have their diplomatic cables shown to the world. Frankly they shouldn't publish them because of their nature and doing so is going to destroy wiki-leaks, Assange is a fool to think he can release diplomatic cables without repercussion.
So Tegra 2 Powered means the Battery life is what like 2 hours? No tablet will be successful with small battery life. The only way to get a successful android tablet is to at least match IMAXI er IPAD battery life.
Seagate had every opportunity afforded them to prove that even if their plan was silly they acted in good faith. Based on the award I would say that the Jury fully believed they outright lied to the gentleman in question and hired him into a position that didn't exist and had no intention of keeping him. That's fraud.
There's undoubtedly someone behind this that figured he'd lie (not only the the gentlemen in question but the company as well) and hire this guy into a job they company didn't even have on the hope of winning a long shot job and actively planned to lay the guy off if it didn't happen. I'd wager this is exactly what was shown through the evidence to the Jury based on the award. With an award of this magnitude those "creative" individuals that decided to fuck over an innocent stranger on an extremely long shot job win to advance their own careers will be punished accordingly likely through their own careers being rightfully destroyed. Make no mistake, Seagate wouldn't "reward" this manager for committing fraud in the companies name if they didn't have to pay this 1.9 million Jury award.
There isn't a justification for software piracy, but I'll be boycotting the game while they run this campaign for the very logical reason that they are going to be sending threats to innocent people. The reason those British lawyers screwed up is because they were doing legal work for so little money that they were sloppy. The promise is that in this case the "fine" will be small, in which case they will again be hiring legal and investigative work for a very inexpensive amount. That low dollar value means there will be mistakes. You simply can't investigate, subpoena evidence and collect a case file, serve the letter, etc.. against a pirate and then recover less than several thousand because it wouldn't pay for the work already done.
The only way to settle for less than a thousand is to skip part of the investigative steps and send letters to innocent people. This is EXACTLY what happened in Britain. The lawyers in question were asking for 500 pounds settlements. They were using minimum wage employees to do the work and it was VERY sloppy (bad investigations, no documentation, legal threats served improperly, etc). The reason they are being censured is because the governing board is arguing that they should have KNOWN that minimum wage employees doing investigative work will make mistakes if someone with experience isn't checking the work. The problem is that when you put that experience person in there and follow all the investigative steps your accumulated man-hours will equate to several thousand dollars. The average person simply doesn't realize how much labor costs (a typical employee costs the business 2-3 times their salary). So if they are offering small settlements they are undoubtedly going to make mistakes because there is no way they can complete a real investigation that quickly.
When the RIAA was doing this they were doing a pretty thorough investigation (and asking for $5k to cover their costs) and they still broke the law in several states and sent letters to innocent people. I have no doubt in my mind that several dozen innocent people are going to be sent letters and that's WRONG. I'm also offended that they think they can fine anyone, they can offer a legal settlement and pursue a legal case if it isn't settled, they can't fine people. His use of the word fine implies that they won't go to court against people that refuse to pay, again trying to keep costs low, meaning that they probably won't care if someone is innocent and try to use debt collection tactics against them. It's very slimy and I'll vote with my dollars against it. I liked the first game but won't be playing the second.
The best response is not Catholism, it's being Mormon. They got nowhere to go with Mormons as all the tricks the JV's use the Mormons used first. Most will turn and walk away if you mention being Mormon.
Which is exactly why a FOI request revealed that 30,000 images had been stored and transmitted to a consultant. This is also why the TSA RFP (Request for Proposals, a purchase order in layman terms) for the scanners required that the scanners be able to save and store images, be network capable and be able to transmit stored images to other locations.
Why do you believe them when the say they can't do it when all the evidence indicates they can and that the agency has not only required that the machines be capable of doing so that they have been caught doing EXACTLY what they say they can't do. The DHS and TSA is FULL of liars!
I see a screaming child. I don't see a Parent that is standing up for their child and bring a civil suit or insisting that the TSA officer be arrested for sexual molestation of a child. What I do see is a Parent implicitly supporting the TSA by NOT acting to defend their child.
