Not sure what a tirade about NAFTA has to do with my statement. I didn't say it is better that the screws come from China or that the US couldn't make the screws. All I was stating is that if something is sold as "Assembled in America" that buying parts from someplace other than America wouldn't change the labeling.
China logistic is far better then USA because all the factories are already there. This is a well known issue. USA factories can't afford to keep mfg capabilities on reserve, ie not producing stuff, so things you orders have a much longer delivery time since they have to be scheduled. It's also not easy for a us factory to ramp up or down their labor force as needed which also as to the issues. In comparison, in China, all the materials are there already and there are so many factories that is fairly easily to get orders out quickly. You could argue that they could order parts from China which many do in advance and assemble in the us but that's us assembled, not made. Most companies don't bother since there not enough advantage.
Apple wasn't marketing these Macs as "Made in America" any way. They were just labeling them as "Assembled in America" so ordering the screws from China and screwing them into cases in Texas wouldn't have affected the labeling at all.
[Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannitty, Fox and Friends, etc.] looked at that small concession, [weren't] happy it wasn't a "BIG WIN", and [Trump] decided he'd pass and wait for something better.
Sorry had to fix that for you.;-)
The president was fine with the previous Republican bill until his friends at Fox News told him it was a bad deal. Why should he listen to the public or his advisors when he can just turn to Fox News to see what he should do?
If Mona Lisa's eyes are always "14.4 degrees to the viewer's right-hand side in real space" even as they move around the room aren't they still following you?
Just because you say that you are inspired by a trademark shouldn't be enough to get your in trouble. If Netflix actually said that the movie was produced with Chooseco or specifically use the phrase "choose your own adventure" (which they may have done for all I know) then I could see a problem.
If I make a yo-yo and say that I was inspired by Duncan Toys I should be allowed to do so. If I used the phrase "The Original. World's #1" then I could see having a problem.
I guess there is no reason Chooseco can't roll the dice and see what the courts say though.
The best one I heard recently was Uber has a forced arbitration rule where the arbitration must occur in the Netherlands.
The clause required drivers to resolve any disputes with Uber via mediation or arbitration in the Netherlands, a process with an upfront cost for drivers of US$14,500.
My point is that nitrites have been used for centuries to cure meat (even bacon/bacoun). It is difficult to find a pre-17th century recipe (best I could find was this site - recipe is about half way down) but I would be surprised if they weren't using saltpeter as part of the recipe. Even "natural" salt from sea water or mining contains nitrites.
Your original post deriding bugnuts for saying bacon wasn't bacon without nitrites seemed to imply that nitrites were only used in the last 100 years or so for curing bacon. Even the link you posted doesn't make reference to whether nitrites (saltpeter) was or wasn't used to cure the bacoun.
Sorry if you still think this is just me trolling you.
So an example for sake of argument under the imposed 'bad' NN rules the 'muh bandwidth wuz stranglified' people keep pushing for: Netflix in North America uses 50%(whatever the real number is doesn't matter) of available bandwidth and pays the same as everyone else under that rule, ISP/trunking/peering companies are unable to charge them more by the imposed rules.
The problem with this statement is that Netflix doesn't pay "the same as everyone else under that rule". They pay a hell of a lot more than I do for Internet access. If Netflix somehow managed to use 99% of the Internet bandwidth that means that 99% of the traffic requests on the Internet are coming from people who wanting Netfix content. Those people are paying their ISP for that requested traffic. ISPs asking Netflix to pay so they aren't throttled won't make any difference to those 99% requesting Netflix content (other than it will take longer for them to access that content if Netflix doesn't pay). All that will happen is that the 1% of requested traffic will be able to access that content faster (assuming that the other 99% don't decide to move to another service that will then also take up 99% of bandwidth). The only thing that will be accomplished is that your ISP will make more money and be able to start a competing service to Netflix that isn't throttled.
Nitrites also weren't invented in the last 100 years. Nitrites have been used to cure meat for centuries. It may not have always been the processed form of nitrites used today but nitrites from natural sources.
It also isn't the nitrites/nitrates that are carcinogenic but rather the nitrosamines that are produced when nitrites are heated (above 300 degrees F if I remember correctly).
