Why do people always discuss National Energy Independence, when the oil is just going to be harvested by a multinational energy corporation and sold at whatever the market will bear?
Because it can't be nationalised by a foreign government. And if necessary, it can be nationalised by the US -- or more subtly, controlled by regulations, tax laws, etc.
when I turn into a driveway with a mailbox at the start
Calling it a "driveway" is begging the question. And in more rural areas I see letterboxes in all kinds of places, far removed from the property boundaries.
Basically, if it's private property, say so. Don't expect people to deduce it from changes in road texture or other clues.
Google is one of the biggest culprits in the utter destruction of the highest traffic Usenet discussion newsgroups. The volume of spam that comes from those servers is ridiculous, not to mention all the former AOL idiots that were the scourge of the groups.
And almost as bad, if you use Google Groups to read and post, you see a great swamp of spam -- much of it FROM Google Groups accounts - (EG, take a look at comp.programming) over recent weeks. Many ISPs no longer provide NNTP servers, Google Groups is pretty much the default way to access usenet now. But the interface sucks so much, most egregiously in the inability to filter spam out of either the feed as a whole, or even on an individual (killfile) basis. Every real NNTP service devotes much effort to keeping spam out of their feed, and stopping users from sending it. Google makes no attempt to do either, and not only spoils their own service but poisons the feed for anyone who accepts their messages. I can't even find a way to communicate with Google about this -- their help groups are populated solely by users complaining or advising each other. Most complaints about usenet are met by Google fanboys saying that usenet is dead, get over it.
It looks very like Google is doing the embrace (buy Deja News) extend (promoting their own web-based discussion groups), and now extinguish (by allowing free rein to spammers on usenet).
So personally I now only use Google Groups to search, and have found a free Usenet host and fire up Forte Agent for participating.
"Executive producer" is a pretty powerful position. And I also called him a "showrunner", a term he used himself in an interview recently. Regardless, he's certainly not "curator of the Doctor Who legacy", a pretty cringeworthy appellation.
Gawking in my window from the public street is legal. Gawking in my window from my driveway/lawn
I didn't see any photos "gawking" into windows. So what is your point? Only the exterior walls were visible. If that bothers you, put up a fence, gate, wall. Or just a sign. Don't expect passersby to use GPS.
How many roads, that are gravel are one way? The drivers of the van should have used that big lump on top of their necks and thought....hmmm this may be a private road and we shouldn't go down it.
The lump on top of my neck would expect that if a public road became a private road that there would BE A SIGN SAYING SO. Otherwise, a road is a road. Gravel or not. You should see some of the "roads" around here.....
So you're stuck with the only movie ever been made of the game that was an important part of your youth being a piece of crap
Okay. But, really, what game movies have been any better?
I sort of enjoyed the "Super Mario Bros" dinosaur movie, but I must admit it was pretty silly. And that was about the best game movie I've seen. The rest -- unwatchable.
Does anyone believe for a minute he would really give up no matter how many signatures?
He would just say: All these people SAY they hate me, but it means a million people know who I am and have seen my movies. Doesn't matter whether they like them or not, I still get paid.
As Oscar Wilde said, "There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about".
you obviously believe in some kind of magic surrounding guns
More stupid unfounded generalisations about people who disagree with you. You gun nuts are a bunch of psychotic loonies (said with the same authority as your characterisations).
I have never seen a weapon that was properly and respectfully treated discharge at any time other than when it's operator intended.
I always thought guns just "went off" spontaneously. I had no idea that an "operator" was involved. Thanks for explaining that. So no chance these "operators" would ever point their weapon at me and "intend" to pull the trigger, then. Of course not.
Anti-gun types actually believe that guns have magical powers to make people commit crimes,
No, we don't. If you did in fact talk to one nutty woman who does not like guns, how on earth can you generalise that?
Speaking as an anti-gun type, I just believe that guns make it easy for anyone, criminal, child, drunken angry loser, etc, to kill people, and/or himself.
I had come across the 146% through some reading else where, so it might be over stated, but as for the increase in violent crimes by gun since further controls were started, they are on an up according to any search I've done.
