The complexity of laws pretty much assured that Uber would get in trouble at some point over something. The way they have to operate to avoid being considered taxicabs for legal purposes pretty much ensured that any way they profited would be an invitation to one suit or another.
Unfortunately, I can't back that since our "principles" apparently consist of bombing the hell out of countries for daring not to kill their citizens with weapons we deem appropriate for killing their own citizens. It's not a principled stance to say that Assad can kill all the Syrian opposition fighters he wants, as long as he doesn't use "chemical" or biological weapons to do so.
That'll teach 'em. No NBC attacks, but bombs, knives, guns, rockets, mortars, brutality, and so on are fine.
I don't think that will work. We've had a test going on it for about sixty years and the results have been pretty disappointing. Not that the World Police from the US getting involved is going to be a good plan either.
Indeed. Personally, I found the bombing to be less disturbing than the reaction to the bombing, and even more, the reports of how many Bostonians found the actions acceptable.
The problem with this measurement is that it's only to be expected for there to be less activity at the time. When you take into account the heavy militarized police/military/occupational force that flooded into Boston, you have to expect that social communications and outings will decrease significantly.
If the US didn't already have such a horrible track record of worldwide meddling, that would matter more. The Washington establishment have essentially been waiting for another war since the last actual "war" wound down into an ineffective BS peacekeeping mission.
it's only as useful as one's willingness to hold to the restrictions you set for yourself. But it definitely cuts down on the incidental, half-conscious drift onto such sites.
How doesn't it? Turkey has shown incredible patience. To argue that Turkey hasn't "has done everything they could to stay out of it", which is what I actually said as opposed to your truncated and misleading version, is nonsense. Sure, as a neighbouring country, Turkey has to draw the line at some point, but has tried to avoid that becoming necessary. However, given the indications of covert US involvement already at this point, there's really no clear-cut way to claim the same about the United States. While Turkey seeks peace for the region, the US seems content to seek war. Or whatever other distractions they can find from their domestic embarrassments.
Amen. I'm more afraid of the government than terrorists. In fact, I'm more afraid of the government, drunk drivers, bathtubs, bacteria on my lettuce, and poorly grounded electrical equipment. Why? Because these are far more likely to impact my life than terrorists. And most of what I've listed, I'm not even actually "afraid" of.
The US are members of NATO. Turkey, who has actually been attacked, has done everything they could to stay out of it, and are also members of NATO, but are doing what they can to help Syrians fleeing the war. Turkey is definitely proving the smarter of the two NATO members here.
I appreciate your view, but at the same time, I can't help but observe that your logic is broken. Making billions but less billions than they previously were making is a bad sign, especially when coupled with a lower percentage of the overall market share and a huge public rejection of your latest flagship products. Gotta look past the number of zeroes.
We're at one of those plateaus where pretty much any new system, provided you give it sufficient disk space and RAM, will do just fine for almost any average user. In terms of raw numbers, (ignoring screen dimensions and the difference between ARM and AMD64), the only significant difference in specs between my laptop and a Galaxy S4 are the keyboard, hard drive space, optical drive, and RAM quantity. Both have quad-core processors in similar clock speeds, both have wireless internet capabilities, both have full-HD output capabilities, quality sound output, and the Galaxy still wins on battery life.
Only if he believes the GOP is even remotely right-wing. Whatever right-wing even means anymore.
Personally, I don't believe we have a left or right in this country, nor conservatives and liberals as most of the world knows them. I think we just have a lot of bullshit terminology with no real meaning, and a bunch of oligarchs who talk one way or the other based on which voting base they wish to appeal to. Sure, occasionally someone else sneaks their way into office, but seldom does it matter.
The irony is, the way half the terms are used in US media, the meanings are almost entirely misleading if compared with their historical use.
Even with an EULA, it would be unenforceable on a work for which you hold no copyright upon which to exercise that EULA. The closest they could come is renting/leasing out the replicas with certain terms included.
Surely you don't think the EULA on Windows XP will be enforceable on copies made 150 years from now, do you? Regardless of how many times one hits the button to "accept" it.
you are correct that the value of an education does not reside solely in earnings potential. However, the value of a debt is quantifiable and can be significant burden that can cripple people financially. To make a major fiscal decision without a reasonable expectation of being able to get out from under its financial obligations is foolhardy.
It's not the sequester that's at fault here. It's the way government agencies run their finances.
I like the way Thomas Sowell put it not too long ago, paraphrased: Let's say there was a government agency who had two purposes. First, to give life-saving medications and vaccines to children. Second, to build statues of Benedict Arnold. Cut the budget by 50%. What happens? The agency quits giving out the medications and vaccines. Why? Because it's a hell of a lot easier to get that funding restored.
That's what we're seeing here. The decisions about how and where to make cuts are being made politically rather than in a fiscally responsible fashion.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I'm sure they would. Or to buy and sell the contractors themselves.
Yes, on this we agree. However, I'm willing to bet there's some contract angle from which the lawyers from Uber would disagree.
The complexity of laws pretty much assured that Uber would get in trouble at some point over something. The way they have to operate to avoid being considered taxicabs for legal purposes pretty much ensured that any way they profited would be an invitation to one suit or another.
