Thank you for the correction. I may have been thinking of centripetal forces - it seems that as the earth revolves around the earth/moon barycenter that the bulge in the ocean on the side of the earth opposite the moon would be due partially from centripetal forces. But I guess I am wrong.
A 30% markup is a little high, but not at all outrageous for taking physical possession of gold bullion. For example, the spot price of gold on the NY futures market as I post this is US$939/ounce. However, an American Buffalo one ounce gold coin will sell today on Ebay for $1200 - a 27% markup.
There has been a substantial rise in the premium for taking physical possession of gold bullion rather than holding it in a pool or via ETF. Draw your own conclusions as to why...
I had a paper route when I was 12. Of course, my parents also let me drive a moped to deliver them. The local sheriff deputies never looked to kindly upon that...
... it's still fraud even if you don't know you're being duped. Actually, it's fraud especially if you don't know you've been duped.
Actually, it's fraud only if you don't know you've been duped. An essential element of fraud is "reliance." If you know you've been duped, then you aren't relying upon the fraudulent act, and hence there would be no fraud.
Dude, thank you so much for your time. I will take the Linux option. Even though I have admistrator privileges on the machine, there is nothing I can do to reset the permissions.
Again, thank you. I am going to take your advice.
My wife recently took my home machine to Staples (without asking me, of course) in order to have it "fixed" so the brand new printer she bought (again, without asking me) would work. I don't know WTF they did, but all the data which had been saved under "my" XP user account is now inaccessible.
So... I just bought a 500GB HD with an external USB case and tried to copy the entire drive over to the new external drive. But it keeps giving me "Access Denied" errors for certain otherwise innocuous files no good reason.
Question - is there any Windoze program out there that can override XP permissions and/or make for smoother, better drive copying with more control?
More like: non-lawyer with too much spare time files an inartful lawsuit, blames the judge for his incompetence, then posts about it on slashdot to drum up publicity for his internet site.
Exactly. As an actual litigation attorney who knows many judges professionally and personally, I can say that with very few exceptions every last one of them is intelligent, conscientious, thoughtful, fair and practical.
Are there bad, lazy judges? I can only assume so. But you have to realize that the demands upon the judicial system is tremendous, and the judge has to make a decision to keep the wheels of justice turning. If the judge doesn't grasp all of the technical nuances of your in propria persona small claims spam suit, put it in perspective.
I think you have touched upon a fundamental point here - the distinction between non-competition agreements and intellectual property (of which trade secrets is a species) protection. The two issues are forced together in the agreement upon which this submission is based: the agreement states that the employee cannot use IP developed during employment to compete with the employer post-employment.
In California, trade secrets are given strong protection, and non-competition agreements are void as a matter of public policy. That is why asking Slashdot to comment on the validity or wisdom of the agreement at issue. One needs to ask not just a lawyer, but a lawyer with knowledge of these issues in one's jurisdiction.
I find it interesting that your post is about how a law is limiting a company's right to shit on its employees and then your sig is advertising for a guy who wants to get rid of all that.
You are probably just trolling, but I didn't write the law, nor did I say that I support the law. I was just stating what the law is. But as another poster said, Ron Paul would respect the right of the states to govern themselves according to the Constitution.
I disagree with a lot of what California's socialist legislature does, but given the state of the Union, my first duty is to get the feds out of what my state is doing, whether or not I disagree with my state. Then I can deal with my state.
Ninth Amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Tenth Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Yeah - but owning the IP you create while working at a company is a quite a bit different than not competing with them. Certainly Apple's attorneys are aware of all the nuances of this law, and I would certainly expect a provision along the lines as the one you signed to be fully enforceable.
California Business & Professions Code 16600 states:
"Except as provided in this chapter, every contract by which
anyone is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or
business of any kind is to that extent void."
The rest of the relevant chapter addresses mainly those instances where one sells an interest in a business. In those cases noncompetes are enforceable.
California courts routinely void noncompetes under B&P 16600.
Yeah, but only $2300. This has had precisely the exact opposite effect ostensibly intended (leveling the fundraising playing field. See Scalia's dissent in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life. In part:
There is wondrous irony to be found in both the genesis and the consequences of BCRA. In the fact that the institutions it was designed to muzzle--unions and nearly all manner of corporations--for all the "corrosive and distorting effects" of their "immense aggregations of wealth," were utterly impotent to prevent the passage of this legislation that forbids them to criticize candidates (including incumbents). In the fact that the effect of BCRA has been to concentrate more political power in the hands of the country's wealthiest individuals and their so-called 527 organizations, unregulated by 203. (In the 2004 election cycle, a mere 24 individuals contributed an astounding total of $142 million to 527s. S. Weissman & R. Hassan, BCRA and the 527 Groups, in The Election After Reform 79, 92--96 (M. Malbin ed. 2006).) And in the fact that while these wealthy individuals dominate political discourse, it is this small, grass-roots organization of Wisconsin Right to Life that is muzzled.
