I wonder if it would be worth attaching copyright longevity to the lifespan of the actual creator person. think of the fringe benefit that would have on the cost of health insurance, or at least the percentage paid by your employer... Once you create something good (profitable) for them, they would have a vested interest in keeping you alive as long as possible.
(hmm.. maybe that's why disney's frozen... in case they change the law they'll still own mickey...)
nah, people are getting more 'sophisicated,' look at how much of the story in between the "matrices" and starwars II and III was left to books, cartoons, video games etc. with no further explanation in the movies. It wasn't till I read the ebert article that I understood why gen grevious was wheezing throughout SWIII, and that was covered in a cartoon. in a way this is nice, because it cuts down on expo, but on the other hand it's much easier to lose track of where the story is supposed to be.
Here's hoping Joss can sort this out in the trailers, I think that would be a novel way to go about it...
(now I just have to move somewhere there are movie theaters...
pity, it got better after they stopped all the exposition.
Which, according to the commentary on the DVD, was duplicated in the first episode, as it was filmed first, and the "pilot" was done later, and that had to have exposition because it was the "pilot." So they ended up with two episodes full of exposition.
As another responder pointed out, most of the security rules are regarding the airport, not the airline. you *can* run an airline where people are allowed to carry guns, you just can't use the normal federally regulated airport, because guns are illegal there.
Of course the thought of voluntarily getting into a pressurized metal tube at high altitudes with a bunch of knowingly armed and self-righteous people tends to make people think of other airlines. and therefore a commercially bad move. same with stripped naked. ugly would go looking for pretty, who would know better than to show up there.
federal mandates on planes allow the airlines to discriminate (against people carrying guns, people on the do-not-fly list. for example) federal mandates allow the locking of the cockpit door, it was the pilots union that demanded it. If you congregate in the front of a plane, you are not breaking a federal law, you are breaking an airline rule.
BUT, that said, let's have a little word about federal regulations/mandates/laws and how they differ.
federal laws, mandates and regulations are slightly different things. worth checking on. remember the "real-id" act is a *mandate*, there is no requirement for the states to follow this *mandate* simply that the federal government will not recognize that state's ID as legit. they're not "forcing" the states to comply, (those of you who have had credit trouble might recognize this argument.)
federal safety *regulations*, (OSHA for example) are not there to protect you from something. they are there to make sure there is a well defined line between "my fault" and "your fault" that's all. If I did not wear a hard hat on a constructions site, I would be in violation of OSHA regulations, would I be arrested for it? no. the company I worked for would insist I wore one, because if I wore one they would not be liable in the case of my injury. Federal regulations about airports and airlines are the same. do this and you won't be liable for this kind of problem. If you don't follow these rules, so be it. on your own head be it. It is not against the law just to carry a gun on a plane. But, if the airline allows it, and something goes wrong, (anything, it not even be directly tied to the fact that you have a gun) the airline would be liable for everything. they did not conform to the rules. If the airline follows every rule, and something still goes wrong, they can say "not our fault!" and walk away.
----I have conferred with someone here, and I may be mistaken about the status of guns on planes being actual law, but I suspect there are conditions. also, the illegality of guns on planes has to do with interstate commerce laws, oddly enough... so if someone could substantiate this, I will happily retract the bits of the above diatribe that apply to guns.)----
rules about guns, knive, nailclippers, mean that already the popular misreading of the 2nd amendment doesn't apply, (and a bit of the 4th) and rules about making silly jokes mean that the 1st doesn't apply either. "no gathering at the front of the cabin" rule, that's the 1st again, so, does the constitution apply?
It doesn't seem like they care who uses the wireless, just that if you're going to hang out *in* the coffeeshop, they would prefer that you were sociable is a "local" sort of way.
this doesn't seem unreasonable, to me, the most important part of picking a coffeeshop to hang out at, is the rest of the people there. if you're in seattle and need a quite place to hook up, I understand that there is this really neat library...
bear in mind of course that seattle is the one place where starbucks does qualify as "local coffeeshop" (sort of) and they use t-mobile hotspots. i appreciate, as much as anybody access to free wireless, but I also appreciate that if you open a coffeeshop, it is not so you can serve a lot of people coffee, it's so you can have a place where people you like to see can congregate.