I hope it comes in blue. It's probably also bigger on the inside.
Unfortunately, I can't back that since our "principles" apparently consist of bombing the hell out of countries for daring not to kill their citizens with weapons we deem appropriate for killing their own citizens. It's not a principled stance to say that Assad can kill all the Syrian opposition fighters he wants, as long as he doesn't use "chemical" or biological weapons to do so.
That'll teach 'em. No NBC attacks, but bombs, knives, guns, rockets, mortars, brutality, and so on are fine.
The 10% that the realtors care about, the collecting a commission part, is the only part they wanted to do anyway.
I don't think that will work. We've had a test going on it for about sixty years and the results have been pretty disappointing. Not that the World Police from the US getting involved is going to be a good plan either.
That's a "side". Sorry to have to let you find out like this.
Your confidence in our chief executive's willingness to adhere to the rules far exceeds mine.
Indeed. Personally, I found the bombing to be less disturbing than the reaction to the bombing, and even more, the reports of how many Bostonians found the actions acceptable.
The problem with this measurement is that it's only to be expected for there to be less activity at the time. When you take into account the heavy militarized police/military/occupational force that flooded into Boston, you have to expect that social communications and outings will decrease significantly.
If the US didn't already have such a horrible track record of worldwide meddling, that would matter more. The Washington establishment have essentially been waiting for another war since the last actual "war" wound down into an ineffective BS peacekeeping mission.
it's only as useful as one's willingness to hold to the restrictions you set for yourself. But it definitely cuts down on the incidental, half-conscious drift onto such sites.
Yes, exactly. The US has to live with the results too, it's just going to take time for the results to kick in.
How doesn't it? Turkey has shown incredible patience. To argue that Turkey hasn't "has done everything they could to stay out of it", which is what I actually said as opposed to your truncated and misleading version, is nonsense. Sure, as a neighbouring country, Turkey has to draw the line at some point, but has tried to avoid that becoming necessary. However, given the indications of covert US involvement already at this point, there's really no clear-cut way to claim the same about the United States. While Turkey seeks peace for the region, the US seems content to seek war. Or whatever other distractions they can find from their domestic embarrassments.
You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!
Amen. I'm more afraid of the government than terrorists. In fact, I'm more afraid of the government, drunk drivers, bathtubs, bacteria on my lettuce, and poorly grounded electrical equipment. Why? Because these are far more likely to impact my life than terrorists. And most of what I've listed, I'm not even actually "afraid" of.
The US are members of NATO. Turkey, who has actually been attacked, has done everything they could to stay out of it, and are also members of NATO, but are doing what they can to help Syrians fleeing the war. Turkey is definitely proving the smarter of the two NATO members here.
I appreciate your view, but at the same time, I can't help but observe that your logic is broken. Making billions but less billions than they previously were making is a bad sign, especially when coupled with a lower percentage of the overall market share and a huge public rejection of your latest flagship products. Gotta look past the number of zeroes.
We're at one of those plateaus where pretty much any new system, provided you give it sufficient disk space and RAM, will do just fine for almost any average user. In terms of raw numbers, (ignoring screen dimensions and the difference between ARM and AMD64), the only significant difference in specs between my laptop and a Galaxy S4 are the keyboard, hard drive space, optical drive, and RAM quantity. Both have quad-core processors in similar clock speeds, both have wireless internet capabilities, both have full-HD output capabilities, quality sound output, and the Galaxy still wins on battery life.
Only if he believes the GOP is even remotely right-wing. Whatever right-wing even means anymore.
Personally, I don't believe we have a left or right in this country, nor conservatives and liberals as most of the world knows them. I think we just have a lot of bullshit terminology with no real meaning, and a bunch of oligarchs who talk one way or the other based on which voting base they wish to appeal to. Sure, occasionally someone else sneaks their way into office, but seldom does it matter.
The irony is, the way half the terms are used in US media, the meanings are almost entirely misleading if compared with their historical use.
Even with an EULA, it would be unenforceable on a work for which you hold no copyright upon which to exercise that EULA. The closest they could come is renting/leasing out the replicas with certain terms included.
Surely you don't think the EULA on Windows XP will be enforceable on copies made 150 years from now, do you? Regardless of how many times one hits the button to "accept" it.
Agreed, AC. Agreed.
you are correct that the value of an education does not reside solely in earnings potential. However, the value of a debt is quantifiable and can be significant burden that can cripple people financially. To make a major fiscal decision without a reasonable expectation of being able to get out from under its financial obligations is foolhardy.
It's not the sequester that's at fault here. It's the way government agencies run their finances.
I like the way Thomas Sowell put it not too long ago, paraphrased: Let's say there was a government agency who had two purposes. First, to give life-saving medications and vaccines to children. Second, to build statues of Benedict Arnold. Cut the budget by 50%. What happens? The agency quits giving out the medications and vaccines. Why? Because it's a hell of a lot easier to get that funding restored.
That's what we're seeing here. The decisions about how and where to make cuts are being made politically rather than in a fiscally responsible fashion.