Unfortunately, current copyright law is so bound up in foreign treaties and world finance that it will be all but impossible to get any significant change to copyright law in the US or Europe. Don't let that stop you from trying, though - it may be a long shot, but at least there's a chance....
Considering how incredibly anticipated HL2 has been, one would think that marketing would be practically unnecessary for it. That makes Vivendi practically irrelevant, as Valve could have easily found investment capital from non-publisher firms and then published the game itself.
West Virginia is the "oldest" state in the Union, even older than Florida, but went Bush, despite its long-running history of being extremely pro-labor and generally very pro-Democrat. Of course, it also has the highest military recruitment rate of any state, and those people are almost exclusively in the youngest voting demographic.
Exit polls revealed that while the youngest age group still formed the same proportion of the voting population that it did in 2000, the next older group voted in a substantially lower proportion, and the oldest two groups voted in a somewhat higher proportion.
Ultimately it's a matter of playing with numbers and interpreting the results in whatever way makes you feel good. In this case, the people involved in youth voter drives are spinning the numbers to say that their efforts actually did something, when really nobody can say one way or another what factors actually influenced the youth vote.
Don't forget that the WWF (World Wildlife Foundation) sued the WWF (World Wrestling Federation) also, which is why it's now called WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment).
I had pretty much blown off Marvel's claims until I read the parent post. Now it seems (to me, at least) that this lawsuit may have some very interesting ramifications with respect to online intellectual property rights as well as EULAs. Most likely it'll be settled out of court and won't provide any sort of binding precedent, but there's still that small chance that some district court somewhere will make a ruling and actually test the validity of EULAs.
Because of that, there's a good possibility that Nader lacks legal standing to request a recount in Ohio, since technically he didn't "lose" the election in that state.
Then as a form of protest, wear an el-cheapo salvaged camera lens (or something that similarly reflects light) on a chain around your neck. Sort of like protesting Echelon by including "bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb" in your e-mail sig.
Instead of saying "do your research", you could try backing up your own argument with some references.
2. France and Japan's nuclear programs are heavily government subsidized, no proof of commercial viability there.
In other words, "I can't prove it to be true, therefore, it must be false."
Now why do we need Nuclear power, if there is no benifit?
If there really were no benefit, then we wouldn't need nuclear power. But you've done nothing to prove that there is no benefit. All you've done is make a bunch of assertions, and the only thing you've done to substantiate those assertions is indicate that the people who disagree with you are slacking off and need to "do some research".
According to Novell's argument, the introduction of outside evidence also raised the stakes - Novell says that now they're playing for the whole ball of wax: a summary judgment in the case rather than merely a dismissal of the complaint.
Does the fake even know that the scientists have made him a leader? If not, how is he to try to assert himself?
He almost certainly doesn't know, but the point of dominance markings mirroring a wasp's eagerness for dominance would most likely be to prevent wasps from engaging in unnecessary violence. That is, a reluctant wasp sees a dominant-marked wasp and knows not to mess with him, while an aggressive wasp sees a non-dominant-marked wasp and knows there's no need to vie with him for dominance. That leaves only dominant-marked wasps competing with each other, and judging from the fact that aggressive wasps still harass falsely dominant-marked reluctant wasps, I would conjecture that aggressive wasps harass other wasps based on a combination of the target's markings and aggressiveness, and will take repeated opportunities to defeat what they perceive as both an easy and valuable opponent.
Actually, I think Blizzard dropped the ball on this one. If they had opened the open beta before this past weekend started, that would have been a ton of people not buying EQ2 and playing the WoW beta right up until late November. As it stands now, a lot more people went ahead and picked up EQ2, and will be far less likely to waste their free month playing WoW instead (and therefore will be less likely to try out WoW unless they decide they completely dislike EQ2).
Why shouldn't YOU implement these measures, and I'll keep to my old ways.
That's exactly what the U.S. government is calling bullshit on. The developing world says that the U.S. should implement new environmental regulations, but those same developing countries are exempt from regulation, even though they are rapidly becoming (and in some cases are) the worst polluters in the world in terms of pollution per dollar GDP.
