Small correction. Martha was busted for insider trading, not cheating on her taxes.
No, but thank you for playing. She was convicted of lying to a federal agent during an investigation even though a) she was not Mirandized, b) she was not under oath and c) what she lied about was not against the law.
The notion that a copyright should last for the entire life of an author is a very new thing.
Only in America, and only since The US signed on to the Bern Convention. That's based on French law, where preserving the creator's rights for as long as possible is more important than any possible benefits that might come from releasing a work to the Public Domain.
A) is not a fact - that's a guess on "they grew wine in Southern England then" - and they grow wine further north now so that absolutely proves nothing.
No, it's not a "guess." It's based on the undisputed FACT that the Norse maintained a colony on the west coast of Greenland (Not, mind you, the east coast, where the Gulf Stream sometimes reaches.) for five hundred years as dairy farmers, and that the ruins are only now coming out of the snow and ice.
You mean like the fact that the climate was warmer during the Medieval Warm than it is now? Like the fact that the glaciers aren't shrinking as fast as the alarmists are claiming? Like the fact that sea level rise isn't something new, but has been going on for thousands of years? Which of these facts have been proven wrong?
The problem is, the deniers believe that even one error in a summary report means that the science is wrong,
On the other side of the coin, the AGW alarmists insist that the science is right no matter how many of the so-called "facts" turn out to be fabricated.
When I was in the Navy, back in '72, one of my best friends aboard ship was a Quartermaster's Mate. (They do things like navigation.) He told me, once, that when we went from Pearl Harbor to the Philippines, they calculated distances assuming a nautical mile was exactly 2000 feet instead of 2018, and that all turns were "point turns," instead of trying to calculate the size of the arc the ship went through. Over a voyage of several thousand nautical miles, the systematic error just wasn't enough to worry about. Yes, I'd say that a 200 meter error isn't enough to worry about.
A few got rich but most were lucky to get paid at all.
Back in the late 30s, it was common for actors to have contracts where they only got paid for those days that they worked on-camera. I know of cases where a director would take a contract player who hadn't worked that day and used them in a bit part so they'd get paid for that day. Not all the studios (or all the directors) were rapacious. How many people in the recording industry today would be so considerate?
In the classic sense, there are no moguls in the music industry today. As the term was used in the Studio Age in Hollywood it referred to somebody who a) ran a studio, b) had earned their wealth in the film industry and c) had a distinct vision of what kind of films should be made and how they were to be made. Putting this vision into practice within whatever budget restraints were imposed by the firm's Board of Directors is what made each studio unique. You don't need to see the opening credits to tell a Warner Brother's picture from a Universal or an MGM, at least not if you know what to look for.
The People running the various recording firms may well fit the first two conditions, but not, AFAICT the third. The only "vision" they have is to maximize profits at any cost, including swindling the artists out of their fair share of the profit. No, what music needs today is one or more real moguls, who actually care about the music and understand that Henry Ford was right: sometimes giving your workers a raise results in higher profits.
No, I'm not, and I don't play one on TV, either. I am, however, glad you asked, because soi disant "climate scientists, especially those of the CRU are exactly the people I was thinking of.
If the data don't make sense according to your theory, you don't discard the data, you discard the theory and work out a new one that fits the facts as you've observed them. TFA says that Dunbar was watching postdocs doing research, and if so, they should have known better. Alas, too many people who call themselves scientists are more interested in proving their pet theory true than in finding out what's actually going on.
Especially when you consider that a lensman can read any communication no matter how encoded, encrypted or obfuscated. Even a one-time pad won't do any good once a lensman sees it.
Who else at your company has to wear a uniform? Probably just the cleaning staff, right? Making the help desk wear a distinctive uniform is telling everybody who works there exactly how low on the pecking order it is. If it were me, I'd point that out to whoever came up with the idea, but do so respectfully. Then, if the idea goes through, start sending out my resume.
The reason for the loss was the failing will of the public in the US.
The real reason is that the NVA waited until after the US pulled out then violated the treaty they'd signed and invaded. When that happened, the US Congress also ignored its treaty obligations and sent nothing but some token munitions.
The current system of "meta-moderation" is absolutely worthless. Deciding whether a post is good or not has no effect on whoever moderated it. Until they go back to a system where the moderations themselves are meta-modded, I, for one, refuse to participate. Maybe that's why I never get mod points any more, but if that's their attitude it's OK by me. Moderation is a responsibility that I took seriously, and I always meta-modded honestly. If that's not the type of moderator they want, it just means less work for me.
I _DO_ work at a hosting provider, and unfortunately root access is often required to repair the steaming piles of crap customers often leave behind.
I'm not disputing that. However, rooting the server because the client doesn't want to give you the root password is a bit much, don't you think? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to say, "Sorry, no root password, not fix." and let it go at that?
