I'm sorry, but I fail to see why you hope we keep an inefficient, unnecessarily expensive, and slow delivery service when we already have multiple options that are much better, especially given the fact that people rarely send letters anymore.
easy. even though nothing requires congress to exercise the power to create post offices and establish post roads granted to it by the constitution, everybody knows that if you give congress the power to do something, they will exercise it.
here's a hint. one of these things is owned by private individuals for their own private use. the other is owned by the government for the use of everyone.
please. go back and read the definition of reckless endangerment. no one is forcing anyone to be there, and once there, if there is a traffic jam preventing either party from "safely" escaping an unsafe scene to which both parties willfully entered, both would, then each party is as guilty as the other of reckless endangerment.
we're not talking about a situation where a locks b in a building and subsequently sets the building ablaze. we're not even talking about a situation where a, through his desire to enter a burning building from which b is trying to escape and in the process prevents b from escaping. we're talking about a and b entering that burning building and both getting stuck in the doorway trying to escape.
the only reckless endangerment here is the driver of a vehicle driving into a storm where there are others, not in control of that vehicle, also inside of that vehicle. from a purely technical and legal perspective, that meets the definition of reckless endangerment and in this case the real guilty parties are the scientists.
except for in the middle of a trailer park going to a common shelter, has anyone ever seen a tornado escape route? of course not. mostly because we're talking about short-term phenomena, which are on the extreme lower end of mesoscale meteorology at best.
as for blocking emergency vehicles, if traffic is so bad that drivers are going the same direction in both lanes of a 2 lane road, preventing an emergency vehicle from using that lane (whether with the direction of that lane or against it), there are already laws against that. that a science entourage can't get from point a to point b in a "reasonable" amount of time because "amateurs" are also following that same path and traffic is crawling along at 5 mph, is something i have absolutely no sympathy for.
mad max got his ass reamed by channel 11 for it too (and if i remember right the faa), well more like a good stern hand slapping, mostly because he was in the news chopper owned by the station, which was probably what gannett was more concerned about. not that they didn't (and don't continue to, to this day) exploit the footage.
agreed. it takes a lot of discipline to keep things separate. at the same time, ib knows what class corresponds to the underlying controller so double clicking a button in ib to get at the event handler shouldn't be a problem. that's just mho though.
And I had been using Microsoft tools for 15 years before looking at them. Sure, it's jarring at first, but you get used to it.
definitely. and it doesn't take a terribly long time for it either. i was looking at it from the perspective that apple has traditionally concentrated on ease of use in its entire environment. having to manually set up outlets and actions in the code so that they can be referenced by ib seems counterintuitive to that history. with vs on the other hand, it "just happens". i.e., double click on a button in the ui view and you get its onclick event handler. if it doesn't exist, it gets created.
Apple's APIs on the other hand, completely blow Microsoft Win32 out of the water. It's not even close.
you ain't kidding on that. even compared to mfc, apple wins. how microsoft managed to promote mfc for years without registry and security attribute classes representing critical aspects of the underlying operating system is beyond me.
exactly. its hard to complain about a free product, and i doubt there will be many mac os/iphone/ipad developers who will rush out to spend several hundred dollars on vs for the mac to replace the xcode that apple gives away for free in their development environment.
more likely, microsoft sees the app store for what it is, a cash cow for apple. its thinking may well be that by moving vs to the mac, it can capitalize on developers' existing code bases necessitating only a build step for those developers to target windows mobile and its own app store. is microsoft ever going to divulge this to apple? hell no, but i wouldn't be surprised if that's what they were thinking with this.
having used apple's developer tools after spending years using microsoft's, let me assure you that apple's ease of use advantage ends when you open up xcode. sure you get used to gui design in interface builder, but vs is still orders of magnitude easier. therefore, the only developers who would rather stick needles in their eyes than use microsoft tools are those who have never used microsoft tools to begin with.
this, of course, makes no commentary on the quality of code that ultimately results from the use of the respective tools, just the ease of use of the tools themselves.
