government makes requests and threats all the time. Some of which are honored as it is the right thing to do and some aren't because it is the right thing to do and we won't always agree on either case.
I would ask why we care that Wikipedia didn't print the current location and status of a reporter when it is neither germain to the rest of the information about him nor of particular immediate interest. In the past tense it would be interesting to hear that it had happened but I see no real reason to be incensed that you didn't hear about it while it was happening.
I assume that the Times requested this and from time to time it is the humanitarian thing to do. You have no "right" to know, I hate it when the public's "right" to know is touted because it is a fiction at best.
Murder is a broad enough subject that being for or against it is moot. We are all opposed to murder. If on the other hand he is opposed to the fact that a murder statute exists it's another story. If the judge were in favor of or against the murder statues being used in cases of drunk driving it might be different. he is then advocating an application of a law that might be inappropriate. It is up to the legislature to make the case of where to apply a law. In some cases usually in supreme courts it can fall to a panel of judges to determine if the legislature intended to apply a law to a circumstance but that's about it.
Judges do not enforce the law, they adjudicate. This means that they are allowed to determine if the law was broken or not, and they can set the punishment for it's breaking within the legislative guidelines. Enforcement is the job of the police. If he approves of a law being enforced he may be more likely to apply it or see it's having been broken in cases where it might not have been appropriate.
The expression of a work is copyrightable, even if the work itself is not copyrighted. If however you merely copy the work entire you have created nothing copyrightable.
The expression of a work is copyrightable, even if the work itself is not copyrighted. You are always free to use the information and in most cases even the exact text of a public domain work. However the cover and illustrations of the book/text/paper and the arrangement of the symphony are the expression that a new author has added to the work and those expressions are what is copyrighted. Stop getting hung up on the copying bullshit. In order for a public domain work to be useful it must be used or expressed in an original fashion or else you have simply repeated the original author without adding anything of value and therefore stood upon the back of giants and trod them under your smelly feet. Information of a general nature such as that found in digests and almanacs are usually copyrighted works consisting of the arrangement and collection of public domain information. It is the arrangement that is copyrighted not the information. So you can have all the public domain information you want and as long as you express it yourself in your own way you do not have to license it. If you merely copy the original text and expression of a work that has fallen into the public domain and add nothing to it, I feel that you have betrayed the nature of public domain and are producing a useless piece of fluff simply because you are not required to pay anyone anything for the privilege.
and judges can't be called "biased" simply because they support existing laws.
Excuse me. A judge may determine whether a law has been broken, he may set a punishment if it is proven that the law is broken, but if he supports or disapproves of a law he is biased. A judge may be in favor of all laws being enforced, but any specific law no.
a judge has been declared unbiased when he was clearly anything but biased
So in other words he wasn't biased he was just not unbiased. I'm confused here
Yes and no. I have rarely thought about how I upgrade windows as it is pretty seamless for me (I don't use windows unless I have to). And if security updates for Linux happened the same way I'd have less of a problem. Perhaps Ubuntu has solved some of this but when versions of the apps are as important as versions of the OS and you have to make sure you got the right mix and match of libraries etc. Well it becomes a disadvantage. Even if this is not 100% true there is a perception that this is true and therefore still a problem.
This isn't quite the same as most of the other attempts. Those were merely trying to bring wireless to the city. This one is the whole enchilada and has been done in another city I think in South Carolina. The court ruled in their favor there also. The people weren't being served by the Telecom sources so the city built it's own and offered it cheaper than the cable company could, basically at cost. The cable company cried foul and sued. They lost and are still losing.
While on a business trip to New York, actually just Long Island, I drove back to the airport down the Long Island Expressway. My Memory is not exact here but I needed to re-fill the rental car with gas and never having been in this particular area before I waited until I could see a gas station from the road. That was not an easy task but I think I was somewhere in Queens (near Kennedy airport but not too close) when I pulled off the road. Assuming that there was no danger of violence I pulled into said gas station and when I went to pay for the gas I was told by the attendant, "get your gas and get the hell out of here fast if you want to keep your hide in one piece" , and so I did and so I did. But making assumptions of no danger of violence has gotten people into trouble that don't know the character of the neighborhood in L.A , Louisiana, Alabama and other places as well.
Slashdot Mirror
government makes requests and threats all the time.
Some of which are honored as it is the right thing to do and some aren't because it is the right thing to do and we won't always agree on either case.
Citation needed...Please name names and be specific as to the reason of their kidnapping...
Because it isn't particularly news worthy?
Citation needed
I would ask why we care that Wikipedia didn't print the current location and status of a reporter when it is neither germain to the rest of the information about him nor of particular immediate interest.
In the past tense it would be interesting to hear that it had happened but I see no real reason to be incensed that you didn't hear about it while it was happening.
I assume that the Times requested this and from time to time it is the humanitarian thing to do. You have no "right" to know, I hate it when the public's "right" to know is touted because it is a fiction at best.
The f'ing word is THAN moron!
It seems to you that this is more political than anything.
Otherwise we are left waiting to hear what anything did.
