I'd rather see the first. You or course don't sacrifice clarity and actual documentation for humor. But if a comment can both express what it is mean to and be humorous, so much the better.
Have to point out... the [Wired] article is dated Jan 2. Can't be a dupe. Sure, we've had very, very similar stories before, but seeing as the article in question was posted today, it can't really be a dupe.
I doubt using the wrong notes in a musical score would hold up in court. There's a provision that you cannot be held liable if there is a reasonable expectation that what you are doing is not in violation. Also, if they sue someone for that, they'd have to admit that's what they are doing. In that case, they could expect to a) lose a lot of customers, and b) have a lot of prior customers attempt to bring a class-action suit for fradulent misrepresentation of the product that;s for sale. Or maybe that's just wishful thinking.
But remasterings are a significant change, and would be protected by copyright.
No, but if I remember correctly (it's been a while since I played around with it), I wasn't able to get any circuit that used either the Quad-NAND IC or the top transister to work.
Care to cite sources? Or just speculate. If you read the site, you'd find out that while the typewriters require more force to operate, the resistance is gradual, which is shy she prefers them. Besides, even if for 99% of people typewriters are worse, if she finds them more comfortable, that's the important thing.
Obviously they [theose who work for the gov't agency that deals with this] need to get at the information eventually. No one suggested that the GPS unit transmit its position; it just needs to store it somewhere. Better than real-time stuff, but not much.
Simply add an 's' to the "Just jam the gps signal" quote and it'll be as strong as the poster intended.
>>As to the "What's to prevent someone from removing their box and driving for free?" argument: If they collect it at the fuel station, it would be hard to get fuel with an illegally modded car.
Expect Oregon to lose... oh, *ALL* of its tourism business if they do this.
Re:Do not pass go, do not collect $200
on
Dow vs. Parody
·
· Score: 2
"It doesn't? If it carries consequences, then it ain't free speech. If that were the definition of free speech, then hey, you have a lot of free speech in, say, china. You can say whatever you want. They might kill you for it, but that's just the consequences, so it's still free speech, right? Is that how you want it to work?"
What the parent means is that you do not have the right to commit slander, libel, etc. Let's think of what absolute free speech means:
-no perjury laws (or you wouldn't have free speech on the bench)
-you can incite illegal actions--such as telling someone to kill someone--without reproach
-you can shout 'fire' in a crowded theatre, probably leading to injuries an property damage and certainly leading to lost revenue for the theatre owner, and not be responsible even if it is just a prank
This is not what the founding fathers and other governmental people intended when they wrote ratified the first amendment. They were trying to protect against censoring speech because of political messages. While parodies are of course protected, they cease to be protected when they cross the line to fradulent misrepresentation, and the Yes Men arguably did with their parody and certainly did when they sent links to journalists claiming that they represent Dow and were issuing a press release.
Re:Do not pass go, do not collect $200
on
Dow vs. Parody
·
· Score: 2
Then again, the Onion doesn't go around emailing journalists saying that they are a real news site. The Yes Men emailed journalists saying they represented Dow and were issuing a press release.
Re:Play a little devils advocate.
on
Dow vs. Parody
·
· Score: 2
Well, the slow argument doesn't really hold water in my opinion; the march took place December 2.
Anyone know of Indian newspapers?
Re:Play a little devils advocate.
on
Dow vs. Parody
·
· Score: 2
I'm just pissed off that no actual newspapers seem to have covered this story... a search for "Bhopal" at nytimes.com, cnn.com, msnbc.com, washingtonpost.com, latimes.com, and Proquest (through Penn State; search terms "Bhopol AND PDN(>12/01/2002) AND PDN(01/01/2003)") yielded no relavant results. I want to know what happened... why are people hushing this up?
Look over this site; I've seen easily half a dozen people who were taken *and posted the dowethics site as an actuial dow release*. I cannot claim innocence here; I was fooled as well. Now, I found it incredible that anyone--even Dow--would come up with that release seriously, but until someone replied saying it was the parody site, that didn't even cross my mind.