Airlines are private companies, and while they are subject to certain anti-discriminatory rules, no, you don't have the right to cross the atlantic IN THEIR AIRPLANE if they don't want you to. you are completely entitled to cross the atlantic on your own. you can swim, row, whatever, however you may have some difficulties at the far shore with customs and immigration officers of that country.
you could always start your own airline with different rules...
I have worked on houses that suffered from that... It's amazing what people will do with ducting. and PLUMBING! hoo boy, don't get me started...
free advice, never buy a house from a construction contractor and never buy a car from an auto-mechanic. these are people that deal subconciously with things that the rest of us agonize over.
maybe they just built the shell first, and they, like everyone else, had to wait for the various subcontractors to finish the utilities before they could move in? Perhaps the realized this for the second one, and figured out that if they built the reactor first, they wouldn't have that head scratching moment of "where's the door?" ala "then, once they're asleep, we leap out of the rabbit..."
before I reply, I just want to make sure that you knew i was being sarcastic in the GP post, right?
Unlike the other person who responded to this post, I *know* you have a point, and it *is* very sad that you do. This set of actions that you describe can be equally applied to large business/multinationals all over. As I think of it though, I think your definition also comes close to fitting the term "loan sharking."
Isn't it great to be a part of a society that penalizes, (and even ridicules) altruism in favor of avarice?
And this demonstrates a basic flaw in pure "capitalism" as a system. The old saying is "The want of money is at the root of all evil." so if you base a society on formalizing the want of money, what else could you expect to happen? I just wish the U.S. wouldn't keep exporting its worst habits...
The saddest part of all is that much of what you describe is based more on thoughtless, opportunistic avarice than true malignant thought. A chink is seen through which money can be wrung, so let's wring it, "this is how it's done." The thought that you might sacrifice the possibility to make lots of money in order to do something good just fails to cross the minds in question. the fact that the thought that goes through this type of mind is more like to be "hey we can get some really cheap land" rather than "we're going to screw these locals" is actually quite painfully frightening. that analogy of human being==virus begins to seem valid...
sorry, it's late, stream of conciousness dammed up... this may not seem to connect. I wonder though, having made a comment critical of capitalism, will someone now accuse me of communism? Do we as a group see the possibility that a bit of this system and a bit of that system and maybe some of these others can be mixed together? Am I too much of an idealist? could the last step of the well known instruction set be;
1 to(n-2) some instructions; (n-1) ???? (n) Universal improvement of life on Earth!
probably not, must be dreaming at keyboard, I shut up now and roll over...*snore*
An important part of U.S. foreign 'policy' is the ability to "Bomb %s back to the stone age!" $otherCountry;
Unless you advance these poor foreigners to our* level of dependence on technology, you devalue this strategy as an effective foreign policy.
Once you understand this, the rest of the errors, become much easier to understand. Anybody got a Stem cell? ___________________________________________ _______ _______ *Yes, I know there are many people here not from the U.S.
I think they eventually managed to cover this in one of the later novels, in that the Kessel run involved a number of black holes and the actual distance travelled was indeed wildly variable, depending on how close you went to the BHs... something to do with surfing the curves of the event horizon. I think it is worth some congratulations to the author in question for making that attempt at explaining the unexplainable...
unfortunately, there are those of us who, due to the masters in the sysad building over there, can not reach coral cache links, as the firewall here blocks everything port that is non "normal" (that they have never heard of.)
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if it would be worth attaching copyright longevity to the lifespan of the actual creator person. think of the fringe benefit that would have on the cost of health insurance, or at least the percentage paid by your employer... Once you create something good (profitable) for them, they would have a vested interest in keeping you alive as long as possible.
(hmm.. maybe that's why disney's frozen... in case they change the law they'll still own mickey...)
nah, people are getting more 'sophisicated,' look at how much of the story in between the "matrices" and starwars II and III was left to books, cartoons, video games etc. with no further explanation in the movies. It wasn't till I read the ebert article that I understood why gen grevious was wheezing throughout SWIII, and that was covered in a cartoon. in a way this is nice, because it cuts down on expo, but on the other hand it's much easier to lose track of where the story is supposed to be.
Here's hoping Joss can sort this out in the trailers, I think that would be a novel way to go about it...