Even if your "statistics" were true, (sourced from "gunowners.org" -- give me a break), they prove nothing. Australians have never carried guns for "self-defence" or kept them in their homes (unless they were farmers for rabbit shooting) the way you do in the USA. Not now, not 10 years ago, or any time in the last century. Guns weren't a deterrent before, because hardly anyone had them. Now that small number has been decreased.
If there has been an increase in violent crime, there are many possible causes. Economic uncertainty, drug-related, etc, etc. And tighter restrictions on gun ownership are a REACTION to violent crime, not a cause of it.
Don't make uninformed statements about Australia to support your insane American gun laws.
You know, if 1.3 billion Chinese can't take control of their country away from government run amok, what chance do a few hundred million Americans stand?
A century ago China was a monarchy. Then it went through 50 years of invasion and civil war and ended up a communist dictatorship. But in the last 20 years it has become startlingly more free and democratic -- it still has a very long way to go, but it's going in the right direction. The US however, seems to be heading in the wrong direction. We can only hope that finally this detour into fascism is coming to an end. If China can become democratic, so can you.
Australia. They banned guns a year ago, and since then, armed robbery is up something like 146%
Prove it. Source for this?
I doubt you do, since guns aren't banned in Australia. Rules were tightened up considerably about 10 years ago (not "a year ago").
Most likely the little unsourced factoids that gun nuts copy and paste from each other without bothering to verify. When you do look into them, invariably they're vastly exaggerated or just made up.
Can you really say that Apple doesn't have a stake in other companies using Apples for logos?
Yes, I can. If a company uses a common English word and an image of a real, natural object, it does not have the right to prevent anyone else using that. And they must know that going in. If you make up a word, like "Microsoft" and a unique logo, you can be a hardass. If you choose an word that is a part of the language and an image that you can find in a million works of art, than you're an idiot and a jerk if you think you can control everyone's use of this word and logo. And fortunately, in this case, the city of NY has lawyers to make its case, I would expect a judge to dismiss Apple's claim very quickly. The problem comes when the megacorporation's mere threats of litigation force everyone else to give up for fear of ruinous litigation (as Microsoft has done with its similar unconscionable appropriation of the word "Windows").
Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see this logo is quite distinct from Apple's, it is nothing to do with their line of business and could do no harm to it.
They'll just buy BeOS from Palm, change the icons, port Wine for backwards compatibility, and be done in a few months. The rest of the time will be devoted to marketing.
go to post office and mail it (sealed) to yourself (and may be also another one to your trusted legal advisor) by registered mail.
Do not open the package, when you receive it.
In case of a prior art you'll have a sealed, registered and dated proof of invention, which can be produced to lawyers.
All you'll have is proof you posted an envelope. No proof it was sealed or had anything it it when you did so. This is only useful for stamp collectors collecting first day covers.
I'm not American, but I did play baseball few times at school, so I know the basics. But I have no idea what is meant by a "hitting streak". He scored a home run in every game? Every innings? Or just got off home base? Or what?
Since morality is completely subjective, how do you propose such a thing be legislated?
Of course it can't. My remarks are directed at those who try to hide behind the excuse that they are "legally compelled" to do things, regardless of harm to others. If someone with a "fiduciary duty" to a company declined to, say, throw orpans out into the street to save a few bucks, he might indeed lose his job for doing so, as may any of us who do not fulfil out employers' expectations. But I do not believe that he could be prosecuted in a court of law for making such a decision.
Morality doesn't really enter into it from a very practical standpoint.
Morality is not a "practical" question. If you think so, you have missed the point.
as an end user, I don't give a fig for publishers any more than I can about "recording" companies. The act of printing is trivial now.
A (good) publisher does a lot more than printing. If that's all you need, just talk directly to a printer. They arrange editing, layout, design, artwork. They oversee printing and check quality and costs. They should try to sell rights to other publishers in other languages and countries They arrange distribution and billing. They get books reviewed in real newspapers, interviews with reporters in various media. I work in publishing, and I've done all that. And I've seen self-published books full of amateurish errors that made me cringe.