What I would personally like to see is someone with a young child, preferably female that instructs their child to start screaming if anyone touches their genitals. After the child begins screaming at the TSA checkpoint said parent asks that the cops be called and insists that the officer arrest the TSA agent for sexual molestation of a child. Most likely the cops will refuse, at that point a civil suit against the TSA for sexual molestation of a child would be appropriate.
And for the record, no Federal law can override state criminal statutes. If it's illegal to touch a child's genitals the DHS and TSA can't make a regulation that says it's OK. One of these days I'm praying that this happens and that either a TSA agent is charged as a sex criminal or the TSA itself is defeated in a Civil Suit for instructing their agents to sexually molest children. These "enhanced" pat downs are offensive and illegal and until someone is willing to stand up and take the damn thing to court the DHS and TSA is going to continue molesting children. And let me tell you, once a pedophile finds out he can touch all the children he wants with TSA approval the ranks of the TSA are going to be FULL of pedophiles. I wouldn't be surprised if it's already occurring!
Looks like Minnesota to me. Lots of Carst Geology in MN, LOTS. You really shouldn't dismiss experts in the field, you consulted a Geologist, he told you what it was most likely to be. Contrary to what the conservatives would like you to believe all Scientists aren't liars. If you want to do more than just poke around and make suppositions with no support you should consider taking some courses in Geology or even getting some texts books and reading on your own time.
"Despite this, Gabe Newell, CEO of Valve, said in a post on the Steam User Forums that "Unless there was some situation I don't understand, we would presumably disable authentication before any event that would preclude the authentication servers from being available." He added, "We've tested disabling authentication, and it works."
That post creates an estopel situation that would prevent any future owner from suing a cracker in the event the steam system isn't functional. Put simply, that promise grants anyone the right to crack steam without fear of prosecution in the event the steam system isn't functional. That's a powerful promise made and one of the guarantees that in the event anything happens to steam no future owner will be able to prevent the public opening the system up to access their purchased games.
Valve isn't going anywhere. At this point the % take on sales is enough to keep it going for darn near eternity so the money isn't an issue. Valve also promised that in the even steam goes dark they will release the tools to decrypt everything. That's a promise that I have no doubt will be enforced even if Valve ends ends up owned by someone else. People are paranoid, I'm not.
Valve have been good stewards, they made reliable DRM that traded a few rights for some benefits, from what I've seen the majority of gamers feel that trade is worthwhile. They created and pushed this DRM when publishers were all out for the worst DRM for the customers available. Time has shown they were right. Above all I trust Valve and Gabe Newell to do the right thing. You might laugh at that trust but I feel they've earned it, not everyone in business is evil. I've also put my money where my mouth is, I have over 500GB's of games on Steam now. Steam isn't going anywhere and the best part is it's controlled by a game developer and not someone like EA.
You act as if the Ultra-Rich spend every dollar they make. Get real. Their spending is often not any different than the upper middle class with a more spent on real estate and services. Unless you plan to apply your un-"fair" tax to real estate and services the revenue from the rich and ultra-rich would actually decline.
You put in place a consumption tax like you are suggesting and a black market economy becomes feasible. Those with means would simply begin purchasing all their expensive products outside the US and importing them and blac kmarket businesses would then import foreign goods and sell them outside the system (both would destroy the US economy and production at the advantage of all foreign nations. The only solution would be massive import duties, a violation of WTO and other treaty obligations and a complete destruction of free-trade.
Out economy is 100% consumption based and has been for more than 20 years. Implementing the un-"fair" tax proposal would destroy that economy. Without the import duties the black market economy develops and robs all revenue from the system. With import duties we start a massive trade war with the rest of the world and take what little remains of the economy and destroy it too. The result would be a depression that would make the 30's look like a cake walk.
I swear to no god that you people that support the un-"fair" tax didn't bother to do anything other than read the damn propaganda and failed to even think about the actual reality of the current system. Also before you even suggest it or talk about the rich you need to defend the real tax increase on those between poverty and the middle class, many of them who can't afford the increased taxes. Why is it morally ok to increase their taxes to give a tax cut to those who can most afford the taxes they pay?
