And your money envy certainly has biased your translation of the sentences. No mention in them at all about her economic state. That was injected by you.
The fact remains that she did do all the hard work. Why do you think she shouldn't make more money now? Oh, your words -- she's a billionare.
"Quite possibly, and would've just made it easier for him to obtain a weapon, and know how to use it."
That sentence doesn't make any sense. An armed clerk would make it easier for him to obtain a weapon how? Not presuming, as you might be that he would of course kill the clerk. It also has no bearing whatsoever on his knowing how to use a weapon.
No. The vast majority of gun owners do not act in that manner and in all probablilty would recognize the novelty item or at least hold the draw on him until he dropped it. In real life situations, not your vested action scenario, people do not shoot first and ask later. Quite the opposite.
And you assume, 1) people are irrational and 2) they will screw up. Neither extreme is accurate, but stats point toward my view instead of yours. We know the armed robber is violent and has no concern for other's welfare. One might ask why you would wish that only he be armed?
1. One man with a gun will shoot until people brave enough can close and overpower him. There are precious few people of that nature, obviously, borne out by the story. The sixty people will be aiming at the one man and funneling their shots into a small space. He will be swiss-cheesed in short order.
2. The many survivors will all point to the puddle of bullet ridden excrement and tell the police who started the crap. Police rarely arrive on the scene until after violence has abated. In those instances when they do arrive on time, here in the US, they are pretty good at telling which ones are shooting at the bad guys, whether you believe that or not.
Not at all. When I was running my stunt show, I weighed 195 at 6'1" and BMI showed me obese. Even with a doctor looking at my torso he told me I was overweight and needed to lose some 30 pounds. It's a joke.
Look AH, conservatives do not always say that. Now that your straw has been dispersed, let's blow away another blade. Green economy is already underway, it's just perhaps not advancing as quickly as you would like. I do agree with the infrastructure point. As to the pissing? Much the same as pissing it away during II. You just need to look at it from a broader point, not me, me, me.
Apparently you don't understand the use of an elipsis:
ellipsis
.
1.Gram.
a. the omission from a sentence or other construction of one or more words that would complete or clarify the construction, as the omission of who are, while I am, or while we are from I like to interview people sitting down.
b. the omission of one or more items from a construction in order to avoid repeating the identical or equivalent items that are in a preceding or following construction, as the omission of been to Paris from the second clause of I've been to Paris, but they haven't.
The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of Al Qaida and cut off a source of terrorist funding.
And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more.
In these 19 months that changed the world, our actions have been focused and deliberate and proportionate to the offense. We have not forgotten the victims of September the 11th, the last phone calls, the cold murder of children, the searches in the rubble. With those attacks, the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States, and war is what they got.
If we're successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it's not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it's not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11.
Reads a bit different when you supply your snip, don't it?
The best part is where extradition is approved on the proviso that the US DA promises not to seek the death penalty, but enforcing that promise is kinda hard when the prisoner is turned over and on US soil!
Nice troll, there. On what cases would you base that paranoia?
Oh, puhlease. "legitmate market to get it" These people won't pay a friggin' dime. There's no "black market" as that assumes payment. Hint: even black marketeers demand money. These people simply engage in wholesale rip-off.
I guess that's the sad thing though, it's no longer the people that made this stuff that own the copyrights.
And, you're talking right out your butt. Whoever owns the copyright, owns the copyright. If someone sells it or leases it, that's their choice. If a company pays someone to produce something, that 'artist' does not own the copyright, the company does.
This goes for sound and video.
Not, however, in the absolute sense you portray. Burton Cummings, for instance, holds his own copyrights. Hmmm. Seems artists can control their own work if they wish to.
I think that a lot of artists would be open to their work being displayed in a tasteful manner without the full work being put online.
Some would, some wouldn't. Those who don't want to have the right to not have their work ripped off.
This was your claim: "Government agencies and military often test their new equipment in more 'predictable' scenarios such as protests." -- emphasis mine.
You have hardly provided any evidence to back that up. Military use in military areas ain't protests.
Tasers were developed by a NASA guy and their development and history also do not fit your previous claim.
So, you have not supported your earlier assertion. Google away, but next time support what you claimed.
Slashdot Mirror
She's not. Just her wizards, etc.
And your money envy certainly has biased your translation of the sentences. No mention in them at all about her economic state. That was injected by you.
The fact remains that she did do all the hard work. Why do you think she shouldn't make more money now? Oh, your words -- she's a billionare.
Fact is, admitting to a crime is not the same as being guilty.
Fact is, legally you're incorrect.
"But look at all the block the Bush Administration has put on various technologies around cloning."
Really? Provide some cites.
"Quite possibly, and would've just made it easier for him to obtain a weapon, and know how to use it."