However, your accident wasn't the result of about 4 or 5 entirely different things going wrong... for example, the two main emergency safeties were currently offline when the accident occured. The plant SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN IN OPERATION with even ONE of these safeties offline (imho), let alone both of them.
NASA paid a couple million for the death of the Challenger Seven because they were *neglegent*. That is the difference; you were not neglegant in your example. Union Carbide was neglegant.
"No, I want the city (or, more accurately, the city's contractor) to come and collect my garbage for disposal and disposal only. That's what the contract says and that's what I expect. If they want to do other things, at the very least I expect my money back (for violation of the terms of said contract)."
What the contract says is probably something along the lines of 'we'll come pick up whatever is sitting at the curb every Friday between 8:00 am and noon.' Which is exactly what they do.
Of course, there's a world of difference between a weed whacker left at the curb presumably on its own and stuff inside a recepticle that was specifically made to contain trash and signal that the trach guys can dump what's in it...
One time my (high school) chem teacher was talking about the importance of homework to the class and felt compelled to mention that in the previous semester I had turned in no homework, which was worth 10% of our grade (I got a B+). The following year I turned in no homework in the second semester in physics. But the physics teacher had a "if you have a 90% or higher average on tests there's an alternative grading scheme that doesn't count homework" thing which was awesome.
The poster brings up a very good point. After reading this, I agree that changing the forward button would be a better solution. Though I think that expanding menus would NOT be the solution. I can't tell if the parent is for this idea ("it could be adequately implemented") or against it ("this is a UI pain-in-the-ass"). I'm not sure what the ideal solution is, but my impression now is that it would involve some sort of tree control as a sidebar and a switchable option between the current style forward button and on that lists all the children of the node which corrosponds to the site you're currently at.
(For the record, I tried it from IE under Windows XP; assuming the image is not a link to somewhere, it will behave the same way. If the image links somewhere, a shortcut to the target will be created instead.)
Slashdot Mirror
I'd rather see the first. You or course don't sacrifice clarity and actual documentation for humor. But if a comment can both express what it is mean to and be humorous, so much the better.
Have to point out... the [Wired] article is dated Jan 2. Can't be a dupe. Sure, we've had very, very similar stories before, but seeing as the article in question was posted today, it can't really be a dupe.
I doubt using the wrong notes in a musical score would hold up in court. There's a provision that you cannot be held liable if there is a reasonable expectation that what you are doing is not in violation. Also, if they sue someone for that, they'd have to admit that's what they are doing. In that case, they could expect to a) lose a lot of customers, and b) have a lot of prior customers attempt to bring a class-action suit for fradulent misrepresentation of the product that;s for sale. Or maybe that's just wishful thinking.
But remasterings are a significant change, and would be protected by copyright.
No, but if I remember correctly (it's been a while since I played around with it), I wasn't able to get any circuit that used either the Quad-NAND IC or the top transister to work.
I've seen that question asked a hundred bajillion times, so I thought I'd step in...
I have a 130-in-one; I think I blew a transister and one of the ICs.
It's /.'s anti-horizontal scrolling thing...
Care to cite sources? Or just speculate. If you read the site, you'd find out that while the typewriters require more force to operate, the resistance is gradual, which is shy she prefers them. Besides, even if for 99% of people typewriters are worse, if she finds them more comfortable, that's the important thing.
Good think the GPS ->receivers- would almost certainly store the information about routes instead of broadcasting it...
I don't like the scheme, but that argument there is complete and utter BS, and nothing but.
>>It makes sense, IMO. There is no reason a hybrid car should contribute less to the road budget than an ineffecient 1960's station wagon.
Except that the 1960's station wagon is probably twice as heave and thus more damaging to the road than the hybrid.
Obviously they [theose who work for the gov't agency that deals with this] need to get at the information eventually. No one suggested that the GPS unit transmit its position; it just needs to store it somewhere. Better than real-time stuff, but not much.
Simply add an 's' to the "Just jam the gps signal" quote and it'll be as strong as the poster intended.
I'm sure *everyone* in Oregon will be able to afford that...
>>As to the "What's to prevent someone from removing their box and driving for free?" argument: If they collect it at the fuel station, it would be hard to get fuel with an illegally modded car.