All nations should be subject to more stringent environmental regulations if any are.
Processes that are cost-effective at reducing energy consumption are, in fact, implemented by industries of their own accord. It would be stupid not to. The issue is that a lot of the processes for reducing pollution reduce the efficiency of the production process (or, at least, don't improve efficiency).
Take, for instance, the catalytic converter in your car - the catalytic converter reduces fuel efficiency and performance somewhat by creating backpressure in the exhaust manifold. Obviously, the emissions benefit is a large net positive, but given the choice, a lot of people would run their cars without a catalytic converter because (a) they wouldn't have to buy the converter and (b) their fuel efficiency and performance would be better. Laws require you to have a properly installed catalytic converter on your car.
Now, the issue that is of concern to our government (not just Bush, but also the Senate, which preemptively refused to ratify Kyoto in 1997, with a resolution sponsored by Democrat Robert Byrd that passed 95-0, including a yes vote from Senator John Kerry) is similar to what would happen to cars if catalytic converters were prohibitively expensive to operate. People wouldn't buy cars, and what's more, people would likely move to a country where they were allowed to run a car without a catalytic converter.
The same is true here - if environmental regulations make operating an industry too expensive in the U.S., then companies will (a) close down plants in the U.S., and (b) likely move those plants overseas to the countries who are already producing the most pollution per dollar GDP but who are exempt from the regulations of Kyoto (such as China).
No one gets laid off because a company can't meet some polution reg.
Except for everybody who worked at the plant that got shut down because the new environmental regs made it unprofitable to continue manufacturing product. But I guess when it comes to left-wing agendas, environment > unions.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, current copyright law is so bound up in foreign treaties and world finance that it will be all but impossible to get any significant change to copyright law in the US or Europe. Don't let that stop you from trying, though - it may be a long shot, but at least there's a chance....
It's too bad you posted AC, because now you'll probably never get to see yourself get pwned:
a ult.htm
http://www.wvdhhr.org/bph/oehp/hsc/briefs/ten/def
Intel holds a trademark for the letter "i".
http://www.rcollins.org/Trademarks/
Considering how incredibly anticipated HL2 has been, one would think that marketing would be practically unnecessary for it. That makes Vivendi practically irrelevant, as Valve could have easily found investment capital from non-publisher firms and then published the game itself.
West Virginia is the "oldest" state in the Union, even older than Florida, but went Bush, despite its long-running history of being extremely pro-labor and generally very pro-Democrat. Of course, it also has the highest military recruitment rate of any state, and those people are almost exclusively in the youngest voting demographic.
Exit polls revealed that while the youngest age group still formed the same proportion of the voting population that it did in 2000, the next older group voted in a substantially lower proportion, and the oldest two groups voted in a somewhat higher proportion.
Ultimately it's a matter of playing with numbers and interpreting the results in whatever way makes you feel good. In this case, the people involved in youth voter drives are spinning the numbers to say that their efforts actually did something, when really nobody can say one way or another what factors actually influenced the youth vote.
Don't forget that the WWF (World Wildlife Foundation) sued the WWF (World Wrestling Federation) also, which is why it's now called WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment).
I had pretty much blown off Marvel's claims until I read the parent post. Now it seems (to me, at least) that this lawsuit may have some very interesting ramifications with respect to online intellectual property rights as well as EULAs. Most likely it'll be settled out of court and won't provide any sort of binding precedent, but there's still that small chance that some district court somewhere will make a ruling and actually test the validity of EULAs.
IANAL, BTW.
Not just nitpicking here, the dispute is over trademark, not copyright.
Because of that, there's a good possibility that Nader lacks legal standing to request a recount in Ohio, since technically he didn't "lose" the election in that state.
Then as a form of protest, wear an el-cheapo salvaged camera lens (or something that similarly reflects light) on a chain around your neck. Sort of like protesting Echelon by including "bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb" in your e-mail sig.
Do you research, solar is sufficiently dense.
Instead of saying "do your research", you could try backing up your own argument with some references.
2. France and Japan's nuclear programs are heavily government subsidized, no proof of commercial viability there.
In other words, "I can't prove it to be true, therefore, it must be false."
