Texas has no property taxes, and the roads are among the best in the nation.
Re:Such systems have been proposed before
on
The Zuckerberg Tax
·
· Score: 2
You mean like an equity loan on a house that has gained value since the purchase? Awesome, I'll just take a loan out on that equity and spend it on improvements, a new car, and my kid's college tuition. I can always sell the house to pay it off. What could possibly go wrong?
"The fears of the opposition are unfounded! This tax will only ever apply to the extraordinarily wealthiest Americans that can most afford to contribute to the general welfare of the country. There is absolutely no reason for any to oppose this modest Income Tax amendment!"
Here's a "news" flash for you - Beck isn't on Fox anymore. The advertisers all left due to pressure from a campaign led by Change.org, so now he's only on the Roku. But complaining about Beck in this context is pretty ironic, considering that all the other MSM "news" outlets kept mum about it, but Beck was complaining about how bad the bills are.
But of course that's the part that is really disingenuous about Sherman's claim. The MSM completely blacked out the story - they didn't talk about it at all. The bills were already written and ready to go, so the way to promote it is to simply ignore it as a news story, and don't even mention that there may be some controversy over a Congressional moving that's boiling over on the Internet and social media. Note that this isn't typical of them. News and conflicts that arise on the Internet are very often picked up by the MSM television news, so it's not that they didn't know about it. They were, in fact, supporting the bills by proactively ignoring the story.
The SCOTUS has ruled over and over that congress has a lot of leeway in their interpretation of the copyright clause. I'm sure there would be no problem if they decided the exclusive right for patents would only last, say 1 year, and then they could require either a compulsory license or the option of abandoning the patent protection entirely. I mean they've basically said that "limited time" could be "forever minus one day", or that they could continue to retroactively expand copyright term over and over. So based on that precedent, I'm sure any challenge to, say, a patent term of 6 months or even 1 would necessarily fail.
You're obviously a legal genius compared to me, because I'm not even aware that such things exist. I'm sure you'll enlighten us all with numerous examples.
The GP was referring to RAND requirements. (Reasonable and Non Discriminatory, or something like that). Very common for industry standards organizations that accept patented technologies as part of the standard. If they do, they usual require RAND requirements from the patent holder.
Or
3) They make Millions of these boards and only sell thousands, stuck with a massive overstock, and the company goes bankrupt. I seriously doubt they will sell that many, since there are already many alternatives at low cost. If Roku can sell their box for $50 and still make a profit, the Pi can't be that big a deal.
I don't know that Roku makes a profit on selling their hardware. They have a black-box content delivery mechanism. I think most of their money comes from content sales and deals, not the hardware.
I see a memorial first edition of a couple core books but hardly all of them. Elsewhere I see 4th edition. Where is the 3.5 ed books that the copyright owner recalled from bookstores before releasing 4th ed.
Not sure if you're just nit-picking here or not. All the 3.5 edition rules are freely available, and I thought that version 4 was supposed to take care of all the complaints from people about 3.5??
And if that's not good enough, the printed books can be found, so I'm not sure what the point is in complaining about not being able to get scanned images of those books from a bittorrent site - that would seem even less useful than the stiff Wizards provides for free.
Well the publisher sells modified versions of the original Rolemaster books, and if you want the true originals there are places to buy them.
previous editions of D&D,
No, now you're just being ridiculous (or trying to justify infringement just because you don't like the publishers). There are no editions of D&D that cannot be had from the copyright owner directly.
Seriously, if you're going to make a case for the issues with copyright, you've got to come up with legitimate issues. The stuff you've come up with are not.
Well the U.S. controls the DNS system, so that puts pretty much the entire world under US jurisdiction (unless you want to homebrew your own name lookups, that is). They shut down MegaUpload recently, and they were in New Zealand. The operators were arrested, too, but it remains to be seen if they will actually be extradited.
Eventually, you will probably need a license from the US government to have a web site at all. If you don't have one, your website will simply vanish, like nasa.gov did.
Not really, but they did put on a big PR stunt where a big, popular file-sharing site, seemingly out-of-reach on the other side of the world, were shut down and the operators arrested. I'm not convinced that is was anything but a scripted reality show, but it seemed to have convinced the operators of BTJunkie that they should quit while they're ahead.
Re:Your right to what?
on
BTJunkie No More?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
It's a very high price compared to cost of distribution, and copyright has gone far beyond the scope required for it's nominal purpose of promoting literary progress. Also, there are lots of things that are out of print, but copyright still covers that.
I don't know about cost - if you have a monopoly on a unique work (regardless of how that monopoly is secured), then you have a right to charge whatever you want. I agree with you that copyright has gone too far in favor of corporate rights with excessively long time periods and too unbalanced in policy. But I also think you would have difficulty defending BTJunkie as a place to find "out of print" copyrighted works.
As long as we're only allowed to vote for people or parties and not on actual decisions, what's the point in making those elections more accessible?
