And in the process of fine-tuning the explanation, you've managed to completely lose everyone. For your misjudgement, I sentence you to a year of hard labor, teaching kindergartners why you cannot pound a square Bessel function through a round hole.
Believe it or not, the blow-up dolls you posted say no to me more than my current girlfriend. That rightbias.com woman is SUCH a slut. She just cannot get enough of my cock, or my cock juice.
He NEVER caught the big fish. He didn't even try. His tactic was to put a tiny little hook on his line and sit in the shallows. In 3 or 4 hours he'd have about a hundred tiny little bluegills. Of course, he'd have to clean all those bitty fish, but he didn't mind. Once they were fried up with a little batter on them, you could eat them whole like sardines and they were FUCKING DELICIOUS.
I agree that intelligence is overrated and interest is key. But you have to have a certain level of intelligence for some pursuits, I think. If you don't have enough intelligence, you have an insurmountable handicap. But once you have enough intelligence, then more intelligence won't help you much. You need to WORK.
This explains why the "losers" in high school didn't become physicists, or cosmologists, but they eventually succeeded at normal occupations. Even though they might not have had as many brains as the smartest, they had enough brains for any normal occupation. And they worked very hard.
The lesson that I draw from this is that I SHOULD have boned that somewhat stupid girl in 10th grade, because she turned out hot and successful even though she wasn't an honors student.
Yes, you can press the next key to go from beginning to the end. I have a Kindle 2 and you don't, because I am rich and deserve it, and you are poor and must therefore have offended thine god.
You're still missing part of the equation, although I don't grant any determination of monopoly. Collusion between more than one company is called "collusion" not monopoly.
The other part of the equation which must be shown is the INTENT and USE of the monopoly in an anti-competitive way. Merely including seats in your car isn't restricting others from producing seats for your car. I'm not sure what your diesel example is doing here, because the thread topic is how car companies are NOT preventing competition by merely including seats in their car.
If you look at what monopolistic companies have done in the past, you can see what happens. When AT&T was broken up they had been using their highly profitable long distance monopoly to keep local service providers out of the market. AT&T could afford to provide local service at a loss, which was anti-competitive.
And Microsoft was using its dominance of the operating system market to keep other browsers from gaining a foothold. If you recall, Microsoft was telling companies that if they wanted to be able to buy Windows, they couldn't install Netscape on their computers. Microsoft wasn't just making IE, they were using their OS monopoly to prevent Netscape from gaining share on IE.
When I talk about getting paychecks in exchange for something which I currently have a right to, I never joke around.
Perhaps Amazon might be liable, perhaps the Author's guild might be liable. All I know is that if I can't have my Kindle read to me, someone owes me some money. At this time I don't know if Amazon can turn off the feature remotely, but I'd expect that it's possible. It's a Linux device, and it has a wireless network connection over which it talks to Amazon directly.
Can you understand what you read? You seem to have some trouble.
Can you understand that when someone wants to restrict MY right to read, that they need to pay me some CASH?
The Kindle has a feature which, like a gun, or a VCR, has a legitimate and legal use which is protected by the Constitution. Anyone saying that I cannot exercise my right to use of public domain materials had better come up with some money, because I don't give away my rights for free.
My new Kindle has shipped from Amazon and will arrive any day. I'm planning to read Gutenberg books with it.
If Mr. Blunt is successful in getting Amazon to remove the text to speech feature from my Kindle, will he compensate me for the loss of use of something I paid for?
If prevents my Kindle from reading public domain books to me, then I expect a fucking check for a hundred bucks in my mailbox. Nothing less.
I can't imagine what of value a bunch of dirty geeks and losers who have never been laid could possibly add to this conversation. This could quite possibly be the article most irrelevant to Slashdot readers.
Slashdot Mirror
Celebrating cultural diversity? You've got to be fucking kidding me.
No, they don't.
And in the process of fine-tuning the explanation, you've managed to completely lose everyone. For your misjudgement, I sentence you to a year of hard labor, teaching kindergartners why you cannot pound a square Bessel function through a round hole.
Believe it or not, the blow-up dolls you posted say no to me more than my current girlfriend. That rightbias.com woman is SUCH a slut. She just cannot get enough of my cock, or my cock juice.
He NEVER caught the big fish. He didn't even try. His tactic was to put a tiny little hook on his line and sit in the shallows. In 3 or 4 hours he'd have about a hundred tiny little bluegills. Of course, he'd have to clean all those bitty fish, but he didn't mind. Once they were fried up with a little batter on them, you could eat them whole like sardines and they were FUCKING DELICIOUS.
