That phrase is right on target and highlights why comparisons to Nixon are particularly appropos. This president is extremely secretive on a scale that would have Nixon nodding in approval, not just with the American people but with Congress who is supposed to be overseeing these things. When the President stonewalls every effort to collect evidence even by the people who are supposed to be monitoring, it makes it very difficult not to indulge in a certain paranoia. Especially when he's been caught with his hand in the cookie jar before.
That doesn't seem fair at all. What difference does how the user uses the software make to the manufacturer? Why should the big company have to pay an inflated fee to subsidise the product's use by smaller companies?
I think you missed the gp's point. He wants to center a container object, not text or the text within a container. text-align is a text property. If you apply it to a container object the results won't be what you needed. Try an example with and see what you get for your trouble. The output won't be a table centered horizontally on the page.
Okay, you managed to find a few counterexamples which happen to further invalidate the gp's model. PBS and its "free, no ads" approach, which I believe is the earliest of the examples you cited, was founded in 1968, well after the introduction of television with its "free, with ads" model.
Interesting but not universally valid. In fact, it isn't valid for our specific case. Neither Tivo nor television itself were ever in the "Free, no adds" category. If you want a specific example, Ipana toothpaste was one of the first television advertisers.
I think maybe you did miss something. The purpose of Tivo is to put viewers back in control of their televisions. If the viewer doesn't want to see adds, Tivo supports that. If the viewer does want to see adds, Tivo supports that too.
This new functionality, being opt-in, is completely consistent with that philosophy.
The idea that you won't interact with other students is completely false. I have two advanced degrees, an M.S. in mathematics from the University of Florida earned at the school and an MBA from Baker College earned through their online program. I had just as much interaction with my fellow students in both programs.
The only criteria that really matters in terms of acceptance (other than general quality of the program which you have to consider with a brick-and-mortar program also) is whether or not the school is accredited by a recognized regional accrediting authority such as the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools. (You can find a list of them at http://www.ope.ed.gov/accreditation/Search.asp.) If you're really concerned about general acceptance then you should also ask whether or not your degree will mention that it was earned online. My MBA, for example, is exactly the same as the ones that the college gives the students who physically attend one of their campuses.
If they developed it on their own time (and preferably at home, not using company computers), then it's their IP.
It's not quite that simple. If they did it in the office, using the company's resources, then the company probably has a claim. It also depends on their employment contract. Some give the company rights to any material including software developed by an employee regardless of when or where it was developed during the period of employment. You can argue that such terms are unconscionable and wouldn't stand up in court but asserting such a claim would be a long, painful and expensive process that would have serious negative career consequences.
This raises a point that's never mentioned in any of these articles. Let's say, hypothetically, that the UN does pass some kind of resolution saying they should "control the Internet". Could someone please explain to me how they plan to physically accomplish this? I assume that this would require taking physical control of the root servers most of which are in the US. Do Cuba and Iran plan to send in troops?
What follows from it? That only the US should be able to use the inernet? Well, have fun then, cause a global network is sure going to be useful when it's not global.
I strongly doubt that I would even notice if the Internet suddenly became non-global. For example, to the best of my knowledge, I've never been to a Cuban, Iranian or Chinese website - those countries being the three always mentioned as backing this whiny proposal.
The government can order someone executed for whatever actions it considers reasonably far out of bounds. There were times in relatively recent history when you could be executed for not worshiping in the correct way but if you reread my post you'll see that that wasn't my point. To put it more simply: If you accept that the government can do things individuals can't then there was no inconsistency in God's ordering the extermination of the Isrealites enemies while at the same time forbidding the Isrealites from commiting murder.
This position isn't "two-faced" or, to put it more politely, inconsistent if you accept the position that it's okay for the government to do things that individuals can't. Taking God as the ultimate governing authority for the Israelits, it was entirely within his authority under this doctrine to order the execution of the Canaanites.
Of course, if you don't accept the assumption then the defense falls apart but I don't think anyone would seriously entertain that position.
Why any rationally thinking country would want to be at the mercy of a foreign owned commercial entity is beyond me.
I've never understood this. Why does it matter in which country the company is incorporated? Do you think Microsoft would be any less Microsoft if they were headquartered in Indonesia instead of Washington?
Mine feels pretty much the same way. The problem is that since they don't pay for my gas, they don't care how much it costs me to get to work every day. So the bottom line is that they don't see any advantage to the company from rearranging my working arrangements.
