Well, that all depends on if the "planting" was forced, (she didn't want your "seed") consentual (you both agreed to the "seeding") or unintentional (you were asleep when the "seeding" tool place.)
The ruling outlined in the article covers the first of the three possibilities you listed.
your claim that countries with tax rates higher than the US are "arguably" less free than the US, is identical to a claim that countries (such as the US) with tax rates higher than country $FOO, which has a tax rate lower than the US, are "arguably" less free than country $FOO.
No, since Finland (which is a country that enjoys a large amount of political freedom, similar to the US) has a high tax rate, it is arguably less free than the US.
I made no broad claims about other countries that have lower tax rates than the US.
Except that the US is arguably less free than them. high tax rate, and all that.
you're confusing the common-sense definition of "invitation" with the technical definition as applies to gmail/orkut/livejournal/kuro5hin/etc... the latter are often solicited, and should more correctly be called "access codes" or "signup codes" than "invitations". every gmail user i know (about two of them, but still) has a list of people who have asked them to send invitations when they get some to send out.
Re:Definately a bad choice on the part of the devs
on
A New Look For Firefox
·
· Score: 1
well, explore the OS a bit before claiming that "Apple's OS" has _no_ buttons resembling those. if you haven't _used_ the OS, you can't be making claims about what button styles it has or doesn't have [there are other examples of such buttons too, even on some non-metal applications]
More important from the bank's point of view is that OSS can simply be compiled from source with this code omitted This may still be considered good enough to stop casual copying, which this is targeted at in the first place... "real" counterfeiters don't use photoshop/etc anyway
The thought that, if a legislator votes for A he/she will inevitably _have_ to vote for Z is a fraud and an intellectual embarassment.
That's not the claim made - the claim is: if the legislator gets away with voting for A, the public won't care when he votes for B, and then hey what's the problem with C, and might as well let them pass D as well, it's not so much worse than C... and finally, no-one even blinks when he and all the other legislators vote for Z.
If we lose 2% of freedom and liberty every year it wont seem like much,..until a 20 years later. It's ironic, but security is a major threat to liberty.
in 20 years, at a 2% rate, we still have about 66.7% of the freedom left [which is more than we still have of the amount of freedom there was 20 years ago, so i think you're being overly optimistic]
but you have to also make the fake images - every hour. it's not a superimposed cartoonish picture, it has actual shadows/lighting... yes, there are tools to do it, but there has to be someone sitting there running the tools _every hour_.
skills using winword 6 on windows 3.1 transfer perfectly well to word 2003 or whatever's in use these days. gui word processing programs interfaces have not changed substantially.
the original proposal says your reverse address's MX record has to match your IP. (and, in the system you propose, how do you tell a machine how to qualify DYN-dialup108.aol.com as "invalid"? sure to you and me it's just dialup)
a 486 pc is no less useful for, say, word processing, than it was when it first came out - the same software (in the same versions) runs on it now as did then, and the same printers attach to it as did then, etc.
suppose the reverse dns for the server that's trying to talk to you is outgoing-smtp.foo.com; the MX record for foo.com is incoming-smtp.foo.com. (and "outgoing-smtp.foo.com" lacks an MX record - no-one sends to somebody@outgoing-smtp.foo.com, so all are happy with this situation) the solution proposed in grandparent rejects this mail.
form SPAMSOL.TXT, abbreviated version - Emphasis means IMPORTANT
This article advocates a
(x) technical
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
(x) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it (x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email (x) Unpopularity of weird new taxes (x) Huge existing software investment in SMTP (x) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack (x) Extreme profitability of spam
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x) Blacklists suck (x) Whitelists suck (x) Sending email should be free (x) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
the numbers given are just guidelines, the actual a4 size is the size with sqrt(2) aspect ratio that is exactly 1/16 of a square meter. if i remember correctly
in case it went over your head "do you mean like mercenaries" was meant to imply that this is nothing new, and thus not a suitable example for something that's "changed too fast to be made illegal"
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that all depends on if the "planting" was forced, (she didn't want your "seed") consentual (you both agreed to the "seeding") or unintentional (you were asleep when the "seeding" tool place.)
The ruling outlined in the article covers the first of the three possibilities you listed.
your claim that countries with tax rates higher than the US are "arguably" less free than the US, is identical to a claim that countries (such as the US) with tax rates higher than country $FOO, which has a tax rate lower than the US, are "arguably" less free than country $FOO.
