Or at least that's how merchants will look at it. Not only do they not have a 50/50 chance of getting paid with each transaction, it is a lot less than that (never mind that the payout is more than the cost of the item). I don't see too many merchants (most of whom probably don't understand statistics) deciding to incorporate a "game of chance" into their business model.
Speaking of gambling, as peppercoin (the House) has to make a profit, doesn't it have to "win" (even just a little bit) in the long run? So the odds of a merchant getting paid fully are less than perfect).
Yes, vegetables are horribly bitter, but they can be eaten if you try. At the very least take a multivitamin daily. Some vegetables are worse than others. Broccoli is simply inedible, but green beans, romaine lettuce, peas, and a few others are edible.
That being said, I pity those who can't taste the nuances of a great wine or cigar. I feel bad for those certain people can't tell the difference between Franzia and a first growth Bordeaux.
By insane I mean running around blabbering about doomsday this, revelations that, allah this, jesus that, judgment day this, heaven and hell that. They simply won't be safe to be around, and that's over 90 percent of the human population right there. Sorry.
If the government announced that everyone has been sentenced to imminent death (which is what such an asteroid announcement would be), I don't have enough faith in humanity to presume that the majority of people would act like grown-ups about it; rather I feel most people would go running around, screaming, looting, crashing cars, smashing things, blowing stuff up, etc. All religious people would immediately go insane.
If a doomsday asteroid is heading for earth, there's nothing we can do about it, and if you think there is you've watched too many Jerry Bruckheimer/Michael Bay movies.
Bottom line, if we have one year to live, it would be better for everyone if that last year were not spent in anarchy.
That being said, I remember reading an article (wish I could find it and cite it) that said there were only 4 government employees whose job description includes looking for asteroids to hit earth; most of the people doing this are amateur astronomers. They won't keep it quiet. So, if there is such an asteroid on a collision course with earth (which there is, somewhere), the odds highly favor it being discovered by an amateur astronomer who will immediately tell everyone which makes this entire thread moot.
This article makes it sound as though it is the lawyers who get "queasy" over copyright issues. Lawyers don't get queasy, they get money. It's the overly-selfish copyright holder - the lawyers' clients - who think any time someone utters the name of their copyrighted work they are losing money (and then they file an infringement suit). Don't blame the lawyers; blame greedy (and stupid) copyright holders.
seems that if i click the lil' arrow next to the back button in IE I already have a list of all the pages i've already been to (or at least the last 10 or so).
There would be a CR violation in using Tolkien's name on his translation, except the article clearly says that the professor who found the manuscript got permission from Tolkien's estate to publish it. Thus, the "Tolkien's Beowulf" to be published next year will not be an infringement, since it was done with permission.
Indeed, the story of beowulf is in the public domain, but any translation of it would be a derivative work protectible by copyright. If you spent 2 years of your life translating beowulf, I don't have the right to steal your translation and publish it just because the story you translated from is in the public domain. We all know disney steals stuff from the public domain (Brother's Grimm, etc) to base their stories on, and they get subsequent copyrights. Way it works.
Yah Dean Kamen has patented it and is due to release them next year. Uses a Stirling engine for its power source. Only prob is they're gonna be pricey - $2,500 each. Oh well, i'll still get one. I hope they come in pink!
I can see it now... the democrats are gonna start bashing the republicans for this illicit solicitation-for-access. The republicans will of course respond by saying "uh yeh, but uh, you guys do it too, read the friggin AP article." The democrats will respond "yeh, but you guys solicited hundreds of thousands of dollars more than we did! We barely did it at all."
If you listen to the demo (the "power" demo) it says the Tablet PC runs a Windows XP Tablet edition, "so you can run applications you already use!"
So, does that mean I don't have to buy two copies of Office XP - one for my home PC and one for my Tablet PC? Somehow I doubt M$ would approve of that, but in their demo, they are clearly implying I can. Fuckers.
Re:How many times can the Democrats pull this crap
on
Indecision 2002
·
· Score: 1
7 was just an average time i picked outta nowhere. It's 7pm in some places, 8pm in others, 10pm in yet others. Often depends on the time zone. That clarification being made, I stand by the rest of my post.
because the old machines are racist. Didn't you watch any election coverage in 2000?
yes racist. only the rich white neighborhoods get the fancy-dancy scantron machines. the poor black (democrat) neighborhoods get the icky punch-card machines. Even when the white people are forced to use the filthy punch-card machines, their rich white precincts use optical recognition machines to spot the holes, which are much more accurate than the hampster-wheel machines the black precincts use to tally the votes. Then you get into the hanging chads, dimpled chads, ect, which the rich white-people machines do not have to concern themselves with.