Now why do we need Nuclear power, if there is no benifit?
If there really were no benefit, then we wouldn't need nuclear power. But you've done nothing to prove that there is no benefit. All you've done is make a bunch of assertions, and the only thing you've done to substantiate those assertions is indicate that the people who disagree with you are slacking off and need to "do some research".
According to Novell's argument, the introduction of outside evidence also raised the stakes - Novell says that now they're playing for the whole ball of wax: a summary judgment in the case rather than merely a dismissal of the complaint.
What's really sad about this is that the Reuters headline for this news article was this:
"Gmail Users Soon Able to Check E-Mail Via Outlook"
Does the fake even know that the scientists have made him a leader? If not, how is he to try to assert himself?
He almost certainly doesn't know, but the point of dominance markings mirroring a wasp's eagerness for dominance would most likely be to prevent wasps from engaging in unnecessary violence. That is, a reluctant wasp sees a dominant-marked wasp and knows not to mess with him, while an aggressive wasp sees a non-dominant-marked wasp and knows there's no need to vie with him for dominance. That leaves only dominant-marked wasps competing with each other, and judging from the fact that aggressive wasps still harass falsely dominant-marked reluctant wasps, I would conjecture that aggressive wasps harass other wasps based on a combination of the target's markings and aggressiveness, and will take repeated opportunities to defeat what they perceive as both an easy and valuable opponent.
Actually, I think Blizzard dropped the ball on this one. If they had opened the open beta before this past weekend started, that would have been a ton of people not buying EQ2 and playing the WoW beta right up until late November. As it stands now, a lot more people went ahead and picked up EQ2, and will be far less likely to waste their free month playing WoW instead (and therefore will be less likely to try out WoW unless they decide they completely dislike EQ2).
If it helps any, this same story was reported by Wired the first time it hit Slashdot.
Why shouldn't YOU implement these measures, and I'll keep to my old ways.
That's exactly what the U.S. government is calling bullshit on. The developing world says that the U.S. should implement new environmental regulations, but those same developing countries are exempt from regulation, even though they are rapidly becoming (and in some cases are) the worst polluters in the world in terms of pollution per dollar GDP.
All nations should be subject to more stringent environmental regulations if any are.
For all the people who for whatever reason still don't believe you, you might also point out that this search still results in over 100 hits.
Processes that are cost-effective at reducing energy consumption are, in fact, implemented by industries of their own accord. It would be stupid not to. The issue is that a lot of the processes for reducing pollution reduce the efficiency of the production process (or, at least, don't improve efficiency).
Take, for instance, the catalytic converter in your car - the catalytic converter reduces fuel efficiency and performance somewhat by creating backpressure in the exhaust manifold. Obviously, the emissions benefit is a large net positive, but given the choice, a lot of people would run their cars without a catalytic converter because (a) they wouldn't have to buy the converter and (b) their fuel efficiency and performance would be better. Laws require you to have a properly installed catalytic converter on your car.
Now, the issue that is of concern to our government (not just Bush, but also the Senate, which preemptively refused to ratify Kyoto in 1997, with a resolution sponsored by Democrat Robert Byrd that passed 95-0, including a yes vote from Senator John Kerry) is similar to what would happen to cars if catalytic converters were prohibitively expensive to operate. People wouldn't buy cars, and what's more, people would likely move to a country where they were allowed to run a car without a catalytic converter.
The same is true here - if environmental regulations make operating an industry too expensive in the U.S., then companies will (a) close down plants in the U.S., and (b) likely move those plants overseas to the countries who are already producing the most pollution per dollar GDP but who are exempt from the regulations of Kyoto (such as China).
No one gets laid off because a company can't meet some polution reg.
Except for everybody who worked at the plant that got shut down because the new environmental regs made it unprofitable to continue manufacturing product. But I guess when it comes to left-wing agendas, environment > unions.
Sinclair didn't notice the boycott. They noticed a drop in their stock value.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_SG-1
Sounds like those Skeksis had better hurry up and make peace with the Gelflings.
Then I think your post title should be "Nothing ruler about it!" because it most certainly is an optimization problem.