So force their hand. ask "Am I free to go?"
If Yes: Leave without answering them.
If No: Congratulations! You are now under arrest, with all rights and privileges associated with said condition.
Disclamer:IANAL
No, since Finland (which is a country that enjoys a large amount of political freedom, similar to the US) has a high tax rate, it is arguably less free than the US.
I made no broad claims about other countries that have lower tax rates than the US.
Except that the US is arguably less free than them. high tax rate, and all that.
you're confusing the common-sense definition of "invitation" with the technical definition as applies to gmail/orkut/livejournal/kuro5hin/etc... the latter are often solicited, and should more correctly be called "access codes" or "signup codes" than "invitations". every gmail user i know (about two of them, but still) has a list of people who have asked them to send invitations when they get some to send out.
well, explore the OS a bit before claiming that "Apple's OS" has _no_ buttons resembling those. if you haven't _used_ the OS, you can't be making claims about what button styles it has or doesn't have [there are other examples of such buttons too, even on some non-metal applications]
More important from the bank's point of view is that OSS can simply be compiled from source with this code omitted
This may still be considered good enough to stop casual copying, which this is targeted at in the first place... "real" counterfeiters don't use photoshop/etc anyway
that's why he wants one. so no-one can take pictures of him. or did you completely miss the point?
Haven't you used safari? you know, the browser built into "Apple's OS"
The inevitable solution is to block access without explanation.
The thought that, if a legislator votes for A he/she will inevitably _have_ to vote for Z is a fraud and an intellectual embarassment.
That's not the claim made - the claim is: if the legislator gets away with voting for A, the public won't care when he votes for B, and then hey what's the problem with C, and might as well let them pass D as well, it's not so much worse than C... and finally, no-one even blinks when he and all the other legislators vote for Z.
Are you sure? read the list again:
You really think the government hasn't passed such laws?
If we lose 2% of freedom and liberty every year it wont seem like much, ..until a 20 years later.
It's ironic, but security is a major threat to liberty.
in 20 years, at a 2% rate, we still have about 66.7% of the freedom left [which is more than we still have of the amount of freedom there was 20 years ago, so i think you're being overly optimistic]
and then if you're going to www.btsucks.com , _that_ fact isn't saved, and your name just goes on the publically viewable [worst case scenario] list.
but you have to also make the fake images - every hour. it's not a superimposed cartoonish picture, it has actual shadows/lighting... yes, there are tools to do it, but there has to be someone sitting there running the tools _every hour_.
skills using winword 6 on windows 3.1 transfer perfectly well to word 2003 or whatever's in use these days. gui word processing programs interfaces have not changed substantially.
the original proposal says your reverse address's MX record has to match your IP. (and, in the system you propose, how do you tell a machine how to qualify DYN-dialup108.aol.com as "invalid"? sure to you and me it's just dialup)
a 486 pc is no less useful for, say, word processing, than it was when it first came out - the same software (in the same versions) runs on it now as did then, and the same printers attach to it as did then, etc.
suppose the reverse dns for the server that's trying to talk to you is outgoing-smtp.foo.com; the MX record for foo.com is incoming-smtp.foo.com. (and "outgoing-smtp.foo.com" lacks an MX record - no-one sends to somebody@outgoing-smtp.foo.com, so all are happy with this situation) the solution proposed in grandparent rejects this mail.
form SPAMSOL.TXT, abbreviated version - Emphasis means IMPORTANT
This article advocates a
(x) technical
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work.
(One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may
have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal
law was passed.)
(x) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
(x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
(x) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
(x) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
(x) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
(x) Extreme profitability of spam
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x) Blacklists suck
(x) Whitelists suck
(x) Sending email should be free
(x) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
the numbers given are just guidelines, the actual a4 size is the size with sqrt(2) aspect ratio that is exactly 1/16 of a square meter. if i remember correctly
or, [i agree, but your post is quite lengthy] put quite simply:
the odds against evolution are, metaphorically, astronomical.
so are, literally (given heavy involvement of astronomical phenomena), the odds against each and every crater on the moon.
there are many craters on the moon. Q.E.D.
That word did not originate as you think it did.
But do the wavelet things cut off at arbitrary positions relative to the image?
in case it went over your head "do you mean like mercenaries" was meant to imply that this is nothing new, and thus not a suitable example for something that's "changed too fast to be made illegal"