Europe, Japan... USA is barely hanging on in Europe, they dont argue, they just ignore you, and you have just suffered 8 years of that
You all sure had a hell of a lot to say about our presidential election and financial situation considering you are ignoring us. If you think we pay more attention to you, than you do to us, you're high.
That's not a bribe, it's called customer service. The customer was dissatisfied, so the company took measures to rectify the situation. I would be happy to deal with a seller that acted in such a way.
Unless the defendant can prove the allegations were true, or they were only his opinion (and were presented as opinion), he will almost certainly lose this case, although the damages awarded are at the discretion of the judge.
Wouldn't the burden of proof generally be on the plaintiff?
Not unless the plaintiff is a public figure, in which case the plaintiff would have to prove "actual malice".
In this case, the plaintiff doesn't even need to prove damages because this is defamation "per se", which means the allegations are presumed to cause damage because of their nature. The four categories or "per se" defamation are (i) accusing someone of a crime; (ii) alleging that someone has a foul or loathsome disease; (iii) adversely reflecting on a personâ(TM)s fitness to conduct her business or trade; and (iv) imputing serious sexual misconduct (from Wikipedia). It would seem that the defendants statements certainly fall into category i, and may fall into category iii as well. Unless the defendant can prove the allegations were true, or they were only his opinion (and were presented as opinion), he will almost certainly lose this case, although the damages awarded are at the discretion of the judge.
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but the bar on the right hand side of that video, that the user is clicking on to switch applications, is a taskbar, you goddamned idiot. Searching for running tasks would be a perfect example of interface retardation, it totally defeats the purpose of quickly switching between active processes.
You really need to get over your blind hatred, it's foolish. I use my MBP every day, and I can assure you that the interface is seriously deficient when used with multiple monitors. Having the menu bar at the top and the dock at the bottom tied to the primary monitor is a design blunder. Windows with Ultramon is significantly better in this use case.
Spotlight is undoubtedly a better search engine, it's probably just a GUI for locate after all, but the GP was talking about using desktop search engines for switching active processes, which is nonsense.
How are desktop widgets or search going to replace the taskbar? Search is going to tell me what applications I currently have running? You shouldn't comment about things that you lack even a rudimentary understanding of.
That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is our Foreign Intelligence spending was cut, preventing the intelligence community from expending the necessary resources to learn of and prevent the attack.
And started a war, caused about $640 Billion in economic damage, and could have been easily prevented for pennies on the dollar. In comparison, Katrina cost less than $300 Billion. It's much cheaper to track what your enemies are trying to do to hurt you and kill them before they get the chance, than to try to clean up the mess afterwords.
The majority of wealth comes from one choice alone: Choosing wealthy parents. I choose not to reward that.
Go back to your Objectivist reading club.
Perhaps you should return to your Liberal propaganda club first. 80% of the millionaires in the United States are first-generation affluent, according to the New York Times. The reason you aren't as successful is because you're lazy and/or stupid, not because you didn't have wealthy parents. The facts among millionaires are as follows:
Only 19 percent receive any income or wealth of any kind from a trust fund or an estate.
Fewer than 20 percent inherited 10 percent or more of their wealth.
More than half never received as much as $1 in inheritance.
Fewer than 25 percent ever received "an act of kindness" of $10,000 or more from their parents, grandparents, or other relatives.
Ninety-one percent never received, as a gift, as much as $1 of the ownership of a family business.
Nearly half never received any college tuition from their parents or other relatives.
Fewer than 10 percent believe they will ever receive an inheritance in the future.
Regulation isn't the solution, it's the problem. My home is currently serviced by two competing cable companies, and Verizon Fios. The cable companies have been competing on price, speed, and features for at least ten years now, and the entry of Verizon only served to further reduce prices. The reason for this is that my county has no cable franchise agreements, so new entrants are free to lay cable and compete. In practice, hardly anyone does since it's expensive, but competition really works. While I currently only have a 20 mbit symmetric internet connection, I could upgrade to 50 with a phone call. Making it harder to compete isn't going to help your situation.