(now I just have to move somewhere there are movie theaters...
pity, it got better after they stopped all the exposition.
Which, according to the commentary on the DVD, was duplicated in the first episode, as it was filmed first, and the "pilot" was done later, and that had to have exposition because it was the "pilot." So they ended up with two episodes full of exposition.
Some thoughts on your thoughts
h tml p /t-12995.html a .asp
As another responder pointed out, most of the security rules are regarding the airport, not the airline. you *can* run an airline where people are allowed to carry guns, you just can't use the normal federally regulated airport, because guns are illegal there.
Of course the thought of voluntarily getting into a pressurized metal tube at high altitudes with a bunch of knowingly armed and self-righteous people tends to make people think of other airlines. and therefore a commercially bad move. same with stripped naked. ugly would go looking for pretty, who would know better than to show up there.
federal mandates on planes allow the airlines to discriminate (against people carrying guns, people on the do-not-fly list. for example) federal mandates allow the locking of the cockpit door, it was the pilots union that demanded it. If you congregate in the front of a plane, you are not breaking a federal law, you are breaking an airline rule.
BUT, that said, let's have a little word about federal regulations/mandates/laws and how they differ.
federal laws, mandates and regulations are slightly different things. worth checking on. remember the "real-id" act is a *mandate*, there is no requirement for the states to follow this *mandate* simply that the federal government will not recognize that state's ID as legit. they're not "forcing" the states to comply, (those of you who have had credit trouble might recognize this argument.)
federal safety *regulations*, (OSHA for example) are not there to protect you from something. they are there to make sure there is a well defined line between "my fault" and "your fault" that's all. If I did not wear a hard hat on a constructions site, I would be in violation of OSHA regulations, would I be arrested for it? no. the company I worked for would insist I wore one, because if I wore one they would not be liable in the case of my injury. Federal regulations about airports and airlines are the same. do this and you won't be liable for this kind of problem. If you don't follow these rules, so be it. on your own head be it. It is not against the law just to carry a gun on a plane. But, if the airline allows it, and something goes wrong, (anything, it not even be directly tied to the fact that you have a gun) the airline would be liable for everything. they did not conform to the rules. If the airline follows every rule, and something still goes wrong, they can say "not our fault!" and walk away.
----I have conferred with someone here, and I may be mistaken about the status of guns on planes being actual law, but I suspect there are conditions. also, the illegality of guns on planes has to do with interstate commerce laws, oddly enough... so if someone could substantiate this, I will happily retract the bits of the above diatribe that apply to guns.)----
rules about guns, knive, nailclippers, mean that already the popular misreading of the 2nd amendment doesn't apply, (and a bit of the 4th) and rules about making silly jokes mean that the 1st doesn't apply either. "no gathering at the front of the cabin" rule, that's the 1st again, so, does the constitution apply?
here are a few links that come up if you google (FAA regulations guns)
http://www.fletc.gov/artesia/travel.htm
http://www.akdart.com/gun1.html
http://www.packing.org/airlines
http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel092601.s
http://forums.officer.com/forums/archive/index.ph
and of course,
http://www.nationallampoon.com/nlbs/santa/xmas/fa
I had a taxi drive comment to me that auto manufacturer interest in sirius dropped after that announcement...
there's a reason why the dolphins are #2 and not us...
It doesn't seem like they care who uses the wireless, just that if you're going to hang out *in* the coffeeshop, they would prefer that you were sociable is a "local" sort of way.
this doesn't seem unreasonable, to me, the most important part of picking a coffeeshop to hang out at, is the rest of the people there. if you're in seattle and need a quite place to hook up, I understand that there is this really neat library...
bear in mind of course that seattle is the one place where starbucks does qualify as "local coffeeshop" (sort of) and they use t-mobile hotspots. i appreciate, as much as anybody access to free wireless, but I also appreciate that if you open a coffeeshop, it is not so you can serve a lot of people coffee, it's so you can have a place where people you like to see can congregate.
I think it's very important to remember that.
but we are already waaaaay down that slope...
Airlines are private companies, and while they are subject to certain anti-discriminatory rules, no, you don't have the right to cross the atlantic IN THEIR AIRPLANE if they don't want you to. you are completely entitled to cross the atlantic on your own. you can swim, row, whatever, however you may have some difficulties at the far shore with customs and immigration officers of that country.
you could always start your own airline with different rules...
you don't know what he looks like, it could be the appropriate spelling...
until IE won't run!
