Use Tax is illegal. The Federal government has put a moratorium on collecting taxes on internet purchases. Thus, States CANNOT COLLECT TAXES ON INTERNET PURCHASES. That's why they ask you to volunteer the information on your tax form. They can't compel you it would be illegal.
There's nothing wrong with RDMS. The problem is that people are poorly trained in the technology to properly implement them. Because of this, jackasses like him spout their voodoo to fix a "supposed" problem.
Buy a house and raise a family, then tell me how much disposable income you have.
But besides that, you seem to be oblivious to the recent global financial meltdown that sucked billions of dollars out of the US economy alone and millions of people lost their jobs. Not alot of people have disposable income today.
Yeah but it's government take over of a town. Do we honestly want government take over of a town. Just say no to your town being taken over by the government:)
I've been following Caldera/SCO since 2000. From 2000 to 2009, SCO was not the most influential company, nor did SCO gain vile from Microsoft or other linux vendors. In fact Microsoft purchased and SCO Source license, after SCO launched it's lawsuit againt IBM and other Linux vendors. Other Linux vendors hated SCO because of the lawsuit against them not because of their product. SCO was not the envy of anyone.
So even before their lawsuit, SCO was maybe 3rd among the Linux distributions (Red Hat, Suse) from 2000 to 2002. After that they weren't even an after thought.
Do you have a clue?? What legal situation around Linux? Facts please.
See, you are the one talking out of your ass.
Microsoft NEVER approved or sanctioned Mono. Microsoft hold several patents around.NET technology. Mono developers are not free to develop and distribute.NET apps without fear that Microsoft will sue them. There is no protection.
"just because he understood the technology 20 years ago doesn't mean he understands today's technologies and their relationships."
I think the problem creationists have is that, an intelligent creator could have developed a process (evolution) whereby man evolved over time from some animal that had a common ancestry with apes.
Think about that.
Creationists are trying to use the Christian bible as fact. Since the bible makes no mention of evolution or dinosaurs, essentially believing man came out of thin air, creationists assume that evolution and an intelligent creator are contradictions.
There's no reason for that.
Now Dawkins is an atheist and he tries to disprove the need of a god; which I think bugs people more. Though if you think about Free Will, he has a point.
ODF is a DOCUMENT FORMAT. ODF can be implemented by any application. It was developed and approved as an ISO standard. This allows people to easily exchange information. ODF is widely used.
The problem is Microsoft has refused to support ODF. Microsoft has LOBBIED organiations against using it saying it puts Microsoft at an competitive disadvantage. This is false since Microsoft can freely implement ODF.
See the market has spoken. They want ODF. However Microsoft is trying hard to prevent that.
I think more to the point it was none of those things. He's using the terms to rationalize why the show was canceled. Basically saying the show was too good for FOX and that's what FOX canceled it but if it was on another network, it would have lived on...honestly, no, because it SUCKED!
Wow, so basically what you are saying is, "My dog ate my homework."
It's just a wonderful way of denying responsibility for your actions.
Bravo. Let's just pass the buck
Listen up jackass, there's no agenda when you are trying to figure out the problem. It's pretty easy to figure it out when you follow the money.
Credit Default swaps were a problem back in the late '90s but Fed Chairman GreenSpan did not want to go anything about them when asked by Congress.
This coupled by the deregulation of the Banking Industry led by Phil Graham led to all this over leveraging. Basically you regulations that kept the Banks honest. One they were removed the Banks were left to the honor system. We know how well that works.
But back to the article. The guy denies any responsibility and even justifies it by saying, "provided banks donâ(TM)t resume writing mortgages to people who canâ(TM)t afford them."
Yes perpetuate that myth. It's the home owners fault. Thing is what happens to a person who loses their job? Well they no longer can afford to pay their mortgage. So they were able to pay their mortgage and now they are not.
So his notion that these are safe if only "safe" mortgages are written is false.
The second exemption "was created for the discrete purpose of permitting the transmission of information relating to betting on particular sports where such betting was legal in both the state from which the information was sent and the state in which it was received."[69]
So betting is illegal in states where it is illegal. Using the internet to place a bet does not circumvent the law; it's still illegal. Betting is only legal via the internet in states that say betting is legal.
