With the correct information? Personally I am a low income woman with 8 kids.
Then you don't need a discount card, because the government buys all your food. And you can't afford to fly.
supermarkets give you loyalty cards on-site so all the information you put on the form can be false. every 6 months or so get a new card under a new identity.
If you are giving them false information, then why do you need to update it every 6 months?
Content creators. You make something once, and you expect to be paid for it for the rest of your lives? You expect that your children, your grand children, even your great grand children should get royalties derived from your genius?
You sniveling twats - go get a real job. And, stop feeding the copyright trolls who belong to RIAA and the like. You're not the fucking geniuses that you think you are. You need a good de-worming, like any stray dog. You're infested with parasitic lawyers, agents, and other undesirable creatures.
May you get your Christmas wish.. and as a result, never get the benefit of enjoying any quality artistic rendering ever again.
Put E-15 in your '69 Mustang and you're just stupid.
Well, put anything besides 100% gasoline in your '69 Mustang and you're just stupid. Unfortunately, in some states, like Texas, you have no choice. Even the regular blended Ethanol is bad for cars and disastrous for small engines.
We use an instant messenger product at work, and the programmers often use it to ask me questions. Shame on them. A programmer should know that a product such as IM is disastrous to productivity. It can take half an hour to get back into the groove after being interrupted by an IM. We also use IM where I work, and I answer it whenever I get to a good stopping point in whatever I am working on. Of course, I answer e-mails just as quickly, and e-mails also have the benefit of being able to attach documents and leave a paper trail, so IM becomes useless. People have been told repeatedly that no one may do any work as a result of an IM and yet we continue to get requests to do work over IM and if you ignore them, people get pissy.
Except that the thing is controlled by Macs with large screens, how is this piece of news relevant on Slashdot?
So, is there software that runs on Macs for maritime navigation? I mean, sure there is probably some toy stuff that you use on your sailboat putting around the bay, but is there actually some sort of luxury yacht-worthy control system software for Macs? Somehow I always figured that stuff was too important to trust to toy OSes like MacOS and Windows.
The focus is that the owner is noticed, and envied for their wealth.
No, rich people are rich and they know it and don't have to or want to care what people think about their wealth. They just want to enjoy themselves. Now, people who want to be noticed and envied are the upper middle class on down to the poor. In fact, Most rich people don't even own boats because they are tremendous wastes of money, and rich people don't get or stay rich by wasting money. Most boats are owned by middle class people, quite a lot of whom can't actually afford them.
The issue is in the principle of acting as if the hardware vendor has the right to choose what software the user and proprietor chooses to run. Or, in this case, the software vendor.
Windows 8 is just Windows 7 PLUS metro.
But Windows 7 is already Windows 7 plus it doesn't have the inconvenience of Metro. Why should I shell out for a version of Windows which is basically the same thing only with a less convenient user interface?
Just like most American parents, you don't want to take responsibility for your own children. You'd rather have the government do that and find a scapegate like movies or games.
How ironic. You talk about not taking responsibility and then blame someone else other than the one who committed the crime. If you commit a crime, YOU are responsible, not your parents, not society, not the government, not videogames, not movies, not your upbringing.
you can always run your own web server from home with your pictures
i'm sure thousands of people will be looking at them
That seems like a rational idea to me. After all, why would you want thousands of people you don't even know to look at your pictures? That seems narcissistic to me. Surely, you just want your friends and family to look at them? Post them on your server, and send a link. Done.
I am sure you would like to see your face endorsing any products in exchange of a service worth almost nothing...
Or even better, products that you don't approve of. I can just see the popes face in an ad now. "When I have sex, I always use Trojan brand condoms!".
In Thailand, they offer up food in the name of the dead. In Buddhism, the wife of a deceased husband will cremate herself in the belief that she will become a goddess. In Egypt, they used to bury kings with their possessions in the belief that they would take them with them to their next life. There are cultures that still eat their dead. In Catholicism, they pray to their dead. Some folks in Madagascar keep rewrapping their dead in new wrappings because they believe the soul doesn't depart until the body is completely decomposed.
If you're talking about a lawsuit, then the government is involved. Who forces you to pay? The government. That's a violation of your speech rights.
No, the government is just forcing the losing party to pay, as they would on any judgment. The fact that it arose out of something that was said does not enter into it at that point.
It's impossible to cause real (physical) damage just by saying something, and potential profit isn't profit. But you can cause real physical damage as a result of what is said. Look at the girl who killed herself after a hateful woman harassed her repeatedly and tirelessly on the internet. The government can't tell her she can't say those things, but the parents of the girl can certainly sue the bejesus out of her for damages. Frankly, I consider it second degree murder. You can't be arrested for saying the words, but you are most definitely not immune from the consequences of you words.
Even though most people, including me, disagree with their opinions that should still be able to picket and print whatever stuff they want.
Bullcrap. They are all about the money. They don't believe what they say and therefore it is not free speech. They are doing the legal equivalent of kids pushing around the janitor knowing that he can't push them back.
I also wonder how many baptist churches preach against what this church is doing.