There is way more nitrite in leafy greens than in cured meat. We just don't usually heat those green to the point that nitrosamines form.
But if your grand pa sold those items would you still be getting royalties from them? The farm, ship and house are physical items. What is the physical item that is being protected by copyright? If I copy a book do I deprive you of your copy of the book?
That is why there is a clause specifically for works for hire. If "products [are] made under funding of a corporation" the copyright is a fixed 75 years. As an example, a corporation could hire a 2 year old to produce a work of art. That creator could live to 80 and the work would be in the public domain for the last few years of their life. If you want to talk about slippery slopes, do you think it would be ok for Shakespeare's heirs to still be profiting from his works (and getting to decide who and when they are performed)?
Disney characters are under trademark so others can't use those characters to create new original works. Trademarks last for as long as they are defended.
Copyright applies to a particular work of art. So you can't make a new work of art using Mickey Mouse (as an example) but if Steamboat Willie were in the public domain you could copy, download, sell, etc. that particular film featuring Mickey Mouse.
You do realize that this wasn't necessarily enacted to allow illegals to vote but to actually give people that are not citizens a say in their children's education. Will illegal residents be able to vote? Sure but there are legitimate non-citizens that are not illegally living in San Fransisco that will also benefit from this law. If you are a legal non-citizen (e.g. you have a green card) now you can actually have a say in your child's education by voting for your local school board representative.
As it turns out though, only 35 people even bothered to register to vote under this provision so I don't see it as a big hole that is allowing "illegals [to] have local vote rights now".
The firm's SpaceShipTwo passenger rocket ship reached a height of 82.7km, beyond the altitude at which space is said to begin. It marked the plane's fourth test flight and followed earlier setbacks in the firm's space programme. Sir Richard is in a race with Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos to send the first fee-paying passengers into space. He founded the commercial spaceflight company in 2004, shortly after Mr Musk started SpaceX and Jeff Bezos established Blue Origin. In 2008, Virgin Galactic first promised sub-orbital spaceflight trips for tourists would be taking place "within 18 months". It has since regularly made similar promises to have space flights airborne in the near future.
Didn't this happen way back when NASA started paying the Russians to fly astronauts to the International Space Station?
Obviously you have a bee in your bonnet about sites regulating their own content so I guess there is no real point in continuing to try and show you that NN has nothing to do with sites regulating content. Since you can't even be bothered to post using an login and hide behind AC it really isn't worth my time.
Based on this response it doesn't sound like you do know what net neutrality is.
The lack of Net Neutrality rules does nothing to protect your scenario that medical data or teacher/student interaction. You seem to think that NN somehow allows Netflix to get away with more profits. Without NN there is just as much of a probability that the medical data and/or teacher/student interaction could be throttled. If your ISP decided they could make more money from throttling that data they possibly would.
The main reason that ISPs throttle Netflix (and similar commercial content) isn't to make the other "critical" data move through the system faster. The reason that they throttle companies like Netflix is so they can either charge them to get better access on their networks (not really how the Internet was setup to work) or more likely because they have a competing service so they want to stifle the competition.
As an example, let's say that Comcast is your ISP. They are happily carrying the data of Netflix without throttling it. Then one day they decide that they would like to start a streaming service of their own. They start the service (let's call it Comflix) and offer it alongside Netflix without throttling either stream. Unfortunately very few subscribers are signing up for Comflix. Comcast decides that instead of competing head-to-head with Netflix they will throttle the Netflix stream to 50% and leave Comflix at 100% bandwidth. To further profit from this Comcast also goes to Netflix and tells them if they pay Comcast a small fee (several million dollars) they will open up the bandwidth and only throttle them to 75% of the bandwidth.
You still may not think this is too much of a problem but... change Netflix in that example to a medical service that is providing you that medical data from your doctor. If Comcast decided to start up a competing medical data service would you still be happy with them throttling the data from your doctors medical data service provider.
Making "data transport fair for cloud providers and video streamers and search engines" via NN is also making data transport fair for the individual.
