The constitutional freedom that says "if it ain't in here, it's a freedom" aka, The Ninth Amendment.
Ehh.. you have a defensable position here, but -- as is the nature of our laws -- not everyone interprets this the same way. R.H. Bork (he was an acting Attorney General and circuit judge for the Appeals court, and some other stuff I can't remember) likened the 9th to an ink blot.
Interpreting the 9th in the same spirit as other legal documents of the time sugguests that the author recognized "natural rights" and uses the 9th to give the Federal Governemnt the power to strike down State laws that encroached on these.
But then, what is a right? When does my freedom encroach on yours? Does an internet user's right to go to whatever website they choose encroach on the right of 13 year olds not to be stalked and raped?
I'm not saying I have an answer, just that there is no easy answer.
Late to the punch, I realize, but I used to do odd (electronics) jobs for a car stereo/alarm dealer, where I learned a great deal about car alarms.
No, car alarms don't disble themselves on an angle. In fact, a common accessory is an angle *detector* to make the alarm go off in case someone (legit or not) attempts to tow. Often this is just a ball bearing in an assembly that completes a circuit when tilted, although I've seen ones made out of mercury that work essentially the same way as the older-school a/c & heating thermostats.
When an alarm WILL disable itself is when you enable the courtesy feature. Say you have your sensitivity set high, and the night is unusually windy. Instead of going off all night, your car alarm will disble the inputs for that ZONE for an hour (or 2, whatever... programmable).
Note that door switches, window break sensors, motion detectors are all still active, since each of these is on its own zone.
I think this is a symptom of the web as a whole anymore. In general, easier something is to do, the more the distribution of quality approaches a bell curve. That's what the web is today: myriad mediocre sites, with a spattering of terrible and excellent ones.
Myspace is no different.
The web should be hard!! When I was a kid, we hand-coded in vi, dammit!
the %15 is actually breakage & comps. Who pays when they send the new album to a radio station? It comes out of that %15.
Using the fee for breakage made sense back in the day, but then remember, back in the day there weren't many comp albums either. Now you have to send them to everyone -- radio, press, anyone who worked on the album, contests, etc. It's actually not an entirely unfair charge.
Whoever modded this as flamebait is wrong. Music at this level is a *business*, nothing more, nothing less. If the bands want their revenue, they should stick with self-produced albums and not have gone with a label.
Anyone who's even thought about the possibility of signing with a label knows this: you *will* get boned. How badly just depends on the skill of your attorney and what other labels are bidding for you. You have GOT to read your contract so you're not shocked when your first royalty check comes in the amount of $0.97
That is the nature of contracts, they don't change automagically when new technology comes along. Had they read the fine print, they would know this. Actually, I'm sure they DO know this, this seems like more of a "moral outrage" lawsuit than anything.
I have to disagree with you. Our powers of logic can only help us so much here. For example, say I am supposed to leave work at 5. I know everyone else will be on the road at 5, so I leave at 4:30 instead. But wait, 1/2 of the other workers had the same "logical" thought as I did ("I'll just leave early!") and now 4:30 is crammed with both soccer moms AND early commuters, resulting in a longer commute time. I live in Sacramento, and this happens at least half the time I try and "beat the traffic".
Ok, you say, then leave at 5! That's show those guys boning out early! Well, today, 3/4 of the workforce had that same thought. Oops!
this is a lot of verbage for not much information...
You know what, I blame this almost entirely on our school system. One cannot write a paper which simply addresses the topic in the length necessary and be graded on whether or not you were thorough, you must not only address the topic but do it within a target wordcount. That's stupid. I've written papers that should have been much longer because of the subject, and mostly papers that should have been much, much shorter.
End result? Editors -- not just for Tom, but for most text media -- give their writers a topic and a page count./offtopic
I'm too late to the game to be modded -- or possibly read -- but I love this line of thinking. It works in pretty much all facets of life.
For example, 5 years ago, I was driving a car from 1986. It was in great shape, ran well, etc. A buddy of mine sugguested, "Hey, let's go test drive some new cars! Just for the heck of it. It'll be fun!" And I said.... no, thanks. I know there are cars out there that blow mine away, but I'm *happy* with what I have, and I don't want to make myself unhappy by sampling the other goods.
