Nutrition is the most important part of a weight-loss regimen. If something is called a diet, be suspect of it. The only way to be fit is through life change, not dieting. Eat the rainbow--red tomatoes, oranges, yellow squash (e.g.), green leafy veggies, blueberries, and purple eggplant and beets and such), get healthy fats (fish, nuts, olive oil)--and get plenty of protein from lean meats (or quinoa, soy, etc. if vegetarianism is your bag).
1hr thrice a week is sufficient for weightlifting. Spend 30 minutes doing cardio thrice a week. That is sufficient for an above-average level of fitness.
And for God's sake, don't starve yourself. Starving yourself to drop weight means your metabolism will be suppressed, and when you stop starving yourself (as it's impossible to sustain), a reversion back to regular eating patterns will cause a dramatic weight increase because (1) your metabolism is lower and (2) you have probably destroyed your muscles, decreasing your basal metabolic rate.
Low carb diets are bullshit. Low fat diets are bullshit. They all hide the ball. The important thing is to eat plenty of fruits, veggies, and lean meats (or alternative protein sources if you're not of the carnivorous persuasion) while keeping calories down. "Diets" just hide the ball.
And realize my comment here is painting with broad strokes, so it's inevitable that I'm oversimplifying. Read up on nutrition and fitness. I suggest finding books written by people who are themselves in great shape.
Finally, if you can't spare 30 minutes a day to be fit, then you don't deserve to be fit. It's 30 minutes. It's literally the time you read one page of Slashdot crap. Get up and move.
That's My.MP3.com. No, it's not coming back. There's a similar service that is legal under my analysis in the forthcoming article. Check out MP3tunes. If its system is set up the way I recall it is, it will withstand a copyright infringement lawsuit, both direct and secondary.
Inasmuch as Allofmp3.com was based in Russia, I can hardly see how a US court decision could have any bearing whatsoever on its legality.
But even if it did apply, this decision does not make AllOfMP3-style services legal.
I do have a paper I wrote on something very similar. I'm finishing it this summer and submitting it for publication in a journal in August-September. You can bet that once (if) it's selected for publication, I'll be whoring it out on Slashdot.;)
Actually, the Cablevision opinion discusses this hypo and distinguishes it based on whether there are copies made for each viewer or just one copy multiple members of the public share.
In the first case (what happened in this case), it's not a "public" performance and thus doesn't implicate the public performance right of copyright owners. However, the latter instance (your pointer hypothetical) is a public performance, and is thus presumptively a direct infringement of copyright.
No, because this case has nothing to do with "excessive use of services" and everything to do with interpretation of the exclusive rights granted to a copyright owner by section 106 of 17 USC.
What bullshit. Denial of certiorari by the Supreme Court expresses literally zero opinion about the merits of the case. This is another example of the MSM getting Supreme Court procedure wrong. I've seen this "victory" touted elsewhere. It's not a victory except inasmuch as those claiming victory were assured a loss if the Supreme Court granted cert.
It would be a victory of SCOTUS issued cert and then issued a per curiam opinion affirming the COA decision. That did not happen, and thus the petitioners are (unless I misunderstand the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure) free to repetition for certiorari next term.
That being said, having read the opinion and cited its reasoning extensively in a law review article I just authored (and will soon be shopping around for publication), I think J. Walker's reasoning was dead-on accurate, particularly on the issue of what "public" means in "public performance."
Just to point out for those who don't know, Judge Posner is probably the single most influential living jurist not on the Supreme Court (and will likely end up being more influential long-term than many on the Supreme Court; certainly more influential than Clarence Thomas). He teaches at one of the top six law schools in the country (Chicago), serves in one of the most important circuits in the country (Seventh, which includes Chicago--other important circuits are DC, 2d, and 9th), and is so ridiculously prolific. He's a pioneer of the currently en vogue jurisprudential theory of law and economics. He frequently feeds clerks from his chambers to the Supreme Court as well
My point is that this man has tremendous influence in the US. He's not an intellectual lightweight. Unfortunately, I can't read what he wrote since the blog entry seems to be down now.