©2009, Scott Beckstead, All rights reserved. This is work is an edited reproduction of a work produced by sbeckstead (555647) posted to Slashdot on Friday, June 26, 2009. The expression of a work is copyrightable, even if the work itself is not copyrighted. You are always free to use the information, and in most cases, even the exact text of a public domain work. However, the cover and illustrations of the book/text/paper and the arrangement of the symphony are the expression that a new author has added to the work and those expressions are what is copyrighted. Stop getting hung up on the copying bullshit. In order for a public domain work to be useful it must be used or expressed in an original fashion, or else you have simply repeated the original author without adding anything of value, and therefore stood upon the back of giants, and trod them under your smelly feet. Information of a general nature such as that found in digests, and almanacs, are usually copyrighted works consisting of the arrangement, and collection of public domain information. It is the arrangement that is copyrighted not the information. So you can have all the public domain information you want and as long as you express it yourself in your own way you do not have to license it. If you merely copy the original text and expression of a work that has fallen into the public domain and add nothing to it, I feel that you have betrayed the nature of public domain and are producing a useless piece of fluff simply because you are not required to pay anyone anything for the privilege. So sue me!
the iPhone also works faster and smoother.
I thought a paranoid was an android that just kept you from falling over?
whoosh!
Yes thank you that is what I was actually trying to articulate.
Murder is a broad enough subject that being for or against it is moot. We are all opposed to murder. If on the other hand he is opposed to the fact that a murder statute exists it's another story. If the judge were in favor of or against the murder statues being used in cases of drunk driving it might be different. he is then advocating an application of a law that might be inappropriate. It is up to the legislature to make the case of where to apply a law. In some cases usually in supreme courts it can fall to a panel of judges to determine if the legislature intended to apply a law to a circumstance but that's about it.
Judges do not enforce the law, they adjudicate. This means that they are allowed to determine if the law was broken or not, and they can set the punishment for it's breaking within the legislative guidelines. Enforcement is the job of the police. If he approves of a law being enforced he may be more likely to apply it or see it's having been broken in cases where it might not have been appropriate.
The expression of a work is copyrightable, even if the work itself is not copyrighted. If however you merely copy the work entire you have created nothing copyrightable.
The expression of a work is copyrightable, even if the work itself is not copyrighted. You are always free to use the information and in most cases even the exact text of a public domain work. However the cover and illustrations of the book/text/paper and the arrangement of the symphony are the expression that a new author has added to the work and those expressions are what is copyrighted. Stop getting hung up on the copying bullshit. In order for a public domain work to be useful it must be used or expressed in an original fashion or else you have simply repeated the original author without adding anything of value and therefore stood upon the back of giants and trod them under your smelly feet. Information of a general nature such as that found in digests and almanacs are usually copyrighted works consisting of the arrangement and collection of public domain information. It is the arrangement that is copyrighted not the information. So you can have all the public domain information you want and as long as you express it yourself in your own way you do not have to license it. If you merely copy the original text and expression of a work that has fallen into the public domain and add nothing to it, I feel that you have betrayed the nature of public domain and are producing a useless piece of fluff simply because you are not required to pay anyone anything for the privilege.
and judges can't be called "biased" simply because they support existing laws.
Excuse me. A judge may determine whether a law has been broken, he may set a punishment if it is proven that the law is broken, but if he supports or disapproves of a law he is biased. A judge may be in favor of all laws being enforced, but any specific law no.
a judge has been declared unbiased when he was clearly anything but biased
So in other words he wasn't biased he was just not unbiased. I'm confused here
Wow stepped in another sacred cow patty! Lighten up folks!
Just one more reason why Unix is inferior to Windows.
Yes and no. I have rarely thought about how I upgrade windows as it is pretty seamless for me (I don't use windows unless I have to). And if security updates for Linux happened the same way I'd have less of a problem. Perhaps Ubuntu has solved some of this but when versions of the apps are as important as versions of the OS and you have to make sure you got the right mix and match of libraries etc. Well it becomes a disadvantage. Even if this is not 100% true there is a perception that this is true and therefore still a problem.
It seems I stepped in a sacred cow patty!
The main Disadvantage of Linux is the rapid development and frequent updates.
You mean like the DWP in Los Angeles, that is cheaper than it's competition and didn't get scammed by Enron.
This isn't quite the same as most of the other attempts. Those were merely trying to bring wireless to the city. This one is the whole enchilada and has been done in another city I think in South Carolina. The court ruled in their favor there also. The people weren't being served by the Telecom sources so the city built it's own and offered it cheaper than the cable company could, basically at cost. The cable company cried foul and sued. They lost and are still losing.
While on a business trip to New York, actually just Long Island, I drove back to the airport down the Long Island Expressway. My Memory is not exact here but I needed to re-fill the rental car with gas and never having been in this particular area before I waited until I could see a gas station from the road. That was not an easy task but I think I was somewhere in Queens (near Kennedy airport but not too close) when I pulled off the road. Assuming that there was no danger of violence I pulled into said gas station and when I went to pay for the gas I was told by the attendant, "get your gas and get the hell out of here fast if you want to keep your hide in one piece" , and so I did and so I did. But making assumptions of no danger of violence has gotten people into trouble that don't know the character of the neighborhood in L.A , Louisiana, Alabama and other places as well.