So what's the solution? put microsoft in charge of ALL voting. At least it won't be racist anymore. err.. wait, bill gates is white, nevermind.
Also, in order to comply with the PATRIOT Act, all voting machines have to be able to keep track of who you voted for, and it has to be traceable back to you. Much easier to do that with electonic machines versus old-fashined paper-punch card machines. Must keep an eye on dissident voters.
How many times can the Democrats pull this crap?!
on
Indecision 2002
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
1. Polls close at 7pm like they're supposed to.
2. Democrats challenge poll closing, say there are still more voters who need to vote (for the democrats, of course).
3. Democrats go to Democrat/liberal judge and get an ex parte injunction, keeping the polls open a few more hours.
4. Republicans challenge the extension, say any vote cast after the polls were supposed to have closed should be discarded.
5. After several hours of bickering, whining, and screaming, Republicans win. Late votes discarded.
6. Democrats accuse Republicans of closing polls to keep the hard workin' man (who votes Democrat) out.
7. Republicans say "no, we really love the hard working man, and we respect the rules -- the polls should have closed when they were supposed to. The time of poll closing was announced weeks ago!"
8. Democrats respond: "no, you hate the hard working man, and we were just trying to fight for him."
9. Republicans crawl away.
10. Repeat next election.
---------------
It boggles my mind that this same scenario happens each and every election day, in countless cities across the country. You'd think the republicans would have enough brain cells to get the democrats to agree (or at least give them certified, return receipt notice) as to the time the polls are going to close. I guess the Democrats have some pretty hard numbers that show a vast majority of people who intend to vote after the polls close are democrats (go figure), so even in bad faith, it is to the democrats' advantage to make every effort to extend the time of poll closing. If they push it through, they get more votes, and if the republicans oppose, worst case scenario is they get to say "the republicans tried to close the polls on the workin' man!"
It's shameful, but what's even more shameful is the republicans not figuring this shit out.
Microsoft is immune from antitrust law. People said "oh just wait until tomorrow"... toldya. Even had the judge decided to punish MS severely, in reality, nothing could have been done.
it wouldn't happen. like i said before, if the judge were to say "ms will be completely broken up and all ms employees will be executed (and their patents and trademarks are all forfeited)" it wouldn't happen. doesn't matter what she says. They would appeal, and her judgment would be stayed, and during the appeal, MS's army of lawyers would work out a "deal" where they do something trivial and that's that. NOTHING BAD can happen to Microsoft as a result of antitrust actions in our courts. MS is way beyond the immunity level, to the point where they can just laugh at the government's attemps to break their monopoly up and brush them away like flies.
Even if the judge decides that MS is to be completely broken up and all MS employees are to be executed to set an example, it isn't going to happen. Of course, the judge isn't going to decide anything close to that, so it's doubly irrelevant what she has to say. But, there's always that off chance that her decision may be worth a few shits and giggles.
I can prove doing anything hurts someone other than the user (especially if i define "society" as someone) if I attenuate the cause and effect far enough. Most of the reasons drugs hurt society are because of the externalities directly associated with them remaining illegal (i.e. huge prison populations). The only direct way drugs hurt someone other than the user is when someone is driving under the influence of drugs and causes an accident. Driving under the influence should of course remain illegal. Shooting yourself up with a gallon of heroin in the confines of your own home shouldn't. If you wanna risk death, that's your right.
AT&T is still pretty darn powerful if you ask me. Still the largest long distance carrier in the US. Breaking up Standard Oil was the purpose of the Sherman Act. MS is much more powerful than Standard Oil was, and the Sherman Act is much weaker today than it was when it was created for the sole purpose of breaking up Standard Oil. Also keep in mind Standard Oil had two US presidents basically campaigning for its breakup, so they could be seen as tough "trust busters." What was relevant back then is completely irrelevant today, and antitrust law doesn't have the power that it once did. In fact, it's pretty weak (in part as a result of subsequent supreme court cases limiting the Sherman Act's power since the Standard Oil days). Sorry, it really sucks, but MS is immune from antitrust laws; at least in the USA.
Yes, meaning NEVER. Just because drugs are unhealthy and potentially addictive does not mean we have to "wage a war" on them. Individual liberties - the freedom to do what you want with your own body as long as it doesn't directly hurt someone else - are what should be fought for.
As a side note, it's interested you didn't mention pot. How come?