it is exactly that. their creator. your creator. my creator. joe the plumber's creator. it is who the individual believes their creator is. you'll note that the declaration doesn't say that they are endowed by God or Jesus with certain inalienable rights, or even endowed by their god with certain inalienable rights.
what's sad is that an even bigger part of the story gets left out, or at least more significant in that it "conveniently" gets left out. japanese americans weren't the only ones placed in internment camps. we did the same thing to german americans as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_American_internment
Except that out of your quotes you have exactly one which refers to a Christian nation. The remainder point to the personal opinions of the authors that they believe in a higher power (which, in most cases, happens to coincide with the Christian, Jewish, and don't forget the Islamic God). We can go further:
Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. - Abraham Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address
But even with that said, a nation of (predominantly) Christians != a Christian nation, codified in fact by the first amendment.
Not that this evisceration of religion from everything governmental hasn't gone too far. Prohibiting students from organizing a public prayer event in a public school is equally as nauseating under the first amendment as forcing a prayer session upon students by the school.
the problem doesn't arise from texas' population, at least not directly. unlike other states, where individual school districts determine curriculum, textbooks, etc., in texas it is determined on a state-wide basis. e.g., every 11th grade history class in the state uses textbook xyz. in california, the los angeles district might use textbook pdq for 11th grade history while san francisco might use abc for the same class. not only would one have to get the states to cooperate, you'd have to get cooperation between various school districts within those states. as we all know, since it is easier to piggyback on the work of someone else (and in this case significantly cheaper), getting the necessary cooperation would fall somewhere on the easiness scale between pulling hen's teeth and causing hell to freeze over.
Is that democracy? If they vote to change pi, will it actually change pi? And if it doesn't, doesn't that prove democracy doesn't work, since the point is to let people decide things like pi for themselves?
they can change the value of pi all they want. but they can't change ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter.
A cousin of mine served in the US Army and was stationed in Germany. He once received a citation because his car was unlocked. Yes, in Germany, there is a law stating you must lock your car, though I don't know if it applies while the care is secured in a garage.
your math is off. the statistic was that for every two russians shot, 11 took their place, so they would have to have had a standing army of 55 million.
or better yet we could create a hierarchical distributed database that maps names, divided by dots, to ip addresses and give the "owner" of each level of their particular branch of the hierarchy control over how they map names to those addresses.
this of course makes me wonder. i wasn't presented a eula for the new car i bought a few years ago. there's certainly firmware in the ecm of it. i wonder...
Instead, Costco's defense is that 17 USC 109(a) precludes 602(a), which the 9th found lacking on the basis that foreign copies don't qualify as "under Title 17" for 109(a). I can't imagine the USSC reversing that finding, because it would as a consequence allow importation of duplicates made in countries without any IP law, which would seem to be against the intent of 602(a).
but if you read quality king distributors, the key to that case hinged on whether the copies were made under the auspices of 17 usc 106. In quality king, scotus held that the copies in question, having been manufactured in the us were indeed made under 106, thus 602(a) didn't apply because of 109(a). the 9th circuit held that the copies here weren't lawfully made under this title. under normal circumstances, i'd agree, particularly given l'anza's arguments in quality king that 602(a) would be irrelevant, in light of 602(b) if 109(a) applied unilaterally. it would be irrelvant (and incidentally, would apply here).
however, omega has registered a us copyright on the "artwork" and is using us copyright law to enforce that artwork copyright for market segmentation. given the incorporation of the berne convention into us copyright law in 1988, costco could (and should) argue that although the watches weren't manufactured in the us, they were lawfully manufactured under the 17 usc 106, and therefore first sale does indeed apply.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, but I fail to see why you hope we keep an inefficient, unnecessarily expensive, and slow delivery service when we already have multiple options that are much better, especially given the fact that people rarely send letters anymore.
easy. even though nothing requires congress to exercise the power to create post offices and establish post roads granted to it by the constitution, everybody knows that if you give congress the power to do something, they will exercise it.
