You do realise that judges just love to punish such stupid "logical" end-run attempts around laws?
There is no debt, you can attempt to create one but just simply saying "there is a debt" doesn't make it so.
Your scenario is also something that a shop would never attempt - because failure to repay a debt is a civil matter, not one which you can detain someone for "shoplifting", so your "if you want to leave" is meaningless. So you have to take down names, addresses, details and make a formal agreement - and then take them to court. But the very act of taking down names etc is what this law is attempting to force you to do - make the transaction trackable.
For there to be a debt when you buy your groceries, those groceries would have to pass into your legal possession voluntarily and by agreement from both parties, prior to payment being made.
Which isn't what happens. Those groceries remain the property of Walmart until you have successfully paid for them.
Sorry, but "debt" doesn't occur in normal shop transactions.
Don't let the fact that the US supported the prior regime make you think that they were best buddies - the US and Egyptian governments have had huge differences in the past, especially over Israel. Their relationship was more one of convenience than actual friendship - the US would have loved to have seen a better regime come into power in Egypt (whether they got one remains to be seen).
How do you explain that 97% (AKA unusual and overwhelming percentage) of Catholics concur that God exists?
I don't care what the climate scientists concur, I believe in the science - there shouldn't need to be a gaggle of scientists that have to push a view, the science should stand alone.
And it does. Overwhelmingly.
(I'm not arguing against your point, I'm arguing about how you are making it - just because a group of people believe something, doesn't make it true. Go to the evidence and nothing else.)
Canada already has platforms set in ice flow areas - there was a documentary ages ago on the launch of a new one, and its literally a concrete fortress island thats floated out and set down on the sea floor, and then embedded into the sea floor using suction. It has several tugboats on constant watch to move the larger ice bergs out of the way, but the platform itself is rated to withstand even those.
I don't consider any rights as innate or inherent - there in-fact rights we grant each other, however there is no natural right to possession as there is nothing to stop me taking the item other than yourself or those around you willing to stop me.
So my position is that there is a difference between a right we grant each other, and a right the government grants us (or recognises the right that we grant each other).
Possession law is the first right - its one we grant each other, and one we use the government to enforce.
So while everyone is taking issue at Facebook doing this, whats really needed is a Personal Information Control Act aimed at individuals rather than corporations?
Rather like (as i am in the UK) a Data Protection Law aimed at everyone, rather than just what businesses and organisations can do with data collected?
Or are we going to try and stick a band aid on it by limiting what companies can collect from people willing to offer?
Hence my mention of UK monopolies law - the FA are already restricted in what they can sell solely to Sky in the UK, so what do you think the position will be if the FA demand other rights purchasers have to sell to viewers at a set rate?
That is applied by Sky, not the company that provides the game footage - that is provided unbranded to the rights holders who provide their own commentary, advertising, logos and analysis.
In this case, the Greek rights holder would not be restricted by Sky at all, because they are not taking their feed.
The case which this ruling is based on is down to Pub and Bar related viewing subscriptions for Sky, which cost venues significant amounts of money in the Uk. This particular venue bought a Greek satellite package for a fraction of the cost - and with this ruling supporting that ability, it basically means that Sky now has lost a significant portion of it's UK revenue because they can legally go elsewhere for the sae service at a fraction of the cost.
No juggling of rights packages is going to recover that revenue stream, especially as the rights packages are controlled in part by UK monopolies law.
Is to support the legal position that a citizen of an EU member state cannot be restricted from purchasing goods or services from any other member state - this is a rule that has been in position for years, and the FA were trying to have it not applied to their TV rights (as they gain billions from UK tv rights to Sky, which are now massively devalued).
It doesn't affect purchases of goods and services from outside of the EU.
Apple underwent a similar issue a few years ago over their iTunes store restrictions within the EU.
But the best moment for you to take action is long gone - when you had your laptop in your possession.
Let this be a lesson readers, do something to secure your possessions now, install something to allow for ease of tracking and identification now, not as an afterthought when it gets nicked.
To the op, can't you just log in with LogMeIn and set a script running which takes a photo every minute or so?
Apple has always been more of a consumer company, but it did provide some top notch Pro tools in the A/V field. From TFA, it seems they are abandoning that top-tier niche with lesser tools. Can't Apple have a division that works only on top-notch pro tools? I'm an Apple guy (I like it, I have no special needs for Windows only software), but if Apple doesn't reverse a trend of alienating a group (albeit a small group) of previously staunch supporters, could this be a first step to Apple losing what professional footprint it does have?
I think it comes down to how much money each group makes - does a selection of lesser-featured apps that covers usage from the mid-range amateur to the mid-range professional bring in more profit than two different selections of apps (and two development teams) each targeted to the amateur/consumer and the professional?
Does having two different products on the market make sense when the high end one is significant amounts of money and not bought in huge quantities?