The dumbest design is ABC's playback of their shows. At the end of the commercial break, it pauses and waits for you to click "Continue" to get back to the show. So it basically does two things 1. makes me get up off the couch to click a mouse button to keep playing 2. alternatively, enables me to leave the room and not worry about missing some of the show right after the commercials; I can walk away and completely ignore the commercials and when I come back it's waiting for me to resume the show.
At least on NBC, it doesn't wait for a click, so if I want to catch all of the episode, I have to at least be aware of when the commercials are ending and the show is starting. This forces at least a nominal amount of attention to be paid to the commercials.
You would also need to know exactly where each IP terminates. Is A.B.C.D within city limits? Etc.
Let's not kid ourselves: Tax rates aren't determined by where the stuff is shipped to; it is determined by where the payment transaction occurs. If I pay for something in NYC and have it shipped to Seattle, I pay NYC tax, not Seattle tax.
Hence, looking at the IP (and not the shipping address or billing address for the credit card) is necessary.
But, you see, we don't actually have databases for where each IP goes.
Imagine a CEO in front of a meeting of shareholders, and they're asking him why all of their dividends just fell. His answer is because he wanted to move his company into a state with a "thriving arts culture", even though he's now paying twice as much to do business there. How much are his shareholders going to care about the arts culture in a city they don't live in?
Point taken, although, to be fair, shareholders would care insomuch as the beautiful surroundings help attract better employees.
There's a reason there isn't a Silicon Plains in Kansas: because the best techies would rather live near the beach (or near Stanford, as it were), nerd stereotypes aside.
Someone who comes into your restaurant to eat is classified as a licensee for tortious negligence analysis. The business owes a licensee a duty to warn against any reasonably foreseeable hazard. Given enough time between spilt water and the slip, you would have breached your duty to the victim and would be liable for tortious negligence.
Smoking bans aren't made to protect patrons; they're made to protect the employees of the restaurant.
You may say "well, those employees can work elsewhere."
But then it sounds like you're arguing that there shouldn't be any OSHA regulations at all. Are you? Maybe you are, but then I think a lot of reasonable people would disagree with you.
Yeah, but to get Scandinavia in Economic Freedom, you have to go all the way down to 28.
Like I tried to emphasize, before deciding which country is the most free, you have to define what "freedom" is for you.
For example, a person might use "free" to mean "free from health concerns" or "free from government influence." These are obviously going to be at loggerheads.
Many people have corrupted the word "free" to mean "free from the influence of others." This is not the only kind of freedom.
Why, if you Google "define:freedom," the first thing that comes up is
the condition of being free; the power to act or speak or think without externally imposed restraints
Health care costs are absolutely an externally imposed restraint. Racism is an externally imposed restraint. Police enforcement of murder laws is an externally imposed restraint.
Freedom means many things, and no debate can resolve such an inquiry without first defining its terms.
It looks like this may be fixed in the next year to a certain extent. Right now, Congress is debating comprehensive health care reform, and the House already passed legislation on it today.
The guy doesn't even define what he means by "freer"! Since it's not well-defined, let's look at various freedoms (restricted to Anglophonic countries):
Freedom of the Press 1. NZ 2. Jamaica 3. Ireland, USA (tie) 5. Bahamas, Barbados, Canada, Marshall Islands (tie)
There are other freedoms to look at, but I don't need to look at more. Ireland, US, NZ, and Canada seem to be the best under those two criteria (and granted those criteria are more like metacriteria themselves).
Slashdot Mirror
Nutrition is the most important part of a weight-loss regimen. If something is called a diet, be suspect of it. The only way to be fit is through life change, not dieting. Eat the rainbow--red tomatoes, oranges, yellow squash (e.g.), green leafy veggies, blueberries, and purple eggplant and beets and such), get healthy fats (fish, nuts, olive oil)--and get plenty of protein from lean meats (or quinoa, soy, etc. if vegetarianism is your bag).