The funny thing is that credit cards actually cost the business 1.5-3% more than using cash. If they were to go cash only I'm sure they could save enough to set aside 2 or 3 square feet for a register and lock box. 8^)
One way would be to force Bell and the rest of the landline providers (I know who uses landlines anymore but...) to actually upgrade their equipment so that they could provide hardwired Internet access. I would even be happy if they used the old equipment that was pulled out of the cities to provide high speed and fiber connections. The phone lines around here don't even support 56K modem connections due to the equipment not getting upgrades for eons. Even though there is a copper phone line going to most (all) houses in the area all we have access to for Internet is cell based (~2-3mbps). This isn't terrible but the data caps are awful (tiered so first 3GB is ~$40/mth). I would be more than happy with a 2mbps dsl connection if it was offered (not holding my breath).
If Ivanka was only the president's daughter it wouldn't be a problem. The problem arises from the fact that she is an official government employee as an unpaid WH advisor.
"I have heard the concerns some have with my advising the President in my personal capacity while voluntarily complying with all ethics rules, and I will instead serve as an unpaid employee in the White House Office, subject to all of the same rules as other federal employees," Ivanka Trump said in a statement. "Throughout this process I have been working closely and in good faith with the White House counsel and my personal counsel to address the unprecedented nature of my role."
So yes you are correct that " President's Daughter is not an official position" but she does have an official position as an unpaid government employee.
1 : money or favor given or promised in order to influence the judgment or conduct of a person in a position of trust police officers accused of taking bribes
2 : something that serves to induce or influence offered the kid a bribe to finish his homework
As long as there is an inducement or influence being offered it can be considered a bribe. After all I don't think it is illegal to bribe your kids with candy or a toy if they do something you want them to (although maybe it should be).
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure what a tirade about NAFTA has to do with my statement. I didn't say it is better that the screws come from China or that the US couldn't make the screws. All I was stating is that if something is sold as "Assembled in America" that buying parts from someplace other than America wouldn't change the labeling.
China logistic is far better then USA because all the factories are already there. This is a well known issue. USA factories can't afford to keep mfg capabilities on reserve, ie not producing stuff, so things you orders have a much longer delivery time since they have to be scheduled. It's also not easy for a us factory to ramp up or down their labor force as needed which also as to the issues. In comparison, in China, all the materials are there already and there are so many factories that is fairly easily to get orders out quickly. You could argue that they could order parts from China which many do in advance and assemble in the us but that's us assembled, not made. Most companies don't bother since there not enough advantage.
Apple wasn't marketing these Macs as "Made in America" any way. They were just labeling them as "Assembled in America" so ordering the screws from China and screwing them into cases in Texas wouldn't have affected the labeling at all.
[Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannitty, Fox and Friends, etc.] looked at that small concession, [weren't] happy it wasn't a "BIG WIN", and [Trump] decided he'd pass and wait for something better.
Sorry had to fix that for you. ;-)
The president was fine with the previous Republican bill until his friends at Fox News told him it was a bad deal. Why should he listen to the public or his advisors when he can just turn to Fox News to see what he should do?
If Mona Lisa's eyes are always "14.4 degrees to the viewer's right-hand side in real space" even as they move around the room aren't they still following you?
Just because you say that you are inspired by a trademark shouldn't be enough to get your in trouble. If Netflix actually said that the movie was produced with Chooseco or specifically use the phrase "choose your own adventure" (which they may have done for all I know) then I could see a problem.
If I make a yo-yo and say that I was inspired by Duncan Toys I should be allowed to do so. If I used the phrase "The Original. World's #1" then I could see having a problem.
I guess there is no reason Chooseco can't roll the dice and see what the courts say though.
The best one I heard recently was Uber has a forced arbitration rule where the arbitration must occur in the Netherlands.
The clause required drivers to resolve any disputes with Uber via mediation or arbitration in the Netherlands, a process with an upfront cost for drivers of US$14,500.
Thankfully this was recently shot down by Ontario's (Canada) to court.
https://business.financialpost...
Why do you foreigners have so much to say about US politics?
Maybe because historically the US has had so much to say (and do) with other countries politics?
