If I were a lawyer and I were being sued for some reason, I would prefer to hire someone to represent me.
My reasoning would be that being sued is a very stressful and emotional circumstance; a circumstance that would deprive me of my best judgment and reason. Instead of making solid, fact-based statements and questions, I would probably be more liable to tell the prosecutor to piss off. Not really something that will get you far in court.
Having someone else represent you provides an amount of detachment from irrational emotion that could ruin a case.
Submersible spectrometers are not new. In fact, I use them every day to monitor urban streams for pesticide and organic impacts. The spectrometers are easily applied to drinking water systems (in fact, easier than how we use them because drinking water doesn't have the same biofouling capacity as a river).
Nevertheless, the company we use sells their device as a 'UV-Vis multi-parameter' monitoring tool, not an anti-terrorism device. Sure, the equipment would function well in this application, but anyone with a clue could envision such a use without a pamphlet featuring a shifty-eyed, dark-complexioned figure.
Regardless of any questions about carbon emission of goats themselves or the transport of goats to and from different work sites, this farmer has a sweet deal!
Feed for farm animals cost a stack of cash and this guy has turned what is normally an expense into a profit.
So he gets food from excess goat production, valuable goats milk, and profit from selling a slightly green-washed grass control method.
It's also a way to avoid international disputes about cross-border drug trade.
For example, if Canada were to effectively legalize the growing of marijuana, the cross-border trade would be enormous as American drug syndicates move to Canada to grow in safety and export to the US.
For that reason, the US wants to be assured that Canada is not relaxing its stance on the growing of marijuana. Should the US feel that is the case, then there could be all sorts of diplomatic issues.
I would be willing to guess that the issue is similar between The Netherlands and their neighbors.
Legalizing drugs would require the assent of a larger area; all of North America, for instance.
It's true... there's no rule that says 'every subsequent generation will be more liberal'.
I saw a few news stories before about teens having less sex, drinking less, and doing less drugs. I can't imagine that generation growing up to relax drug laws.
Sorry dude, but sometimes there are reasons to follow the herd sometimes. If that many people run for their lives, there's probably a good reason for it.
Maybe they knew something about it that you didn't. Maybe you were in the shitter concentrating very hard when everyone else heard the 'terrorism alert' over the PA.
Think about wildebeests on the Savannah... hundreds of thousands running in formation. The couple that break rank and leave the herd are probably eaten by the lions.
I don't think his argument is any more foolish than yours. What I've gathered from your post is that you want to stay the course and proceed as-is, in terms of copyright law.
I propose, given the amount of lawsuits on old ladies, young teens and the absurd damages the RIAA bring to court, that the current copyright structure is deformed.
Let's not forget that the RIAA is a very well-funded organization with the ear of the government. This group has a huge advantage over the consumer in that media conglomerates and record labels make up the organization. Such a group is much more powerful and capable of swaying the opinion of courts and legislators compared to your or I.
Furthermore, there are very few consumers who understand copyright (I don't claim to) and function on what they feel is fair-use of what they have purchased -- yet even this has resulted in lawsuits. When my father ripped the tracks from an Elton John CD he purchased a decade ago and put them on his MP3 player, he has contravened copyright. Certainly that's not fair. It's not right to insist that he re-purchase the Elton John MP3s via some online website to stay within the confines of copyright.
TPB will be remembered as martyrs should they actually fall permanently.
Napster is regarded by P2P users quite fondly and won't be forgotten. If ISOhunt were to fall, they may not be remembered, but TPB has had so much press and attention that even my parents know what TPB is... or at least they have a rudimentary understanding.
The very people who use ABP are also the people who would never click on the advertisement to make a random purchase. Therefore, there is no revenue lost if it's a pay-per-click advertisement.
People who provide content on the internet should expect that many viewers have no intention of spending money on the internet, save the monthly ISP bill. I, for one, do not see the internet as an extension of the shopping mall.
I don't care if people don't believe in anthropogenic global warming... if our houses can be powered with windmills instead of power plants burning bunker C (which stinks), then lets do it.