If the parent's idea is the foundation of a solid, living-within-your-means life, this idea is easily the cornerstone: don't put yourself in a position to lust after new tech. Unless you're using it for your job and it's putting money in your pocket (in which case it could safely be called an asset), it's an expense you more than likely don't need.
No. Unless you're referring to what the summary should have said in reference to the article. But then yI would point out that "Eggs and ham" is a unit, making "green eggs and ham" consist of both green eggs and green ham as shown on the cover illustration of the book.
How do you know that was the hypothetical?
Maybe the hypothetical was if I were to commit the same crime, in which case not committing it wouldn't be an option.
I understand your line of thought, but the language of the submission sugguests otherwise.
Personally, I would have gone for a less blatant discount, or refrained from visiting the same store so soon afterwards.
"[As far as I'm concerned|If I were in his shoes|If it were me], then I would have gone..."
It's a simple conditional, something we around here should be familiar with. Hypotheticals and conditionals are, of course, related. He may have meant what you sugguest, I think that is a legitimate explaination of his intent, but if that is the case, he should have used appropriately precise syntax.
Apparently not. The submitter's statement was -- to paraphrase in order to highlight the hypothetical even more blatently: Had I been in this kid's shoes, I would have committed the same crime in a different way which would have resulted in a higher probability of not getting caught.
I replied that had I been in his shoes, I would have not committed a crime at all -- an additional hypothetical.
There were a few hypotheticals in there, you missed at least one. Back to kindergarden for you!
Slashdot Mirror
The constitutional freedom that says "if it ain't in here, it's a freedom" aka, The Ninth Amendment.
Ehh.. you have a defensable position here, but -- as is the nature of our laws -- not everyone interprets this the same way. R.H. Bork (he was an acting Attorney General and circuit judge for the Appeals court, and some other stuff I can't remember) likened the 9th to an ink blot.
Interpreting the 9th in the same spirit as other legal documents of the time sugguests that the author recognized "natural rights" and uses the 9th to give the Federal Governemnt the power to strike down State laws that encroached on these.
But then, what is a right? When does my freedom encroach on yours? Does an internet user's right to go to whatever website they choose encroach on the right of 13 year olds not to be stalked and raped?
I'm not saying I have an answer, just that there is no easy answer.
Skadet
Senior, Political Science
UC Davis
Maybe they should get some Cell-alis and increase the size of their cells anywhere from 2-6 feet?
...Only outlaws will have 13-year-olds?
Isn't that precisely what this legislation is?
Not that it makes it right....
I think you're missing the point that locking a car down via software (which is what you're advocating above) isn't secure.
Late to the punch, I realize, but I used to do odd (electronics) jobs for a car stereo/alarm dealer, where I learned a great deal about car alarms.
No, car alarms don't disble themselves on an angle. In fact, a common accessory is an angle *detector* to make the alarm go off in case someone (legit or not) attempts to tow. Often this is just a ball bearing in an assembly that completes a circuit when tilted, although I've seen ones made out of mercury that work essentially the same way as the older-school a/c & heating thermostats.
When an alarm WILL disable itself is when you enable the courtesy feature. Say you have your sensitivity set high, and the night is unusually windy. Instead of going off all night, your car alarm will disble the inputs for that ZONE for an hour (or 2, whatever... programmable).
Note that door switches, window break sensors, motion detectors are all still active, since each of these is on its own zone.
Walmart - "Alrighty then."
Walmart - Huh.. I think that's how it's spozed to go. Maybe you need a DVD drive.
Have you ever bent the rules on your income tax returns? Rolled through a stop sign?
1984 called... it wants its paranoia back.
Or maybe it was Orwell calling, wanting his powers of "writing fiction to freak people out" back. One of those.
I think this is a symptom of the web as a whole anymore. In general, easier something is to do, the more the distribution of quality approaches a bell curve. That's what the web is today: myriad mediocre sites, with a spattering of terrible and excellent ones.
Myspace is no different.
The web should be hard!! When I was a kid, we hand-coded in vi, dammit!
Q: What's something kids love that's ugly, bloated, slow, and constantly goes down on them?
A: Michael Jackson!
Uh, I mean, MySpace!!
Domain Name = $35 @ year
Are you seriously playing $35/year for your domain names?
the %15 is actually breakage & comps. Who pays when they send the new album to a radio station? It comes out of that %15.
Using the fee for breakage made sense back in the day, but then remember, back in the day there weren't many comp albums either. Now you have to send them to everyone -- radio, press, anyone who worked on the album, contests, etc. It's actually not an entirely unfair charge.
