I think you're looking for the wrong fallacy, unless you're either trying to say that Republicans are either universally conservative, or that I stated that no Republicans are conservatives. Both of these things would be silly to argue.
Surely you don't mean to argue that conservative and Republican are synonymous?
Well, considering both the FCC and common sense agree, let's hope the appeal fixes this nonsense. Even better if it dismisses the whole case as without merit.
I'm not a fan of what Google was doing, but it's not Google's responsibility to treat publicly accessible networks as sacred. It's the responsibility of the access point's owner to secure the thing.
The second the trials start (if any ever do) I fully expect to see the Nuremberg Defense in heavy usage. And in this case, the courts will almost certainly let that stand.
I have a complaint about it. Two, actually. First is that by default, it saves files in a format that will confuse some MS Office users if you send them as an attachment. Sure, you can change that in the options, and sure, it's Microsoft's fault for not supporting open file standards, but whose fault the confusion is doesn't matter when you're dealing with business contacts. They only care how easy it is to interoperate with you.
The second, and of a more pressing nature, is that the spreadsheet is much less useful than Gnumeric. I just plain don't like it, and use Gnumeric instead. Sure, Gnumeric's also free, but the topic is LibreOffice here. And yes, before you say it, Gnumeric doesn't import some spreadsheets as smoothly as I'd like.
Ah, excellent! This is the kind of trolling I anticipated being targeted by.
Due to the complete failure of modern political terms, I wouldn't bother to label them anything but corrupt. But that's how I label the Democrats, and they aren't that different from one another.
TFA says they've limited the overlap to prevent the need to rewrite the whole disk. Only the three-track segments, which do not affect the tracks beside the trio.
That said, I won't be an early adopter on this one. We'll see how it pans out in the real world before I consider deploying this.
I think it's cute that the synopsis above thinks Texas has a lot of conservatives in its government. Republicans != conservatives, at least not universially.
An HDTV is a peripheral, not a standalone entity. Much like a printer, it is a single-purpose output device, it just interacts with different devices to different ends. You can hook it to a computer, a gaming console, a DVR/receiver, an antenna, a DVD/BluRay, or in some cases even a VCR.
That said, I'll replace mine when it dies, but only because I have a Netflix-capable and local-stream-supporting BluRay player and a PS3. The real question is whether it's worth buying a TV that doesn't already handle things like Netflix and local streams natively when my HDTV finally bites the dust. And that could well still be a yes, since I probably will be hooking it up to multiple devices that already do these things. Also, I just plain don't care about the illusion of 3D.
You've got an interesting idea, but that's not really what curbs the infringement of copyright laws (I object to use of the term "piracy" in this context). What curbs copyright infringement is convincing people that it is wrong to do it, or that following these laws somehow benefits them and society. Copyright infringement may be illegal, but I know basically nobody who considers it immoral or detrimental to society.
Which, of course, leads us to the fundamental problem with the MPAA. They assume consumption will not be rationed relative to price. Without Netflix, I'd probably only turn on my TV for Grand Theft Auto games.
Plus, it's not just seats at that point. Meals, possibly beds, and most damning of all, you have to get people out of hurry mode, something nobody seems willing to exit even when going on holiday. Economically, (in the broad sense, which includes factors such as time as well), airships will not ever be viable for standard service as passenger transports in that context. You'd pretty much have to ban jets, turboprops, and make standard prop planes unconscionably expensive.
Oh, I don't dispute those concerns at all. It's simply a difference in perception between the industry and the consumers. Like most industries, really...
Agreed. I think the real test will not be the feasibility of the concept, but rather whether they can manage their finances long enough to get rolling and find a price that brings customers at a profit and allows the company to grow.
Unfortunately, I think that the days of glamourous airship travel are gone. Cargo will probably find a niche, but passenger flights will be either nonexistent or close to it. We might some cruise-type flights over majestic terrain, but the true awesomeness of the Zeppelins was the ability to travel in luxury while taking in views the passengers never imagined.
My solution is to amend the constitution to extend the right to refuse to testify to everybody. After all, there's no way to be sure what will and won't incriminate a person or otherwise deprive them of their well-being. In the case of a reporter, I would consider compulsion to testify to be both damaging to his livelihood and an infringement of his first-amendment rights as a member of a "free" press in that it greatly reduces his ability to continue as a productive member of the free press.
Self-incrimination does not always manifest its harm in terms of court rulings against you.
There were two separate groups presenting, and that one was indefensible. However, my post was clearly about the breast-related presentation, not the simulated wanking.
The real problem is that we have reached the point where the puritanical values have caused men's reactions to breasts to become national news, and to where breastfeeding mothers are made to feel they are doing something shameful.
Stupid, stupid Americans. I doubt the Aussies even considered America's hypersensitivity in the process.
Slashdot Mirror
You have a lot more faith in the court system than I do if you believe it would go anywhere remotely related to the direction you describe.
I think you're looking for the wrong fallacy, unless you're either trying to say that Republicans are either universally conservative, or that I stated that no Republicans are conservatives. Both of these things would be silly to argue.