Ah, Moron's calling Moron's Morons. Seeing as that's the game this Moron will join in. You Moron.
The beauty of any tax proposal is to convince everyone else to raise their taxes so you can pay less. If all things are equal and the same "tax" revenue is required, the only way to lower taxes for ANYONE in the system is to raise taxes on someone else. More than 50% of the population doesn't even pay federal income tax right now. In fact a significant percentage pays "negative" taxes through the earned income credit.
Your "fair"-tax proposal would raise the taxes of everyone between the poverty level and middle income earning levels. That's a fact. This income group is also the largest group of tax payers, it's also the group where children are most likely to be present and comprises the largely of blue collar workers. The benefit of a tax increase on this large portion of the population that is barely making end's meet is to decrease the tax level of the highest 1% of earners. The irony of this is to call the tax "fair", this is the typical game the highest earners play because by percentage they pay the highest percentage of taxes, ignoring of course that they pay a lower percentage of total income than anyone else.
I won't argue that the tax system is hideously broken, but the solution isn't to butt fuck the blue collar workers in the name of a tax cut for the ultra-rich. If you want to fix the tax system in a fair way eliminate ALL deductions. Mortgage, children, charity, etc and make all earnings income (eliminate the idea of capital gains being different than income) and you will restore the fairness. The progressive tax is fair because everyone pays exactly the same rate for every dollar earned, the system is gamed with "deductions" that congress added at the request of special interest groups. Those deductions create the loopholes to allow those with the means to game the system and reduce their tax bill.
Mormons wear "scared" underwear with "sacred" and "secret" symbols embroidered onto them. Public display of these garments is considered VERY taboo in Mormon culture. It's probably one of the reasons (I can't be certain as I've never spoken to him or written him a letter about it) Utah Representative Jason Chaffetz has been so hostile to the scanner program and DHS for using them. IIRC someone (I don't recall off hand who it was that ranked the congress-critters on scanner support) ranked him the most hostile congress-critter to the scanners.
They weren't developers because Sun didn't allow submissions without copyright assignment which kills community participation. Now that LibreOffice accepts contributions without copyright assignment it will simply be a matter of time until there are more software developers on LO than on OO.org.
Slashdot Mirror
Sitting on their asses and cheering on the "Drug" war they used to expand federal powers to include what you do on your own property and in your own home and to make the seizure of property trivial. The Drug was was the test case for massive interdiction by the fed and most of the country cheered the damn thing on.
The two "ObamaCare" initiatives that go into effect this year, elimination of the pre-existing condition and elimination on caps on total care (1 million in the case of my health plan) are the only two items that affect the cost of health care in your yearly increase. My company is member owned (in other words the employees own the company) and every year they come around and explain what's going up and why along with the quarterly financial presentation. Our yearly health care increase this year is 7-8%, 1% of which is the two ObamaCare requirements. The only thing that went through my mind when I found that out is, if it only costs 1% to get rid of those two onerous requirements, why the hell have they been in place in the first place!
You might find this hard to believe but the insurance companies see Obamacare as an excuse to raise prices for political reasons (in that they have someone to blame). This is no different than the insurance company in California that was going to raise rates 38% and when the government demanded justification they backed off completely.
According to the NYT Time article, Ms. Rodriguez was using T-Mobile and attempted to get them to do something but was told by T-Mobile they could do nothing because he was calling from a blocked number. All utter bullshit from the T-Mobile rep and a very good reason to NEVER use T-Mobile.
I agree he won't go to jail for 50 years. But he was denied bail and has a public defender. Given the wait to trail that the PD will need to build a defense the guy will be in Rikers for at LEAST a year till the trail.
Even if the court slap his hands after a conviction he going to be incarcerated for year. If he's lucky his wife will wait for him, chances are she won't. So by the time he gets out he'll be homeless, broke and divorced with child support due. I don't have a lot of sympathy for him after reading the times article and just how threatening he got.
