Yet that is who Comcast is attempting to appeal to by taking their offer for Disney public despite being refused by Eisner and friends. Translation: Comcast's hoping a longshot works.
The $66.6 billion number is certainly the result of semi-random numbers being added together, as the figure also includes all of Disney's debt that Comcast would end up aquiring, and that's in the range of about $12 billion at the moment. Still, it's kinda interesting that the wheels all stopped on 6's to make the $66.6 billion figure.
Comcast might even sell the entire Disney brand, which would attach all the Mickey Mouse cartoons with the theme parks. Afterall, Comcast is more interested in owning broadcasting assets...
FCC rules prevent any cable network owned by a cable company that is relayed by satellite to refuse to make itself available to cable. The notable exceptions are regional networks that are only delivered by landline, such as regionalized news channels and sports networks. At this time, no national networks use landline landline-only, and it'd be quite expensive to convert ESPN to such.
The thing about the 30%+31% situation is that it leaves 39% of the stock in the hands of people who are a member of neither voting block, and therefore become the swing voters any time the two groups disagree.
Actually, a cable company owning ABC is trouble... you cannot own a cable company in an area where you own a TV station per FCC rules. (News Corp. was allowed to purchase DirecTV without giving up its TV stations because DirecTV isn't a cable company.)
Yep, The Walt Disney Company is a whole lot bigger than just the things that the Disney name appears on. Disney is reserved for family-friendly products, while you can't say the same for everything that comes out of ABC, ESPN, Miramax or Touchstone...
PIT's main food court and mall is in the center of the building, with the gates on four very long hallways going outwards like spokes in a wheel. It's definitely on the secure side of the building, and there'd be no way to redraw the lines short of having to rescreen everybody who moves from one terminal to the other.
To reach the food court at PIT you have to go through security, which requires a ticket in hand and identity info be presented. Buy a ticket and not fly several times, and that's a great way to be red-flagged as a possible terrorist.
Re:WiFi access at airports
on
WiFi Free-For-All
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Actually, it will make a difference in terms of passengers who have a choice. US Airways rents more than half of the gates at PIT... so for flights that involve a non-major city, it's a safe bet that if you pick US Airways you're going to go through PIT, and if you pick Delta you'll hub at ATL.
For two otherwise equal situaitons, this could be the tiebreaker. In fact, somebody might be more inclined to pick US Airways because of this, and that might be worth the money to pay a few bucks extra for the ticket.
Hey studioqb is too easy. my friend got every question right with google in like 40 minutes.
Admittedly going offtopic here...
Your friend must have been the one who set the new speed record yesterday.
I tell people answering the first 20 from the top of your head and then searching for the rest is the way to go, but do they listen? Well, everybody else who played the game in the last 24 hours didn't win.
"I'm not paranoid! Which one of my enemies told you that?"
If one thinks they have many enemies, and they infact do, then they are in fact not paranoid. In addition, paranoia does not constitute proof that enemies do not exist.
There's a very big difference between a bad review and a slanderous one. It's okay to give your opinion that something is bad, it's not okay to express as a fact something that is not a fact about what you're reviewing.
Notable times where the 1st amendment doesn't work:
- When testifying in a court, you can't just say anything you want. - When in a crowded theater, you cannot yell "Fire" unless the place is really on fire. - When writing in any publication, you cannot say something that you know is false about somebody or something to injure their reputation...
Schools already have the resources to provide information in a much more reliable way. All they have to do is take the end-of-course data that they share with the professor, and publish it. If they got an average of 1.34 out of 5, that's an irrefutable fact and therefore no libel charge can come of that.... and that's really all the students need to know.
But that's only because eBay can deflect by coughing up everything they have about the user account that made the posting. A site that intentionally forgets what IP address made a post exposes themself to the liabilty for what they allow to published.
In a sense, those who bring forward Anonymous works end up accepting the slander and libel problems pn behalf of those whose identites they offer to hide.
Libel at -1 can still attract a lawsuit. And/., for its part, will immediately respond by standing up and... telling them the IP address the post came from, and that, coupled with the timestamp, equates to an ISP account somewhere.