I would imagine quiet a lot of them. I am not affiliated with the Baptists, but my Church certainly condemns their tactics, as do all of the Christians that I know. I am surprised that the Baptist Convention has not attempted to sue them to stop using Baptist in their name. I am sure they have no more affiliation with the Baptist Convention than the "Franklin Mint" has with the Federal Government.
I know of no one who agrees with their tactics. A few ultra-conservatives may agree with their message, but their message is not their ideology. It is a means to an end, and that is to stir up trouble so someone will react and they can sue and make money. Therefore, I don't believe that what they do should fall under free speech protection.
There is no right to not be offended, but there is a right to seek compensation for damages, including emotional damages, which are a very real and distinct possibility when you have lost a loved one and someone is claiming they went to hell.
I suspect you won't find much tolerance for mockery of a funeral ritual within a culture, but I also expect that just about every culture finds it hard to hold their tongue when viewing another cultures funeral rituals.
So next time you're in a crowded theater, I should yell "fire"
You can't be arrested for doing so, because that would violate free speech. However, the theater owner can kick you out, because free speech is a mandate to the government, not private concerns. Also, your free speech does not prevent the theater owner from collecting damages from you scaring off his patrons. Free Speech does not guarantee you immunity from consequences of your speech, nor does it guarantee that you should be given free access to radio, tv or media to make your free speech, nor does it guarantee that anyone has to listen.
I was in a theater that "caught fire" recently. It was rather uneventful and people all filed out in a quiet and orderly manner.Me too. I took my kids to watch "Rise of the Guardians", and the heating system started issuing smoke and an electrical smell about 30 minutes in. We had to exit, but everybody did so orderly. Nobody yelled "Fire".
What anonymous did was not free speech. What they did was illegally break into someone else's computer records and post private information without the parties permission. WBC sucks the sweat off of donkey balls, but at least they don't do anything illegal, like anonymous. I say, kill them both and let them share a grave. Neither one of them belongs in our society.
IANAL, but IIRC, if one can prove racist intent, the sentence can be made more severe.
Increasing a sentence based upon racist intent is racist. I feel that the judge should be convicted of a hate crime for doing so but that would also be racist.
In United States "laws against hate speech" are unconstitutional. There may be many laws against hate speech in other countries, but if you are talking about US, you are wrong.
Umm, are you being FACETIOUS or what? While I agree that laws against hate speech are unconstitutional, there are plenty of laws against hate speech on the books. Most of the time, if they make it to the supreme court, they get overturned. But most people don't have the wherewithal to take it that far and just do the time and/or pay the fine.
Slashdot Mirror
With the correct information? Personally I am a low income woman with 8 kids.
Then you don't need a discount card, because the government buys all your food. And you can't afford to fly.
supermarkets give you loyalty cards on-site so all the information you put on the form can be false. every 6 months or so get a new card under a new identity.
If you are giving them false information, then why do you need to update it every 6 months?
'nuff said.
Content creators. You make something once, and you expect to be paid for it for the rest of your lives? You expect that your children, your grand children, even your great grand children should get royalties derived from your genius? You sniveling twats - go get a real job. And, stop feeding the copyright trolls who belong to RIAA and the like. You're not the fucking geniuses that you think you are. You need a good de-worming, like any stray dog. You're infested with parasitic lawyers, agents, and other undesirable creatures.
May you get your Christmas wish.. and as a result, never get the benefit of enjoying any quality artistic rendering ever again.
Put E-15 in your '69 Mustang and you're just stupid.
Well, put anything besides 100% gasoline in your '69 Mustang and you're just stupid. Unfortunately, in some states, like Texas, you have no choice. Even the regular blended Ethanol is bad for cars and disastrous for small engines.
We use an instant messenger product at work, and the programmers often use it to ask me questions.
Shame on them. A programmer should know that a product such as IM is disastrous to productivity. It can take half an hour to get back into the groove after being interrupted by an IM. We also use IM where I work, and I answer it whenever I get to a good stopping point in whatever I am working on. Of course, I answer e-mails just as quickly, and e-mails also have the benefit of being able to attach documents and leave a paper trail, so IM becomes useless. People have been told repeatedly that no one may do any work as a result of an IM and yet we continue to get requests to do work over IM and if you ignore them, people get pissy.
Except that the thing is controlled by Macs with large screens, how is this piece of news relevant on Slashdot?
So, is there software that runs on Macs for maritime navigation? I mean, sure there is probably some toy stuff that you use on your sailboat putting around the bay, but is there actually some sort of luxury yacht-worthy control system software for Macs? Somehow I always figured that stuff was too important to trust to toy OSes like MacOS and Windows.
The focus is that the owner is noticed, and envied for their wealth.
No, rich people are rich and they know it and don't have to or want to care what people think about their wealth. They just want to enjoy themselves. Now, people who want to be noticed and envied are the upper middle class on down to the poor. In fact, Most rich people don't even own boats because they are tremendous wastes of money, and rich people don't get or stay rich by wasting money. Most boats are owned by middle class people, quite a lot of whom can't actually afford them.
The issue is in the principle of acting as if the hardware vendor has the right to choose what software the user and proprietor chooses to run.
