I also understand that in Europe it's more common to smoke cannabis by cutting it with tobacco. Why anybody would do this is beyond me -- is it more expensive over there and you want to conserve it or did it just become trendy for some other reason?
From what I was told (by someone in Amsterdam) it's because the pot is so strong you get too fucked up smoking it straight.
Methyl benzoate isn't specific to cocaine, and it is not just a byproduct of manufacture of cocaine, but is produced by cocaine hydrochloride (powder cocaine) exposed to humid air. So if there's cocaine on the bills, and the air is humid, there will be methyl benzoate as well. Further, if the bills were exposed to methyl benzoate from some other source, a dog trained to alert on it would detect it.
Now this 787 project comes out and blows my assumptions away! Apparently you CAN overrun a construction or build project's time and budget just as easily as IT projects.
The 787 is new. Most of the time if you're doing a construction project, you're doing something basically the same or very similar to something you've done before, so you can estimate it well. When this doesn't hold, construction projects end up estimated just as poorly as IT projects. IT projects are always something new; if what you wanted already existed, you'd probably just buy it.
Is it in the public's interest for individual officers to have their names, pictures, addresses and photographs of their houses published to the world?
Would you appreciate it if that were done to yourself?
Hmm. Given my name, a check of the phone book gets my address. A Google Image Search pulls up my picture. While Google Street View does not yet show my house, it could. And it might be in a real estate listing from the last time it sold. Doesn't seem like such a big deal. If someone were to aggregate all these, I'm hard pressed to see any crime.
Except that you're creating a false division. You're pretending to be living under some oppressive dictatorship, where it's possible to draw clear lines between "us" and "the", and incite the crowds to rise up against their oppressors. And while I'm sure that drama-queens like yourself get a huge kick out of pretending to be the leaders of the revolution, the fact of the matter is that WE ARE the government, and we're not going to rise up against ourselves.
No, we are not the government. That's grade school level naive idealism. Some animals really are more equal than others in our system... and as in Animal Farm, that includes pigs.
There never will be a "good" one, because rational people in full possession of their faculties will know the cops will get them for doing so regardless of the law.
Miranda was a scumbag, but the Miranda warning is still a good thing.
Infringement is a past tense of stolen. It follows the lines of conversion theft and is in the same legal construct as theft. In conversion, you are not necessarily deprived of your usage either.
Infringement is not a past tense of "stolen", "stolen" is the past participle of "steal". Conversion is not theft, conversion is a tort distinct from the crime of theft and encompassing many acts which are not theft.
It can be a slippery slope if you treat these kinds of operations as "fixing people", but I think if you treat it instead as enabling them to do something new (to them, at least), you don't run the risk of "fixing" people who don't feel that they are broken.
Too bad if they feel they aren't "broken". They are, by any reasonable standard. Besides, that seems to be a thing for deaf people only; I've never heard of the equivalent for blind people.
They could hire someone to dig through the IBM research journals and patents on the General Markup Language and its successor SGML, and find some prior art. They might even have some prior art of their own related to RTF. This patent sucks; it's on a basic technique that anyone writing a program to read a document with inline tags would at least consider, and I find it hard to believe it wasn't actually used on occasion.
The Blizzard case's judge asserted that "title transfers" don't ever happen with software. Nothing is ever sold.
Which means the Uniform Commercial Code doesn't apply. I doubt he considered the implications of that, though; he just wanted to rule for Blizzard. However, that was a US case and this is in Denmark...
I'm afraid Fox News didn't send me their list of talking points this week (I think Murdoch wants to charge for them), so I had to come up with that one all on my own. However, if you think there's any racism there, you're jumping at shado... oops, there I go again, right?
(In case anyone ELSE needs the joke explained, it's not implying that Obama is racist; it's implying that he's might be so concerned with image that he's afraid a black politician eating a white marshmallow would be read the wrong way, and paranoid enough to think that he's being given the marshmallow specifically for that purpose. Of course, considering Fox News, were the situation to come up he might actually be right.)
The odds are pretty slim for a planet to be stripped from one star and then captured again by another star.
How about a direct capture, from an near-encounter with another star? That is, similar to the explanation in TFA, except that the planet originally belonged to the other star.
They are not naked in public. They are naked in a gated community.
Suppose I live in a gated community. One of my neighbors decides to walk around the common areas naked. I take pictures of him. Exactly what claim does he, or the community association, have on the copyright to my photographs?