I agree with completely, and I know Scalia and Thomas agree with us as well. Kennedy, Alito and Roberts aren't ready to say that McCain-Feingold and the BCRA are facially unconstitutional (as are Scalia and Thomas), but they have been willing to opine that much of these laws are unconstitutional.
"...could get the attention of the Federal Election Commission."
Ooooohhhh... scary. How easily we are cowed into forgetting about the First Amendment. I don't know what kind of laws the FEC is working with, but I do know that the supreme law of the land states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
If some lawyer attempted to go after my client with this BS they would get an anti-SLAPP special motion to strike on their desk. My client would get his/her/its attorney's fees paid.
Essentially, it is a way for the small guy to fight Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (big companies trying to shut the little guy up by suing him) by giving other lawyers incentive to take the cases on contingency. If this shit happens to you, contact the EFF; they send out emails to lawyers across the country who may take your defense on contingency.
The fact remains that the U.S. Constitution specifically provides for courts, either inferior or supreme. There is no such provision for a central bank.
Dr. PAUL. "Maybe there is too much power in the hands of those who control monetary policy, the power to create the financial bubbles, the power to maybe bring the bubble about, the power to change the value of the stock market within minutes? That to me is just an ominous power and challenges the whole concept of freedom and liberty sound money."
Dr. GREENSPAN. "Congressman, as I have said to you before, the problem you are alluding to is the conversion of a commodity standard to fiat money. We have statutorily gone onto a fiat money standard, and as a consequence of that it is inevitable that the authority, which is the producer of the money supply, will have inordinate power."
Here is a letter I sent to my congressman and senators:
I am not afraid of terrorism, and I want you to stop being afraid on my behalf. Please start scaling back the official government war on terror. Please replace it with a smaller, more focused anti-terrorist police effort in keeping with the rule of law. Please stop overreacting. I understand that it will not be possible to stop all terrorist acts. I am not afraid.
So instead of Washington insiders bought by corporate lobbyists we'd have Tallahassee/Sacramento/Albany/etc insiders? What an improvement.
It would be a VAST improvement in the sense that Tallahassee/Sacramento/Albany would be balanced against the District of Columbia.
"This balance between the National and State governments ought to be dwelt on with peculiar attention, as it is of the utmost importance. It forms a double security to the people. If one encroaches on their rights they will find a powerful protection in the other. Indeed, they will both be prevented from overpassing their constitutional limits by a certain rivalship, which will ever subsist between them."
-- Alexander Hamilton (speech to the New York Ratifying Convention, 17 June 1788)
Reference: The Works of Alexander Hamilton, Henry Cabot Lodge, ed., vol. 2 (28)
So true. While I (for the most part) love Sprint (I have been a customer for eight years) my bill increased substantially several months ago after I added a line and changed plans. With five phones on my plan, my bill was usually around 100 pages. I simply didn't have the time to look through my bill for several months and I didn't want to call customer service unless I had at least done my part to review my bill. It ended up they had been erronously charging me over $150/month for three months.
They were apologetic and immediately credited my account for the error, but it made me wonder if some devious vice-president hadn't implemented this plan to reap some extra profits from those whose time is too valuable to spend trying to figure out if they are being overcharged.
An out of control Federal government is the result of many decades of the judiciary backing down as congress passed laws which allowed the executive to invade the provinces of the States, rendering the Ninth and Tenth Amendments all but meaningless.
It wasn't until Lopez v. United States (and, subsequently, United States v. Morrison) that the Supreme Court had the balls (well, with O'Connor, the ovaries) to draw the line for the first time in seventy years and keep the Feds out of the State's business.
Yes, that would be Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, O'Connor and Rehnquist. We can only hope that Alito and Roberts will be "conservative" that way too.
If it was up to those nutbags Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg and Souter, there would be no distinction between the States' province and the Fed's province. Those of you hoping for a democrat president better be aware that democratic appointees will almost surely give the Feds back all the power they lost under Rehnquist. (Yes, I know Souter was appointed by Bush I.)
Re:Spam success not always defined by direct purch
on
How Image Spam Works
·
· Score: 1
No. The recipient of the spam never gives money. They give information. The spammer captures this information and turns into money by selling that information in the form of a lead. The person who buys that lead sells it again, and this process is often repeated another two or three times. But the spam recipient never parted with any money.
Slashdot Mirror
Really? TWO choices? Time to start considering 3rd parties, dude.
Thank you for the correction. I may have been thinking of centripetal forces - it seems that as the earth revolves around the earth/moon barycenter that the bulge in the ocean on the side of the earth opposite the moon would be due partially from centripetal forces. But I guess I am wrong.
Actually, centrifugal force plays an important role as well.
There has been a substantial rise in the premium for taking physical possession of gold bullion rather than holding it in a pool or via ETF. Draw your own conclusions as to why ...
I had a paper route when I was 12. Of course, my parents also let me drive a moped to deliver them. The local sheriff deputies never looked to kindly upon that ...
Dude, thank you so much for your time. I will take the Linux option. Even though I have admistrator privileges on the machine, there is nothing I can do to reset the permissions. Again, thank you. I am going to take your advice.