I have worked on houses that suffered from that... It's amazing what people will do with ducting. and PLUMBING! hoo boy, don't get me started...
free advice, never buy a house from a construction contractor and never buy a car from an auto-mechanic. these are people that deal subconciously with things that the rest of us agonize over.
maybe they just built the shell first, and they, like everyone else, had to wait for the various subcontractors to finish the utilities before they could move in? Perhaps the realized this for the second one, and figured out that if they built the reactor first, they wouldn't have that head scratching moment of "where's the door?" ala "then, once they're asleep, we leap out of the rabbit..."
before I reply, I just want to make sure that you knew i was being sarcastic in the GP post, right?
Unlike the other person who responded to this post, I *know* you have a point, and it *is* very sad that you do. This set of actions that you describe can be equally applied to large business/multinationals all over. As I think of it though, I think your definition also comes close to fitting the term "loan sharking."
Isn't it great to be a part of a society that penalizes, (and even ridicules) altruism in favor of avarice?
And this demonstrates a basic flaw in pure "capitalism" as a system. The old saying is "The want of money is at the root of all evil." so if you base a society on formalizing the want of money, what else could you expect to happen? I just wish the U.S. wouldn't keep exporting its worst habits...
The saddest part of all is that much of what you describe is based more on thoughtless, opportunistic avarice than true malignant thought. A chink is seen through which money can be wrung, so let's wring it, "this is how it's done." The thought that you might sacrifice the possibility to make lots of money in order to do something good just fails to cross the minds in question. the fact that the thought that goes through this type of mind is more like to be "hey we can get some really cheap land" rather than "we're going to screw these locals" is actually quite painfully frightening. that analogy of human being==virus begins to seem valid...
sorry, it's late, stream of conciousness dammed up... this may not seem to connect. I wonder though, having made a comment critical of capitalism, will someone now accuse me of communism? Do we as a group see the possibility that a bit of this system and a bit of that system and maybe some of these others can be mixed together? Am I too much of an idealist? could the last step of the well known instruction set be;
1 to(n-2) some instructions;
(n-1) ????
(n) Universal improvement of life on Earth!
probably not, must be dreaming at keyboard, I shut up now and roll over...*snore*
An important part of U.S. foreign 'policy' is the ability to "Bomb %s back to the stone age!" $otherCountry;
_ _______ _______
Unless you advance these poor foreigners to our* level of dependence on technology, you devalue this strategy as an effective foreign policy.
Once you understand this, the rest of the errors, become much easier to understand. Anybody got a Stem cell?
__________________________________________
*Yes, I know there are many people here not from the U.S.
multi-billion dollar drug industries who get their subsidies/tax-breaks/favorable-trade-restrictions from who?
well at the moment, bear in mind that a big chunk of the active U.S. military is elsewhere right now...
perhaps we might do better assigning our patriotism to the *Planet* we all *share*?
why build version control into each application, wouldn't it be a better feature of the OS? then the individual applications would get it for free...
or perhaps use a file format that isn't encoded in some weird way, and allow people to use a rational version control system of their choice.
I think this was meant to be funny... it's hard to tell in this subject area...
I think the most important thing is that the experience can be recorded and shared, just imagine the new website/p2p possibilites...
and while your at it, "Stop, Drop, and Roll!"
not observably, though it may be concurrent... If we look at A Galaxy Far, Far Away® then we may also be looking A Long Time Ago®.
I think they eventually managed to cover this in one of the later novels, in that the Kessel run involved a number of black holes and the actual distance travelled was indeed wildly variable, depending on how close you went to the BHs... something to do with surfing the curves of the event horizon. I think it is worth some congratulations to the author in question for making that attempt at explaining the unexplainable...
an "egosystem" perhaps...
quick someone else use it so we can send ot to the OED (if it's not already there...)
ah the joys of salt and bacteria...
check out the south bay around san jose, ca
colorful
unfortunately, there are those of us who, due to the masters in the sysad building over there, can not reach coral cache links, as the firewall here blocks everything port that is non "normal" (that they have never heard of.)