Yes they do, that's why they state the 1961 Wire Act:
"The Wire Act was intended to assist the states, territories and possessions of the United States, as well as the District of Columbia, in enforcing their respective laws on gambling and bookmaking and to suppress organized gambling activities.[58] Subsection (a) of the Wire Act, a criminal provision, provides:
Whoever being engaged in the business of betting or wagering knowingly uses a wire communication facility for the transmission in interstate or foreign commerce of bets or wagers or information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers on any sporting event or contest, or for the transmission of a wire communication which entitles the recipient to receive money or credit as a result of bets or wagers, or for information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.[59]"
However, the Wire Act mentions nothing about shutting down wire services or having wire services stopping certain transmissions based on their destination.
In fact, all the Wire Act says is it is illegal to use a wire service to place a bet, where each state (sender state/receiver state) say it is illegal.
It is PERFECTLY LEGAL for the wire service to place the transmission.
Meaning Minnesota is going after the middleman and the Wire Act says nothing about that.
Minnesota you lose. AT&T should have no problem telling Minnesota to take a hike.
Slashdot Mirror
RTFA moron!
All California is planning to do is mandate Energy Star guidelines. Today they are voluntary.
There is no limitation on TV size.
Jackass
Call me when they have a reliable ICBM.
You are a twit.
Use Tax is illegal. The Federal government has put a moratorium on collecting taxes on internet purchases. Thus, States CANNOT COLLECT TAXES ON INTERNET PURCHASES. That's why they ask you to volunteer the information on your tax form. They can't compel you it would be illegal.
Change the law if you don't like it.
Then Microsoft should have opened the NET Compact Framework. That's what is used in mobile devices, not the Micro Framework.
Read article before commenting.
And from a clod to boot!
There's nothing wrong with RDMS. The problem is that people are poorly trained in the technology to properly implement them. Because of this, jackasses like him spout their voodoo to fix a "supposed" problem.
You're an idiot.
Buy a house and raise a family, then tell me how much disposable income you have.
But besides that, you seem to be oblivious to the recent global financial meltdown that sucked billions of dollars out of the US economy alone and millions of people lost their jobs. Not alot of people have disposable income today.
Time for you to move out of your parents house.
Yeah but it's government take over of a town. Do we honestly want government take over of a town. Just say no to your town being taken over by the government :)
Well, yeah.
Win 2000 = NT 5.0
Win XP = NT 5.1
Win Vista = NT 6.0
Win 7 = NT 6.1
What did people expect. It's not a new iteration, it's an enhancement. Just because they brand it as a new OS does not make it so.
What crack have you been smokin'
I've been following Caldera/SCO since 2000. From 2000 to 2009, SCO was not the most influential company, nor did SCO gain vile from Microsoft or other linux vendors. In fact Microsoft purchased and SCO Source license, after SCO launched it's lawsuit againt IBM and other Linux vendors. Other Linux vendors hated SCO because of the lawsuit against them not because of their product. SCO was not the envy of anyone.
So even before their lawsuit, SCO was maybe 3rd among the Linux distributions (Red Hat, Suse) from 2000 to 2002. After that they weren't even an after thought.
Did you read the article? This was done to increase Playboy's sagging sales.
Exactly!
Earth to Gartner, cell phone users don't care about the OS that runs their phones. They care about the functionality of the phone!
Unless you can beat the iPhone, it don't matter what OS cell phone manufacturers use.
The case was dismissed by a Federal Judge:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/08/technology/companies/08antitrust.html?_r=1
CCIA is shill for Microsoft. Thats' why this is happening.
http://mainframe.typepad.com/blog/2009/10/press-reports-us-justice-dept-opens-ibm-antitrust-probe.html
What?!
.NET technology. Mono developers are not free to develop and distribute .NET apps without fear that Microsoft will sue them. There is no protection.
Do you have a clue?? What legal situation around Linux? Facts please.
See, you are the one talking out of your ass.
Microsoft NEVER approved or sanctioned Mono. Microsoft hold several patents around
"just because he understood the technology 20 years ago doesn't mean he understands today's technologies and their relationships."
You're an idiot.
Bridge burner? Surely you gest.
He is a Microsoft apologist. Just look at his comments about ODF and OOXML.
If he was bridge building he would be getting Microsoft to adopt ODF. But instead he wants to do away with ODF and have the world adopt OOXML.