Because that would be even easier to manipulate than the congress, which passed the PATRIOT act almost unanimously, after allowing 20 minutes for reading it, and a year later most of them still hadn't read it. How many voters would actually read 1000+ pages of legislation, AND actually take the time to understand it? More likely they'd put stuff in front of people like "STOP CHILD PORNOGRAPHY act", with things in it like automatic access to every GPS device, requiring a Federal license to access the Internet, and making encryption illegal without authorization from the Federal Reserve.
Hmmm... I dunno... Maybe something to do the the energy of the sun and the greenhouse effect? You know, that shit you conveniently forgot about/ignored.
What a troll. The warming mechanism is irrelevant - I was only trying to determine how they arrived at that figure (with really bad math - yea, I messed up my calculations, there).
Still, it seems greenhouse effect is much more important, as the Met has decided that even with a significant drop in the output of the sun, the greenhouse effect would continue to warm the earth, with an insignificant affect from less solar energy.
Yea, yea, I posted without looking. Maybe it should have been more like 22 x 10^44 kJ or something. Really didn't need 10 different people pointing that out.
You're right - it doesn't even pass the common sense test now that I look at it. I must have dropped and exponent somewhere. That's what I get for rushing a post.
So now burning (hint, just a chemical action) some dead dinosaur is releasing the energy equivilent of 160 TONNES?
I'm pretty sure he means that if the surface temperature increases by 1 degree C, then that corresponds to a higher amount of energy in the planet. it has nothing to do with burning fuel or anything else.
So how does that translate to 160 tonnes a year? The total mass of earth is estimated as 5.9721986×10^24 kg or 5.9721986×10^21 tonnes. To raise that mass by 1 C requires 22,964.44 J of energy. That amount of energy translates to only 2.55514×10^-10 grams (a very tiny number). And it takes about 100 years to raise the temperature of earth by 1 C. So I'd say their math is way off.
It sounds to me like they are stable once removed from the substrate. They talk about using "energenic contributions" (?) to guide the assembly process. So even if it were possible to trigger self-assembly mechanism outside that environment, you'd have to re-energize them in a similar fashion, or you'd just get some random clumping of... junk.
These energetic contributions can be easily tuned by varying the supramolecular morphology, which is accomplished simply by attaching different types of small molecules to the side chains of the block copolymers.
Slashdot Mirror
If all you are whining about is that they have deductions that they use
The whine is that people with wealth have access to deductions that people without wealth don't have.
That's like whining about not having access to handicap parking because you're not in a wheelchair.
Texas has no property taxes, and the roads are among the best in the nation.
You mean like an equity loan on a house that has gained value since the purchase? Awesome, I'll just take a loan out on that equity and spend it on improvements, a new car, and my kid's college tuition. I can always sell the house to pay it off. What could possibly go wrong?
"The fears of the opposition are unfounded! This tax will only ever apply to the extraordinarily wealthiest Americans that can most afford to contribute to the general welfare of the country. There is absolutely no reason for any to oppose this modest Income Tax amendment!"
Here's a "news" flash for you - Beck isn't on Fox anymore. The advertisers all left due to pressure from a campaign led by Change.org, so now he's only on the Roku. But complaining about Beck in this context is pretty ironic, considering that all the other MSM "news" outlets kept mum about it, but Beck was complaining about how bad the bills are.
But of course that's the part that is really disingenuous about Sherman's claim. The MSM completely blacked out the story - they didn't talk about it at all. The bills were already written and ready to go, so the way to promote it is to simply ignore it as a news story, and don't even mention that there may be some controversy over a Congressional moving that's boiling over on the Internet and social media. Note that this isn't typical of them. News and conflicts that arise on the Internet are very often picked up by the MSM television news, so it's not that they didn't know about it. They were, in fact, supporting the bills by proactively ignoring the story.
We report, you decide.
The SCOTUS has ruled over and over that congress has a lot of leeway in their interpretation of the copyright clause. I'm sure there would be no problem if they decided the exclusive right for patents would only last, say 1 year, and then they could require either a compulsory license or the option of abandoning the patent protection entirely. I mean they've basically said that "limited time" could be "forever minus one day", or that they could continue to retroactively expand copyright term over and over. So based on that precedent, I'm sure any challenge to, say, a patent term of 6 months or even 1 would necessarily fail.
You're obviously a legal genius compared to me, because I'm not even aware that such things exist. I'm sure you'll enlighten us all with numerous examples.
The GP was referring to RAND requirements. (Reasonable and Non Discriminatory, or something like that). Very common for industry standards organizations that accept patented technologies as part of the standard. If they do, they usual require RAND requirements from the patent holder.
Sorry, no. According to the FAQ, it won't fit in an Altoids tin because of the rounded corners.
Or 3) They make Millions of these boards and only sell thousands, stuck with a massive overstock, and the company goes bankrupt. I seriously doubt they will sell that many, since there are already many alternatives at low cost. If Roku can sell their box for $50 and still make a profit, the Pi can't be that big a deal.
I don't know that Roku makes a profit on selling their hardware. They have a black-box content delivery mechanism. I think most of their money comes from content sales and deals, not the hardware.
and to prove ourselves to be a trustworthy partner.
I think the ship has already sailed on that one.