True anonymous posting is simply imposible to allow because the web site operator ends up assuming the liablity for libel and slander when the eventual misbehaving trolls invade the site. The closest any web site operator can come is to know as little about their posters as possible, but to log the exact timestamp of the post and the IP address, so that if the site is ever bothered with a legal threat, those two pieces of information can be turned over, which when taken to the ISP starts a path that leads to the identity of the poster, or at least a service operator that (sometimes knowingly, sometimes not...) provides anonymity and will either A: be on the hook or B: continue the path that leads to the user...
Sorry, you've got to stand behind what you write, even online.
We gather here today to mourn the loss of Anonymous Coward. Anon been a great writer in the history of The United States, with The Federalist Papers and Primary Colors being two of his greatest works.
When the Internet came into being, Anon's greatest hour was realized. Many webboards at first welcomed posting for Anon with open arms, and Anon was even allowed to send e-mail freely. But, Anon's greatest foes, the lawyers would never let him sleep easy. Still, he fought on, trying to find what few places would still accept him, such as Slashdot.
But, when he came down with those horrible diseases of libel and slander, the doctors, er, lawyers, just weren't able to save him. Try the best they could, the logging of IP addresses just wasn't able to keep him alive. He gave a brave strugle, and for that we remember him. Dispite his ability to show his face, or give any contact info, you could always trust him to be at any political rally of any kind, and that he'd always be willing to fight the system.
His work in his name will be continued on Slashdot by his family, even though those who attempt to use their services should be aware that IP addresses are now logged and cookies are now fed on unsuspecting user in a way that the Anon we know and love never would tolerate.
Slashdot Mirror
Yet that is who Comcast is attempting to appeal to by taking their offer for Disney public despite being refused by Eisner and friends. Translation: Comcast's hoping a longshot works.
I'll remember to play those digits in the lotto tonight, because aren't patents good for nothing more than a random number generator lately?
The $66.6 billion number is certainly the result of semi-random numbers being added together, as the figure also includes all of Disney's debt that Comcast would end up aquiring, and that's in the range of about $12 billion at the moment. Still, it's kinda interesting that the wheels all stopped on 6's to make the $66.6 billion figure.
Comcast might even sell the entire Disney brand, which would attach all the Mickey Mouse cartoons with the theme parks. Afterall, Comcast is more interested in owning broadcasting assets...
FCC rules prevent any cable network owned by a cable company that is relayed by satellite to refuse to make itself available to cable. The notable exceptions are regional networks that are only delivered by landline, such as regionalized news channels and sports networks. At this time, no national networks use landline landline-only, and it'd be quite expensive to convert ESPN to such.
The thing about the 30%+31% situation is that it leaves 39% of the stock in the hands of people who are a member of neither voting block, and therefore become the swing voters any time the two groups disagree.
Not to mention ABC.
Actually, a cable company owning ABC is trouble... you cannot own a cable company in an area where you own a TV station per FCC rules. (News Corp. was allowed to purchase DirecTV without giving up its TV stations because DirecTV isn't a cable company.)
Yep, The Walt Disney Company is a whole lot bigger than just the things that the Disney name appears on. Disney is reserved for family-friendly products, while you can't say the same for everything that comes out of ABC, ESPN, Miramax or Touchstone...
The problem is, in your future, every channel on DirecTV comes from Fox, since the Hughes-News Corp. deal just closed back here in the present.
An asterisk belongs next to ESPN and A&E on that list. Disney owns neither of those cable operations outright, just a major interest in each.
PIT's main food court and mall is in the center of the building, with the gates on four very long hallways going outwards like spokes in a wheel. It's definitely on the secure side of the building, and there'd be no way to redraw the lines short of having to rescreen everybody who moves from one terminal to the other.
To reach the food court at PIT you have to go through security, which requires a ticket in hand and identity info be presented. Buy a ticket and not fly several times, and that's a great way to be red-flagged as a possible terrorist.