So ... I just bought a 500GB HD with an external USB case and tried to copy the entire drive over to the new external drive. But it keeps giving me "Access Denied" errors for certain otherwise innocuous files no good reason.
Question - is there any Windoze program out there that can override XP permissions and/or make for smoother, better drive copying with more control?
Thanks for any help.
Are there bad, lazy judges? I can only assume so. But you have to realize that the demands upon the judicial system is tremendous, and the judge has to make a decision to keep the wheels of justice turning. If the judge doesn't grasp all of the technical nuances of your in propria persona small claims spam suit, put it in perspective.
I think you have touched upon a fundamental point here - the distinction between non-competition agreements and intellectual property (of which trade secrets is a species) protection. The two issues are forced together in the agreement upon which this submission is based: the agreement states that the employee cannot use IP developed during employment to compete with the employer post-employment. In California, trade secrets are given strong protection, and non-competition agreements are void as a matter of public policy. That is why asking Slashdot to comment on the validity or wisdom of the agreement at issue. One needs to ask not just a lawyer, but a lawyer with knowledge of these issues in one's jurisdiction.
You are probably just trolling, but I didn't write the law, nor did I say that I support the law. I was just stating what the law is. But as another poster said, Ron Paul would respect the right of the states to govern themselves according to the Constitution.
I disagree with a lot of what California's socialist legislature does, but given the state of the Union, my first duty is to get the feds out of what my state is doing, whether or not I disagree with my state. Then I can deal with my state.
Ninth Amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Tenth Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Yeah - but owning the IP you create while working at a company is a quite a bit different than not competing with them. Certainly Apple's attorneys are aware of all the nuances of this law, and I would certainly expect a provision along the lines as the one you signed to be fully enforceable.
"Except as provided in this chapter, every contract by which anyone is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind is to that extent void."
The rest of the relevant chapter addresses mainly those instances where one sells an interest in a business. In those cases noncompetes are enforceable.
California courts routinely void noncompetes under B&P 16600.
I agree with completely, and I know Scalia and Thomas agree with us as well. Kennedy, Alito and Roberts aren't ready to say that McCain-Feingold and the BCRA are facially unconstitutional (as are Scalia and Thomas), but they have been willing to opine that much of these laws are unconstitutional.
Such a motion is available in California and in other states as well.
Essentially, it is a way for the small guy to fight Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (big companies trying to shut the little guy up by suing him) by giving other lawyers incentive to take the cases on contingency. If this shit happens to you, contact the EFF; they send out emails to lawyers across the country who may take your defense on contingency.
The fact remains that the U.S. Constitution specifically provides for courts, either inferior or supreme. There is no such provision for a central bank.
Except for the fact that the federal courts are established by Article III of the United States Constitution . (Did that really need a link to Wikipedia?)
Dr. PAUL. "Maybe there is too much power in the hands of those who control monetary policy, the power to create the financial bubbles, the power to maybe bring the bubble about, the power to change the value of the stock market within minutes? That to me is just an ominous power and challenges the whole concept of freedom and liberty sound money."
Dr. GREENSPAN. "Congressman, as I have said to you before, the problem you are alluding to is the conversion of a commodity standard to fiat money. We have statutorily gone onto a fiat money standard, and as a consequence of that it is inevitable that the authority, which is the producer of the money supply, will have inordinate power."
See also: I am not afraid.
It would be a VAST improvement in the sense that Tallahassee/Sacramento/Albany would be balanced against the District of Columbia.
"This balance between the National and State governments ought to be dwelt on with peculiar attention, as it is of the utmost importance. It forms a double security to the people. If one encroaches on their rights they will find a powerful protection in the other. Indeed, they will both be prevented from overpassing their constitutional limits by a certain rivalship, which will ever subsist between them."
-- Alexander Hamilton (speech to the New York Ratifying Convention, 17 June 1788)
Reference: The Works of Alexander Hamilton, Henry Cabot Lodge, ed., vol. 2 (28)
They were apologetic and immediately credited my account for the error, but it made me wonder if some devious vice-president hadn't implemented this plan to reap some extra profits from those whose time is too valuable to spend trying to figure out if they are being overcharged.
It wasn't until Lopez v. United States (and, subsequently, United States v. Morrison) that the Supreme Court had the balls (well, with O'Connor, the ovaries) to draw the line for the first time in seventy years and keep the Feds out of the State's business.
Yes, that would be Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, O'Connor and Rehnquist. We can only hope that Alito and Roberts will be "conservative" that way too.
If it was up to those nutbags Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg and Souter, there would be no distinction between the States' province and the Fed's province. Those of you hoping for a democrat president better be aware that democratic appointees will almost surely give the Feds back all the power they lost under Rehnquist. (Yes, I know Souter was appointed by Bush I.)
No. The recipient of the spam never gives money. They give information. The spammer captures this information and turns into money by selling that information in the form of a lead. The person who buys that lead sells it again, and this process is often repeated another two or three times. But the spam recipient never parted with any money.