By all accounts by the time this all over he's going to be starting his life over with a felony conviction, no job prospects, probation terms that bar computer use, a large fine to pay and very little education or experience. Given the raw fear he put so many people through I can't say he doesn't deserve it. He threatened to kill people, their children, rape customers and burn peoples homes down. He needs counseling and probably to be put on a permanent watch list because he appears to be a sociopath to me.
They tear most meth homes down these days because it costs more than the home is worth to really decontaminate it. Who knows what this guy has stored in the house, it could literally be as toxic as a meth production home. Secondly, for those concerned about the real owners. The owners should be happy getting off not having to pay for the cleanup. No where has it said the local authorities will charge them for the cleanup (which they CAN do). Given the cost of this cleanup, having the house burned down is a minuscule loss in equity given what they could be hit with. The clean-up costs are probably several million dollars at this point and the controlled burn will probably push it over 10 million. The loss of a few hundred thousand dollars in structure while retaining the land is a godsend to them cause the local authorities could go after every asset of the owner to pay for the cleanup.
A judge declared the house a public nuisance. (Under Cali law that gives them the right to demolish without payment) The owner could sue for the cost of the house, then the county could counter-sue for the cost of the disposal. Having the house burned down is going to be far cheaper than a several million dollars the county spends burning it down and if the current owner is smart they will take their lumps for not doing regular tenant inspections. If they are stupid they will sue and end up responsible for all the cleanup costs.
Boy that's gonna cost you Karma. Even if the US government does filter out potential employees that break US law (such as smoking Dope) the rabid support around here is going to make sure you get down-ranked.
When Assange was asked a legitimate question about how diplomatic cables being secret helps get good work get done (such as freeing political prisoners), and that destroying that secrecy will prevent that good work from happening (because sources can't be protected) Assange replied that he wouldn't respond to the question with the "editorial" comments about how secrecy can actually help good works happen. Not only that, but he's now blaming everything that happens on the US (and ignoring that EasyDNS said they dumped them because of the DDOS) and has threatened to release the everything to the public if he's arrested by InterPOL (not wiki-leaks, him personally). The guy is showing as much nut-job as Perot did. Every time he speaks I see more and more evidence of what kind of person he is and I'm not impressed. In fact he's convincing me that the Swedish charges against him are probably accurate as I sense a lot of egotistical madness that would lead to behavior that would elicit such charges.
I think the more appropriate question is what person believe they aren't being tracked when downloading images from some server?
Every Web transaction is tracked and when it loads images it downloads those images from a website which is tracking downloads. But the main question is who in their right mind doesn't realize that happens? I thought this was common knowledge. There is simply no way for a website not to know you are downloading images unless they turn off all tracking and that would make bug reporting and troubleshooting impossible so it's not going to happen. I know people like to load the images and don't like dealing with the garbled text emails but I really did think it was common knowledge that everyone knew loading the images tells them you opened the email.
The outrage you sense is that Diplomatic Cables are restricted by international agreement. They are the single communication all nations agree are private (even if they try to snoop each other). Releasing the diplomatic cables will be the end of wiki-leaks IMO. Everything else they could get away with, but the diplomatic cables every nation supports them remaining private and it's the cheese the US is going to be able to use to get the computer systems shut down and the people associated with the network arrested. It was terribly ill-advised to release them.
Direct Democracy has always resulted in two very bad things.
Majority rule and minority repression.
The whole point of a representative democracy is to give minority voices power and protection. You put majority rule in place and things like the Yugoslavian war happen because the minorities are suppressed and targeted by the majority. It's a common theme in human relations to blame minorities for all your problems. It's been the basis for the majority of wars and leads to more unrest and death than just about any cause besides direct religious conflict (which is indirectly a majority/minority issue). Look at almost any conflict in the world today and you will find a majority repressing a minority to the point where violence is considered the only option by the minority. Direct democracy is BAD in any situation where the population isn't one big homogeneous group of like minded people from the same culture (in other words never). Direct democracy almost always leads to minority repression and the only time it's ever been successful was 2000+ years ago in the very small communities of Greeks that all had the same religion, enterprise, background and world views.