Have you ever been inside of a post office? Talk about a shining example of government "efficiency". The whole affair is borderline pathetic. You really want to spread that disease? You're either stupid or incredibly naive if you actually believe it would be less expensive or higher quality.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Definition of Promote:
contribute to the progress or growth of
Definition of Provide:
supply: give something useful or necessary to
Paying for universal broadband doesn't promote the general welfare, it provides the general welfare.
It's entirely possible to have a market cap of $75 million with annual profits of less than $7.5 million. Indeed, for start-ups, annual profit could be a lot closer to $2.5 million, yielding a P/E ratio of 30. All of the additional archiving and compliance measures could easily soak up a large percentage of that profit.
You believe the situation would be better without any public oversight and with large companies being controlled exclusively by select individuals (the people that own the company)? You don't want to see entrenched publicly traded companies challenged by newcomers? You honestly believe that publicly traded companies don't innovate?
Your post title, "Misses the point!", is quite appropriate, since that's exactly what you did. Sarbox prevents large private businesses, startups, that aren't publicly traded from making the transition to being publicly traded, because of the incredible expense associated with getting into compliance. In other words, the millions a year it costs is acceptable to already publicly traded companies, but the millions that much be spent precludes non-publicly traded companies from making the transition, significantly raising the barriers to entry.
When Steve Fossett's plane crashed, nobody speculated that he was killed so he would be unable to break any more world records. Granted, that while suicides and accidents surrounding those in power are always suspicious, some of the conspiracy theorists are little better than the 9/11 truthers.
Slashdot Mirror
Europe, Japan ... USA is barely hanging on in Europe, they dont argue, they just ignore you, and you have just suffered 8 years of that
You all sure had a hell of a lot to say about our presidential election and financial situation considering you are ignoring us. If you think we pay more attention to you, than you do to us, you're high.
That's not a bribe, it's called customer service. The customer was dissatisfied, so the company took measures to rectify the situation. I would be happy to deal with a seller that acted in such a way.
Unless the defendant can prove the allegations were true, or they were only his opinion (and were presented as opinion), he will almost certainly lose this case, although the damages awarded are at the discretion of the judge.
I've bolded the important parts for you.
Wouldn't the burden of proof generally be on the plaintiff?
Not unless the plaintiff is a public figure, in which case the plaintiff would have to prove "actual malice".
In this case, the plaintiff doesn't even need to prove damages because this is defamation "per se", which means the allegations are presumed to cause damage because of their nature. The four categories or "per se" defamation are (i) accusing someone of a crime; (ii) alleging that someone has a foul or loathsome disease; (iii) adversely reflecting on a personâ(TM)s fitness to conduct her business or trade; and (iv) imputing serious sexual misconduct (from Wikipedia). It would seem that the defendants statements certainly fall into category i, and may fall into category iii as well. Unless the defendant can prove the allegations were true, or they were only his opinion (and were presented as opinion), he will almost certainly lose this case, although the damages awarded are at the discretion of the judge.
IANAL, but I have taken a few law classes.
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but the bar on the right hand side of that video, that the user is clicking on to switch applications, is a taskbar, you goddamned idiot. Searching for running tasks would be a perfect example of interface retardation, it totally defeats the purpose of quickly switching between active processes.
You really need to get over your blind hatred, it's foolish. I use my MBP every day, and I can assure you that the interface is seriously deficient when used with multiple monitors. Having the menu bar at the top and the dock at the bottom tied to the primary monitor is a design blunder. Windows with Ultramon is significantly better in this use case.
Spotlight is undoubtedly a better search engine, it's probably just a GUI for locate after all, but the GP was talking about using desktop search engines for switching active processes, which is nonsense.
How are desktop widgets or search going to replace the taskbar? Search is going to tell me what applications I currently have running? You shouldn't comment about things that you lack even a rudimentary understanding of.
Me too, I can't wait till the doctors office is as well managed as the DMV.