My point is that nitrites have been used for centuries to cure meat (even bacon/bacoun). It is difficult to find a pre-17th century recipe (best I could find was this site - recipe is about half way down) but I would be surprised if they weren't using saltpeter as part of the recipe. Even "natural" salt from sea water or mining contains nitrites.
Your original post deriding bugnuts for saying bacon wasn't bacon without nitrites seemed to imply that nitrites were only used in the last 100 years or so for curing bacon. Even the link you posted doesn't make reference to whether nitrites (saltpeter) was or wasn't used to cure the bacoun.
Sorry if you still think this is just me trolling you.
So an example for sake of argument under the imposed 'bad' NN rules the 'muh bandwidth wuz stranglified' people keep pushing for:
Netflix in North America uses 50%(whatever the real number is doesn't matter) of available bandwidth and pays the same as everyone else under that rule, ISP/trunking/peering companies are unable to charge them more by the imposed rules.
The problem with this statement is that Netflix doesn't pay "the same as everyone else under that rule". They pay a hell of a lot more than I do for Internet access. If Netflix somehow managed to use 99% of the Internet bandwidth that means that 99% of the traffic requests on the Internet are coming from people who wanting Netfix content. Those people are paying their ISP for that requested traffic.
ISPs asking Netflix to pay so they aren't throttled won't make any difference to those 99% requesting Netflix content (other than it will take longer for them to access that content if Netflix doesn't pay). All that will happen is that the 1% of requested traffic will be able to access that content faster (assuming that the other 99% don't decide to move to another service that will then also take up 99% of bandwidth). The only thing that will be accomplished is that your ISP will make more money and be able to start a competing service to Netflix that isn't throttled.
Nitrites also weren't invented in the last 100 years. Nitrites have been used to cure meat for centuries. It may not have always been the processed form of nitrites used today but nitrites from natural sources.
It also isn't the nitrites/nitrates that are carcinogenic but rather the nitrosamines that are produced when nitrites are heated (above 300 degrees F if I remember correctly).
There is way more nitrite in leafy greens than in cured meat. We just don't usually heat those green to the point that nitrosamines form.
Actually the joke is still on you. Visa just got to double dip on the activation fee. ;-)
Not all heirs get an equal share of the copyright. It is bequeathed to an individual or individuals of the copyright holder's choosing.
But if your grand pa sold those items would you still be getting royalties from them? The farm, ship and house are physical items. What is the physical item that is being protected by copyright? If I copy a book do I deprive you of your copy of the book?
That is why there is a clause specifically for works for hire. If "products [are] made under funding of a corporation" the copyright is a fixed 75 years. As an example, a corporation could hire a 2 year old to produce a work of art. That creator could live to 80 and the work would be in the public domain for the last few years of their life.
If you want to talk about slippery slopes, do you think it would be ok for Shakespeare's heirs to still be profiting from his works (and getting to decide who and when they are performed)?
Disney characters are under trademark so others can't use those characters to create new original works. Trademarks last for as long as they are defended.
Copyright applies to a particular work of art. So you can't make a new work of art using Mickey Mouse (as an example) but if Steamboat Willie were in the public domain you could copy, download, sell, etc. that particular film featuring Mickey Mouse.
Sorry meant to add link to above:
https://thehill.com/homenews/s...
You do realize that this wasn't necessarily enacted to allow illegals to vote but to actually give people that are not citizens a say in their children's education. Will illegal residents be able to vote? Sure but there are legitimate non-citizens that are not illegally living in San Fransisco that will also benefit from this law. If you are a legal non-citizen (e.g. you have a green card) now you can actually have a say in your child's education by voting for your local school board representative.
As it turns out though, only 35 people even bothered to register to vote under this provision so I don't see it as a big hole that is allowing "illegals [to] have local vote rights now".
The firm's SpaceShipTwo passenger rocket ship reached a height of 82.7km, beyond the altitude at which space is said to begin. It marked the plane's fourth test flight and followed earlier setbacks in the firm's space programme. Sir Richard is in a race with Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos to send the first fee-paying passengers into space . He founded the commercial spaceflight company in 2004, shortly after Mr Musk started SpaceX and Jeff Bezos established Blue Origin. In 2008, Virgin Galactic first promised sub-orbital spaceflight trips for tourists would be taking place "within 18 months". It has since regularly made similar promises to have space flights airborne in the near future.