Bukkake?
When I first learned English in the 19th century, run-on sentences were not the terrible sin they are considered to be today.
Man who remove Internet Explorer but not Windows is a little like Lance Armstrong: still one Ballmer remaining.
It's like creating a world-spanning network with submarine cables, microwave links, fiber-optic everything, satellite dishes, protocols out the wazoo, billions of lines of code and huge multinational telecommunications and consulting companies to service and support it, employing tens of millions in highly skilled work...just to look at some big titties. http://images.google.com/images?q=bigtitties&sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3GGGL_en___US233&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi
How's the support for DX10 and surround sound?
I wouldn't call that thing in Pudge's fist a ham. It's more like a bacon bit.
Are you saying that the set of hot women and the set of women I've boned have a null intersection set?
I agree that intelligence is overrated and interest is key. But you have to have a certain level of intelligence for some pursuits, I think. If you don't have enough intelligence, you have an insurmountable handicap. But once you have enough intelligence, then more intelligence won't help you much. You need to WORK.
This explains why the "losers" in high school didn't become physicists, or cosmologists, but they eventually succeeded at normal occupations. Even though they might not have had as many brains as the smartest, they had enough brains for any normal occupation. And they worked very hard.
The lesson that I draw from this is that I SHOULD have boned that somewhat stupid girl in 10th grade, because she turned out hot and successful even though she wasn't an honors student.
I want a FOREskin made from stem cells.
He must have been thinking of his girlfriend's ass when he said "BAM-another pound."
Can't we just make some telluranium out of used fish fry oil?
Now you're just being silly and stupid.
Yes, you can press the next key to go from beginning to the end. I have a Kindle 2 and you don't, because I am rich and deserve it, and you are poor and must therefore have offended thine god.
I think that answers your question.
Take some responsibility? I am. That's why I am spending a good part of my fortune to see the destruction of copyrights within my lifetime.
You're still missing part of the equation, although I don't grant any determination of monopoly. Collusion between more than one company is called "collusion" not monopoly.
The other part of the equation which must be shown is the INTENT and USE of the monopoly in an anti-competitive way. Merely including seats in your car isn't restricting others from producing seats for your car. I'm not sure what your diesel example is doing here, because the thread topic is how car companies are NOT preventing competition by merely including seats in their car.
If you look at what monopolistic companies have done in the past, you can see what happens. When AT&T was broken up they had been using their highly profitable long distance monopoly to keep local service providers out of the market. AT&T could afford to provide local service at a loss, which was anti-competitive.
And Microsoft was using its dominance of the operating system market to keep other browsers from gaining a foothold. If you recall, Microsoft was telling companies that if they wanted to be able to buy Windows, they couldn't install Netscape on their computers. Microsoft wasn't just making IE, they were using their OS monopoly to prevent Netscape from gaining share on IE.
When I talk about getting paychecks in exchange for something which I currently have a right to, I never joke around.
Perhaps Amazon might be liable, perhaps the Author's guild might be liable. All I know is that if I can't have my Kindle read to me, someone owes me some money. At this time I don't know if Amazon can turn off the feature remotely, but I'd expect that it's possible. It's a Linux device, and it has a wireless network connection over which it talks to Amazon directly.
There is no car company which can be considered to be a monopoly. Not even close.
You can't use monopoly power to keep others out of the market. You are being deceitful when you leave out the fact that Microsoft is a monopoly.
Can you understand what you read? You seem to have some trouble.
Can you understand that when someone wants to restrict MY right to read, that they need to pay me some CASH?
The Kindle has a feature which, like a gun, or a VCR, has a legitimate and legal use which is protected by the Constitution. Anyone saying that I cannot exercise my right to use of public domain materials had better come up with some money, because I don't give away my rights for free.
My new Kindle has shipped from Amazon and will arrive any day. I'm planning to read Gutenberg books with it.
If Mr. Blunt is successful in getting Amazon to remove the text to speech feature from my Kindle, will he compensate me for the loss of use of something I paid for?
If prevents my Kindle from reading public domain books to me, then I expect a fucking check for a hundred bucks in my mailbox. Nothing less.
I can't imagine what of value a bunch of dirty geeks and losers who have never been laid could possibly add to this conversation. This could quite possibly be the article most irrelevant to Slashdot readers.