Surely you don't mean to argue that conservative and Republican are synonymous?
Well, considering both the FCC and common sense agree, let's hope the appeal fixes this nonsense. Even better if it dismisses the whole case as without merit.
I'm not a fan of what Google was doing, but it's not Google's responsibility to treat publicly accessible networks as sacred. It's the responsibility of the access point's owner to secure the thing.
That's completely unacceptable. We have to have a one-size-fits-all scapegoat that we can heavily politicize.
The second the trials start (if any ever do) I fully expect to see the Nuremberg Defense in heavy usage. And in this case, the courts will almost certainly let that stand.
One of my biggest fears is that you are correct.
I have a complaint about it. Two, actually. First is that by default, it saves files in a format that will confuse some MS Office users if you send them as an attachment. Sure, you can change that in the options, and sure, it's Microsoft's fault for not supporting open file standards, but whose fault the confusion is doesn't matter when you're dealing with business contacts. They only care how easy it is to interoperate with you.
The second, and of a more pressing nature, is that the spreadsheet is much less useful than Gnumeric. I just plain don't like it, and use Gnumeric instead. Sure, Gnumeric's also free, but the topic is LibreOffice here. And yes, before you say it, Gnumeric doesn't import some spreadsheets as smoothly as I'd like.
Ah, excellent! This is the kind of trolling I anticipated being targeted by.
Due to the complete failure of modern political terms, I wouldn't bother to label them anything but corrupt. But that's how I label the Democrats, and they aren't that different from one another.
TFA says they've limited the overlap to prevent the need to rewrite the whole disk. Only the three-track segments, which do not affect the tracks beside the trio.
That said, I won't be an early adopter on this one. We'll see how it pans out in the real world before I consider deploying this.
I'm a little disappointed. I expected to get bombed with "troll" mod-downs from the GOP party-line faithful.
I think it's cute that the synopsis above thinks Texas has a lot of conservatives in its government. Republicans != conservatives, at least not universially.
An HDTV is a peripheral, not a standalone entity. Much like a printer, it is a single-purpose output device, it just interacts with different devices to different ends. You can hook it to a computer, a gaming console, a DVR/receiver, an antenna, a DVD/BluRay, or in some cases even a VCR.
That said, I'll replace mine when it dies, but only because I have a Netflix-capable and local-stream-supporting BluRay player and a PS3. The real question is whether it's worth buying a TV that doesn't already handle things like Netflix and local streams natively when my HDTV finally bites the dust. And that could well still be a yes, since I probably will be hooking it up to multiple devices that already do these things. Also, I just plain don't care about the illusion of 3D.
You've got an interesting idea, but that's not really what curbs the infringement of copyright laws (I object to use of the term "piracy" in this context). What curbs copyright infringement is convincing people that it is wrong to do it, or that following these laws somehow benefits them and society. Copyright infringement may be illegal, but I know basically nobody who considers it immoral or detrimental to society.
Which, of course, leads us to the fundamental problem with the MPAA. They assume consumption will not be rationed relative to price. Without Netflix, I'd probably only turn on my TV for Grand Theft Auto games.
you seem to be confusing the government with the people.
Can't pull the same plan twice on the same guy in this age of media leaking things prematurely.
Plus, it's not just seats at that point. Meals, possibly beds, and most damning of all, you have to get people out of hurry mode, something nobody seems willing to exit even when going on holiday. Economically, (in the broad sense, which includes factors such as time as well), airships will not ever be viable for standard service as passenger transports in that context. You'd pretty much have to ban jets, turboprops, and make standard prop planes unconscionably expensive.
Oh, I don't dispute those concerns at all. It's simply a difference in perception between the industry and the consumers. Like most industries, really...
Agreed. I think the real test will not be the feasibility of the concept, but rather whether they can manage their finances long enough to get rolling and find a price that brings customers at a profit and allows the company to grow.
Whatever keeps people paying into the system while raising the retirement age, ne?
It's true. But even in those circumstances, they wouldn't have been able to get rolling from a lack of existing market.
Unfortunately, I think that the days of glamourous airship travel are gone. Cargo will probably find a niche, but passenger flights will be either nonexistent or close to it. We might some cruise-type flights over majestic terrain, but the true awesomeness of the Zeppelins was the ability to travel in luxury while taking in views the passengers never imagined.
My solution is to amend the constitution to extend the right to refuse to testify to everybody. After all, there's no way to be sure what will and won't incriminate a person or otherwise deprive them of their well-being. In the case of a reporter, I would consider compulsion to testify to be both damaging to his livelihood and an infringement of his first-amendment rights as a member of a "free" press in that it greatly reduces his ability to continue as a productive member of the free press.
Self-incrimination does not always manifest its harm in terms of court rulings against you.
There were two separate groups presenting, and that one was indefensible. However, my post was clearly about the breast-related presentation, not the simulated wanking.
The real problem is that we have reached the point where the puritanical values have caused men's reactions to breasts to become national news, and to where breastfeeding mothers are made to feel they are doing something shameful.
Stupid, stupid Americans. I doubt the Aussies even considered America's hypersensitivity in the process.