Prices in the UK aren't high because of economics. They're high because an unreasonably high percentage (up to 75%) of the total price comes from taxes.
They aren't necessarily being listened to. I understand that viewer statistics for PBS are generally inflated because people want to "seem smart" by saying they watch it when they really don't. Maybe Beethoven is benefiting from the same effect.
Is is that difficult to grasp that the Internet is not a 100% American project? ARPANET was. The US certainly wasn't involved in building and setting up all the Internet infrastructure outside US soil.
You're right. We didn't set up all of the infrastructure outside the U.S. but this brings us back to my point. If the countries that do own that infrastructure want to do something else with it, they're welcome to but I don't see any reason to cede control over the parts that do belong to us to the United Nations. If this leaves some third world countries isolated from the "Internet proper" they should take that up with the officials that made the decision to secede.
Your analogy (and that of others) is flawed. It would only be correct if we were talking about the U.S. using German engines. Germans may have invented the concept but the engines used in American cars are built for those cars. If the rest of the world wants to build their own Internet they have my best wishes. I won't have any objection to not being able to access sites in Syria, China or Ghanna.
Bad grammar interferes with content. When I read a malformed sentence like the one mentioned by the grandparent it's jarring. Having to stop and try to recreate the author's meaning completely disrupts the flow of the content. If it happens repeatedly I usually end up not even finishing the piece.
Yes it is, although the assertion is often phrased poorly. You aren't stealing the product, you're stealing part of the profit that the producer would have made were it not for your illegal activity.
IANAL but I don't see how failure to keep detailed server logs could result in his going to prison. Is there a law that requires web admins to keep those sorts of records? If there isn't then I don't see what recourse Apple or the courts would have.
You should look into your local community college. The one here has certificate programs in a variety of programming topics. These aren't actual degrees so you don't have to jump through all the general education hoops but you still get a piece of paper from an accredited school that says you know something about the subject.
Slashdot Mirror
you have no evidence
That phrase is right on target and highlights why comparisons to Nixon are particularly appropos. This president is extremely secretive on a scale that would have Nixon nodding in approval, not just with the American people but with Congress who is supposed to be overseeing these things. When the President stonewalls every effort to collect evidence even by the people who are supposed to be monitoring, it makes it very difficult not to indulge in a certain paranoia. Especially when he's been caught with his hand in the cookie jar before.
That doesn't seem fair at all. What difference does how the user uses the software make to the manufacturer? Why should the big company have to pay an inflated fee to subsidise the product's use by smaller companies?
I think you missed the gp's point. He wants to center a container object, not text or the text within a container. text-align is a text property. If you apply it to a container object the results won't be what you needed. Try an example with and see what you get for your trouble. The output won't be a table centered horizontally on the page.
Okay, you managed to find a few counterexamples which happen to further invalidate the gp's model. PBS and its "free, no ads" approach, which I believe is the earliest of the examples you cited, was founded in 1968, well after the introduction of television with its "free, with ads" model.
Interesting but not universally valid. In fact, it isn't valid for our specific case. Neither Tivo nor television itself were ever in the "Free, no adds" category. If you want a specific example, Ipana toothpaste was one of the first television advertisers.
I think maybe you did miss something. The purpose of Tivo is to put viewers back in control of their televisions. If the viewer doesn't want to see adds, Tivo supports that. If the viewer does want to see adds, Tivo supports that too.
This new functionality, being opt-in, is completely consistent with that philosophy.
Superman got married? To a human?!? The poor woman. Can you imagine the muzzle velocity of an orgasm powered by Kryptonian muscles?
Larry Niven discussed this in great detail in his essay Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex.
The idea that you won't interact with other students is completely false. I have two advanced degrees, an M.S. in mathematics from the University of Florida earned at the school and an MBA from Baker College earned through their online program. I had just as much interaction with my fellow students in both programs.
The only criteria that really matters in terms of acceptance (other than general quality of the program which you have to consider with a brick-and-mortar program also) is whether or not the school is accredited by a recognized regional accrediting authority such as the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools. (You can find a list of them at http://www.ope.ed.gov/accreditation/Search.asp.) If you're really concerned about general acceptance then you should also ask whether or not your degree will mention that it was earned online. My MBA, for example, is exactly the same as the ones that the college gives the students who physically attend one of their campuses.