Don't worry, we've coughed. You'll catch the flu soon enough.
What ended up happening with the company? Were the results as disastrous as I would suspect?
You are absolutely right about that, the two are in no way mutually exclusive.
Being self employed is, in many ways, the same as being permanently unemployed.
They've already put the Falcon 1 into orbit. I'd say that's an accomplishment.
That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is our Foreign Intelligence spending was cut, preventing the intelligence community from expending the necessary resources to learn of and prevent the attack.
And started a war, caused about $640 Billion in economic damage, and could have been easily prevented for pennies on the dollar. In comparison, Katrina cost less than $300 Billion. It's much cheaper to track what your enemies are trying to do to hurt you and kill them before they get the chance, than to try to clean up the mess afterwords.
The majority of wealth comes from one choice alone: Choosing wealthy parents. I choose not to reward that.
Go back to your Objectivist reading club.
Perhaps you should return to your Liberal propaganda club first. 80% of the millionaires in the United States are first-generation affluent, according to the New York Times. The reason you aren't as successful is because you're lazy and/or stupid, not because you didn't have wealthy parents. The facts among millionaires are as follows:
Only 19 percent receive any income or wealth of any kind from a trust fund or an estate.
Fewer than 20 percent inherited 10 percent or more of their wealth.
More than half never received as much as $1 in inheritance.
Fewer than 25 percent ever received "an act of kindness" of $10,000 or more from their parents, grandparents, or other relatives.
Ninety-one percent never received, as a gift, as much as $1 of the ownership of a family business.
Nearly half never received any college tuition from their parents or other relatives.
Fewer than 10 percent believe they will ever receive an inheritance in the future.
The best thing that happened to the Internet was when Clinton exploited the Peace Dividend and starved the military
And also the intelligence community, which directly lead to the largest terrorist attack in this nations history.
Regulation isn't the solution, it's the problem. My home is currently serviced by two competing cable companies, and Verizon Fios. The cable companies have been competing on price, speed, and features for at least ten years now, and the entry of Verizon only served to further reduce prices. The reason for this is that my county has no cable franchise agreements, so new entrants are free to lay cable and compete. In practice, hardly anyone does since it's expensive, but competition really works. While I currently only have a 20 mbit symmetric internet connection, I could upgrade to 50 with a phone call. Making it harder to compete isn't going to help your situation.
Have you ever been inside of a post office? Talk about a shining example of government "efficiency". The whole affair is borderline pathetic. You really want to spread that disease? You're either stupid or incredibly naive if you actually believe it would be less expensive or higher quality.
The devil is in the details:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Definition of Promote:
contribute to the progress or growth of
Definition of Provide:
supply: give something useful or necessary to
Paying for universal broadband doesn't promote the general welfare, it provides the general welfare.
It's entirely possible to have a market cap of $75 million with annual profits of less than $7.5 million. Indeed, for start-ups, annual profit could be a lot closer to $2.5 million, yielding a P/E ratio of 30. All of the additional archiving and compliance measures could easily soak up a large percentage of that profit.
You believe the situation would be better without any public oversight and with large companies being controlled exclusively by select individuals (the people that own the company)? You don't want to see entrenched publicly traded companies challenged by newcomers? You honestly believe that publicly traded companies don't innovate?
Your post title, "Misses the point!", is quite appropriate, since that's exactly what you did. Sarbox prevents large private businesses, startups, that aren't publicly traded from making the transition to being publicly traded, because of the incredible expense associated with getting into compliance. In other words, the millions a year it costs is acceptable to already publicly traded companies, but the millions that much be spent precludes non-publicly traded companies from making the transition, significantly raising the barriers to entry.
When Steve Fossett's plane crashed, nobody speculated that he was killed so he would be unable to break any more world records. Granted, that while suicides and accidents surrounding those in power are always suspicious, some of the conspiracy theorists are little better than the 9/11 truthers.
Not everything has to be a conspiracy. Aircraft do crash.
I'm glad somebody is being reasonable here.