If the following is true they've already killed at least one person with this leak:
"Toby Harnden of the Telegraph notes that one of the released documents names a U.S. informant in the region. The document identifies him as a U.K.-educated engineer from a prominent pre-revolution Isfahan family who once owned a large factory in Iran and is a former national fencing champion of Iran, a former president of the Iran Fencing Association and a former vice president of an Azerbaijan sports association. Harnden aptly asks: How many such persons do you think are out there?"
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/11/29/frum.wikileaks.iran/index.html?hpt=Sbin
I supported wiki-leaks with the war info releases because I felt there was a right to know for the public. On the other hand leaking diplomatic cables does nothing to help anyone. IMO there is no press-freedom or public interest in releasing private diplomatic assessments to the world. By agreement of nations these communications are private, to have these published does nothing but damage wiki-leaks. There is so little public value in these communications and so much damage to international relations that almost every country is going to see this release as damaging diplomacy and an internationally agreed institution where privacy is guaranteed. (Diplomatic satchels and communications are privileged by international agreement)
My guess is Assange is going to be charged with something for this by Australia (the only country he holds citizenship in) and the US will be able to convince it's allies that wiki-leaks threatens them all and as a result get cooperation in shutting it down by seizing servers and domain names. I can't help but believe with all my heart that this release was terribly ill advised and it's going to result in wiki-leaks ceasing to exist because Assange has a hard-on for attacking the US and getting publicity that he didn't get exposing small totalitarian governments. IMO this release is going to be the end of Wiki-Leaks, all reports indicate Europe and others are as upset about this release as the US is. Assange forgets that his only protection from the US right now rides on Denmark and Sweden supporting him and Australia not wanting to prosecute him and they all reacted negatively to this release. He should be very worried, if the US gets his hands on him he's going to be looking at life in prison and Australia is talking actively about finding something to prosecute him on. There is simply no public value in diplomatic cables and 100% of countries would be abhorred to have their diplomatic cables shown to the world. Frankly they shouldn't publish them because of their nature and doing so is going to destroy wiki-leaks, Assange is a fool to think he can release diplomatic cables without repercussion.
So Tegra 2 Powered means the Battery life is what like 2 hours? No tablet will be successful with small battery life. The only way to get a successful android tablet is to at least match IMAXI er IPAD battery life.
Seagate had every opportunity afforded them to prove that even if their plan was silly they acted in good faith. Based on the award I would say that the Jury fully believed they outright lied to the gentleman in question and hired him into a position that didn't exist and had no intention of keeping him. That's fraud.
There's undoubtedly someone behind this that figured he'd lie (not only the the gentlemen in question but the company as well) and hire this guy into a job they company didn't even have on the hope of winning a long shot job and actively planned to lay the guy off if it didn't happen. I'd wager this is exactly what was shown through the evidence to the Jury based on the award. With an award of this magnitude those "creative" individuals that decided to fuck over an innocent stranger on an extremely long shot job win to advance their own careers will be punished accordingly likely through their own careers being rightfully destroyed. Make no mistake, Seagate wouldn't "reward" this manager for committing fraud in the companies name if they didn't have to pay this 1.9 million Jury award.
There isn't a justification for software piracy, but I'll be boycotting the game while they run this campaign for the very logical reason that they are going to be sending threats to innocent people. The reason those British lawyers screwed up is because they were doing legal work for so little money that they were sloppy. The promise is that in this case the "fine" will be small, in which case they will again be hiring legal and investigative work for a very inexpensive amount. That low dollar value means there will be mistakes. You simply can't investigate, subpoena evidence and collect a case file, serve the letter, etc.. against a pirate and then recover less than several thousand because it wouldn't pay for the work already done.
The only way to settle for less than a thousand is to skip part of the investigative steps and send letters to innocent people. This is EXACTLY what happened in Britain. The lawyers in question were asking for 500 pounds settlements. They were using minimum wage employees to do the work and it was VERY sloppy (bad investigations, no documentation, legal threats served improperly, etc). The reason they are being censured is because the governing board is arguing that they should have KNOWN that minimum wage employees doing investigative work will make mistakes if someone with experience isn't checking the work. The problem is that when you put that experience person in there and follow all the investigative steps your accumulated man-hours will equate to several thousand dollars. The average person simply doesn't realize how much labor costs (a typical employee costs the business 2-3 times their salary). So if they are offering small settlements they are undoubtedly going to make mistakes because there is no way they can complete a real investigation that quickly.