Or, in this case, the software vendor.
Windows 8 is just Windows 7 PLUS metro.
But Windows 7 is already Windows 7 plus it doesn't have the inconvenience of Metro. Why should I shell out for a version of Windows which is basically the same thing only with a less convenient user interface?
Just like most American parents, you don't want to take responsibility for your own children. You'd rather have the government do that and find a scapegate like movies or games.
How ironic. You talk about not taking responsibility and then blame someone else other than the one who committed the crime. If you commit a crime, YOU are responsible, not your parents, not society, not the government, not videogames, not movies, not your upbringing.
you can always run your own web server from home with your pictures
i'm sure thousands of people will be looking at them
That seems like a rational idea to me. After all, why would you want thousands of people you don't even know to look at your pictures? That seems narcissistic to me. Surely, you just want your friends and family to look at them? Post them on your server, and send a link. Done.
I am sure you would like to see your face endorsing any products in exchange of a service worth almost nothing...
Or even better, products that you don't approve of. I can just see the popes face in an ad now. "When I have sex, I always use Trojan brand condoms!".
In Thailand, they offer up food in the name of the dead. In Buddhism, the wife of a deceased husband will cremate herself in the belief that she will become a goddess. In Egypt, they used to bury kings with their possessions in the belief that they would take them with them to their next life. There are cultures that still eat their dead. In Catholicism, they pray to their dead. Some folks in Madagascar keep rewrapping their dead in new wrappings because they believe the soul doesn't depart until the body is completely decomposed.
If you're talking about a lawsuit, then the government is involved. Who forces you to pay? The government. That's a violation of your speech rights.
No, the government is just forcing the losing party to pay, as they would on any judgment. The fact that it arose out of something that was said does not enter into it at that point.
It's impossible to cause real (physical) damage just by saying something, and potential profit isn't profit.
But you can cause real physical damage as a result of what is said. Look at the girl who killed herself after a hateful woman harassed her repeatedly and tirelessly on the internet. The government can't tell her she can't say those things, but the parents of the girl can certainly sue the bejesus out of her for damages. Frankly, I consider it second degree murder. You can't be arrested for saying the words, but you are most definitely not immune from the consequences of you words.
Even though most people, including me, disagree with their opinions that should still be able to picket and print whatever stuff they want.
Bullcrap. They are all about the money. They don't believe what they say and therefore it is not free speech. They are doing the legal equivalent of kids pushing around the janitor knowing that he can't push them back.
I also wonder how many baptist churches preach against what this church is doing.
I would imagine quiet a lot of them. I am not affiliated with the Baptists, but my Church certainly condemns their tactics, as do all of the Christians that I know. I am surprised that the Baptist Convention has not attempted to sue them to stop using Baptist in their name. I am sure they have no more affiliation with the Baptist Convention than the "Franklin Mint" has with the Federal Government.
I know of no one who agrees with their tactics. A few ultra-conservatives may agree with their message, but their message is not their ideology. It is a means to an end, and that is to stir up trouble so someone will react and they can sue and make money. Therefore, I don't believe that what they do should fall under free speech protection.
There is no right to not be offended, but there is a right to seek compensation for damages, including emotional damages, which are a very real and distinct possibility when you have lost a loved one and someone is claiming they went to hell.
I suspect you won't find much tolerance for mockery of a funeral ritual within a culture, but I also expect that just about every culture finds it hard to hold their tongue when viewing another cultures funeral rituals.
So next time you're in a crowded theater, I should yell "fire"
You can't be arrested for doing so, because that would violate free speech. However, the theater owner can kick you out, because free speech is a mandate to the government, not private concerns. Also, your free speech does not prevent the theater owner from collecting damages from you scaring off his patrons. Free Speech does not guarantee you immunity from consequences of your speech, nor does it guarantee that you should be given free access to radio, tv or media to make your free speech, nor does it guarantee that anyone has to listen.
I was in a theater that "caught fire" recently. It was rather uneventful and people all filed out in a quiet and orderly manner.Me too. I took my kids to watch "Rise of the Guardians", and the heating system started issuing smoke and an electrical smell about 30 minutes in. We had to exit, but everybody did so orderly. Nobody yelled "Fire".
What anonymous did was not free speech. What they did was illegally break into someone else's computer records and post private information without the parties permission. WBC sucks the sweat off of donkey balls, but at least they don't do anything illegal, like anonymous. I say, kill them both and let them share a grave. Neither one of them belongs in our society.
IANAL, but IIRC, if one can prove racist intent, the sentence can be made more severe.
Increasing a sentence based upon racist intent is racist. I feel that the judge should be convicted of a hate crime for doing so but that would also be racist.
In United States "laws against hate speech" are unconstitutional. There may be many laws against hate speech in other countries, but if you are talking about US, you are wrong.
Umm, are you being FACETIOUS or what? While I agree that laws against hate speech are unconstitutional, there are plenty of laws against hate speech on the books. Most of the time, if they make it to the supreme court, they get overturned. But most people don't have the wherewithal to take it that far and just do the time and/or pay the fine.