I fail to see how Clearwire has the right to falsely advertise just because they were basing their business model on co-opting public land. Even if their use of that public land would have been harmless.
Nothing about "representative republic" implies that we elect anything. Our benevolent dictator could force the oldest member of each clan to attend court, and state the needs of the people of the clan. That in no way implies that the oldest member was elected or the representative asked for input from his or her constituents.
I installed it on hundreds of machines at the University of Tennessee while I was a student employee there. I primarily did professor and office installs, not students, but until today I didn't realize it was anything other than freeware. It was simply one of the things I was trained to install.
I regularly unmaximize a window, drag it to the other monitor, and maximize it again. My two monitors have different resolutions, and I move things back and forth so I'm always reading from windows on my left and typing in windows on my right.
Agreeing to look at the merits of each individual case gives legitimacy to the process that allowed the creation of so, so many unmerited cases. And it certainly gives legitimacy to the concept of software patents as a whole.
You are always welcome to wait until the movie has been out a few weeks, at which time I'm certain you can find a review that mentions the presence of blatant product placement (if present).
The government can do a good number of things pretty well - better than the private sector even - but I certainly don't see any value in having the government manage this when the free market can take care of it, too.
You are welcome to enjoy independent and foreign film, which will noticeably lack product placement in most cases because, if it's not pre-arranged as advertising, it's possible the product owners could sue over the (mis)use of their trademarks. Plenty of posters on slashdot say this works for music. It could work for you for film, too.
Start by attending a film festival. You'll find a large number of independent and foreign films at those. SXSW Film is coming up a in few weeks. I'll be there. You can still buy a badge or a film pass. FantasticFest is this fall and you can still buy (non-VIP) badges. I'll be there too. There's likely a festival this year somewhere in your area.
"While you were driving a Ford, I was driving a Chevy."
How many commercials have you seen that have said something like that? Hundreds? Thousands? This is no different. Attempting to stop it via the power of law is censorship.
Conceded, but what the OP meant was that you can "arrest criminals before they commit the [primary] crime." You can likely get them on a conspiracy or solicitation charge, or perhaps an ancillary theft (such as of a get-away vehicle), while preventing the primary crime.
No, because that encourages killing people whose works you would like to co-opt.
Short, reasonable, fixed durations are the answer - like, say 15 years automatically, then another 20 if you provide a DRM-free copy and $1 to the government.
90% of content would be free in 15 years and, for the rest, an archive would ensure the works aren't lost forever.
Meanwhile, I don't care if this means someone who's a brilliant author at age 23 loses all copyright protection at age 58. That's what retirement savings are for. Talk to your financial planner and start saving.
I assume that someone willing to invest in one news source are going to make use of their investment. It's a rare person these days that subscribes to multiple newspapers, for example.
I think you made a flawed logical leap when you assumed that I was speaking against those willing to pay for content. Actually I'd be happier with this product if it was a for-pay news feed that would fit into an existing display method.
Even for heartless bastards with no sense of ethics, wouldn't you rather have a neighbor in the house next door paying taxes, keeping the property maintained, and watching out for the community, than have an empty, run-down house dragging down your property value and leading to few cops and more crime? Because the person you would outsource too certainly cares more about his neighborhood than he does about yours...
For people with no inherent sense of empathy, here's a rational argument as to why you should favor local products and jobs over oursourcing:
The people on the other side of the planet may be nice, decent folks, but would you honestly expect them to care if the house across the street from you is maintained by a homeowner paying his property taxes to help fund the local police force, or is an squatter crack house / meth lab that the few remaining cops are too scared to enter?
But you probably care. Therefore you should care more that your neighbor has a job than someone across the world.
Yup, I do exactly this for about the same length of time. The only difficulty is when I have to give an address to someone verbally, and they think I'm giving them a fake one since it's yourcompany@mydomain.com. I usually get around this by giving those people randomthreedigits@mydomain.com or similar.
As it happens I've only ever lost one address this way to spam, but it was obvious right away who sold my address.
If there is no law that requires a succession plan, then Apple should not be made to make a plan.
So you're saying that the shareholders - the owners of the company - cannot direct any actions of their company? Only the government can direct action via law?
Slashdot Mirror
I fail to see how Clearwire has the right to falsely advertise just because they were basing their business model on co-opting public land. Even if their use of that public land would have been harmless.
Hahaha, that's pretty funny. Just exactly how many sites do you know that moved behind a registration wall and gained readership?
If you'll read the about page, you'll note that Heston Blumenthal provided praise for the book.
My wife buys them because she can do so at 11:57 PM from our bed, just as soon as she finishes the last book.