When the RIAA was doing this they were doing a pretty thorough investigation (and asking for $5k to cover their costs) and they still broke the law in several states and sent letters to innocent people. I have no doubt in my mind that several dozen innocent people are going to be sent letters and that's WRONG. I'm also offended that they think they can fine anyone, they can offer a legal settlement and pursue a legal case if it isn't settled, they can't fine people. His use of the word fine implies that they won't go to court against people that refuse to pay, again trying to keep costs low, meaning that they probably won't care if someone is innocent and try to use debt collection tactics against them. It's very slimy and I'll vote with my dollars against it. I liked the first game but won't be playing the second.
The best response is not Catholism, it's being Mormon. They got nowhere to go with Mormons as all the tricks the JV's use the Mormons used first. Most will turn and walk away if you mention being Mormon.
Which is exactly why a FOI request revealed that 30,000 images had been stored and transmitted to a consultant. This is also why the TSA RFP (Request for Proposals, a purchase order in layman terms) for the scanners required that the scanners be able to save and store images, be network capable and be able to transmit stored images to other locations.
Why do you believe them when the say they can't do it when all the evidence indicates they can and that the agency has not only required that the machines be capable of doing so that they have been caught doing EXACTLY what they say they can't do. The DHS and TSA is FULL of liars!
I see a screaming child. I don't see a Parent that is standing up for their child and bring a civil suit or insisting that the TSA officer be arrested for sexual molestation of a child. What I do see is a Parent implicitly supporting the TSA by NOT acting to defend their child.
What I would personally like to see is someone with a young child, preferably female that instructs their child to start screaming if anyone touches their genitals. After the child begins screaming at the TSA checkpoint said parent asks that the cops be called and insists that the officer arrest the TSA agent for sexual molestation of a child. Most likely the cops will refuse, at that point a civil suit against the TSA for sexual molestation of a child would be appropriate.
And for the record, no Federal law can override state criminal statutes. If it's illegal to touch a child's genitals the DHS and TSA can't make a regulation that says it's OK. One of these days I'm praying that this happens and that either a TSA agent is charged as a sex criminal or the TSA itself is defeated in a Civil Suit for instructing their agents to sexually molest children. These "enhanced" pat downs are offensive and illegal and until someone is willing to stand up and take the damn thing to court the DHS and TSA is going to continue molesting children. And let me tell you, once a pedophile finds out he can touch all the children he wants with TSA approval the ranks of the TSA are going to be FULL of pedophiles. I wouldn't be surprised if it's already occurring!
Looks like Minnesota to me. Lots of Carst Geology in MN, LOTS. You really shouldn't dismiss experts in the field, you consulted a Geologist, he told you what it was most likely to be. Contrary to what the conservatives would like you to believe all Scientists aren't liars. If you want to do more than just poke around and make suppositions with no support you should consider taking some courses in Geology or even getting some texts books and reading on your own time.
"Despite this, Gabe Newell, CEO of Valve, said in a post on the Steam User Forums that "Unless there was some situation I don't understand, we would presumably disable authentication before any event that would preclude the authentication servers from being available." He added, "We've tested disabling authentication, and it works."
That post creates an estopel situation that would prevent any future owner from suing a cracker in the event the steam system isn't functional. Put simply, that promise grants anyone the right to crack steam without fear of prosecution in the event the steam system isn't functional. That's a powerful promise made and one of the guarantees that in the event anything happens to steam no future owner will be able to prevent the public opening the system up to access their purchased games.
Valve isn't going anywhere. At this point the % take on sales is enough to keep it going for darn near eternity so the money isn't an issue. Valve also promised that in the even steam goes dark they will release the tools to decrypt everything. That's a promise that I have no doubt will be enforced even if Valve ends ends up owned by someone else. People are paranoid, I'm not.