I think the problem creationists have is that, an intelligent creator could have developed a process (evolution) whereby man evolved over time from some animal that had a common ancestry with apes.
Think about that.
Creationists are trying to use the Christian bible as fact. Since the bible makes no mention of evolution or dinosaurs, essentially believing man came out of thin air, creationists assume that evolution and an intelligent creator are contradictions.
There's no reason for that.
Now Dawkins is an atheist and he tries to disprove the need of a god; which I think bugs people more. Though if you think about Free Will, he has a point.
Right....it's not like Microsoft threatened Linux with patent infringement but never sued.
No they would never do that.
Dumbass
ODF is a DOCUMENT FORMAT. ODF can be implemented by any application. It was developed and approved as an ISO standard. This allows people to easily exchange information. ODF is widely used.
The problem is Microsoft has refused to support ODF. Microsoft has LOBBIED organiations against using it saying it puts Microsoft at an competitive disadvantage. This is false since Microsoft can freely implement ODF.
See the market has spoken. They want ODF. However Microsoft is trying hard to prevent that.
Think much.
Right...and in the REAL universe, where people do REAL science, we have FOUR DIMENSIONS.
Different polarizations of light DOES NOT CONSTITUTE 2 MORE DIMENSIONS.
Dimensionality of spin...again does not constitute more dimensions. You need to learn how to stop borrowing words an use better descriptors.
I think more to the point it was none of those things. He's using the terms to rationalize why the show was canceled. Basically saying the show was too good for FOX and that's what FOX canceled it but if it was on another network, it would have lived on...honestly, no, because it SUCKED!
Bottom line: another Logon's Run.
Please, the show sucked.
It's 35 not 42. http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/05/19/19climatewire-white-house-proposes-new-stricter-national-f-12208.html Helps to do some research.
Wow, so basically what you are saying is, "My dog ate my homework."
It's just a wonderful way of denying responsibility for your actions.
Bravo. Let's just pass the buck
Listen up jackass, there's no agenda when you are trying to figure out the problem. It's pretty easy to figure it out when you follow the money.
Credit Default swaps were a problem back in the late '90s but Fed Chairman GreenSpan did not want to go anything about them when asked by Congress.
This coupled by the deregulation of the Banking Industry led by Phil Graham led to all this over leveraging. Basically you regulations that kept the Banks honest. One they were removed the Banks were left to the honor system. We know how well that works.
But back to the article. The guy denies any responsibility and even justifies it by saying, "provided banks donâ(TM)t resume writing mortgages to people who canâ(TM)t afford them."
Yes perpetuate that myth. It's the home owners fault. Thing is what happens to a person who loses their job? Well they no longer can afford to pay their mortgage. So they were able to pay their mortgage and now they are not.
So his notion that these are safe if only "safe" mortgages are written is false.
Nice one ass.
Read it more closely:
The second exemption "was created for the discrete purpose of permitting the transmission of information relating to betting on particular sports where such betting was legal in both the state from which the information was sent and the state in which it was received."[69]
So betting is illegal in states where it is illegal. Using the internet to place a bet does not circumvent the law; it's still illegal. Betting is only legal via the internet in states that say betting is legal.
Yes they do, that's why they state the 1961 Wire Act:
"The Wire Act was intended to assist the states, territories and possessions of the United States, as well as the District of Columbia, in enforcing their respective laws on gambling and bookmaking and to suppress organized gambling activities.[58] Subsection (a) of the Wire Act, a criminal provision, provides: Whoever being engaged in the business of betting or wagering knowingly uses a wire communication facility for the transmission in interstate or foreign commerce of bets or wagers or information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers on any sporting event or contest, or for the transmission of a wire communication which entitles the recipient to receive money or credit as a result of bets or wagers, or for information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.[59]"
However, the Wire Act mentions nothing about shutting down wire services or having wire services stopping certain transmissions based on their destination.
In fact, all the Wire Act says is it is illegal to use a wire service to place a bet, where each state (sender state/receiver state) say it is illegal.
It is PERFECTLY LEGAL for the wire service to place the transmission.
Meaning Minnesota is going after the middleman and the Wire Act says nothing about that.
Minnesota you lose. AT&T should have no problem telling Minnesota to take a hike.
Yes, yes they did :)