I guess it takes a constitutional amendment to make that happen, and if so, let's do it. Also it's interesting that the Confederate president had line-item veto power explicitly granted in that constitution.
Putting aside the particulars of this case, something that really bothers me about law in general is that somebody has to be punished for a precedent to be set.
Suppose (taking an example from this case), the fellow genuinely believed that an Orkut community was not equivalent to a public forum. Without a very specific law, and without a ruling on the matter, all a lawyer would be able to tell him would be "maybe".
So your choices: a) play it safe, and never do anything that hasn't specifically been ruled "legal", or b) proceed, and when you're the first to find out it's not legal, you get slapped hard.
"a" is what most people choose, and it's among the largest costs of our lawyer-ocracy.
Is there a way for a judge to declare something illegal while letting a guy off the hook if he genuinely had no way to know for sure?
It can start as a specially-formed TXT and transition to its own field, like SPF did. DNS spoofing is its own problem; if they own DNS they have you anyway.
We're all bound by myriad laws that we have no choice about, that require a law degree to begin to understand, and for which "ignorance of the law is no excuse". Let's start simplifying things there and see where that takes us.
Slashdot Mirror
That's my retirement grease!
What could be more non-standard than Flash, a proprietary, binary blob format executed by a proprietary, binary blob plugin?
www.againstmonopoly.org
The number would be 99.8%. Dr Paul does not ever vote for those bills.
I guess it takes a constitutional amendment to make that happen, and if so, let's do it. Also it's interesting that the Confederate president had line-item veto power explicitly granted in that constitution.
heh, that one's before my time; I'd have to cheat and look it up. :-)
I'm guessing that was around 1992? According to the Inflation Calculator, that's about $2000 in today's dollars.
a so-called culture of honor, such as that found in the South were people of necessity had nothing but their reputations
Before the war, the South was the rich half of the country.
n/t
Please post your name and city; you may get a large number of /.ers beating down your door.
Actually, I don't have Flash installed either...
I'm not blaming MS for Netflix's mistake; I'm just saying there's no excuse to use Silverlight for anything. Whether it's well-done or not.
There's no excuse for Silverlight, in any circumstance.
That's a fascinating idea. Did you have a chance to look into SSDs and see how the math worked out there?
What takes so long? Why not now?
Putting aside the particulars of this case, something that really bothers me about law in general is that somebody has to be punished for a precedent to be set.
Suppose (taking an example from this case), the fellow genuinely believed that an Orkut community was not equivalent to a public forum. Without a very specific law, and without a ruling on the matter, all a lawyer would be able to tell him would be "maybe".
So your choices: a) play it safe, and never do anything that hasn't specifically been ruled "legal", or b) proceed, and when you're the first to find out it's not legal, you get slapped hard.
"a" is what most people choose, and it's among the largest costs of our lawyer-ocracy.
Is there a way for a judge to declare something illegal while letting a guy off the hook if he genuinely had no way to know for sure?
I thought Bayer lost its trademark to Aspirin as part of World War I reparations.
Well, right, but I think that's an orthogonal problem to the one that an SSL-only DNS option would solve.
It can start as a specially-formed TXT and transition to its own field, like SPF did. DNS spoofing is its own problem; if they own DNS they have you anyway.
That sounds like a good idea. There could be a DNS option on the domain for secure-only. Of course DNS has had its own issues, but every bit helps.
Just make sure that a 240V device, like an oven or dryer, is on when you want to use the network.
We're all bound by myriad laws that we have no choice about, that require a law degree to begin to understand, and for which "ignorance of the law is no excuse". Let's start simplifying things there and see where that takes us.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/incentive
Allow me to quote:
incentive
noun
1. something that incites or tends to incite to action or greater effort, as a reward offered for increased productivity.
adjective
2. inciting, as to action; stimulating; provocative.
The word is "incite", not "incentivize". There's no need to make up a new word when the word you're looking for already exists.
What is Jen doing with The Internet??