Syberz meant that SaNo's math was wrong.
Okay, maybe my math is wrong...
It is wrong...
You can't get your money back at a theater if you didn't like the movie
If you walk out before it's finished, you usually can.
Nothing about "representative republic" implies that we elect anything. Our benevolent dictator could force the oldest member of each clan to attend court, and state the needs of the people of the clan. That in no way implies that the oldest member was elected or the representative asked for input from his or her constituents.
I installed it on hundreds of machines at the University of Tennessee while I was a student employee there. I primarily did professor and office installs, not students, but until today I didn't realize it was anything other than freeware. It was simply one of the things I was trained to install.
I regularly unmaximize a window, drag it to the other monitor, and maximize it again. My two monitors have different resolutions, and I move things back and forth so I'm always reading from windows on my left and typing in windows on my right.
And I minimize all the time so I can find things.
Agreeing to look at the merits of each individual case gives legitimacy to the process that allowed the creation of so, so many unmerited cases. And it certainly gives legitimacy to the concept of software patents as a whole.
Someone hasn't read the 10th amendment.
I think the OP would have an aneurysm over this film.
You are always welcome to wait until the movie has been out a few weeks, at which time I'm certain you can find a review that mentions the presence of blatant product placement (if present).
The government can do a good number of things pretty well - better than the private sector even - but I certainly don't see any value in having the government manage this when the free market can take care of it, too.
You are welcome to enjoy independent and foreign film, which will noticeably lack product placement in most cases because, if it's not pre-arranged as advertising, it's possible the product owners could sue over the (mis)use of their trademarks. Plenty of posters on slashdot say this works for music. It could work for you for film, too.
Start by attending a film festival. You'll find a large number of independent and foreign films at those. SXSW Film is coming up a in few weeks. I'll be there. You can still buy a badge or a film pass. FantasticFest is this fall and you can still buy (non-VIP) badges. I'll be there too. There's likely a festival this year somewhere in your area.
"While you were driving a Ford, I was driving a Chevy."
How many commercials have you seen that have said something like that? Hundreds? Thousands? This is no different. Attempting to stop it via the power of law is censorship.
>>Some shows last only two or three episodes.
Fox killed Lonestar after one. And no I didn't watch it either.
They have a lot of news to carry. I suggest swallows. African swallows.
Conceded, but what the OP meant was that you can "arrest criminals before they commit the [primary] crime." You can likely get them on a conspiracy or solicitation charge, or perhaps an ancillary theft (such as of a get-away vehicle), while preventing the primary crime.
No, because that encourages killing people whose works you would like to co-opt.
Short, reasonable, fixed durations are the answer - like, say 15 years automatically, then another 20 if you provide a DRM-free copy and $1 to the government.
90% of content would be free in 15 years and, for the rest, an archive would ensure the works aren't lost forever.
Meanwhile, I don't care if this means someone who's a brilliant author at age 23 loses all copyright protection at age 58. That's what retirement savings are for. Talk to your financial planner and start saving.
That's exactly what will happen at the shareholders meeting. Thank you for making my point.
I assume that someone willing to invest in one news source are going to make use of their investment. It's a rare person these days that subscribes to multiple newspapers, for example. I think you made a flawed logical leap when you assumed that I was speaking against those willing to pay for content. Actually I'd be happier with this product if it was a for-pay news feed that would fit into an existing display method.
Even for heartless bastards with no sense of ethics, wouldn't you rather have a neighbor in the house next door paying taxes, keeping the property maintained, and watching out for the community, than have an empty, run-down house dragging down your property value and leading to few cops and more crime? Because the person you would outsource too certainly cares more about his neighborhood than he does about yours...
For people with no inherent sense of empathy, here's a rational argument as to why you should favor local products and jobs over oursourcing:
The people on the other side of the planet may be nice, decent folks, but would you honestly expect them to care if the house across the street from you is maintained by a homeowner paying his property taxes to help fund the local police force, or is an squatter crack house / meth lab that the few remaining cops are too scared to enter?
But you probably care. Therefore you should care more that your neighbor has a job than someone across the world.
Don't they prefer eggs, spam, baked beans, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, democracy, and spam?
Yup, I do exactly this for about the same length of time. The only difficulty is when I have to give an address to someone verbally, and they think I'm giving them a fake one since it's yourcompany@mydomain.com. I usually get around this by giving those people randomthreedigits@mydomain.com or similar. As it happens I've only ever lost one address this way to spam, but it was obvious right away who sold my address.
If there is no law that requires a succession plan, then Apple should not be made to make a plan.
So you're saying that the shareholders - the owners of the company - cannot direct any actions of their company? Only the government can direct action via law?