The cheap HP Multifunction I bought 18 months ago has worked for me. Yes, there are the occasional jams, but I have been able to scan all my old tax returns and continue to scan new documents. HP has made a loss on this machine, since I have not installed (let alone bought new) the ink cartridges.
That's where your argument fails. Many, many large corporations use tax strategies, often including offshore entities, to reduce their overall tax liability to single digits, and in some cases zero.
Re:Such systems have been proposed before
on
The Zuckerberg Tax
·
· Score: 1
What's the difference between Larry Ellison borrowing against his stock vs borrowing against his house (other than the mortgage interest being tax deductible)?
Either way, he pays back the loan (with money that's been taxed) or he loses the underlying collateral. Please, explain how it's a magic money machine that avoids taxes
You misunderstood the article. These super-rich guys never need to pay back the loans. They have revolving loans guaranteed against their effectively limitless shareholdings and then, when they die, their heirs can sell the shares without paying any taxes. No taxes ever get paid.
Except most people are horrible at thinking ahead in financial terms.
Or the carrier doesn't really offer it. T-Mobile offers pre-paid bring-your-own plans, except that they won't let you transfer from a post-paid plan to a pre-paid plan.
Not to cut in on the INFORMATION-WANTS-TO-BE-FREE rant, but culture can't survive in the long term if its creators don't get rewarded for their work
Please tell me how cave-dwellers who painted on the walls of their caves were rewarded? Did Michaelangelo get a cut of the entrance fees to the Sistene Chapel? Yes, artists need to live, but over history, the idea that artists get royalties is very modern. There are many ways that artists can be paid.
What is going on is that the economic value of music publishers has been destroyed by the Internet. There is no need for the RIAA member companies to exist -- they provide very little value. They are the buggy whip manufacturers of the 21st century. They have been replaced by alternative methods of distribuiton such as iTunes.
Most of the people who create music today make money from their live perfornamces. Mass copyright violations don't affect this -- in fact, studies have suggested that the effects of P2P sharing of copyrighted music is actually the opposite -- it increases the artists' income.
Oh, and since you seem to get the first (or almost first) post on many discussions : GET A JOB!
Observing that "it is commonly accepted that the price of a piece of software represents 10 percent to 25 percent of the price of a computer," the court ordered Lenovo to reimburse Petrus â120 for the software.
Commonly accepted by whom? Certainly not by Oracle salesmen, or EDA software salesmen, or many other application and operating system areas (eg. MS Server). OK, it may be true for desktop PCs, but the computer market is more than just desktops.
So, your argument is that it is not a free speech issue while it might not lead to a problem?
Or is your argument that it is only a problem if it mostly occurs? It's OK to violate free speech requirements as long as it doesn't happen too often?
Do you realistically think that if people are forced to use a subset of computers to watch or research objectionable material, those computers won't (in some libraries in the USA) become effectively unavailable? If you think that, I have a bridge to sell you.
The write up (above) says he asked the patron to change computers, not stop exercising his first amendment rights... The librarian took the request to change computers to be the same as censorship, which it is not.
And when there is only one computer available for watching objectional meterial and it is in constant use? Hey, I know, why don't we set up "Free Speech Zones"?
Seriously, though, once you accept the principle of requiring the library patron to move to another computer, it can easily become a free speech issue. As other have pointed out, it might start with porn, but what about academic books on human anatomy? Who gets to decide what is objectionable?
Your argument assumes that bank employees do what is good for the bank. The last fnancial crisis has showed that this is simply not true. The excessive compensation schemes put in place at banks have disconnected what is good for employees from what is good for banks.
Huge bonuses were obtained by employees for deals that were very bad for the banks. Enough money to retire was paid in bonuses in a couple of years, so why would those employees care about the long-term health of the bank? External market pressures won't change that dynamic -- banks have to reform their compensation schemes.
not quite. Its like the FBI seizing all units of a storage facility where the storage facility itself is believed to be storing illegal materials on the premises.
Having destroyed the material, how do they prove it was illegal? Even if they can point to a few files, how do they show that the majority of files are infringing (which will be required under US law)?
No, the objective here is simple: put Megaupload out of business, irrespective of what is legal or not. This deletion will put them out of business.
Agreed. Although with "who cares" I meant that we just shouldn't obey all these irrational laws they vote since most of them are written to either fuck us (the people) or serve some specific financial lobby, or both.
The copyright lobby has not dropped SOPA/PIPA. Even a watered-down version of these could make it very difficult for communities to develop around rooting/jailbreaking phones so that, unless you can figure out your own jailbreak, you may not be able to download the information and binaries required to jailbreak.
If I buy a carrier independent Android compatible phone then I don't have to jailbreak it.
You are confused between sim-unlocking (allws the phone to be used with different carriers) and jailbreaking (allows different firmware to be loaded or features enabled).
Someone in the UK must have a photograph that is sufficiently similar that this judge would consider that that the plaintiff in the case was himself infringing on someone else's work.
There is an equiry going on in the UK discussing this and other issues, but the answer is simple: people need to go to jail. Not only is there evidence of illegal activity (accing voicemails and emails), but now it looks like there is evidence of perjury (lying to the enquiry).
There is also evidence of obstruction (destruction of computers). It's quite clear that the illegal activity is at the highest levels of News Corp. People at the highest levels need to go to jail. Paying out this amount of money means nothing to billionaires.