Canada is officially metric, which is to say official pieces of info like speed limits and driver's license weight, height, and eye colour.
metric eye colors, eh?
publicly owned roadways.
privately owned steel mill.
can you see the problem now?
here's a hint. one of these things is owned by private individuals for their own private use. the other is owned by the government for the use of everyone.
please. go back and read the definition of reckless endangerment. no one is forcing anyone to be there, and once there, if there is a traffic jam preventing either party from "safely" escaping an unsafe scene to which both parties willfully entered, both would, then each party is as guilty as the other of reckless endangerment.
we're not talking about a situation where a locks b in a building and subsequently sets the building ablaze. we're not even talking about a situation where a, through his desire to enter a burning building from which b is trying to escape and in the process prevents b from escaping. we're talking about a and b entering that burning building and both getting stuck in the doorway trying to escape.
the only reckless endangerment here is the driver of a vehicle driving into a storm where there are others, not in control of that vehicle, also inside of that vehicle. from a purely technical and legal perspective, that meets the definition of reckless endangerment and in this case the real guilty parties are the scientists.
except for in the middle of a trailer park going to a common shelter, has anyone ever seen a tornado escape route? of course not. mostly because we're talking about short-term phenomena, which are on the extreme lower end of mesoscale meteorology at best.
as for blocking emergency vehicles, if traffic is so bad that drivers are going the same direction in both lanes of a 2 lane road, preventing an emergency vehicle from using that lane (whether with the direction of that lane or against it), there are already laws against that. that a science entourage can't get from point a to point b in a "reasonable" amount of time because "amateurs" are also following that same path and traffic is crawling along at 5 mph, is something i have absolutely no sympathy for.
dc has the capital, arizona has the grand canyon, nevada has las vegas, oklahoma has tornadoes.
of course not. but your analogy breaks down somewhere in the neighborhood of the words "invading steel mills". i'll leave it to you to figure out how.
mad max got his ass reamed by channel 11 for it too (and if i remember right the faa), well more like a good stern hand slapping, mostly because he was in the news chopper owned by the station, which was probably what gannett was more concerned about. not that they didn't (and don't continue to, to this day) exploit the footage.
kickass footage indeed.
agreed. it takes a lot of discipline to keep things separate. at the same time, ib knows what class corresponds to the underlying controller so double clicking a button in ib to get at the event handler shouldn't be a problem. that's just mho though.
And I had been using Microsoft tools for 15 years before looking at them. Sure, it's jarring at first, but you get used to it.
definitely. and it doesn't take a terribly long time for it either. i was looking at it from the perspective that apple has traditionally concentrated on ease of use in its entire environment. having to manually set up outlets and actions in the code so that they can be referenced by ib seems counterintuitive to that history. with vs on the other hand, it "just happens". i.e., double click on a button in the ui view and you get its onclick event handler. if it doesn't exist, it gets created.
Apple's APIs on the other hand, completely blow Microsoft Win32 out of the water. It's not even close.
you ain't kidding on that. even compared to mfc, apple wins. how microsoft managed to promote mfc for years without registry and security attribute classes representing critical aspects of the underlying operating system is beyond me.
Give a new developer XCode and Visual Studio - see which he likes better.
that'd make a hell of an experiment.
exactly. its hard to complain about a free product, and i doubt there will be many mac os/iphone/ipad developers who will rush out to spend several hundred dollars on vs for the mac to replace the xcode that apple gives away for free in their development environment.
more likely, microsoft sees the app store for what it is, a cash cow for apple. its thinking may well be that by moving vs to the mac, it can capitalize on developers' existing code bases necessitating only a build step for those developers to target windows mobile and its own app store. is microsoft ever going to divulge this to apple? hell no, but i wouldn't be surprised if that's what they were thinking with this.
having used apple's developer tools after spending years using microsoft's, let me assure you that apple's ease of use advantage ends when you open up xcode. sure you get used to gui design in interface builder, but vs is still orders of magnitude easier. therefore, the only developers who would rather stick needles in their eyes than use microsoft tools are those who have never used microsoft tools to begin with.
