It's not audacity that emboldens us to demand NK and Iran not have nukes: it's the long history of supporting terrorism and international crimes by both countries.
Quick question: name a country that doesn't mind NK having nukes?
This guys was already busted. The question is whether or not he gets additional time for this other provision of the criminal code. Ideally we want this perp to 1) be behind bars and 2)fix the law's ambiguity/vagueness. This guys goes to jail regardless. So that's good. However, because of this judge's bending of the law, it will now be more difficult to "fix".
The core question here is the justification for making distinctions about how someone solicits sex from a minor. Why is it more wrong to do it over email/IM than, say, in person, or via snail mail? In other words, it's a bogus law created by politicians pandering to mothers' fear of online sexual predation. We don't need this law, and by this judges ruling, it will now be harder to remove it.
mostly. I guess that we have to trust that they do in fact have a huge image stored on some drive somewhere. However, odds are that what we are seeing in the Flash viewer app are an array of images each representing a different area and different resolution. In other words, they are serving that photo up the same way GoogleEarth and WorldWind do.
It's a marketing stunt. You too could generate the world's largest digital (or analog, don't know if Landstat images are taken digitally or not) photo by taking a bunch of GE images at a zoomed in depth and stitching them together on your super-fast and beafy setup. It would then be kinda hard to prove you have such an image because, how would you show it to anybody? I don't think Photoshop will open anything that large. Something called Xres(?) used to specialize in large photos, maybe it would. The only way to show that image on the net is to serve it up like GE/WW does, or some similar scheme, whereby you save several different versions of your original photos, each at a different resolution.
I've watched the phenomena happen live. Like many of us, I've tutored beginning and novice users on specific apps and general OS tasks. Maybe it's just the run of numbers, but some people, in spite of my instructions, will want to click on the button that gets them the furthest from their goal.
I've also witnessed something a little more, well, let's just say metaphysical. A couple people I know seem to make computers crash or operate unpredictably. Anywhere from full-on crashes (on say, my computer that never/mostly never crashes) to problems that instantly go away when someone other than they are using the machine. Weird.
The GP is right. And your observations dont' contradict it. Most every judge imparts directions as rules, rather than the actual guidelines and suggestions that the law sees them as. Think about it, nobody in the court system wants this to become a frequent thing: juries deciding law.
I've found most the lingering problems (not FF-specific, rather non-IE) center around sound and video files. Almost every time I encounter a problem, the site is being run on asp. A simple IE-Tab (FF extension, I'm too lazy to get the link)click and problem solved!
I will be downloading IE7 eventually, but only for testing pages.
I'll support the artists I like by buying tickets to their show when and if they come to town.
Someone who haggles over $0.84 is going to buy a $50 ticket? Yea, sure you are.
Money from every product sold gets divided up: some goes to pay for materials, some for labor, some for transportation, etc. So what other products do you feel have an inequitable breakdown? Do you find a way to get those for free too, and then pay the people you feel deserve it the most, whatever amount you feel is equitable?
Funny, you seem to be protesting the song breakdown and RIAA tactics more than the artists themselves: you're breaking the law. And the end result is they don't even get that 16 cents. Well, unless you follow through on your promise to pay later in whatever way you've found is equitable. I guess all those artists whose song's you've downloaded for free now have to trust that you'll eventually pay. MacWiz economics: pay whatever amount you want, and take your sweet time doing it. Brilliant, why didn't anybody think of this before!!!
For online discussions/debates. Of course, a simple retort - "The veracity of that claim, by the very nature of Wiki, is severely diminished/limited." - should be enough set that particular claim aside, for the moment.
BTW, do you have any info that particular claim is bogus?
Boy, I just installed 2.0 and I'm pissed (as in not drunk). The TabMixPlus extension does not work and the built-in Tabs preferences doesn't allow you to 1)get rid of the close button on every tab 2)a newly opened tab doesn't go to my home page, or any page for that matter, and there doesn't seem to be a way to change that 3)after deciding to go back to version 1.5 (by Add/Remove), it turns out I no longer have a version 1.5.