Correctly edited version: Zhang said that he used the GWA Code in connection with a private business he ran training Chinese Hackers in Reserve Bank Code.
That's all right then. Otherwise he would probably have been in violation of the work visa that Bloomberg says he held.
And "existing law" does NOT allow military detention of US Citizens unless they're engaged in an act of war against the USA outside the USA. INSIDE the USA, they're covered by normal law enforcment, absent a declaration of martial law, which hasn't happened.
You might want to look at what happened to Jose Padilla before you make that claim.
Slashdot Mirror
The cheap HP Multifunction I bought 18 months ago has worked for me. Yes, there are the occasional jams, but I have been able to scan all my old tax returns and continue to scan new documents. HP has made a loss on this machine, since I have not installed (let alone bought new) the ink cartridges.
In America...
you tax IRS!
If you live in the Bay Area (home to Fry's), never buy HDDs from Fry's -- buy online, or if you need it today, Central Computer.
That's where your argument fails. Many, many large corporations use tax strategies, often including offshore entities, to reduce their overall tax liability to single digits, and in some cases zero.
You misunderstood the article. These super-rich guys never need to pay back the loans. They have revolving loans guaranteed against their effectively limitless shareholdings and then, when they die, their heirs can sell the shares without paying any taxes. No taxes ever get paid.
Or the carrier doesn't really offer it. T-Mobile offers pre-paid bring-your-own plans, except that they won't let you transfer from a post-paid plan to a pre-paid plan.
Please tell me how cave-dwellers who painted on the walls of their caves were rewarded? Did Michaelangelo get a cut of the entrance fees to the Sistene Chapel? Yes, artists need to live, but over history, the idea that artists get royalties is very modern. There are many ways that artists can be paid.
What is going on is that the economic value of music publishers has been destroyed by the Internet. There is no need for the RIAA member companies to exist -- they provide very little value. They are the buggy whip manufacturers of the 21st century. They have been replaced by alternative methods of distribuiton such as iTunes.
Most of the people who create music today make money from their live perfornamces. Mass copyright violations don't affect this -- in fact, studies have suggested that the effects of P2P sharing of copyrighted music is actually the opposite -- it increases the artists' income.
Oh, and since you seem to get the first (or almost first) post on many discussions : GET A JOB!
National (and European) laws trump EULAs.
Commonly accepted by whom? Certainly not by Oracle salesmen, or EDA software salesmen, or many other application and operating system areas (eg. MS Server). OK, it may be true for desktop PCs, but the computer market is more than just desktops.
So, your argument is that it is not a free speech issue while it might not lead to a problem?
Or is your argument that it is only a problem if it mostly occurs? It's OK to violate free speech requirements as long as it doesn't happen too often?
Do you realistically think that if people are forced to use a subset of computers to watch or research objectionable material, those computers won't (in some libraries in the USA) become effectively unavailable? If you think that, I have a bridge to sell you.
And when there is only one computer available for watching objectional meterial and it is in constant use? Hey, I know, why don't we set up "Free Speech Zones"?
Seriously, though, once you accept the principle of requiring the library patron to move to another computer, it can easily become a free speech issue. As other have pointed out, it might start with porn, but what about academic books on human anatomy? Who gets to decide what is objectionable?
Your argument assumes that bank employees do what is good for the bank. The last fnancial crisis has showed that this is simply not true. The excessive compensation schemes put in place at banks have disconnected what is good for employees from what is good for banks.
Huge bonuses were obtained by employees for deals that were very bad for the banks. Enough money to retire was paid in bonuses in a couple of years, so why would those employees care about the long-term health of the bank? External market pressures won't change that dynamic -- banks have to reform their compensation schemes.
Obviously, the Perl Terorist, because no-one can figure out what they are doing, even when they have all the code.
Having destroyed the material, how do they prove it was illegal? Even if they can point to a few files, how do they show that the majority of files are infringing (which will be required under US law)?
No, the objective here is simple: put Megaupload out of business, irrespective of what is legal or not. This deletion will put them out of business.
The copyright lobby has not dropped SOPA/PIPA. Even a watered-down version of these could make it very difficult for communities to develop around rooting/jailbreaking phones so that, unless you can figure out your own jailbreak, you may not be able to download the information and binaries required to jailbreak.
You are confused between sim-unlocking (allws the phone to be used with different carriers) and jailbreaking (allows different firmware to be loaded or features enabled).
And when no manufacturer sells such a phone/tablet/whatever? What will you do then?
Someone in the UK must have a photograph that is sufficiently similar that this judge would consider that that the plaintiff in the case was himself infringing on someone else's work.
There is an equiry going on in the UK discussing this and other issues, but the answer is simple: people need to go to jail. Not only is there evidence of illegal activity (accing voicemails and emails), but now it looks like there is evidence of perjury (lying to the enquiry).
There is also evidence of obstruction (destruction of computers). It's quite clear that the illegal activity is at the highest levels of News Corp. People at the highest levels need to go to jail. Paying out this amount of money means nothing to billionaires.
That's all right then. Otherwise he would probably have been in violation of the work visa that Bloomberg says he held.
Especially when the fiber is on a pole [RTFA].
Why don't we call the law/treaty the DMEA "Digital Millenium Enclosures Act".
A glance at this graph will give you a swift education on why copper theft has increased recently.
You might want to look at what happened to Jose Padilla before you make that claim.
Where is /. in that list? They want to monitor people critical of the government but miss /. in favor of the Drudge Report?