Actually, it will make a difference in terms of passengers who have a choice. US Airways rents more than half of the gates at PIT... so for flights that involve a non-major city, it's a safe bet that if you pick US Airways you're going to go through PIT, and if you pick Delta you'll hub at ATL.
For two otherwise equal situaitons, this could be the tiebreaker. In fact, somebody might be more inclined to pick US Airways because of this, and that might be worth the money to pay a few bucks extra for the ticket.
Hey studioqb is too easy. my friend got every question right with google in like 40 minutes.
Admittedly going offtopic here...
Your friend must have been the one who set the new speed record yesterday.
I tell people answering the first 20 from the top of your head and then searching for the rest is the way to go, but do they listen? Well, everybody else who played the game in the last 24 hours didn't win.
"I'm not paranoid! Which one of my enemies told you that?"
If one thinks they have many enemies, and they infact do, then they are in fact not paranoid. In addition, paranoia does not constitute proof that enemies do not exist.
There's a very big difference between a bad review and a slanderous one. It's okay to give your opinion that something is bad, it's not okay to express as a fact something that is not a fact about what you're reviewing.
Notable times where the 1st amendment doesn't work:
- When testifying in a court, you can't just say anything you want.
- When in a crowded theater, you cannot yell "Fire" unless the place is really on fire.
- When writing in any publication, you cannot say something that you know is false about somebody or something to injure their reputation...
what about sites like cryptome.org? they delete all their logs. That's truly anonymous
Then that's where the trail would die. But that's also where the lawsuit would be sent. It'd be almost as if they made the offensive post themselves.
Schools already have the resources to provide information in a much more reliable way. All they have to do is take the end-of-course data that they share with the professor, and publish it. If they got an average of 1.34 out of 5, that's an irrefutable fact and therefore no libel charge can come of that.... and that's really all the students need to know.
But that's only because eBay can deflect by coughing up everything they have about the user account that made the posting. A site that intentionally forgets what IP address made a post exposes themself to the liabilty for what they allow to published.
In a sense, those who bring forward Anonymous works end up accepting the slander and libel problems pn behalf of those whose identites they offer to hide.
Libel at -1 can still attract a lawsuit. And /., for its part, will immediately respond by standing up and... telling them the IP address the post came from, and that, coupled with the timestamp, equates to an ISP account somewhere.
You should have posted that as AnonCow... for the irony sake at least.
True anonymous posting is simply imposible to allow because the web site operator ends up assuming the liablity for libel and slander when the eventual misbehaving trolls invade the site. The closest any web site operator can come is to know as little about their posters as possible, but to log the exact timestamp of the post and the IP address, so that if the site is ever bothered with a legal threat, those two pieces of information can be turned over, which when taken to the ISP starts a path that leads to the identity of the poster, or at least a service operator that (sometimes knowingly, sometimes not...) provides anonymity and will either A: be on the hook or B: continue the path that leads to the user...
Sorry, you've got to stand behind what you write, even online.
We gather here today to mourn the loss of Anonymous Coward. Anon been a great writer in the history of The United States, with The Federalist Papers and Primary Colors being two of his greatest works.
When the Internet came into being, Anon's greatest hour was realized. Many webboards at first welcomed posting for Anon with open arms, and Anon was even allowed to send e-mail freely. But, Anon's greatest foes, the lawyers would never let him sleep easy. Still, he fought on, trying to find what few places would still accept him, such as Slashdot.
But, when he came down with those horrible diseases of libel and slander, the doctors, er, lawyers, just weren't able to save him. Try the best they could, the logging of IP addresses just wasn't able to keep him alive. He gave a brave strugle, and for that we remember him. Dispite his ability to show his face, or give any contact info, you could always trust him to be at any political rally of any kind, and that he'd always be willing to fight the system.
His work in his name will be continued on Slashdot by his family, even though those who attempt to use their services should be aware that IP addresses are now logged and cookies are now fed on unsuspecting user in a way that the Anon we know and love never would tolerate.
Anon, we miss you.
That sounds like very interesting research. I'd love to see it.