I don't know Apples sales figures for Final Cut, so I couldn't speculate more - but to me thats what the thinking boils down to.
Agreed with the "define professionals" - its a hugely broad group to be tarring with the same brush stroke.
I'm a professional, I love my MBP with its glossy screen - I'm a developer - and I have no issues with it. I sit in front of it for most of the day, in either Windows 7 for.Net, or in OSX for IOS development and its a great bit of kit to use.
Yesterday, while picking up my iPhone4S, the Apple bloke dealing with me asked me some chatty questions and realised I was a professional - so he took me straight over to their Business Development peeps to talk a load of things over with an eye to improving my business relationship with Apple.
So it really depends on what you mean by "professionals" - people buying Apple kit to make money on the Apple platform, or people buying Apple kit to make money through the Apple platform? Because for one of those two options, they seem to be quite willing to help.
Since you are the one that started with the cursing and insults, your last line made me laugh out loud - I couldn't give a fuck about convincing you, because its become patently obvious that you aren't open to discussion.
Is it really nitpicking or pedanticism to point out that the modern world is a result of the tools available at the time, rather than only being possible because of a single tool? Today would still have happened, whether it was written in C or whatever - C didn't create the modern world, it was merely the tool used to create it. Other tools would have been used in its place.
Looking back on history and saying "that is the only way it could have happened" is just a kindergarten point of view - you are correct, history has already been written, and it was using C. But is that the only way history could have been written? Fuck no.
So are you really asserting that C is the One True Way to the modern world, as the original poster did?
You are either trying really hard to not see the actual point, or you really are just dumb.
So you think that if C hadn't been invented, nothing else would have been? So you think that if Ritchie hadn't been born, Windows would never have been written in another language?
The fact that they are written in C has fuck all to do with the point - they would have been written regardless. The world would have moved on regardless. The computing world would not have reached some day in 1973 (the year C was made public) and completely stopped, stagnant because C never happened...
We would have had UNIX (or an equivalent), Mac OSX (and the i-devices), Windows et al. They would have just been written in something else.
So what is it, are you really just dumb or just trying hard not to see the actual point being made?
Slashdot Mirror
Has anyone sent that link to the Samsung lawyers...?
You do realise that judges just love to punish such stupid "logical" end-run attempts around laws?
There is no debt, you can attempt to create one but just simply saying "there is a debt" doesn't make it so.
Your scenario is also something that a shop would never attempt - because failure to repay a debt is a civil matter, not one which you can detain someone for "shoplifting", so your "if you want to leave" is meaningless. So you have to take down names, addresses, details and make a formal agreement - and then take them to court. But the very act of taking down names etc is what this law is attempting to force you to do - make the transaction trackable.
Congratulations to him, he strung two words together.
Still doesn't get to own them.
For there to be a debt when you buy your groceries, those groceries would have to pass into your legal possession voluntarily and by agreement from both parties, prior to payment being made.
Which isn't what happens. Those groceries remain the property of Walmart until you have successfully paid for them.
Sorry, but "debt" doesn't occur in normal shop transactions.
If you take a basket of groceries to the checkout, there's no debt there...
Don't let the fact that the US supported the prior regime make you think that they were best buddies - the US and Egyptian governments have had huge differences in the past, especially over Israel. Their relationship was more one of convenience than actual friendship - the US would have loved to have seen a better regime come into power in Egypt (whether they got one remains to be seen).
How do you explain that 97% (AKA unusual and overwhelming percentage) of Catholics concur that God exists?
I don't care what the climate scientists concur, I believe in the science - there shouldn't need to be a gaggle of scientists that have to push a view, the science should stand alone.
And it does. Overwhelmingly.
(I'm not arguing against your point, I'm arguing about how you are making it - just because a group of people believe something, doesn't make it true. Go to the evidence and nothing else.)
Canada already has platforms set in ice flow areas - there was a documentary ages ago on the launch of a new one, and its literally a concrete fortress island thats floated out and set down on the sea floor, and then embedded into the sea floor using suction. It has several tugboats on constant watch to move the larger ice bergs out of the way, but the platform itself is rated to withstand even those.
Uhm, you do realise the US has several "viable launch vehicles"? They just ditched the only man rated one.
I don't consider any rights as innate or inherent - there in-fact rights we grant each other, however there is no natural right to possession as there is nothing to stop me taking the item other than yourself or those around you willing to stop me.
So my position is that there is a difference between a right we grant each other, and a right the government grants us (or recognises the right that we grant each other).
Possession law is the first right - its one we grant each other, and one we use the government to enforce.
So while everyone is taking issue at Facebook doing this, whats really needed is a Personal Information Control Act aimed at individuals rather than corporations?
Rather like (as i am in the UK) a Data Protection Law aimed at everyone, rather than just what businesses and organisations can do with data collected?
Or are we going to try and stick a band aid on it by limiting what companies can collect from people willing to offer?
