Given the recent widespread corporate support politically, it sure appears so. For them to insult 97% of their customers in favor of the 3%, something is certainly going on.
Oh, and I see no reason to respect the opinion of somebody who hasn't bothered to read the basic white papers on the topic and chooses ridicule instead of debate. Your opinion is just worthless bullshit.
Well, yes it was. The entire point of monotheism was to concentrate power into a single God figure instead of dividing the worship of civilization into several groups at cross purposes.
Likewise, the point of atheism is to ridicule older religions as "absurd fairy tales" [my new rule being to ridicule any atheist who has not done the basic research of reading the 23 volumes Summa Theologicae; how can you ridicule something as an absurd fairy tale when you have not even examined the scientific evidence for it that definitively proved its existence over 750 years ago?].
Personally, though, I wish the copyright law lasted that long and was on scriptures. Catholics should pay Jews for the use of the Old Testament, and lacking the imprimatur and nihil obstat on any printing of a translation of the Bible should result in a copyright lawsuit, just like that hacker who was sending out e-mails a few paragraphs at a time from the Catechism got sued by the Vatican a few years back.
I was wondering when I was going to get the atheist argument.
I would point out that you are saying exactly the same thing I am, but missing the point.
I think a creator God does in fact care a good deal about his creation- and especially about a legal system desinged to *destroy* his rights over that creation.
Thus "we don't give a fuck about god, and 'he' doesn't factor into our laws" is actually the entire point of my first sentence, said without misusing the definitions of words (why you would want to rape God is beyond the scope of this discussion- or better yet why you wouldn't- the first half of your sentence is rather confusing, but what can I expect from an ignorant asshole who failed 2nd grade English).
The rest, well, stealing power from God is rather the point of atheism, isn't it?
Quite the opposite actually. I'm very much for rule of law- LIMITED TO THE WRITTEN LAW. I'm very against judges legislating from the bench by deciding what words mean on the spot.
Not only that but I should mention- he's released all 300 episodes to Youtube of the old content, and he occasionally snips out a Handiman Corner or an Adventures With Bill to let his Youtube subscribers know things he wants them to know (Shows the clip, then an announcement).
That was the description of the Red Green Show in a nutshell. Well, also, thoughts disconnected from action, from brains, well, from anything really (from another TV interview where he let the Interviewer try to play Red Green for a build that replaced a tire with old shoes).
"enacted" is a funny word for a non-enforcable policy that isn't law because it never went through Congress. Whether you are talking Emperor Obama or Emperor Trump, isn't the *real* problem having executives who legislate without a legislature?
I just saw a youtube video with one of my favorite TV stars- a man who found success first in Canadian television, then selling his show to American PBS networks, that did 15 seasons and a movie.
He's now producing new content in the character online, and his sons have started a Twitch channel in which they show an episode and give additional director's style commentary interactive with a chat window.
In the interview with network news, this actor/producer/creator said he'd never touch TV again, and had the web been well developed as it is now back in 1990 when he started, his show would never have been seen on TV at all.
It isn't just viewers who are fed up with the big business that advertising-and-tax-supported-television brings with it. It's the content creators.
Slashdot Mirror
Welcome to the world of http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm
Given the recent widespread corporate support politically, it sure appears so. For them to insult 97% of their customers in favor of the 3%, something is certainly going on.
The November sell off of 75% of his shares in Intel may be an indicator.
http://americantimezones.com/
Given the current month that it is and the Rainbow Flag flying at Intel Campuses, what makes you think it is a woman?
The consensual relationship story may be a cover for the fact that BK has lost faith in Intel's ability to fix security issues with the processors.
Complete with quotes from the original e-mail sent out to employees at 6:15am PDT. Within 20 minutes, was on slashdot.
I thought the reason taco bell creates the problems it does, is because it's a low residue, low fiber diet.
I'm well familiar with Buddhism, including Zen.
Aside from Tibetan, it is atheist. And yes, atheist is religious, and seeking enlightenment is stealing from the power of God.
Oh, and I see no reason to respect the opinion of somebody who hasn't bothered to read the basic white papers on the topic and chooses ridicule instead of debate. Your opinion is just worthless bullshit.
Both are intimately connected, aren't they? Isn't ridicule the first stage of any revolution? I see them very much as the same thing.
Well, yes it was. The entire point of monotheism was to concentrate power into a single God figure instead of dividing the worship of civilization into several groups at cross purposes.
Likewise, the point of atheism is to ridicule older religions as "absurd fairy tales" [my new rule being to ridicule any atheist who has not done the basic research of reading the 23 volumes Summa Theologicae; how can you ridicule something as an absurd fairy tale when you have not even examined the scientific evidence for it that definitively proved its existence over 750 years ago?].
Personally, though, I wish the copyright law lasted that long and was on scriptures. Catholics should pay Jews for the use of the Old Testament, and lacking the imprimatur and nihil obstat on any printing of a translation of the Bible should result in a copyright lawsuit, just like that hacker who was sending out e-mails a few paragraphs at a time from the Catechism got sued by the Vatican a few years back.
I was wondering when I was going to get the atheist argument.
I would point out that you are saying exactly the same thing I am, but missing the point.
I think a creator God does in fact care a good deal about his creation- and especially about a legal system desinged to *destroy* his rights over that creation.
Thus "we don't give a fuck about god, and 'he' doesn't factor into our laws" is actually the entire point of my first sentence, said without misusing the definitions of words (why you would want to rape God is beyond the scope of this discussion- or better yet why you wouldn't- the first half of your sentence is rather confusing, but what can I expect from an ignorant asshole who failed 2nd grade English).
The rest, well, stealing power from God is rather the point of atheism, isn't it?
Not under today's secularist legal system he doesn't. In fact, I'd say that *all* property rights are an infringement on his copyrights.
If God ever gets copyright rights, I foresee a LOT of prior art patent lawsuits.
Who said anything about Quality of Service? I'm just pointing out that technically, net neutrality is impossible.
Quite the opposite actually. I'm very much for rule of law- LIMITED TO THE WRITTEN LAW. I'm very against judges legislating from the bench by deciding what words mean on the spot.
Not only that but I should mention- he's released all 300 episodes to Youtube of the old content, and he occasionally snips out a Handiman Corner or an Adventures With Bill to let his Youtube subscribers know things he wants them to know (Shows the clip, then an announcement).
Yep. Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati.
That was the description of the Red Green Show in a nutshell. Well, also, thoughts disconnected from action, from brains, well, from anything really (from another TV interview where he let the Interviewer try to play Red Green for a build that replaced a tire with old shoes).
Well, for that matter, there won't be net neutrality as long as TCP/IP protocol allows individual routers to prioritize data packets.
"enacted" is a funny word for a non-enforcable policy that isn't law because it never went through Congress. Whether you are talking Emperor Obama or Emperor Trump, isn't the *real* problem having executives who legislate without a legislature?
Better yet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMqhs6GQwpM
I just saw a youtube video with one of my favorite TV stars- a man who found success first in Canadian television, then selling his show to American PBS networks, that did 15 seasons and a movie.
He's now producing new content in the character online, and his sons have started a Twitch channel in which they show an episode and give additional director's style commentary interactive with a chat window.
In the interview with network news, this actor/producer/creator said he'd never touch TV again, and had the web been well developed as it is now back in 1990 when he started, his show would never have been seen on TV at all.
It isn't just viewers who are fed up with the big business that advertising-and-tax-supported-television brings with it. It's the content creators.
Because a big reason why so many jobs are still not filled is because wages have not caught up to the demand.