Whoever modded this as flamebait is wrong. Music at this level is a *business*, nothing more, nothing less. If the bands want their revenue, they should stick with self-produced albums and not have gone with a label.
Anyone who's even thought about the possibility of signing with a label knows this: you *will* get boned. How badly just depends on the skill of your attorney and what other labels are bidding for you. You have GOT to read your contract so you're not shocked when your first royalty check comes in the amount of $0.97
That is the nature of contracts, they don't change automagically when new technology comes along. Had they read the fine print, they would know this. Actually, I'm sure they DO know this, this seems like more of a "moral outrage" lawsuit than anything.
I have to disagree with you. Our powers of logic can only help us so much here. For example, say I am supposed to leave work at 5. I know everyone else will be on the road at 5, so I leave at 4:30 instead. But wait, 1/2 of the other workers had the same "logical" thought as I did ("I'll just leave early!") and now 4:30 is crammed with both soccer moms AND early commuters, resulting in a longer commute time. I live in Sacramento, and this happens at least half the time I try and "beat the traffic".
Ok, you say, then leave at 5! That's show those guys boning out early! Well, today, 3/4 of the workforce had that same thought. Oops!
this is a lot of verbage for not much information...
/offtopic
You know what, I blame this almost entirely on our school system. One cannot write a paper which simply addresses the topic in the length necessary and be graded on whether or not you were thorough, you must not only address the topic but do it within a target wordcount. That's stupid. I've written papers that should have been much longer because of the subject, and mostly papers that should have been much, much shorter.
End result? Editors -- not just for Tom, but for most text media -- give their writers a topic and a page count.
I'm too late to the game to be modded -- or possibly read -- but I love this line of thinking. It works in pretty much all facets of life.
For example, 5 years ago, I was driving a car from 1986. It was in great shape, ran well, etc. A buddy of mine sugguested, "Hey, let's go test drive some new cars! Just for the heck of it. It'll be fun!" And I said.... no, thanks. I know there are cars out there that blow mine away, but I'm *happy* with what I have, and I don't want to make myself unhappy by sampling the other goods.
If the parent's idea is the foundation of a solid, living-within-your-means life, this idea is easily the cornerstone: don't put yourself in a position to lust after new tech. Unless you're using it for your job and it's putting money in your pocket (in which case it could safely be called an asset), it's an expense you more than likely don't need.
depends on the scoring method. If there were 13 teams instead of 12, and that team scored 1/4 point, would they have been in 13th place?
In other news, RIM has secured a contract for the Irish city of Dingle. The headline?
DingleBerry is the new RIM job.
late to the punch, i realize, but its not fair to lump in radio with tv and games. How much do you pay a month for regular fm and am reception?
...huh? What was that? Something about patents? Sorry, I was busy sending out some emails.
I'm late to the punch, but....
The point is that they don't *want* to stop the affiliates. They issue press releases to keep up the facade that they're doing something about it.
No. Unless you're referring to what the summary should have said in reference to the article. But then yI would point out that "Eggs and ham" is a unit, making "green eggs and ham" consist of both green eggs and green ham as shown on the cover illustration of the book.
Equal rights for foul play?
m _tu_quoque
That's a subtype of the ad hominem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Ad_homine
How do you know that was the hypothetical? Maybe the hypothetical was if I were to commit the same crime, in which case not committing it wouldn't be an option.
I understand your line of thought, but the language of the submission sugguests otherwise.
Personally, I would have gone for a less blatant discount, or refrained from visiting the same store so soon afterwards.
"[As far as I'm concerned|If I were in his shoes|If it were me], then I would have gone..."
It's a simple conditional, something we around here should be familiar with. Hypotheticals and conditionals are, of course, related. He may have meant what you sugguest, I think that is a legitimate explaination of his intent, but if that is the case, he should have used appropriately precise syntax.
That's all beside the point though.
Personally, I can understand hypotheticals.
Apparently not. The submitter's statement was -- to paraphrase in order to highlight the hypothetical even more blatently:
Had I been in this kid's shoes, I would have committed the same crime in a different way which would have resulted in a higher probability of not getting caught.
I replied that had I been in his shoes, I would have not committed a crime at all -- an additional hypothetical.
There were a few hypotheticals in there, you missed at least one. Back to kindergarden for you!