Slashdot Mirror
You do realize, don't you, that the point of letterboxing a movie is to preserve the original 16:9 ratio on a 4:3 screen?
Wrong. Unlike on TV, in Real Life(TM) the cops are supposed to read you your rights any time you're considered a suspect.
No, but thank you for playing. She was convicted of lying to a federal agent during an investigation even though a) she was not Mirandized, b) she was not under oath and c) what she lied about was not against the law.
Once you're in orbit, you're halfway to anywhere.
Robert A. Heinlein
Cool! Thanx! One question, though, who is this "Watts" of whom you speak?
Only in America, and only since The US signed on to the Bern Convention. That's based on French law, where preserving the creator's rights for as long as possible is more important than any possible benefits that might come from releasing a work to the Public Domain.
No, it's not a "guess." It's based on the undisputed FACT that the Norse maintained a colony on the west coast of Greenland (Not, mind you, the east coast, where the Gulf Stream sometimes reaches.) for five hundred years as dairy farmers, and that the ruins are only now coming out of the snow and ice.
You mean like the fact that the climate was warmer during the Medieval Warm than it is now? Like the fact that the glaciers aren't shrinking as fast as the alarmists are claiming? Like the fact that sea level rise isn't something new, but has been going on for thousands of years? Which of these facts have been proven wrong?
On the other side of the coin, the AGW alarmists insist that the science is right no matter how many of the so-called "facts" turn out to be fabricated.
In Soviet Russia, the captive Yorkshireman beats the confession out of you!
I'm not so much saying it as asking if that's what the OP meant.
So what you're saying is, Windows doesn't have almost complete control of the PC OS market share because it's the best OS but because it isn't?
No. Wrong ship and, he was an enlisted man, not the Navigation Officer.
When I was in the Navy, back in '72, one of my best friends aboard ship was a Quartermaster's Mate. (They do things like navigation.) He told me, once, that when we went from Pearl Harbor to the Philippines, they calculated distances assuming a nautical mile was exactly 2000 feet instead of 2018, and that all turns were "point turns," instead of trying to calculate the size of the arc the ship went through. Over a voyage of several thousand nautical miles, the systematic error just wasn't enough to worry about. Yes, I'd say that a 200 meter error isn't enough to worry about.
Personally I prefer RDELVIS. Of course, I always appreciated having to hit Bubba over the head with a crow bar to end most of the levels.
Back in the late 30s, it was common for actors to have contracts where they only got paid for those days that they worked on-camera. I know of cases where a director would take a contract player who hadn't worked that day and used them in a bit part so they'd get paid for that day. Not all the studios (or all the directors) were rapacious. How many people in the recording industry today would be so considerate?
The People running the various recording firms may well fit the first two conditions, but not, AFAICT the third. The only "vision" they have is to maximize profits at any cost, including swindling the artists out of their fair share of the profit. No, what music needs today is one or more real moguls, who actually care about the music and understand that Henry Ford was right: sometimes giving your workers a raise results in higher profits.
No, I'm not, and I don't play one on TV, either. I am, however, glad you asked, because soi disant "climate scientists, especially those of the CRU are exactly the people I was thinking of.
If the data don't make sense according to your theory, you don't discard the data, you discard the theory and work out a new one that fits the facts as you've observed them. TFA says that Dunbar was watching postdocs doing research, and if so, they should have known better. Alas, too many people who call themselves scientists are more interested in proving their pet theory true than in finding out what's actually going on.
Especially when you consider that a lensman can read any communication no matter how encoded, encrypted or obfuscated. Even a one-time pad won't do any good once a lensman sees it.
The "proof" turned out to be flawed.
Who else at your company has to wear a uniform? Probably just the cleaning staff, right? Making the help desk wear a distinctive uniform is telling everybody who works there exactly how low on the pecking order it is. If it were me, I'd point that out to whoever came up with the idea, but do so respectfully. Then, if the idea goes through, start sending out my resume.
The real reason is that the NVA waited until after the US pulled out then violated the treaty they'd signed and invaded. When that happened, the US Congress also ignored its treaty obligations and sent nothing but some token munitions.
The current system of "meta-moderation" is absolutely worthless. Deciding whether a post is good or not has no effect on whoever moderated it. Until they go back to a system where the moderations themselves are meta-modded, I, for one, refuse to participate. Maybe that's why I never get mod points any more, but if that's their attitude it's OK by me. Moderation is a responsibility that I took seriously, and I always meta-modded honestly. If that's not the type of moderator they want, it just means less work for me.
I'm not disputing that. However, rooting the server because the client doesn't want to give you the root password is a bit much, don't you think? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to say, "Sorry, no root password, not fix." and let it go at that?