Not to debate good ol' George (Orwell), but it seems a large oversight to compare Obama to Big Brother when the recent Bush Administration was so opaque, secretive and misleading.
Who were we at war with again? Iraq or Al-Quaeda? Or was it Eurasia or Eastasia... I always get the two confused.
I doubt your commitment to dieing for free speech. As you say, there are groups all around us with the right to free speech revoked and yet, here you are: alive.
But a lot of others claim to be willing to die for free speech. Well... why aren't they dieing all over the UK for their highly vaunted cause?
Furthermore, where are all the privacy martyrs? Face it... very very few in Western culture are willing to die for a cause. We're way too concerned with our next pay raise, our next promotion all to get the newest flat screen TV.
Factory freezer-trawlers are still in wide use. Portugal and Spain are always fishing on the Flemmish Cap of the Grand Banks just outside of Canada's 200 nautical mile limit.
Slashdot Mirror
If I were a lawyer and I were being sued for some reason, I would prefer to hire someone to represent me.
My reasoning would be that being sued is a very stressful and emotional circumstance; a circumstance that would deprive me of my best judgment and reason. Instead of making solid, fact-based statements and questions, I would probably be more liable to tell the prosecutor to piss off. Not really something that will get you far in court.
Having someone else represent you provides an amount of detachment from irrational emotion that could ruin a case.
Submersible spectrometers are not new. In fact, I use them every day to monitor urban streams for pesticide and organic impacts. The spectrometers are easily applied to drinking water systems (in fact, easier than how we use them because drinking water doesn't have the same biofouling capacity as a river).
Nevertheless, the company we use sells their device as a 'UV-Vis multi-parameter' monitoring tool, not an anti-terrorism device. Sure, the equipment would function well in this application, but anyone with a clue could envision such a use without a pamphlet featuring a shifty-eyed, dark-complexioned figure.
All this company has patented is fear.
What do you mean another way?
Are you holding out on us?!
That's no antenna...
He'd soil himself if he knew that the rays cast from his monitor are traveling at 299,792,458 m/s!
Don't you think that living in one of the world's safest and healthiest countries is worth something?
How else can you fund the social machine that allows you to have a decent standard of living? Roads, hospitals, education, and government costs money.
It doesn't sound like punishment to me.
Regardless of any questions about carbon emission of goats themselves or the transport of goats to and from different work sites, this farmer has a sweet deal!
Feed for farm animals cost a stack of cash and this guy has turned what is normally an expense into a profit.
So he gets food from excess goat production, valuable goats milk, and profit from selling a slightly green-washed grass control method.
The guy's a frickin' genius.
It's also a way to avoid international disputes about cross-border drug trade.
For example, if Canada were to effectively legalize the growing of marijuana, the cross-border trade would be enormous as American drug syndicates move to Canada to grow in safety and export to the US.
For that reason, the US wants to be assured that Canada is not relaxing its stance on the growing of marijuana. Should the US feel that is the case, then there could be all sorts of diplomatic issues.
I would be willing to guess that the issue is similar between The Netherlands and their neighbors.
Legalizing drugs would require the assent of a larger area; all of North America, for instance.
It's true... there's no rule that says 'every subsequent generation will be more liberal'.
I saw a few news stories before about teens having less sex, drinking less, and doing less drugs. I can't imagine that generation growing up to relax drug laws.
Sorry dude, but sometimes there are reasons to follow the herd sometimes. If that many people run for their lives, there's probably a good reason for it.
Maybe they knew something about it that you didn't. Maybe you were in the shitter concentrating very hard when everyone else heard the 'terrorism alert' over the PA.
Think about wildebeests on the Savannah... hundreds of thousands running in formation. The couple that break rank and leave the herd are probably eaten by the lions.
I don't think his argument is any more foolish than yours. What I've gathered from your post is that you want to stay the course and proceed as-is, in terms of copyright law.
