It is kind of neat to look at the logs, but it's amazing to me that my phone is writing logs every 5-10 minutes. It takes me 2 minutes to scroll to the bottom of the LIST of logs, which are only about two weeks of data.
I still fundamentally disagree with you. They have to do much more than just use it to sell their own pharmaceuticals. They have to try to appear to BE like Merck. I don't believe having a link/page would do enough to cause trademark infringement. http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/infringe.html
Sanofi can do what ever they want with facebook.com/Merck, as long as it doesn't look like they're selling Merck products, or endorsed by Merck.
So, you're saying that Facebook doesn't have the exclusive rights to do whatever they want under the facebook.com domain? Because I really don't buy that.
If Sanofi wanted Facebook.com/Merck and had a page that said Merck kills babies (with sources), I'm pretty sure that Facebook could allow that, legally. It's their domain, legally. And no one has any rights, legal or otherwise, to facebook.com/*anyname* except Facebook.
I'm simply arguing that in order for any meaningful management of the debt, both HAVE to be done.
As I posted above:
In order to get rid of (or at least significantly lower) the debt, spending needs to be cut by a lot, and revenue needs to be raised by a lot. If you decrease spending by $1T/year, and increase taxes by $1T/ year, it will still take 7 years before we start saving ANYthing for a rainy day.
Neither raising taxes by $1T/yr nor lowering spending by $1T/yr are doable by our current government.
First, that would require a cut in total spending of greater than 28%. Second, if you only *just* cut it to under $2.5T, you'll take forever to get rid of the debt.
So, no it couldn't actually be done that way. In order to get rid of (or at least significantly lower) the debt, spending needs to be cut by a lot, and revenue needs to be raised by a lot. If you decrease spending by $1T/year, and increase taxes by $1T/ year, it will still take 7 years before we start saving ANYthing for a rainy day.
The government has debt equivalent to 6 years worth of income. Debt is $14T, annual tax revenues are ~$2.5T. Annual spending is ~$3.5T. Which means you HAVE to raise taxes in order to lower the debt, along with lower spending. You can't 'spend less' your way out of 6 years worth of debt, or even 1 year.
That's a LOT of pain in order to lower the debt. And no politician can live with that much pain.
Slashdot Mirror
That they stood on the shoulders of giants, and combed their hair?
Or not linking to a PDF named Woodpecker?
realpix.xxx is available...
It is kind of neat to look at the logs, but it's amazing to me that my phone is writing logs every 5-10 minutes. It takes me 2 minutes to scroll to the bottom of the LIST of logs, which are only about two weeks of data.
Every link to evenweb.com is goatse.
The more you know...
Then you'd WISH the printer caught on fire & burned all the paper.
Facebook.com/Merck is not close to merckpharma.com which is my entire point.
Thanks for completely missing it.
Workaround:
DISCLAIMER: MERCK IS NOT AFFILIATED WITH THIS WEBPAGE
Buy our drugs: sanofi.com
blahbalhablahbalbhablabhblahbcapsarebadblhablahbalbhablhb
I still fundamentally disagree with you. They have to do much more than just use it to sell their own pharmaceuticals. They have to try to appear to BE like Merck. I don't believe having a link/page would do enough to cause trademark infringement.
http://www.bitlaw.com/trademark/infringe.html
Sanofi can do what ever they want with facebook.com/Merck, as long as it doesn't look like they're selling Merck products, or endorsed by Merck.
Tear what?
So, you're saying that Facebook doesn't have the exclusive rights to do whatever they want under the facebook.com domain? Because I really don't buy that.
If Sanofi wanted Facebook.com/Merck and had a page that said Merck kills babies (with sources), I'm pretty sure that Facebook could allow that, legally. It's their domain, legally. And no one has any rights, legal or otherwise, to facebook.com/*anyname* except Facebook.
Which was my point, obliquely made.
Pretty sure Facebook has all the rights to Facebook.com/*anyname* and always will.
If they want to sell/give it to the highest bidder, or the american branch of a company, or the Mars Rover, they can.
That made me wonder who had to clean off the thermometers, or did they just measure air temp?
If we cut military and social services spending by 50%, there would be no deficit. Probably no lobbyist either though.
"Hello, I am Peggy"
I'm simply arguing that in order for any meaningful management of the debt, both HAVE to be done.
As I posted above:
In order to get rid of (or at least significantly lower) the debt, spending needs to be cut by a lot, and revenue needs to be raised by a lot. If you decrease spending by $1T/year, and increase taxes by $1T/ year, it will still take 7 years before we start saving ANYthing for a rainy day.
Neither raising taxes by $1T/yr nor lowering spending by $1T/yr are doable by our current government.
First, that would require a cut in total spending of greater than 28%.
Second, if you only *just* cut it to under $2.5T, you'll take forever to get rid of the debt.
So, no it couldn't actually be done that way. In order to get rid of (or at least significantly lower) the debt, spending needs to be cut by a lot, and revenue needs to be raised by a lot. If you decrease spending by $1T/year, and increase taxes by $1T/ year, it will still take 7 years before we start saving ANYthing for a rainy day.
Congressmen don't run states. So that's a completely useless argument, that you obviously spend a bit of time on.
10% ain't going to cut it.
The government has debt equivalent to 6 years worth of income. Debt is $14T, annual tax revenues are ~$2.5T. Annual spending is ~$3.5T.
Which means you HAVE to raise taxes in order to lower the debt, along with lower spending. You can't 'spend less' your way out of 6 years worth of debt, or even 1 year.
That's a LOT of pain in order to lower the debt. And no politician can live with that much pain.
OS X has had a basic AV for 2 years now.
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/answer/What-are-the-Mac-OS-X-Snow-Leopard-antivirus-features
So, yes you have. You just didn't know about it.
In preview, you can now draw lines, circles, squares, arrows, text.
Can you find a computer company that doesn't use parts from China? Doubtful.
Mods, in case you were wondering what the proper mod to use for parent is, its "No fucking sense of humor".
Treo 650
which came out 6 years after this patent...