Who says there needs to be a relationship?
Hence my mention of UK monopolies law - the FA are already restricted in what they can sell solely to Sky in the UK, so what do you think the position will be if the FA demand other rights purchasers have to sell to viewers at a set rate?
That is applied by Sky, not the company that provides the game footage - that is provided unbranded to the rights holders who provide their own commentary, advertising, logos and analysis.
In this case, the Greek rights holder would not be restricted by Sky at all, because they are not taking their feed.
All laws of possession are government imposed restrictions, this is no different.
Just to clarify, there are four major football rights packages in the UK, and sky is limited in what percentage of total games the can buy.
The case which this ruling is based on is down to Pub and Bar related viewing subscriptions for Sky, which cost venues significant amounts of money in the Uk. This particular venue bought a Greek satellite package for a fraction of the cost - and with this ruling supporting that ability, it basically means that Sky now has lost a significant portion of it's UK revenue because they can legally go elsewhere for the sae service at a fraction of the cost.
No juggling of rights packages is going to recover that revenue stream, especially as the rights packages are controlled in part by UK monopolies law.
Just to note, I fully support the ruling.
Is to support the legal position that a citizen of an EU member state cannot be restricted from purchasing goods or services from any other member state - this is a rule that has been in position for years, and the FA were trying to have it not applied to their TV rights (as they gain billions from UK tv rights to Sky, which are now massively devalued).
It doesn't affect purchases of goods and services from outside of the EU.
Apple underwent a similar issue a few years ago over their iTunes store restrictions within the EU.
But the best moment for you to take action is long gone - when you had your laptop in your possession.
Let this be a lesson readers, do something to secure your possessions now, install something to allow for ease of tracking and identification now, not as an afterthought when it gets nicked.
To the op, can't you just log in with LogMeIn and set a script running which takes a photo every minute or so?
Sod that, how about Turing being American, with the Americans cracking Enigma...?
Apple has always been more of a consumer company, but it did provide some top notch Pro tools in the A/V field. From TFA, it seems they are abandoning that top-tier niche with lesser tools. Can't Apple have a division that works only on top-notch pro tools? I'm an Apple guy (I like it, I have no special needs for Windows only software), but if Apple doesn't reverse a trend of alienating a group (albeit a small group) of previously staunch supporters, could this be a first step to Apple losing what professional footprint it does have?
I think it comes down to how much money each group makes - does a selection of lesser-featured apps that covers usage from the mid-range amateur to the mid-range professional bring in more profit than two different selections of apps (and two development teams) each targeted to the amateur/consumer and the professional?
Does having two different products on the market make sense when the high end one is significant amounts of money and not bought in huge quantities?
I don't know Apples sales figures for Final Cut, so I couldn't speculate more - but to me thats what the thinking boils down to.
Agreed with the "define professionals" - its a hugely broad group to be tarring with the same brush stroke.
I'm a professional, I love my MBP with its glossy screen - I'm a developer - and I have no issues with it. I sit in front of it for most of the day, in either Windows 7 for .Net, or in OSX for IOS development and its a great bit of kit to use.
Yesterday, while picking up my iPhone4S, the Apple bloke dealing with me asked me some chatty questions and realised I was a professional - so he took me straight over to their Business Development peeps to talk a load of things over with an eye to improving my business relationship with Apple.
So it really depends on what you mean by "professionals" - people buying Apple kit to make money on the Apple platform, or people buying Apple kit to make money through the Apple platform? Because for one of those two options, they seem to be quite willing to help.
Thank you, my point exactly. Except I doubt that you see it that way...
Since you are the one that started with the cursing and insults, your last line made me laugh out loud - I couldn't give a fuck about convincing you, because its become patently obvious that you aren't open to discussion.
Is it really nitpicking or pedanticism to point out that the modern world is a result of the tools available at the time, rather than only being possible because of a single tool? Today would still have happened, whether it was written in C or whatever - C didn't create the modern world, it was merely the tool used to create it. Other tools would have been used in its place.
Looking back on history and saying "that is the only way it could have happened" is just a kindergarten point of view - you are correct, history has already been written, and it was using C. But is that the only way history could have been written? Fuck no.
So are you really asserting that C is the One True Way to the modern world, as the original poster did?
You are either trying really hard to not see the actual point, or you really are just dumb.
So you think that if C hadn't been invented, nothing else would have been? So you think that if Ritchie hadn't been born, Windows would never have been written in another language?
The fact that they are written in C has fuck all to do with the point - they would have been written regardless. The world would have moved on regardless. The computing world would not have reached some day in 1973 (the year C was made public) and completely stopped, stagnant because C never happened...
We would have had UNIX (or an equivalent), Mac OSX (and the i-devices), Windows et al. They would have just been written in something else.
So what is it, are you really just dumb or just trying hard not to see the actual point being made?