1hr thrice a week is sufficient for weightlifting. Spend 30 minutes doing cardio thrice a week. That is sufficient for an above-average level of fitness.
And for God's sake, don't starve yourself. Starving yourself to drop weight means your metabolism will be suppressed, and when you stop starving yourself (as it's impossible to sustain), a reversion back to regular eating patterns will cause a dramatic weight increase because (1) your metabolism is lower and (2) you have probably destroyed your muscles, decreasing your basal metabolic rate.
Low carb diets are bullshit. Low fat diets are bullshit. They all hide the ball. The important thing is to eat plenty of fruits, veggies, and lean meats (or alternative protein sources if you're not of the carnivorous persuasion) while keeping calories down. "Diets" just hide the ball.
And realize my comment here is painting with broad strokes, so it's inevitable that I'm oversimplifying. Read up on nutrition and fitness. I suggest finding books written by people who are themselves in great shape.
Finally, if you can't spare 30 minutes a day to be fit, then you don't deserve to be fit. It's 30 minutes. It's literally the time you read one page of Slashdot crap. Get up and move.
You can do it.
Wow. You have the most prescient username in all of Slashdot. Who could have known when UID5s were gettable that "divide by zero" would become memery?
That's a fair way to compromise between my unfair, Legal Nazi-style complaining of armchair lawyers and the common meaning of "allow."
NYCL, doubling as Slashdot Mediator!
That's My.MP3.com. No, it's not coming back. There's a similar service that is legal under my analysis in the forthcoming article. Check out MP3tunes. If its system is set up the way I recall it is, it will withstand a copyright infringement lawsuit, both direct and secondary.
Inasmuch as Allofmp3.com was based in Russia, I can hardly see how a US court decision could have any bearing whatsoever on its legality.
But even if it did apply, this decision does not make AllOfMP3-style services legal.
I do have a paper I wrote on something very similar. I'm finishing it this summer and submitting it for publication in a journal in August-September. You can bet that once (if) it's selected for publication, I'll be whoring it out on Slashdot. ;)
We've been there for maybe half a decade now. I know Azureus incorporated DHT a long time ago for this very reason.
Actually, the Cablevision opinion discusses this hypo and distinguishes it based on whether there are copies made for each viewer or just one copy multiple members of the public share.
In the first case (what happened in this case), it's not a "public" performance and thus doesn't implicate the public performance right of copyright owners. However, the latter instance (your pointer hypothetical) is a public performance, and is thus presumptively a direct infringement of copyright.
No, because this case has nothing to do with "excessive use of services" and everything to do with interpretation of the exclusive rights granted to a copyright owner by section 106 of 17 USC.
"High Court Allows"
What bullshit. Denial of certiorari by the Supreme Court expresses literally zero opinion about the merits of the case. This is another example of the MSM getting Supreme Court procedure wrong. I've seen this "victory" touted elsewhere. It's not a victory except inasmuch as those claiming victory were assured a loss if the Supreme Court granted cert.
It would be a victory of SCOTUS issued cert and then issued a per curiam opinion affirming the COA decision. That did not happen, and thus the petitioners are (unless I misunderstand the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure) free to repetition for certiorari next term.
That being said, having read the opinion and cited its reasoning extensively in a law review article I just authored (and will soon be shopping around for publication), I think J. Walker's reasoning was dead-on accurate, particularly on the issue of what "public" means in "public performance."
But he's also a professor at the University of Chicago. One thing academics frequently do is publish proposals about changing the law.
I think you misunderstand. Posner was proposing statutory copyright reform, not judicial re-interpretation of copyright law.
Just to point out for those who don't know, Judge Posner is probably the single most influential living jurist not on the Supreme Court (and will likely end up being more influential long-term than many on the Supreme Court; certainly more influential than Clarence Thomas). He teaches at one of the top six law schools in the country (Chicago), serves in one of the most important circuits in the country (Seventh, which includes Chicago--other important circuits are DC, 2d, and 9th), and is so ridiculously prolific. He's a pioneer of the currently en vogue jurisprudential theory of law and economics. He frequently feeds clerks from his chambers to the Supreme Court as well
My point is that this man has tremendous influence in the US. He's not an intellectual lightweight. Unfortunately, I can't read what he wrote since the blog entry seems to be down now.