Expect Oregon to lose... oh, *ALL* of its tourism business if they do this.
"It doesn't? If it carries consequences, then it ain't free speech. If that were the definition of free speech, then hey, you have a lot of free speech in, say, china. You can say whatever you want. They might kill you for it, but that's just the consequences, so it's still free speech, right?
Is that how you want it to work?"
What the parent means is that you do not have the right to commit slander, libel, etc. Let's think of what absolute free speech means:
-no perjury laws (or you wouldn't have free speech on the bench)
-you can incite illegal actions--such as telling someone to kill someone--without reproach
-you can shout 'fire' in a crowded theatre, probably leading to injuries an property damage and certainly leading to lost revenue for the theatre owner, and not be responsible even if it is just a prank
This is not what the founding fathers and other governmental people intended when they wrote ratified the first amendment. They were trying to protect against censoring speech because of political messages. While parodies are of course protected, they cease to be protected when they cross the line to fradulent misrepresentation, and the Yes Men arguably did with their parody and certainly did when they sent links to journalists claiming that they represent Dow and were issuing a press release.
Then again, the Onion doesn't go around emailing journalists saying that they are a real news site. The Yes Men emailed journalists saying they represented Dow and were issuing a press release.
Well, the slow argument doesn't really hold water in my opinion; the march took place December 2.
Anyone know of Indian newspapers?
I'm just pissed off that no actual newspapers seem to have covered this story... a search for "Bhopal" at nytimes.com, cnn.com, msnbc.com, washingtonpost.com, latimes.com, and Proquest (through Penn State; search terms "Bhopol AND PDN(>12/01/2002) AND PDN(01/01/2003)") yielded no relavant results. I want to know what happened... why are people hushing this up?
Look over this site; I've seen easily half a dozen people who were taken *and posted the dowethics site as an actuial dow release*. I cannot claim innocence here; I was fooled as well. Now, I found it incredible that anyone--even Dow--would come up with that release seriously, but until someone replied saying it was the parody site, that didn't even cross my mind.
However, your accident wasn't the result of about 4 or 5 entirely different things going wrong... for example, the two main emergency safeties were currently offline when the accident occured. The plant SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN IN OPERATION with even ONE of these safeties offline (imho), let alone both of them.
NASA paid a couple million for the death of the Challenger Seven because they were *neglegent*. That is the difference; you were not neglegant in your example. Union Carbide was neglegant.
"No, I want the city (or, more accurately, the city's contractor) to come and collect my garbage for disposal and disposal only. That's what the contract says and that's what I expect. If they want to do other things, at the very least I expect my money back (for violation of the terms of said contract)."
What the contract says is probably something along the lines of 'we'll come pick up whatever is sitting at the curb every Friday between 8:00 am and noon.' Which is exactly what they do.
Great way to take a quote out of context... you forgot the "Either the garbage" and "or it isn't" parts. Thus the full statement is perfectly correct.
Of course, there's a world of difference between a weed whacker left at the curb presumably on its own and stuff inside a recepticle that was specifically made to contain trash and signal that the trach guys can dump what's in it...
One time my (high school) chem teacher was talking about the importance of homework to the class and felt compelled to mention that in the previous semester I had turned in no homework, which was worth 10% of our grade (I got a B+). The following year I turned in no homework in the second semester in physics. But the physics teacher had a "if you have a 90% or higher average on tests there's an alternative grading scheme that doesn't count homework" thing which was awesome.
The poster brings up a very good point. After reading this, I agree that changing the forward button would be a better solution. Though I think that expanding menus would NOT be the solution. I can't tell if the parent is for this idea ("it could be adequately implemented") or against it ("this is a UI pain-in-the-ass"). I'm not sure what the ideal solution is, but my impression now is that it would involve some sort of tree control as a sidebar and a switchable option between the current style forward button and on that lists all the children of the node which corrosponds to the site you're currently at.
Oh, that would work... nice idea.
(For the record, I tried it from IE under Windows XP; assuming the image is not a link to somewhere, it will behave the same way. If the image links somewhere, a shortcut to the target will be created instead.)