You're a dolt. The US isn't a democracy, and that was never the form of government intented. Do some research and you'll see the founders rejected a democratic government. Try also looking up republic, and pondering why each state, regardless of population, has exactly two Senators.
I didn't say I wanted anarchy either. Your reading comprehension is very low. Being offensive to many isn't a reason to stop a few from reading or watching something. At the end of the day, what I read or watch has no effect on you and your rights whatsoever. Censorship isn't helpful to society, whereas murder laws are because they do take away one's rights.
You're definatly missing something. When you lease a property, your landlord CANNOT disconnect your services at will. Doing so would be illegal. Being a landlord does not make you a god, and you CANNOT do whatever you want to the tennants in your property.
Try shutting off electric service to one of your buildings while a tennant is still living there. You'll likely wind up in court very quickly.
Switching the service into your own name when you do in fact own the property is not at issue here.. someone is still paying, and you do own the property. But that's not what was being discussed. What was discussed was one tennant trying to shut off service of the previous owner.
Funny you say that. That's exactly what happened in my city (Burlington, VT) and the second they told me they had service on my street I dropped Comcast. Comcast can rot in hell for all I care.
If you refuse to give the number, it doesn't really matter if you're the real owner of that number or not. They will just say "sorry, can't open an account with one." Of course I could be misunderstanding your question.. its not very well worded.
Well the US system is actually a republic, and not a democracy for exactly the reason the founders didn't want mob rule. The minority should have power to block their rights being taken away, which was one of the reasons the Senate is always two dispite the population of the state.
What discussion is there really on censorship of games or banning of drugs? I don't see much at all, and most of the pro side are arguing with lies and half truths.
Child porn is a bit different, because the creation of it actually harms a child (barring CG stuff). So to say its just because people find it offensive is just being ignorant.
Yes, yes they do. Go check out the fact on the SSA's website. It clearly states that anyone can refuse to do business with you if you refuse to give your SSN. They simply can't use it to identify you.
No you have it all wrong. Its always a PERSON that is to blame when things go wrong, but you must always PRAISE god for anything that goes right. Only the good things are his doing.
In this case I must say I can see the point; most people would find a game like that revolting, I believe, and would want the government to say that there has to be a limit. It's like pornography, most of it is harmless and simply boring, but some of it is too extreme to be tolerated by the large majority of people, and I think it is fair to ban it.
So you're basically saying that mob rule is just fine with you? Sorry, but just because a majority of people find something distasteful or offensive does not mean that society has the right to censor it. Perhaps we should ban the practice of voodoo as well, because I'm sure you can find quite a few people that find it wrong.
How about this instead: don't buy things you find offensive, and leave other people alone.
Yes, drug laws are pointless. At this point, all they do is increase the violence involved in the sale of illegal drugs. Yet you can still find them just about anywhere.
Oh my god. Comcast didn't indicated that almost 2 years later the price might go up.
Read what is written again. Its not that the price went up, its that they silently forced her into a higher, more expensive tier. That's something I would expect to be told about, and not something I'd expect to be forced to do.
A household of three people can easy amass a $1000+ debt to a cable company by having someone who lives there sign up for service under their name after someone [i]else[/i] there has been disconnected for non-payment. This is just one address we're talking about here.
So who's fault is that? The cable co's for letting it go that far.
People balk at having to give their SSN's to the cable company to get service, but it's information they want so they can send you to a collection collections if you don't pay or run off with digital boxes (those thing can run $300-$500 [i]apiece[/i] depending on the model's capabilities.
As you said, they could require a deposit. Honestly that would be the best thing.. someone that keeps a $500 cable box (that they probably won't be able to use anywhere else) isn't going to pay a collection agency either. Plus, if everything required a deposit, we wouldn't really have much need for credit agencies either. Another plus!
What a bunch of nonsense. What possible damages could there be when the majority of the boxes don't have a problem at all? Even still, unless the box is getting so hot that it causes fire in MANY causes there's no reason for MS to "fix" the current boxes.
And people still like to have physical discs for some reason.