Umph! Way to put a damper on our government-funding-cuts-will-cause-disaster hyperbolefest!
I see a memorial first edition of a couple core books but hardly all of them. Elsewhere I see 4th edition. Where is the 3.5 ed books that the copyright owner recalled from bookstores before releasing 4th ed.
Not sure if you're just nit-picking here or not. All the 3.5 edition rules are freely available, and I thought that version 4 was supposed to take care of all the complaints from people about 3.5??
And if that's not good enough, the printed books can be found, so I'm not sure what the point is in complaining about not being able to get scanned images of those books from a bittorrent site - that would seem even less useful than the stiff Wizards provides for free.
Actually Bittorrent sites are a great place to find scans of all kinds of out of print gaming books.
The old Battletech stuff,
You can actually download PDFs of the out-of-print Battletech stuff right from their web site.
Rolemaster,
Well the publisher sells modified versions of the original Rolemaster books, and if you want the true originals there are places to buy them.
previous editions of D&D,
No, now you're just being ridiculous (or trying to justify infringement just because you don't like the publishers). There are no editions of D&D that cannot be had from the copyright owner directly.
Seriously, if you're going to make a case for the issues with copyright, you've got to come up with legitimate issues. The stuff you've come up with are not.
Well the U.S. controls the DNS system, so that puts pretty much the entire world under US jurisdiction (unless you want to homebrew your own name lookups, that is). They shut down MegaUpload recently, and they were in New Zealand. The operators were arrested, too, but it remains to be seen if they will actually be extradited.
Eventually, you will probably need a license from the US government to have a web site at all. If you don't have one, your website will simply vanish, like nasa.gov did.
Not really, but they did put on a big PR stunt where a big, popular file-sharing site, seemingly out-of-reach on the other side of the world, were shut down and the operators arrested. I'm not convinced that is was anything but a scripted reality show, but it seemed to have convinced the operators of BTJunkie that they should quit while they're ahead.
It's a very high price compared to cost of distribution, and copyright has gone far beyond the scope required for it's nominal purpose of promoting literary progress. Also, there are lots of things that are out of print, but copyright still covers that.
I don't know about cost - if you have a monopoly on a unique work (regardless of how that monopoly is secured), then you have a right to charge whatever you want. I agree with you that copyright has gone too far in favor of corporate rights with excessively long time periods and too unbalanced in policy. But I also think you would have difficulty defending BTJunkie as a place to find "out of print" copyrighted works.
As long as we're only allowed to vote for people or parties and not on actual decisions, what's the point in making those elections more accessible?
Because that would be even easier to manipulate than the congress, which passed the PATRIOT act almost unanimously, after allowing 20 minutes for reading it, and a year later most of them still hadn't read it. How many voters would actually read 1000+ pages of legislation, AND actually take the time to understand it? More likely they'd put stuff in front of people like "STOP CHILD PORNOGRAPHY act", with things in it like automatic access to every GPS device, requiring a Federal license to access the Internet, and making encryption illegal without authorization from the Federal Reserve.
Now you're just trying to discriminate against dead people. That's Deadism, you insensitive clod!
So how does that translate to 160 tonnes a year?
Hmmm... I dunno... Maybe something to do the the energy of the sun and the greenhouse effect? You know, that shit you conveniently forgot about/ignored.
What a troll. The warming mechanism is irrelevant - I was only trying to determine how they arrived at that figure (with really bad math - yea, I messed up my calculations, there).
Still, it seems greenhouse effect is much more important, as the Met has decided that even with a significant drop in the output of the sun, the greenhouse effect would continue to warm the earth, with an insignificant affect from less solar energy.
Yea, yea, I posted without looking. Maybe it should have been more like 22 x 10^44 kJ or something. Really didn't need 10 different people pointing that out.
-- I am a crackpot
So you are, so you are.
... says the "CS" moron.
You're right - it doesn't even pass the common sense test now that I look at it. I must have dropped and exponent somewhere. That's what I get for rushing a post.
So now burning (hint, just a chemical action) some dead dinosaur is releasing the energy equivilent of 160 TONNES?
I'm pretty sure he means that if the surface temperature increases by 1 degree C, then that corresponds to a higher amount of energy in the planet. it has nothing to do with burning fuel or anything else.
So how does that translate to 160 tonnes a year? The total mass of earth is estimated as 5.9721986×10^24 kg or 5.9721986×10^21 tonnes. To raise that mass by 1 C requires 22,964.44 J of energy. That amount of energy translates to only 2.55514×10^-10 grams (a very tiny number). And it takes about 100 years to raise the temperature of earth by 1 C. So I'd say their math is way off.
It sounds to me like they are stable once removed from the substrate. They talk about using "energenic contributions" (?) to guide the assembly process. So even if it were possible to trigger self-assembly mechanism outside that environment, you'd have to re-energize them in a similar fashion, or you'd just get some random clumping of ... junk.
These energetic contributions can be easily tuned by varying the supramolecular morphology, which is accomplished simply by attaching different types of small molecules to the side chains of the block copolymers.
Sounds so easy! Why didn't I think of that?