(If you haven't figured it out, it's "none at all")
Basically, if you paid for a ticket and took pictures from inside the event boundaries, this probably IS enforceable.
Uh, "citation needed". Seeing as I already provided mine.
As for the difference between an exclusive license and a transfer of copyright ownership:
From 17 USC 101: "A "transfer of copyright ownership" is an assignment, mortgage, exclusive license, or any other conveyance, alienation, or hypothecation of a copyright or of any of the exclusive rights comprised in a copyright, whether or not it is limited in time or place of effect, but not including a nonexclusive license."
Delaying gratification is a form of risk taking; you're taking the risk that by delaying gratification now, you'll get greater gratification later.
If your experiences have led you to believe that you won't actually get the greater gratification, it's irrational for you to delay it. If the marshmallow will go stale sitting there and the second one won't actually be forthcoming, eat it now. If your savings are going to be destroyed by inflation, taxes and stock market crashes, spend the money now. If work expands to fill all available time, procrastinate now (or when you get around to it, anyway).
Good cite. If I were their lawyer, other than the other comment's argument that the ticket is a conveyance, I'd argue that the ticket created an exclusive license to BMO, which would allow them to enforce the copyright, even though the actual transfer of ownership had not happened.
I'm fairly sure that an exclusive license and a transfer of copyright ownership have been found to be the same thing, but I don't have cites.
As for the ticket -- that's why I specified that the ticket by purchased by phone. No signed agreement in that case.
To put that in a way parents might actually have a chance of understanding: The light from the Sun is made up of all colors, but the atmosphere filters out all but the color blue.
But that's just plain wrong. It's nothing like filtering. That might be a good answer to "why is the Sun blue", if in fact the sun appeared blue, but it does not.
Slashdot just so happens to be much further up on it, especially in science-related fields, than your average person. Just because we're at and near the top doesn't mean we should ridicule them. It means we should help to educate them, so that by the time we're up further in our absolute level of knowledge, so are they.
Bah. They don't want to learn, and they ridicule us for having done so. Screw 'em.
And that is from a paper written 85 years ago. So a college degree in engineering apparently barely starts to touch on many of the concepts that have been explored by mathematicians.
Mathematics certainly is vast. But the main reason, IMO, that the papers are hard to read for an intelligent person with some grounding in the subject is not that the concepts are that hard, but that the notation and language is so opaque. The concept of an Abelian group isn't all that complex, but if you don't know what one is, you won't understand a paper referring to it. Same goes for many of the terms in any given math paper.
Slashdot Mirror
From what I was told (by someone in Amsterdam) it's because the pot is so strong you get too fucked up smoking it straight.
Methyl benzoate isn't specific to cocaine, and it is not just a byproduct of manufacture of cocaine, but is produced by cocaine hydrochloride (powder cocaine) exposed to humid air. So if there's cocaine on the bills, and the air is humid, there will be methyl benzoate as well. Further, if the bills were exposed to methyl benzoate from some other source, a dog trained to alert on it would detect it.
Carbs aren't essential. The essential components for fats are omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids.
I smell a viral marketing campaign.
The 787 is new. Most of the time if you're doing a construction project, you're doing something basically the same or very similar to something you've done before, so you can estimate it well. When this doesn't hold, construction projects end up estimated just as poorly as IT projects. IT projects are always something new; if what you wanted already existed, you'd probably just buy it.
Well, that and beating the shit out of them and THEN making them fight charges of "resisting arrest".
Robert Bork, is that you? Remember, there's a reason you didn't get on the Supreme Court.
Hmm. Given my name, a check of the phone book gets my address. A Google Image Search pulls up my picture. While Google Street View does not yet show my house, it could. And it might be in a real estate listing from the last time it sold. Doesn't seem like such a big deal. If someone were to aggregate all these, I'm hard pressed to see any crime.
No, we are not the government. That's grade school level naive idealism. Some animals really are more equal than others in our system... and as in Animal Farm, that includes pigs.
There never will be a "good" one, because rational people in full possession of their faculties will know the cops will get them for doing so regardless of the law.
Miranda was a scumbag, but the Miranda warning is still a good thing.
Infringement is not a past tense of "stolen", "stolen" is the past participle of "steal". Conversion is not theft, conversion is a tort distinct from the crime of theft and encompassing many acts which are not theft.
Too bad if they feel they aren't "broken". They are, by any reasonable standard. Besides, that seems to be a thing for deaf people only; I've never heard of the equivalent for blind people.