Up to this point, I've been very pleased with FF. I guess every software has that moment I'll call post-honeymoon reality check. I should've known it was too good to last.
Looks to me like the system is 99% working, 1% fatally flawed. But I'm also a little older than you, probably. Looking at all the violence in the world: the idea that humans have evolved past needing laws is, well, absurd.
Slashdot Mirror
Quick question: name a country that doesn't mind NK having nukes?
The core question here is the justification for making distinctions about how someone solicits sex from a minor. Why is it more wrong to do it over email/IM than, say, in person, or via snail mail? In other words, it's a bogus law created by politicians pandering to mothers' fear of online sexual predation. We don't need this law, and by this judges ruling, it will now be harder to remove it.
One less app, err a website I wont be using.
lack of commitment are what hold radio astronomy back?! Yeah, uh....right.
they just hire other people to do it. Do I get it now?
It's a marketing stunt. You too could generate the world's largest digital (or analog, don't know if Landstat images are taken digitally or not) photo by taking a bunch of GE images at a zoomed in depth and stitching them together on your super-fast and beafy setup. It would then be kinda hard to prove you have such an image because, how would you show it to anybody? I don't think Photoshop will open anything that large. Something called Xres(?) used to specialize in large photos, maybe it would. The only way to show that image on the net is to serve it up like GE/WW does, or some similar scheme, whereby you save several different versions of your original photos, each at a different resolution.
I've also witnessed something a little more, well, let's just say metaphysical. A couple people I know seem to make computers crash or operate unpredictably. Anywhere from full-on crashes (on say, my computer that never/mostly never crashes) to problems that instantly go away when someone other than they are using the machine. Weird.
he just likes living on the edge!
The GP is right. And your observations dont' contradict it. Most every judge imparts directions as rules, rather than the actual guidelines and suggestions that the law sees them as. Think about it, nobody in the court system wants this to become a frequent thing: juries deciding law.
I will be downloading IE7 eventually, but only for testing pages.
(May I suggest to the GP to stay away from financial transactions on the weekends :P)
Someone who haggles over $0.84 is going to buy a $50 ticket? Yea, sure you are.
Money from every product sold gets divided up: some goes to pay for materials, some for labor, some for transportation, etc. So what other products do you feel have an inequitable breakdown? Do you find a way to get those for free too, and then pay the people you feel deserve it the most, whatever amount you feel is equitable?
Funny, you seem to be protesting the song breakdown and RIAA tactics more than the artists themselves: you're breaking the law. And the end result is they don't even get that 16 cents. Well, unless you follow through on your promise to pay later in whatever way you've found is equitable. I guess all those artists whose song's you've downloaded for free now have to trust that you'll eventually pay. MacWiz economics: pay whatever amount you want, and take your sweet time doing it. Brilliant, why didn't anybody think of this before!!!
What, and take all the fun out of finding them yourself?!
You know, the litigious Christian cult leader who owns godhatesfags.com, smellthebrimstone.com, etc.
BTW, do you have any info that particular claim is bogus?
The majority of the population is breaking copyright law? Says who (link)?
Don't believe I've ever seen a non-two sided coin: Have you?
Or cost.
I'm pretty sure you don't know a single professional musician.
Knows how to break IT security, but no longer feels the need to.
+5 Karma for you: the real karma.
For me, I no longer have a 1.5. Very sad, because I wanted to roll back after a couple extensions don't work.
Up to this point, I've been very pleased with FF. I guess every software has that moment I'll call post-honeymoon reality check. I should've known it was too good to last.
Don't hold out on us: let us read your alternative to laws.
Looks to me like the system is 99% working, 1% fatally flawed. But I'm also a little older than you, probably. Looking at all the violence in the world: the idea that humans have evolved past needing laws is, well, absurd.