I wish all POD books would just go away for the most part. They are often of poor quality both in content and presentation.
I wrote a sci-fi novel last year and we published it hardback with our own press.
What's the difference between that and POD? Pretty much everything
I work in publishing, mostly conventional offset, but have prepared several POD books.
The quality can be almost as good as offset. Even interior colour recently, but I mostly just do text. Anyway, POD is very useful to make books available with a minimum investment. It's suitable for the "long tail" kind of book, not general fiction. Books that people look for and order, not randomly come across in a bookshop -- in fact, few sell via bookshops at all, unless ordered by a customer. It needs a much lower upfront cost, has zero warehousing costs. The unit cost is much higher, of course, but as you are usually selling directly to the customer, you can have a higher margin. If you were confident of selling 1000 or more copies in a reasonable time, go offset.
Slashdot Mirror
Because it can't be nationalised by a foreign government. And if necessary, it can be nationalised by the US -- or more subtly, controlled by regulations, tax laws, etc.
Calling it a "driveway" is begging the question. And in more rural areas I see letterboxes in all kinds of places, far removed from the property boundaries.
Basically, if it's private property, say so. Don't expect people to deduce it from changes in road texture or other clues.
And almost as bad, if you use Google Groups to read and post, you see a great swamp of spam -- much of it FROM Google Groups accounts - (EG, take a look at comp.programming) over recent weeks. Many ISPs no longer provide NNTP servers, Google Groups is pretty much the default way to access usenet now. But the interface sucks so much, most egregiously in the inability to filter spam out of either the feed as a whole, or even on an individual (killfile) basis. Every real NNTP service devotes much effort to keeping spam out of their feed, and stopping users from sending it. Google makes no attempt to do either, and not only spoils their own service but poisons the feed for anyone who accepts their messages. I can't even find a way to communicate with Google about this -- their help groups are populated solely by users complaining or advising each other. Most complaints about usenet are met by Google fanboys saying that usenet is dead, get over it.
It looks very like Google is doing the embrace (buy Deja News) extend (promoting their own web-based discussion groups), and now extinguish (by allowing free rein to spammers on usenet).
So personally I now only use Google Groups to search, and have found a free Usenet host and fire up Forte Agent for participating.
"Executive producer" is a pretty powerful position. And I also called him a "showrunner", a term he used himself in an interview recently. Regardless, he's certainly not "curator of the Doctor Who legacy", a pretty cringeworthy appellation.
I didn't see any photos "gawking" into windows. So what is your point? Only the exterior walls were visible. If that bothers you, put up a fence, gate, wall. Or just a sign. Don't expect passersby to use GPS.
The lump on top of my neck would expect that if a public road became a private road that there would BE A SIGN SAYING SO. Otherwise, a road is a road. Gravel or not. You should see some of the "roads" around here.....
1) His name is "Russell T. DaviEs"
2) "Curator of the Doctor Who legacy"? Bollocks. RTD is offically "writer and executive producer". Similar to a US "showrunner".
Okay. But, really, what game movies have been any better?
I sort of enjoyed the "Super Mario Bros" dinosaur movie, but I must admit it was pretty silly. And that was about the best game movie I've seen. The rest -- unwatchable.
He would just say: All these people SAY they hate me, but it means a million people know who I am and have seen my movies. Doesn't matter whether they like them or not, I still get paid.
As Oscar Wilde said, "There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about".
More stupid unfounded generalisations about people who disagree with you. You gun nuts are a bunch of psychotic loonies (said with the same authority as your characterisations).
I always thought guns just "went off" spontaneously. I had no idea that an "operator" was involved. Thanks for explaining that. So no chance these "operators" would ever point their weapon at me and "intend" to pull the trigger, then. Of course not.
As I said before.
No, we don't. If you did in fact talk to one nutty woman who does not like guns, how on earth can you generalise that?
Speaking as an anti-gun type, I just believe that guns make it easy for anyone, criminal, child, drunken angry loser, etc, to kill people, and/or himself.
If you're not scared of guns, you're an idiot.