Didn't this happen way back when NASA started paying the Russians to fly astronauts to the International Space Station?
Sorry I know I said I wasn't going to keep trying to convince you but forgot to add these links:
https://consumerist.com/2014/0...
https://www.theverge.com/2014/...
that shows that ISPs were in fact limiting bandwidth pre-2015 NN rules.
Obviously you have a bee in your bonnet about sites regulating their own content so I guess there is no real point in continuing to try and show you that NN has nothing to do with sites regulating content. Since you can't even be bothered to post using an login and hide behind AC it really isn't worth my time.
Based on this response it doesn't sound like you do know what net neutrality is.
The lack of Net Neutrality rules does nothing to protect your scenario that medical data or teacher/student interaction. You seem to think that NN somehow allows Netflix to get away with more profits. Without NN there is just as much of a probability that the medical data and/or teacher/student interaction could be throttled. If your ISP decided they could make more money from throttling that data they possibly would.
The main reason that ISPs throttle Netflix (and similar commercial content) isn't to make the other "critical" data move through the system faster. The reason that they throttle companies like Netflix is so they can either charge them to get better access on their networks (not really how the Internet was setup to work) or more likely because they have a competing service so they want to stifle the competition.
As an example, let's say that Comcast is your ISP. They are happily carrying the data of Netflix without throttling it. Then one day they decide that they would like to start a streaming service of their own. They start the service (let's call it Comflix) and offer it alongside Netflix without throttling either stream. Unfortunately very few subscribers are signing up for Comflix. Comcast decides that instead of competing head-to-head with Netflix they will throttle the Netflix stream to 50% and leave Comflix at 100% bandwidth. To further profit from this Comcast also goes to Netflix and tells them if they pay Comcast a small fee (several million dollars) they will open up the bandwidth and only throttle them to 75% of the bandwidth.
You still may not think this is too much of a problem but... change Netflix in that example to a medical service that is providing you that medical data from your doctor. If Comcast decided to start up a competing medical data service would you still be happy with them throttling the data from your doctors medical data service provider.
Making "data transport fair for cloud providers and video streamers and search engines" via NN is also making data transport fair for the individual.
The funny thing is that credit cards actually cost the business 1.5-3% more than using cash. If they were to go cash only I'm sure they could save enough to set aside 2 or 3 square feet for a register and lock box. 8^)
One way would be to force Bell and the rest of the landline providers (I know who uses landlines anymore but...) to actually upgrade their equipment so that they could provide hardwired Internet access. I would even be happy if they used the old equipment that was pulled out of the cities to provide high speed and fiber connections. The phone lines around here don't even support 56K modem connections due to the equipment not getting upgrades for eons. Even though there is a copper phone line going to most (all) houses in the area all we have access to for Internet is cell based (~2-3mbps). This isn't terrible but the data caps are awful (tiered so first 3GB is ~$40/mth). I would be more than happy with a 2mbps dsl connection if it was offered (not holding my breath).
If Ivanka was only the president's daughter it wouldn't be a problem. The problem arises from the fact that she is an official government employee as an unpaid WH advisor.
"I have heard the concerns some have with my advising the President in my personal capacity while voluntarily complying with all ethics rules, and I will instead serve as an unpaid employee in the White House Office, subject to all of the same rules as other federal employees," Ivanka Trump said in a statement. "Throughout this process I have been working closely and in good faith with the White House counsel and my personal counsel to address the unprecedented nature of my role."
https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/29...
So yes you are correct that " President's Daughter is not an official position" but she does have an official position as an unpaid government employee.
Bribery doesn't necessarily imply illegality.
bribe noun
\brb
\
Definition of bribe
(Entry 1 of 2)
1 : money or favor given or promised in order to influence the judgment or conduct of a person in a position of trust police officers accused of taking bribes
2 : something that serves to induce or influence offered the kid a bribe to finish his homework
https://www.merriam-webster.co...
As long as there is an inducement or influence being offered it can be considered a bribe. After all I don't think it is illegal to bribe your kids with candy or a toy if they do something you want them to (although maybe it should be).