1. I'd like to pay $25 once, and watch it an unlimited number of times 2. I'd like to be able to watch my movie when the cable / sat is out. 3. OnDemand may not have the particular movie I want to watch. 4. I can watch a movie on a disc on a player that I take with me on a camping trip.
but his presence in the situation was very much not needed. People like to spark that same anti-gun pro-gun debate after every human tragedy with weapons and ignore the details of the tragedy itself.
I would argue the NRA is needed at a time like that. The anti-gun lobby certainly does so to push their view using emotional, factless arguments. Would you fault those that support the first amendment showing up whenever those that oppose it are appearing somewhere?
The fact of the matter is that everytime gun control laws are passed, crime in that area goes up, not down. The statistics are there.
So does it just so all these people that can't afford health insurance and how mean companies won't give it to them? That's fine, but I'd like to know if it shows the other side of things.. 400 lbs. people that can't stop shoving donuts down their throats and then complain that a gastric bypass is their "only" hope.
Still it's not worth my time to go down to the police station once a year and fill out a police report when I can get my money back by a 5 minute phone call.
You have this happen once a year? Wow... FWIW, it only took 5 minutes to get a police report filed too..
The bank in turn will indeed ask the merchant to prove that the charge was valid, and i've never known them to ever challenge the validity of any charge I've reversed.
I was asked to get a police report before my bank would proceed with the reversal. If you're getting hit once a year, perhaps your bank should as well, as it seems like an awful lot of reverses.
The debt falls on you though. The bank can't claim the charge was fradulent, only you can do that. Just like someone else can't file a charge of assault on your behalf.
Well since the credit card companies won't take responsibility, it is up to the merchants to do so. I'm not saying it's right to put the responsibility squarely on the merchant's shoulders, but life isn't fair. And since credit companies just cancel payment to the retailers, there is a strong business case to make sure that charges aren't fraudulent.
In my case, the 'merchant' wasn't a merchant at all. The day after I filed a police report, the number was mysterously disconnected.
Slashdot Mirror
Your guess would be wrong. Dell pulled back its support for businesses to the US because they had so many complaints on the outsourced 'support.'
You're a dolt. The US isn't a democracy, and that was never the form of government intented. Do some research and you'll see the founders rejected a democratic government. Try also looking up republic, and pondering why each state, regardless of population, has exactly two Senators.
I didn't say I wanted anarchy either. Your reading comprehension is very low. Being offensive to many isn't a reason to stop a few from reading or watching something. At the end of the day, what I read or watch has no effect on you and your rights whatsoever. Censorship isn't helpful to society, whereas murder laws are because they do take away one's rights.
You're definatly missing something. When you lease a property, your landlord CANNOT disconnect your services at will. Doing so would be illegal. Being a landlord does not make you a god, and you CANNOT do whatever you want to the tennants in your property.
Try shutting off electric service to one of your buildings while a tennant is still living there. You'll likely wind up in court very quickly.
Switching the service into your own name when you do in fact own the property is not at issue here.. someone is still paying, and you do own the property. But that's not what was being discussed. What was discussed was one tennant trying to shut off service of the previous owner.
Funny you say that. That's exactly what happened in my city (Burlington, VT) and the second they told me they had service on my street I dropped Comcast. Comcast can rot in hell for all I care.
That would prove what exactly? Ever heard of a lease?
If you refuse to give the number, it doesn't really matter if you're the real owner of that number or not. They will just say "sorry, can't open an account with one." Of course I could be misunderstanding your question.. its not very well worded.
Well the US system is actually a republic, and not a democracy for exactly the reason the founders didn't want mob rule. The minority should have power to block their rights being taken away, which was one of the reasons the Senate is always two dispite the population of the state.
What discussion is there really on censorship of games or banning of drugs? I don't see much at all, and most of the pro side are arguing with lies and half truths.
Child porn is a bit different, because the creation of it actually harms a child (barring CG stuff). So to say its just because people find it offensive is just being ignorant.
Yes, yes they do. Go check out the fact on the SSA's website. It clearly states that anyone can refuse to do business with you if you refuse to give your SSN. They simply can't use it to identify you.
No you have it all wrong. Its always a PERSON that is to blame when things go wrong, but you must always PRAISE god for anything that goes right. Only the good things are his doing.
Nevermind that he created the devil.