They could hire someone to dig through the IBM research journals and patents on the General Markup Language and its successor SGML, and find some prior art. They might even have some prior art of their own related to RTF. This patent sucks; it's on a basic technique that anyone writing a program to read a document with inline tags would at least consider, and I find it hard to believe it wasn't actually used on occasion.
Until we manage to create real zombies and release them on the population, we'll never be able to test the model.
Which means the Uniform Commercial Code doesn't apply. I doubt he considered the implications of that, though; he just wanted to rule for Blizzard. However, that was a US case and this is in Denmark...
I'm afraid Fox News didn't send me their list of talking points this week (I think Murdoch wants to charge for them), so I had to come up with that one all on my own. However, if you think there's any racism there, you're jumping at shado... oops, there I go again, right?
(In case anyone ELSE needs the joke explained, it's not implying that Obama is racist; it's implying that he's might be so concerned with image that he's afraid a black politician eating a white marshmallow would be read the wrong way, and paranoid enough to think that he's being given the marshmallow specifically for that purpose. Of course, considering Fox News, were the situation to come up he might actually be right.)
How about a direct capture, from an near-encounter with another star? That is, similar to the explanation in TFA, except that the planet originally belonged to the other star.
Washington won't eat the marshmallow and sneers at your plebian tastes.
Jefferson lights the marshmallow on fire, then lights other marshmallows from it.
Lincoln rips the marshmallow in half, then eats it, demonstrating that a marshmallow divided cannot survive.
U.S. Grant knocks the marshmallow on the floor in a drunken stupor. It's still under one of the White House sofas.
Teddy Roosevelt eats the marshmallow immediately, and asks you for another... while staring you down and carrying a rifle.
Calvin Coolidge waits until you give him the second marshmallow, then eats both without comment.
Franklin Roosevelt starts an government organization called Marshmallow Making Men, and soon has more marshmallows than he knows what to do with.
JFK doesn't eat either marshmallow, and what he later did with them, a containert of chocolate sauce, and Marilyn Monroe is lost to history.
Nixon has G. Gordon Liddy take your entire bag.
Jimmy Carter says "No thanks, I prefer peanuts".
Ronald Reagan waits, and eats both marshmallows, but only after getting Nancy's approval.
Bush Sr. says he won't eat the marshmallow, but does.
Bush Jr. eats the marshmallow immediately, and looks utterly and pathetically confused when he doesn't get the second one.
Obama notes the whiteness of the marshmallow and accuses the researchers of trying to set him up.
Suppose I live in a gated community. One of my neighbors decides to walk around the common areas naked. I take pictures of him. Exactly what claim does he, or the community association, have on the copyright to my photographs?
(If you haven't figured it out, it's "none at all")
Uh, "citation needed". Seeing as I already provided mine.
As for the difference between an exclusive license and a transfer of copyright ownership:
From 17 USC 101:
"A "transfer of copyright ownership" is an assignment, mortgage, exclusive license, or any other conveyance, alienation, or hypothecation of a copyright or of any of the exclusive rights comprised in a copyright, whether or not it is limited in time or place of effect, but not including a nonexclusive license."
is worth over two on the table.
Delaying gratification is a form of risk taking; you're taking the risk that by delaying gratification now, you'll get greater gratification later.
If your experiences have led you to believe that you won't actually get the greater gratification, it's irrational for you to delay it. If the marshmallow will go stale sitting there and the second one won't actually be forthcoming, eat it now. If your savings are going to be destroyed by inflation, taxes and stock market crashes, spend the money now. If work expands to fill all available time, procrastinate now (or when you get around to it, anyway).
I'm fairly sure that an exclusive license and a transfer of copyright ownership have been found to be the same thing, but I don't have cites.
As for the ticket -- that's why I specified that the ticket by purchased by phone. No signed agreement in that case.
But that's just plain wrong. It's nothing like filtering. That might be a good answer to "why is the Sun blue", if in fact the sun appeared blue, but it does not.
Bah. They don't want to learn, and they ridicule us for having done so. Screw 'em.
Mathematics certainly is vast. But the main reason, IMO, that the papers are hard to read for an intelligent person with some grounding in the subject is not that the concepts are that hard, but that the notation and language is so opaque. The concept of an Abelian group isn't all that complex, but if you don't know what one is, you won't understand a paper referring to it. Same goes for many of the terms in any given math paper.