I propose, given the amount of lawsuits on old ladies, young teens and the absurd damages the RIAA bring to court, that the current copyright structure is deformed.
Let's not forget that the RIAA is a very well-funded organization with the ear of the government. This group has a huge advantage over the consumer in that media conglomerates and record labels make up the organization. Such a group is much more powerful and capable of swaying the opinion of courts and legislators compared to your or I.
Furthermore, there are very few consumers who understand copyright (I don't claim to) and function on what they feel is fair-use of what they have purchased -- yet even this has resulted in lawsuits. When my father ripped the tracks from an Elton John CD he purchased a decade ago and put them on his MP3 player, he has contravened copyright. Certainly that's not fair. It's not right to insist that he re-purchase the Elton John MP3s via some online website to stay within the confines of copyright.
I think you're just obsessed with money and you're stuck in uber-capitalist mode.
There are plenty of insurance agents/nurses/mechanics/fishermen in my area who also play and create music.
Their music doesn't make them millionaires, their crab boat does.
Tell that to Max Brod who published Franz Kafka's work despite a Will that declared his notebooks should be burned.
Kafka didn't make any money off his books... someone else did after he died. But Kafka is still pretty famous.
Max Brod was not arrested for breach of a legal document. Why should we?
TPB will be remembered as martyrs should they actually fall permanently.
Napster is regarded by P2P users quite fondly and won't be forgotten. If ISOhunt were to fall, they may not be remembered, but TPB has had so much press and attention that even my parents know what TPB is... or at least they have a rudimentary understanding.
The American military's response is said to be akin to the 90s cartoon Superhuman Samurai Cyber-Squad.
Error.
Maher Arar
Moron.
The very people who use ABP are also the people who would never click on the advertisement to make a random purchase. Therefore, there is no revenue lost if it's a pay-per-click advertisement.
People who provide content on the internet should expect that many viewers have no intention of spending money on the internet, save the monthly ISP bill. I, for one, do not see the internet as an extension of the shopping mall.
The stupid won't destroy the world... it'll probably be fine. We'll be fucked though.
I've been saying this to people for a long time.
I don't care if people don't believe in anthropogenic global warming... if our houses can be powered with windmills instead of power plants burning bunker C (which stinks), then lets do it.
It's a misnomer, unfortunately :p
It's sadly lacking in proper greenspace and urban planning.
The GoogleEarth imagery is very out of date; there's not half the amount of trees anymore :(
It depends on the failure rate, obviously, but you're one VERY unlucky person if this is the case.
Failure Rate
1%: 0.01^9 = 10*10^-18 * 27930000(360s sold) = 2.79*10^-11 people have experienced nine replacements
10%: 0.1^9 = 1.0*10^-9*27930000 = 0.028 people have experienced nine replacements
50%: 54550 people have experienced nine replacements.
I tend to believe that the failure rate isn't 50%, or there'd be class action lawsuits. In any case, you're a truly unlucky person.
Two words: Patriot Act
Not to debate good ol' George (Orwell), but it seems a large oversight to compare Obama to Big Brother when the recent Bush Administration was so opaque, secretive and misleading.
Who were we at war with again? Iraq or Al-Quaeda? Or was it Eurasia or Eastasia... I always get the two confused.
Settle down, weirdo.
I doubt your commitment to dieing for free speech. As you say, there are groups all around us with the right to free speech revoked and yet, here you are: alive.
But a lot of others claim to be willing to die for free speech. Well... why aren't they dieing all over the UK for their highly vaunted cause?
Furthermore, where are all the privacy martyrs? Face it... very very few in Western culture are willing to die for a cause. We're way too concerned with our next pay raise, our next promotion all to get the newest flat screen TV.
We suck.
Factory freezer-trawlers are still in wide use. Portugal and Spain are always fishing on the Flemmish Cap of the Grand Banks just outside of Canada's 200 nautical mile limit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flemish_Cap
What is it about about your iPhone, Wii, BlackBerry or power locks on your car that aren't trivial?
Welcome to the economy where triviality is worth trillions of dollars a year.