In this case I must say I can see the point; most people would find a game like that revolting, I believe, and would want the government to say that there has to be a limit. It's like pornography, most of it is harmless and simply boring, but some of it is too extreme to be tolerated by the large majority of people, and I think it is fair to ban it.
So you're basically saying that mob rule is just fine with you? Sorry, but just because a majority of people find something distasteful or offensive does not mean that society has the right to censor it. Perhaps we should ban the practice of voodoo as well, because I'm sure you can find quite a few people that find it wrong.
How about this instead: don't buy things you find offensive, and leave other people alone.
Yes, drug laws are pointless. At this point, all they do is increase the violence involved in the sale of illegal drugs. Yet you can still find them just about anywhere.
Oh my god. Comcast didn't indicated that almost 2 years later the price might go up.
Read what is written again. Its not that the price went up, its that they silently forced her into a higher, more expensive tier. That's something I would expect to be told about, and not something I'd expect to be forced to do.
You're right, but they also have the right to refuse service without it. Even a video store can do that.
A household of three people can easy amass a $1000+ debt to a cable company by having someone who lives there sign up for service under their name after someone [i]else[/i] there has been disconnected for non-payment. This is just one address we're talking about here.
So who's fault is that? The cable co's for letting it go that far.
People balk at having to give their SSN's to the cable company to get service, but it's information they want so they can send you to a collection collections if you don't pay or run off with digital boxes (those thing can run $300-$500 [i]apiece[/i] depending on the model's capabilities.
As you said, they could require a deposit. Honestly that would be the best thing.. someone that keeps a $500 cable box (that they probably won't be able to use anywhere else) isn't going to pay a collection agency either. Plus, if everything required a deposit, we wouldn't really have much need for credit agencies either. Another plus!
What a bunch of nonsense. What possible damages could there be when the majority of the boxes don't have a problem at all? Even still, unless the box is getting so hot that it causes fire in MANY causes there's no reason for MS to "fix" the current boxes.
it's pretty apparent that consumers go for convenience over quality... at least in terms of their media.
Right, because we must pick one over the other..
And people still like to have physical discs for some reason.
1. I'd like to pay $25 once, and watch it an unlimited number of times
2. I'd like to be able to watch my movie when the cable / sat is out.
3. OnDemand may not have the particular movie I want to watch.
4. I can watch a movie on a disc on a player that I take with me on a camping trip.
but his presence in the situation was very much not needed. People like to spark that same anti-gun pro-gun debate after every human tragedy with weapons and ignore the details of the tragedy itself.
I would argue the NRA is needed at a time like that. The anti-gun lobby certainly does so to push their view using emotional, factless arguments. Would you fault those that support the first amendment showing up whenever those that oppose it are appearing somewhere?
The fact of the matter is that everytime gun control laws are passed, crime in that area goes up, not down. The statistics are there.
So does it just so all these people that can't afford health insurance and how mean companies won't give it to them? That's fine, but I'd like to know if it shows the other side of things.. 400 lbs. people that can't stop shoving donuts down their throats and then complain that a gastric bypass is their "only" hope.
You may want to look up the meaning of "joke" and "sarcasm."
I'm not sure how you think our system favors the transgressor. Perhaps you buy too much into the media.
Still it's not worth my time to go down to the police station once a year and fill out a police report when I can get my money back by a 5 minute phone call.
You have this happen once a year? Wow... FWIW, it only took 5 minutes to get a police report filed too..
The bank in turn will indeed ask the merchant to prove that the charge was valid, and i've never known them to ever challenge the validity of any charge I've reversed.
I was asked to get a police report before my bank would proceed with the reversal. If you're getting hit once a year, perhaps your bank should as well, as it seems like an awful lot of reverses.
The debt falls on you though. The bank can't claim the charge was fradulent, only you can do that. Just like someone else can't file a charge of assault on your behalf.
If you can't figure out what I was getting at, I'm not going to explain it to you.
Well since the credit card companies won't take responsibility, it is up to the merchants to do so. I'm not saying it's right to put the responsibility squarely on the merchant's shoulders, but life isn't fair. And since credit companies just cancel payment to the retailers, there is a strong business case to make sure that charges aren't fraudulent.
In my case, the 'merchant' wasn't a merchant at all. The day after I filed a police report, the number was mysterously disconnected.