The dumbest design is ABC's playback of their shows. At the end of the commercial break, it pauses and waits for you to click "Continue" to get back to the show. So it basically does two things
1. makes me get up off the couch to click a mouse button to keep playing
2. alternatively, enables me to leave the room and not worry about missing some of the show right after the commercials; I can walk away and completely ignore the commercials and when I come back it's waiting for me to resume the show.
At least on NBC, it doesn't wait for a click, so if I want to catch all of the episode, I have to at least be aware of when the commercials are ending and the show is starting. This forces at least a nominal amount of attention to be paid to the commercials.
Sheer ineptitude on ABC's part.
You would also need to know exactly where each IP terminates. Is A.B.C.D within city limits? Etc.
Let's not kid ourselves: Tax rates aren't determined by where the stuff is shipped to; it is determined by where the payment transaction occurs. If I pay for something in NYC and have it shipped to Seattle, I pay NYC tax, not Seattle tax.
Hence, looking at the IP (and not the shipping address or billing address for the credit card) is necessary.
But, you see, we don't actually have databases for where each IP goes.
Point taken, although, to be fair, shareholders would care insomuch as the beautiful surroundings help attract better employees.
There's a reason there isn't a Silicon Plains in Kansas: because the best techies would rather live near the beach (or near Stanford, as it were), nerd stereotypes aside.
Someone who comes into your restaurant to eat is classified as a licensee for tortious negligence analysis. The business owes a licensee a duty to warn against any reasonably foreseeable hazard. Given enough time between spilt water and the slip, you would have breached your duty to the victim and would be liable for tortious negligence.
Smoking bans aren't made to protect patrons; they're made to protect the employees of the restaurant.
You may say "well, those employees can work elsewhere."
But then it sounds like you're arguing that there shouldn't be any OSHA regulations at all. Are you? Maybe you are, but then I think a lot of reasonable people would disagree with you.
Economic freedom also refers to personal income taxes, e.g.
I guess I'm just used to /. talk, where taxation = erosion of civil liberties. Hence my confusion.
Yeah, but to get Scandinavia in Economic Freedom, you have to go all the way down to 28.
Like I tried to emphasize, before deciding which country is the most free, you have to define what "freedom" is for you.
For example, a person might use "free" to mean "free from health concerns" or "free from government influence." These are obviously going to be at loggerheads.
Many people have corrupted the word "free" to mean "free from the influence of others." This is not the only kind of freedom.
Why, if you Google "define:freedom," the first thing that comes up is
Health care costs are absolutely an externally imposed restraint. Racism is an externally imposed restraint. Police enforcement of murder laws is an externally imposed restraint.
Freedom means many things, and no debate can resolve such an inquiry without first defining its terms.
And their President looks like Conan O'Brien!
Well, you'd still have to deal with the Quebecois. Yeesh! ;)
It looks like this may be fixed in the next year to a certain extent. Right now, Congress is debating comprehensive health care reform, and the House already passed legislation on it today.
I think he may have meant McConaugheys or Zellwegers or Wilsons or some other manner of Austin creature.
First, there is little protection for free speech there. Speech that can "cause disharmony" are prohibited.
Also, don't forget that chewing gum is illegal, and vandalism GETS YOU FUCKING CANED.
The guy doesn't even define what he means by "freer"! Since it's not well-defined, let's look at various freedoms (restricted to Anglophonic countries):
Freedom of the Press
1. NZ
2. Jamaica
3. Ireland, USA (tie)
5. Bahamas, Barbados, Canada, Marshall Islands (tie)
Economic Freedoms
1. Australia
2. Ireland
3. NZ
4. USA
5. Canada
There are other freedoms to look at, but I don't need to look at more. Ireland, US, NZ, and Canada seem to be the best under those two criteria (and granted those criteria are more like metacriteria themselves).