Slashdot Mirror
Or at least that's how merchants will look at it. Not only do they not have a 50/50 chance of getting paid with each transaction, it is a lot less than that (never mind that the payout is more than the cost of the item). I don't see too many merchants (most of whom probably don't understand statistics) deciding to incorporate a "game of chance" into their business model. Speaking of gambling, as peppercoin (the House) has to make a profit, doesn't it have to "win" (even just a little bit) in the long run? So the odds of a merchant getting paid fully are less than perfect).
Indeed smell is vitally important to fully tasting anything. As for tastes, don't forget umami!
So you're saying atheists have no morals, is that it?
Yes, vegetables are horribly bitter, but they can be eaten if you try. At the very least take a multivitamin daily. Some vegetables are worse than others. Broccoli is simply inedible, but green beans, romaine lettuce, peas, and a few others are edible.
That being said, I pity those who can't taste the nuances of a great wine or cigar. I feel bad for those certain people can't tell the difference between Franzia and a first growth Bordeaux.
By insane I mean running around blabbering about doomsday this, revelations that, allah this, jesus that, judgment day this, heaven and hell that. They simply won't be safe to be around, and that's over 90 percent of the human population right there. Sorry.
If the government announced that everyone has been sentenced to imminent death (which is what such an asteroid announcement would be), I don't have enough faith in humanity to presume that the majority of people would act like grown-ups about it; rather I feel most people would go running around, screaming, looting, crashing cars, smashing things, blowing stuff up, etc. All religious people would immediately go insane.
If a doomsday asteroid is heading for earth, there's nothing we can do about it, and if you think there is you've watched too many Jerry Bruckheimer/Michael Bay movies.
Bottom line, if we have one year to live, it would be better for everyone if that last year were not spent in anarchy.
That being said, I remember reading an article (wish I could find it and cite it) that said there were only 4 government employees whose job description includes looking for asteroids to hit earth; most of the people doing this are amateur astronomers. They won't keep it quiet. So, if there is such an asteroid on a collision course with earth (which there is, somewhere), the odds highly favor it being discovered by an amateur astronomer who will immediately tell everyone which makes this entire thread moot.
..."drawing conclusions from a single data point" 'Data' is plural; the singular is 'datum' (I love being a dickhead)
Here is an excellent article on the issues involved with this lawsuit. http://tompaine.com/feature.cfm/ID/7050
I know, but I am only wondering if they (the plaintiffs in Cali) are going to sue KaZaAlite also. Better to have two defendants than one.
first! It was fun while it lasted. I wonder if they're gonna sue KaZaaLite also.
This article makes it sound as though it is the lawyers who get "queasy" over copyright issues. Lawyers don't get queasy, they get money. It's the overly-selfish copyright holder - the lawyers' clients - who think any time someone utters the name of their copyrighted work they are losing money (and then they file an infringement suit). Don't blame the lawyers; blame greedy (and stupid) copyright holders.
seems that if i click the lil' arrow next to the back button in IE I already have a list of all the pages i've already been to (or at least the last 10 or so).
There would be a CR violation in using Tolkien's name on his translation, except the article clearly says that the professor who found the manuscript got permission from Tolkien's estate to publish it. Thus, the "Tolkien's Beowulf" to be published next year will not be an infringement, since it was done with permission. Indeed, the story of beowulf is in the public domain, but any translation of it would be a derivative work protectible by copyright. If you spent 2 years of your life translating beowulf, I don't have the right to steal your translation and publish it just because the story you translated from is in the public domain. We all know disney steals stuff from the public domain (Brother's Grimm, etc) to base their stories on, and they get subsequent copyrights. Way it works.
Yah Dean Kamen has patented it and is due to release them next year. Uses a Stirling engine for its power source. Only prob is they're gonna be pricey - $2,500 each. Oh well, i'll still get one. I hope they come in pink!
I can see it now... the democrats are gonna start bashing the republicans for this illicit solicitation-for-access. The republicans will of course respond by saying "uh yeh, but uh, you guys do it too, read the friggin AP article." The democrats will respond "yeh, but you guys solicited hundreds of thousands of dollars more than we did! We barely did it at all."
If you listen to the demo (the "power" demo) it says the Tablet PC runs a Windows XP Tablet edition, "so you can run applications you already use!" So, does that mean I don't have to buy two copies of Office XP - one for my home PC and one for my Tablet PC? Somehow I doubt M$ would approve of that, but in their demo, they are clearly implying I can. Fuckers.