Valve have been good stewards, they made reliable DRM that traded a few rights for some benefits, from what I've seen the majority of gamers feel that trade is worthwhile. They created and pushed this DRM when publishers were all out for the worst DRM for the customers available. Time has shown they were right. Above all I trust Valve and Gabe Newell to do the right thing. You might laugh at that trust but I feel they've earned it, not everyone in business is evil. I've also put my money where my mouth is, I have over 500GB's of games on Steam now. Steam isn't going anywhere and the best part is it's controlled by a game developer and not someone like EA.
You act as if the Ultra-Rich spend every dollar they make. Get real. Their spending is often not any different than the upper middle class with a more spent on real estate and services. Unless you plan to apply your un-"fair" tax to real estate and services the revenue from the rich and ultra-rich would actually decline.
You put in place a consumption tax like you are suggesting and a black market economy becomes feasible. Those with means would simply begin purchasing all their expensive products outside the US and importing them and blac kmarket businesses would then import foreign goods and sell them outside the system (both would destroy the US economy and production at the advantage of all foreign nations. The only solution would be massive import duties, a violation of WTO and other treaty obligations and a complete destruction of free-trade.
Out economy is 100% consumption based and has been for more than 20 years. Implementing the un-"fair" tax proposal would destroy that economy. Without the import duties the black market economy develops and robs all revenue from the system. With import duties we start a massive trade war with the rest of the world and take what little remains of the economy and destroy it too. The result would be a depression that would make the 30's look like a cake walk.
I swear to no god that you people that support the un-"fair" tax didn't bother to do anything other than read the damn propaganda and failed to even think about the actual reality of the current system. Also before you even suggest it or talk about the rich you need to defend the real tax increase on those between poverty and the middle class, many of them who can't afford the increased taxes. Why is it morally ok to increase their taxes to give a tax cut to those who can most afford the taxes they pay?
Ah, Moron's calling Moron's Morons. Seeing as that's the game this Moron will join in. You Moron.
The beauty of any tax proposal is to convince everyone else to raise their taxes so you can pay less. If all things are equal and the same "tax" revenue is required, the only way to lower taxes for ANYONE in the system is to raise taxes on someone else. More than 50% of the population doesn't even pay federal income tax right now. In fact a significant percentage pays "negative" taxes through the earned income credit.
Your "fair"-tax proposal would raise the taxes of everyone between the poverty level and middle income earning levels. That's a fact. This income group is also the largest group of tax payers, it's also the group where children are most likely to be present and comprises the largely of blue collar workers. The benefit of a tax increase on this large portion of the population that is barely making end's meet is to decrease the tax level of the highest 1% of earners. The irony of this is to call the tax "fair", this is the typical game the highest earners play because by percentage they pay the highest percentage of taxes, ignoring of course that they pay a lower percentage of total income than anyone else.
I won't argue that the tax system is hideously broken, but the solution isn't to butt fuck the blue collar workers in the name of a tax cut for the ultra-rich. If you want to fix the tax system in a fair way eliminate ALL deductions. Mortgage, children, charity, etc and make all earnings income (eliminate the idea of capital gains being different than income) and you will restore the fairness. The progressive tax is fair because everyone pays exactly the same rate for every dollar earned, the system is gamed with "deductions" that congress added at the request of special interest groups. Those deductions create the loopholes to allow those with the means to game the system and reduce their tax bill.
Mormons wear "scared" underwear with "sacred" and "secret" symbols embroidered onto them. Public display of these garments is considered VERY taboo in Mormon culture. It's probably one of the reasons (I can't be certain as I've never spoken to him or written him a letter about it) Utah Representative Jason Chaffetz has been so hostile to the scanner program and DHS for using them. IIRC someone (I don't recall off hand who it was that ranked the congress-critters on scanner support) ranked him the most hostile congress-critter to the scanners.
They weren't developers because Sun didn't allow submissions without copyright assignment which kills community participation. Now that LibreOffice accepts contributions without copyright assignment it will simply be a matter of time until there are more software developers on LO than on OO.org.