The opposite of all nations is not no nations, the opposite is less than all nations. While that set includes no nations that is not exactly a choice because the company still has to obey the laws in which it resides And because of that your analogies does not work. Following your logic all data in the internet would soon be scrubbed because all companies, including those repressive ones, would want data they do not like removed from the internet.
Actually from Ars technica, the site you listed as a citation, they waited 8 years before doing anything, not that they spent 8 years trying to convince her to change it.
They did work with them to maintain a middle ground.. He wanted to keep the site as it was, they wanted the site dismantled. Middle ground, he gets to keep the site but must make a disclaimer and remove the advertising...I know most/.ers dont understand what a middle ground is, but that is one....
It does not matter how much you like their products, you dont have a right to use their property without their prior permission, which he did not have.
What was douchebag about it? Are they supposed let them use their brand and make money off it while advertising competing items? They let him keep the domain, the only thing was he needed to remove the advertising and put up a disclaimer, that seems pretty fine to me.
How is that nonsense, let alone clearly nonsense? Having permanently confidential information is damaging to the democracy. A democracy only works if the system is transparent.
The article only says they were outbid and then wanted to buy what was planed to be a site for a light rail. That does not seem like the city throwing up obstacles, it seems like a company wanting preferential treatment.
Seeing how we are talking about ISPs. He said the word telco, but in this instance it was obvious that he meant ISP, since that is what this entire thing is talking about....
What legislation forced the ISPs to connect to the unprofitable areas, without compensation that was vastly more than the cost. Shoot I would just like to know the legislation that forced this at all....
What obstacles were put in front of them? I see lots of people saying that, but no one ever states what those obstacles were. Some obstacles are good, some are bad, so just from that statement we cannot know anything about your statement.
Well that is one of the things that SCO failed on in court so I am fairly certain you are incorrect. This gives the other company an affirmative defense.
Well the blog post is really all they need now. he is the CEO of the company, which means what he writes there is what it is. If they sue now there will be some massive fees for them..
The question I would have though is what it means to be in good faith...
The president has been a very good at compromising, even when the Republicans refuse over and over. I am a middle of the road person, but in this case I see the Republicans unwillingness to compromise as an issue that cause most of what you state. The thing is the President will bend to the breaking point and even breaks sometimes, but typically will not given completely in. The Republicans will bend barely if any because they know they can block him.
There is no evidence that he is partisan. This discussion was about the tea party, so therefore pointing out the problems with the tea parties agenda is no more partisan than point out the problems with the far lefts platform in a discussion about the far left's platform. He also never claimed they were lunatics. If it was just a general political thread you would have a possible point.
The problem would be probable cause. If they could show the agents were patrolling the area and noticed something sketchy going on, without having that data, then they may be able to do that. If they say they were there to just see what you are doing then no.
Because in this context the "right" is ensuring that your crippling addition can be done in ways that harm / potentially harm others, violating their rights.
No, that you cannot just look at the delta from to arbitrary tests to determine the performance. For example in order to change the delta of the lowest performing students they have to lesson the load for the higher performing students, therefore throwing off the delta for that student.
Slashdot Mirror
The opposite of all nations is not no nations, the opposite is less than all nations. While that set includes no nations that is not exactly a choice because the company still has to obey the laws in which it resides And because of that your analogies does not work. Following your logic all data in the internet would soon be scrubbed because all companies, including those repressive ones, would want data they do not like removed from the internet.
So you dont want middle ground, you want them to give in, and even promote them.. That is not middle ground...
duplicates or disputes?
Actually from Ars technica, the site you listed as a citation, they waited 8 years before doing anything, not that they spent 8 years trying to convince her to change it.
IKEA waits 8 years, then shuts down IKEAhackers site with trademark claim
They did work with them to maintain a middle ground.. He wanted to keep the site as it was, they wanted the site dismantled. Middle ground, he gets to keep the site but must make a disclaimer and remove the advertising...I know most /.ers dont understand what a middle ground is, but that is one....
It does not matter how much you like their products, you dont have a right to use their property without their prior permission, which he did not have.
What was douchebag about it? Are they supposed let them use their brand and make money off it while advertising competing items? They let him keep the domain, the only thing was he needed to remove the advertising and put up a disclaimer, that seems pretty fine to me.
The service is free.. The setup is not free. So they are offering the service for free......Also please point out where they scoop up your data....
How is that nonsense, let alone clearly nonsense? Having permanently confidential information is damaging to the democracy. A democracy only works if the system is transparent.
Good thing we dont live in that type of democracy...
The article only says they were outbid and then wanted to buy what was planed to be a site for a light rail. That does not seem like the city throwing up obstacles, it seems like a company wanting preferential treatment.
Seeing how we are talking about ISPs. He said the word telco, but in this instance it was obvious that he meant ISP, since that is what this entire thing is talking about....
What legislation forced the ISPs to connect to the unprofitable areas, without compensation that was vastly more than the cost. Shoot I would just like to know the legislation that forced this at all....
What obstacles were put in front of them? I see lots of people saying that, but no one ever states what those obstacles were. Some obstacles are good, some are bad, so just from that statement we cannot know anything about your statement.
Well that is one of the things that SCO failed on in court so I am fairly certain you are incorrect. This gives the other company an affirmative defense.
Well the blog post is really all they need now. he is the CEO of the company, which means what he writes there is what it is. If they sue now there will be some massive fees for them..
The question I would have though is what it means to be in good faith...
The president has been a very good at compromising, even when the Republicans refuse over and over. I am a middle of the road person, but in this case I see the Republicans unwillingness to compromise as an issue that cause most of what you state. The thing is the President will bend to the breaking point and even breaks sometimes, but typically will not given completely in. The Republicans will bend barely if any because they know they can block him.
There is no evidence that he is partisan. This discussion was about the tea party, so therefore pointing out the problems with the tea parties agenda is no more partisan than point out the problems with the far lefts platform in a discussion about the far left's platform. He also never claimed they were lunatics. If it was just a general political thread you would have a possible point.
Well lets see, the people seeking "proper" visas are waiting 21 years already, and there is no evidence that one affects the other
You stated no evidence that she was using a SS#, so not really an issue
And for the most part they dont compete with many other low skilled Americans because they do work even they dont want to do for the price.
So you are upset they did not talk about a 2 non issues and an issue there is no evidence of...
The problem would be probable cause. If they could show the agents were patrolling the area and noticed something sketchy going on, without having that data, then they may be able to do that. If they say they were there to just see what you are doing then no.
Because in this context the "right" is ensuring that your crippling addition can be done in ways that harm / potentially harm others, violating their rights.
Except that saying "global warming is over estimated" is not the same as saying, "there is no global warming"
So a couple equates to the vast majority now? Also overestimate is not the same thing as saying it does not exist.
teaching requires face to face time, typically tech work does not. That is why things could go wrong.
No, that you cannot just look at the delta from to arbitrary tests to determine the performance. For example in order to change the delta of the lowest performing students they have to lesson the load for the higher performing students, therefore throwing off the delta for that student.
Not all children can be above average, in fact it is nearly impossible because of the nature of statistics.