this, of course, makes no commentary on the quality of code that ultimately results from the use of the respective tools, just the ease of use of the tools themselves.
it is exactly that. their creator. your creator. my creator. joe the plumber's creator. it is who the individual believes their creator is. you'll note that the declaration doesn't say that they are endowed by God or Jesus with certain inalienable rights, or even endowed by their god with certain inalienable rights.
what's sad is that an even bigger part of the story gets left out, or at least more significant in that it "conveniently" gets left out. japanese americans weren't the only ones placed in internment camps. we did the same thing to german americans as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_American_internment
i agree completely. look at how well political parties whose names aren't democrat or republican fare.
Except that out of your quotes you have exactly one which refers to a Christian nation. The remainder point to the personal opinions of the authors that they believe in a higher power (which, in most cases, happens to coincide with the Christian, Jewish, and don't forget the Islamic God). We can go further:
Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. - Abraham Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address
But even with that said, a nation of (predominantly) Christians != a Christian nation, codified in fact by the first amendment.
Not that this evisceration of religion from everything governmental hasn't gone too far. Prohibiting students from organizing a public prayer event in a public school is equally as nauseating under the first amendment as forcing a prayer session upon students by the school.
the problem doesn't arise from texas' population, at least not directly. unlike other states, where individual school districts determine curriculum, textbooks, etc., in texas it is determined on a state-wide basis. e.g., every 11th grade history class in the state uses textbook xyz. in california, the los angeles district might use textbook pdq for 11th grade history while san francisco might use abc for the same class. not only would one have to get the states to cooperate, you'd have to get cooperation between various school districts within those states. as we all know, since it is easier to piggyback on the work of someone else (and in this case significantly cheaper), getting the necessary cooperation would fall somewhere on the easiness scale between pulling hen's teeth and causing hell to freeze over.
Is that democracy? If they vote to change pi, will it actually change pi? And if it doesn't, doesn't that prove democracy doesn't work, since the point is to let people decide things like pi for themselves?
they can change the value of pi all they want. but they can't change ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter.
A cousin of mine served in the US Army and was stationed in Germany. He once received a citation because his car was unlocked. Yes, in Germany, there is a law stating you must lock your car, though I don't know if it applies while the care is secured in a garage.
your math is off. the statistic was that for every two russians shot, 11 took their place, so they would have to have had a standing army of 55 million.
not that this makes it any more plausible.
silly slashdot poster. you wave your comically undersized wang (or not depending on how comically undersized it is), but waive your rights.
or better yet we could create a hierarchical distributed database that maps names, divided by dots, to ip addresses and give the "owner" of each level of their particular branch of the hierarchy control over how they map names to those addresses.
wait a minute.
nevermind.
this of course makes me wonder. i wasn't presented a eula for the new car i bought a few years ago. there's certainly firmware in the ecm of it. i wonder...
Instead, Costco's defense is that 17 USC 109(a) precludes 602(a), which the 9th found lacking on the basis that foreign copies don't qualify as "under Title 17" for 109(a). I can't imagine the USSC reversing that finding, because it would as a consequence allow importation of duplicates made in countries without any IP law, which would seem to be against the intent of 602(a).
but if you read quality king distributors, the key to that case hinged on whether the copies were made under the auspices of 17 usc 106. In quality king, scotus held that the copies in question, having been manufactured in the us were indeed made under 106, thus 602(a) didn't apply because of 109(a). the 9th circuit held that the copies here weren't lawfully made under this title. under normal circumstances, i'd agree, particularly given l'anza's arguments in quality king that 602(a) would be irrelevant, in light of 602(b) if 109(a) applied unilaterally. it would be irrelvant (and incidentally, would apply here).
however, omega has registered a us copyright on the "artwork" and is using us copyright law to enforce that artwork copyright for market segmentation. given the incorporation of the berne convention into us copyright law in 1988, costco could (and should) argue that although the watches weren't manufactured in the us, they were lawfully manufactured under the 17 usc 106, and therefore first sale does indeed apply.