If they developed it on their own time (and preferably at home, not using company computers), then it's their IP.
It's not quite that simple. If they did it in the office, using the company's resources, then the company probably has a claim. It also depends on their employment contract. Some give the company rights to any material including software developed by an employee regardless of when or where it was developed during the period of employment. You can argue that such terms are unconscionable and wouldn't stand up in court but asserting such a claim would be a long, painful and expensive process that would have serious negative career consequences.
Of course, IANAL.
This raises a point that's never mentioned in any of these articles. Let's say, hypothetically, that the UN does pass some kind of resolution saying they should "control the Internet". Could someone please explain to me how they plan to physically accomplish this? I assume that this would require taking physical control of the root servers most of which are in the US. Do Cuba and Iran plan to send in troops?
What follows from it? That only the US should be able to use the inernet? Well, have fun then, cause a global network is sure going to be useful when it's not global.
I strongly doubt that I would even notice if the Internet suddenly became non-global. For example, to the best of my knowledge, I've never been to a Cuban, Iranian or Chinese website - those countries being the three always mentioned as backing this whiny proposal.
The government can order someone executed for whatever actions it considers reasonably far out of bounds. There were times in relatively recent history when you could be executed for not worshiping in the correct way but if you reread my post you'll see that that wasn't my point. To put it more simply: If you accept that the government can do things individuals can't then there was no inconsistency in God's ordering the extermination of the Isrealites enemies while at the same time forbidding the Isrealites from commiting murder.
This position isn't "two-faced" or, to put it more politely, inconsistent if you accept the position that it's okay for the government to do things that individuals can't. Taking God as the ultimate governing authority for the Israelits, it was entirely within his authority under this doctrine to order the execution of the Canaanites.
Of course, if you don't accept the assumption then the defense falls apart but I don't think anyone would seriously entertain that position.
Why any rationally thinking country would want to be at the mercy of a foreign owned commercial entity is beyond me.
I've never understood this. Why does it matter in which country the company is incorporated? Do you think Microsoft would be any less Microsoft if they were headquartered in Indonesia instead of Washington?
Mine feels pretty much the same way. The problem is that since they don't pay for my gas, they don't care how much it costs me to get to work every day. So the bottom line is that they don't see any advantage to the company from rearranging my working arrangements.
Prices in the UK aren't high because of economics. They're high because an unreasonably high percentage (up to 75%) of the total price comes from taxes.
Among these is the right to privacy.
Okay, I'll take the bait. Can you tell me in which article this "right to privacy" is? I seem to have missed it.
They aren't necessarily being listened to. I understand that viewer statistics for PBS are generally inflated because people want to "seem smart" by saying they watch it when they really don't. Maybe Beethoven is benefiting from the same effect.
Is is that difficult to grasp that the Internet is not a 100% American project? ARPANET was. The US certainly wasn't involved in building and setting up all the Internet infrastructure outside US soil.
You're right. We didn't set up all of the infrastructure outside the U.S. but this brings us back to my point. If the countries that do own that infrastructure want to do something else with it, they're welcome to but I don't see any reason to cede control over the parts that do belong to us to the United Nations. If this leaves some third world countries isolated from the "Internet proper" they should take that up with the officials that made the decision to secede.
Your analogy (and that of others) is flawed. It would only be correct if we were talking about the U.S. using German engines. Germans may have invented the concept but the engines used in American cars are built for those cars. If the rest of the world wants to build their own Internet they have my best wishes. I won't have any objection to not being able to access sites in Syria, China or Ghanna.
Bad grammar interferes with content. When I read a malformed sentence like the one mentioned by the grandparent it's jarring. Having to stop and try to recreate the author's meaning completely disrupts the flow of the content. If it happens repeatedly I usually end up not even finishing the piece.
Yes it is, although the assertion is often phrased poorly. You aren't stealing the product, you're stealing part of the profit that the producer would have made were it not for your illegal activity.
IANAL but I don't see how failure to keep detailed server logs could result in his going to prison. Is there a law that requires web admins to keep those sorts of records? If there isn't then I don't see what recourse Apple or the courts would have.
We've had term limits in this country since it was founded. The technical term for them is elections.
You should look into your local community college. The one here has certificate programs in a variety of programming topics. These aren't actual degrees so you don't have to jump through all the general education hoops but you still get a piece of paper from an accredited school that says you know something about the subject.