Even if your "statistics" were true, (sourced from "gunowners.org" -- give me a break), they prove nothing. Australians have never carried guns for "self-defence" or kept them in their homes (unless they were farmers for rabbit shooting) the way you do in the USA. Not now, not 10 years ago, or any time in the last century. Guns weren't a deterrent before, because hardly anyone had them. Now that small number has been decreased.
If there has been an increase in violent crime, there are many possible causes. Economic uncertainty, drug-related, etc, etc. And tighter restrictions on gun ownership are a REACTION to violent crime, not a cause of it.
Don't make uninformed statements about Australia to support your insane American gun laws.
A century ago China was a monarchy. Then it went through 50 years of invasion and civil war and ended up a communist dictatorship. But in the last 20 years it has become startlingly more free and democratic -- it still has a very long way to go, but it's going in the right direction. The US however, seems to be heading in the wrong direction. We can only hope that finally this detour into fascism is coming to an end. If China can become democratic, so can you.
In that vein: Neal Stephenson, Stephen Baxter, KIm Stanley Robinson, Greg Benford. Have a look at and more generally, Locus.
Prove it. Source for this?
I doubt you do, since guns aren't banned in Australia. Rules were tightened up considerably about 10 years ago (not "a year ago").
Most likely the little unsourced factoids that gun nuts copy and paste from each other without bothering to verify. When you do look into them, invariably they're vastly exaggerated or just made up.
Yes, I can. If a company uses a common English word and an image of a real, natural object, it does not have the right to prevent anyone else using that. And they must know that going in. If you make up a word, like "Microsoft" and a unique logo, you can be a hardass. If you choose an word that is a part of the language and an image that you can find in a million works of art, than you're an idiot and a jerk if you think you can control everyone's use of this word and logo. And fortunately, in this case, the city of NY has lawyers to make its case, I would expect a judge to dismiss Apple's claim very quickly. The problem comes when the megacorporation's mere threats of litigation force everyone else to give up for fear of ruinous litigation (as Microsoft has done with its similar unconscionable appropriation of the word "Windows").
Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see this logo is quite distinct from Apple's, it is nothing to do with their line of business and could do no harm to it.
They'll just buy BeOS from Palm, change the icons, port Wine for backwards compatibility, and be done in a few months. The rest of the time will be devoted to marketing.
All you'll have is proof you posted an envelope. No proof it was sealed or had anything it it when you did so. This is only useful for stamp collectors collecting first day covers.
I'm not American, but I did play baseball few times at school, so I know the basics. But I have no idea what is meant by a "hitting streak". He scored a home run in every game? Every innings? Or just got off home base? Or what?
Of course it can't. My remarks are directed at those who try to hide behind the excuse that they are "legally compelled" to do things, regardless of harm to others. If someone with a "fiduciary duty" to a company declined to, say, throw orpans out into the street to save a few bucks, he might indeed lose his job for doing so, as may any of us who do not fulfil out employers' expectations. But I do not believe that he could be prosecuted in a court of law for making such a decision.
Morality doesn't really enter into it from a very practical standpoint.
Morality is not a "practical" question. If you think so, you have missed the point.
A (good) publisher does a lot more than printing. If that's all you need, just talk directly to a printer. They arrange editing, layout, design, artwork. They oversee printing and check quality and costs. They should try to sell rights to other publishers in other languages and countries They arrange distribution and billing. They get books reviewed in real newspapers, interviews with reporters in various media. I work in publishing, and I've done all that. And I've seen self-published books full of amateurish errors that made me cringe.
I work in publishing, mostly conventional offset, but have prepared several POD books. The quality can be almost as good as offset. Even interior colour recently, but I mostly just do text. Anyway, POD is very useful to make books available with a minimum investment. It's suitable for the "long tail" kind of book, not general fiction. Books that people look for and order, not randomly come across in a bookshop -- in fact, few sell via bookshops at all, unless ordered by a customer. It needs a much lower upfront cost, has zero warehousing costs. The unit cost is much higher, of course, but as you are usually selling directly to the customer, you can have a higher margin. If you were confident of selling 1000 or more copies in a reasonable time, go offset.