That sentence doesn't make any sense. An armed clerk would make it easier for him to obtain a weapon how? Not presuming, as you might be that he would of course kill the clerk. It also has no bearing whatsoever on his knowing how to use a weapon.
No. The vast majority of gun owners do not act in that manner and in all probablilty would recognize the novelty item or at least hold the draw on him until he dropped it. In real life situations, not your vested action scenario, people do not shoot first and ask later. Quite the opposite.
And you assume, 1) people are irrational and 2) they will screw up. Neither extreme is accurate, but stats point toward my view instead of yours. We know the armed robber is violent and has no concern for other's welfare. One might ask why you would wish that only he be armed?
Incorrect.
1. One man with a gun will shoot until people brave enough can close and overpower him. There are precious few people of that nature, obviously, borne out by the story. The sixty people will be aiming at the one man and funneling their shots into a small space. He will be swiss-cheesed in short order.
2. The many survivors will all point to the puddle of bullet ridden excrement and tell the police who started the crap. Police rarely arrive on the scene until after violence has abated. In those instances when they do arrive on time, here in the US, they are pretty good at telling which ones are shooting at the bad guys, whether you believe that or not.
Not at all. When I was running my stunt show, I weighed 195 at 6'1" and BMI showed me obese. Even with a doctor looking at my torso he told me I was overweight and needed to lose some 30 pounds. It's a joke.
If the day ever comes where what I do can be done by a robot/script (not likely!)...
Wonder if he thought that?
Your hypothesis could be easily tested by counting the number of critical articles done by reviewers receiving swag.
Did no one learn anything from Clippy?
Look AH, conservatives do not always say that. Now that your straw has been dispersed, let's blow away another blade. Green economy is already underway, it's just perhaps not advancing as quickly as you would like. I do agree with the infrastructure point. As to the pissing? Much the same as pissing it away during II. You just need to look at it from a broader point, not me, me, me.
Apparently you don't understand the use of an elipsis:
ellipsis
. 1.Gram. a. the omission from a sentence or other construction of one or more words that would complete or clarify the construction, as the omission of who are, while I am, or while we are from I like to interview people sitting down. b. the omission of one or more items from a construction in order to avoid repeating the identical or equivalent items that are in a preceding or following construction, as the omission of been to Paris from the second clause of I've been to Paris, but they haven't.
The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of Al Qaida and cut off a source of terrorist funding.
And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more.
In these 19 months that changed the world, our actions have been focused and deliberate and proportionate to the offense. We have not forgotten the victims of September the 11th, the last phone calls, the cold murder of children, the searches in the rubble. With those attacks, the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States, and war is what they got.
If we're successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it's not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it's not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11.
Reads a bit different when you supply your snip, don't it?
The best part is where extradition is approved on the proviso that the US DA promises not to seek the death penalty, but enforcing that promise is kinda hard when the prisoner is turned over and on US soil!
Nice troll, there. On what cases would you base that paranoia?
Wow. How easy would this be? Don't buy one generation seeds. Plenty of seed companies that sell heritage seeds.
Blowing statues to pieces is hardly restoration. That you would reference that is strange.
Radiohead holds the right to determine distribution. Unless they stated it's OK to do as you've said, that is how.
Oh, puhlease. "legitmate market to get it" These people won't pay a friggin' dime. There's no "black market" as that assumes payment. Hint: even black marketeers demand money. These people simply engage in wholesale rip-off.
I guess that's the sad thing though, it's no longer the people that made this stuff that own the copyrights.
And, you're talking right out your butt. Whoever owns the copyright, owns the copyright. If someone sells it or leases it, that's their choice. If a company pays someone to produce something, that 'artist' does not own the copyright, the company does.
This goes for sound and video.
Not, however, in the absolute sense you portray. Burton Cummings, for instance, holds his own copyrights. Hmmm. Seems artists can control their own work if they wish to.
I think that a lot of artists would be open to their work being displayed in a tasteful manner without the full work being put online.
Some would, some wouldn't. Those who don't want to have the right to not have their work ripped off.
You do understand that I could use Pepsi in a parody and that's legal? Trademark does not trump all uses.
Would you please pare that selection of the examples which use enforced in the negative and the possible?
Nope. The constitution explicitly states it is the deciding factor.
This was your claim: "Government agencies and military often test their new equipment in more 'predictable' scenarios such as protests." -- emphasis mine.
You have hardly provided any evidence to back that up. Military use in military areas ain't protests. Tasers were developed by a NASA guy and their development and history also do not fit your previous claim. So, you have not supported your earlier assertion. Google away, but next time support what you claimed.
And then if caught, you good sir, would actually do friggin' time in butt-slam prison. Didn't think that through, did you?
Um, no. The penalties are for illegally distributing. That's what copyright is about, not sales. By the way, they weren't hers to "share".
Use one percent. That's 20K * 15 = 300K dollars.
Uh, no. It's abstract. Touch the square root of 141.22.