7 was just an average time i picked outta nowhere. It's 7pm in some places, 8pm in others, 10pm in yet others. Often depends on the time zone. That clarification being made, I stand by the rest of my post.
because the old machines are racist. Didn't you watch any election coverage in 2000? yes racist. only the rich white neighborhoods get the fancy-dancy scantron machines. the poor black (democrat) neighborhoods get the icky punch-card machines. Even when the white people are forced to use the filthy punch-card machines, their rich white precincts use optical recognition machines to spot the holes, which are much more accurate than the hampster-wheel machines the black precincts use to tally the votes. Then you get into the hanging chads, dimpled chads, ect, which the rich white-people machines do not have to concern themselves with. So what's the solution? put microsoft in charge of ALL voting. At least it won't be racist anymore. err.. wait, bill gates is white, nevermind. Also, in order to comply with the PATRIOT Act, all voting machines have to be able to keep track of who you voted for, and it has to be traceable back to you. Much easier to do that with electonic machines versus old-fashined paper-punch card machines. Must keep an eye on dissident voters.
1. Polls close at 7pm like they're supposed to.
2. Democrats challenge poll closing, say there are still more voters who need to vote (for the democrats, of course).
3. Democrats go to Democrat/liberal judge and get an ex parte injunction, keeping the polls open a few more hours.
4. Republicans challenge the extension, say any vote cast after the polls were supposed to have closed should be discarded.
5. After several hours of bickering, whining, and screaming, Republicans win. Late votes discarded.
6. Democrats accuse Republicans of closing polls to keep the hard workin' man (who votes Democrat) out.
7. Republicans say "no, we really love the hard working man, and we respect the rules -- the polls should have closed when they were supposed to. The time of poll closing was announced weeks ago!"
8. Democrats respond: "no, you hate the hard working man, and we were just trying to fight for him."
9. Republicans crawl away.
10. Repeat next election.
---------------
It boggles my mind that this same scenario happens each and every election day, in countless cities across the country. You'd think the republicans would have enough brain cells to get the democrats to agree (or at least give them certified, return receipt notice) as to the time the polls are going to close. I guess the Democrats have some pretty hard numbers that show a vast majority of people who intend to vote after the polls close are democrats (go figure), so even in bad faith, it is to the democrats' advantage to make every effort to extend the time of poll closing. If they push it through, they get more votes, and if the republicans oppose, worst case scenario is they get to say "the republicans tried to close the polls on the workin' man!"
It's shameful, but what's even more shameful is the republicans not figuring this shit out.
Microsoft is immune from antitrust law. People said "oh just wait until tomorrow" ... toldya. Even had the judge decided to punish MS severely, in reality, nothing could have been done.
it wouldn't happen. like i said before, if the judge were to say "ms will be completely broken up and all ms employees will be executed (and their patents and trademarks are all forfeited)" it wouldn't happen. doesn't matter what she says. They would appeal, and her judgment would be stayed, and during the appeal, MS's army of lawyers would work out a "deal" where they do something trivial and that's that. NOTHING BAD can happen to Microsoft as a result of antitrust actions in our courts. MS is way beyond the immunity level, to the point where they can just laugh at the government's attemps to break their monopoly up and brush them away like flies.
Even if the judge decides that MS is to be completely broken up and all MS employees are to be executed to set an example, it isn't going to happen. Of course, the judge isn't going to decide anything close to that, so it's doubly irrelevant what she has to say. But, there's always that off chance that her decision may be worth a few shits and giggles.
I can prove doing anything hurts someone other than the user (especially if i define "society" as someone) if I attenuate the cause and effect far enough. Most of the reasons drugs hurt society are because of the externalities directly associated with them remaining illegal (i.e. huge prison populations). The only direct way drugs hurt someone other than the user is when someone is driving under the influence of drugs and causes an accident. Driving under the influence should of course remain illegal. Shooting yourself up with a gallon of heroin in the confines of your own home shouldn't. If you wanna risk death, that's your right.
AT&T is still pretty darn powerful if you ask me. Still the largest long distance carrier in the US. Breaking up Standard Oil was the purpose of the Sherman Act. MS is much more powerful than Standard Oil was, and the Sherman Act is much weaker today than it was when it was created for the sole purpose of breaking up Standard Oil. Also keep in mind Standard Oil had two US presidents basically campaigning for its breakup, so they could be seen as tough "trust busters." What was relevant back then is completely irrelevant today, and antitrust law doesn't have the power that it once did. In fact, it's pretty weak (in part as a result of subsequent supreme court cases limiting the Sherman Act's power since the Standard Oil days). Sorry, it really sucks, but MS is immune from antitrust laws; at least in the USA.
Yes, meaning NEVER. Just because drugs are unhealthy and potentially addictive does not mean we have to "wage a war" on them. Individual liberties - the freedom to do what you want with your own body as long as it doesn't directly hurt someone else - are what should be fought for. As a side note, it's interested you didn't mention pot. How come?