I don't. Google has shown time and again that their motto should truly be "Do no illegal activities" rather then "Do no evil." Although there's no pleasing everyone in this case, they are backing their "do nothing illegal" policy, rather then a "do no evil" one. After all if they sought to do no evil either they would leave the blogs online no matter what, or they would remove them no matter what. At the moment they're just doing as little as they're legally obligated.
what would happen if a (google-based) Chinese blogger runs afoul of the Chinese Government?
Will Google remove the blog?
I don't expect slashdotters to read the fucking article. But at least read the fucking summary.
Google... says it will take the blogs in question offline only if ordered to do so by a court.
Pretty easy to work out what they'd do in the case of China (especially given their past actions). But I'm guessing you just wanted to bash Google rather then have a serious discussion.
Apparently that happened about 2,000 years after the Earth was first formed. Considering that happened 4.57 billion years ago I find it appalling that only now are they attempting to translate the numerous languages that resulted from the Tower of Babel travesty. I mean, how lazy can you get? What have they been doing all this time?
The diamond is idea for this purpose because it has almost no resale value. It's a way for the male to make a demonstratively extravagant purchase, one which the female (or whoever) is not able to whip back around for a cash refund.
In that case why not just hire a male whore for the night? It meets all of the criteria you mentioned.
I know the comment was meant to be funny. But Canadians have some of the highest connectivity rates in the world. In 2003 approx 64% of households in Canada were connected.
Well it's easier to connect them when there is so few people living in Canada.
and that works really well when everyone pirates the movies and music, and the people making them go off to become plumbers instead. How the hell does that 'benefit' everyone?
Perhaps if copyright term limits were more reasonable people wouldn't pirate copyrighted material (at least anywhere near as prevalent as it currently is). Music from 28 years ago can most definitely be interesting for the average modern music fan, if they have a choice between that for free or albums (at a higher cost) that came out yesterday. However Music from 95 years ago doesn't hold anywhere near the appeal, and so people can't freely access art legally that they would be able to enjoy. Therefore they freely access art that they enjoy illegally. If the *AA's want people to stop pirating their content, perhaps the *AA's should stop bribing congress to pass copyright extensions.
No matter what the arguments are from either side, the bottom line is that piracy of copyrighted works is still wrong and shameful.
No, the bottom line is that piracy of copyrighted works is still illegal.
The fact is pirates are enjoying the fruits of someone else's labor without compensating them for the price they are charging.
Given how long copyright terms exist, I find it difficult to feel sorry for copyright holders who take advantage of the ridiculously long copyright term limits.
That's funny. Many have refuted that claim, pointing out when the Democrats were in power the Daily Show concentrated on the lambasting the media with the occassional ribbing of the Democrats. Now that the Republicans are in power it concentrates on lambasting the Republicans, with the occassional ribbing of the media. That's a bias against the Republicans no matter how you cut it.
Any time Bush or the Republicans makes a valid point, the Daily Show either ignores it, ridicules the point regardless, or make ad hominem attacks. It is not unbiased. No matter how much you try to convince yourself otherwise.
Do they feel reporters should be extended the same privileges as the attorney / client relationship? If so I don't agree with that, because the press is not (strictly speaking) a necessary part of the court system.
No but they are every bit as necessary to a free society as doctors (who get doctor/patient priviledge) and possibly even more so then spouses (who also get that priviledge).
But "free healthcare" advocates tend to forget that Americans with real jobs already get "free healthcare"
And those that single-parents whose partner were killed so they stay at home to raise their children properly can do what? Or what about those that retire? Is healthcare "free" for them as well?
I wonder where Slashdot would rank if it were a nation?
I'd say pretty darn high given the level of behaviour you have to sink to in order to get banned from this site. And even then I doubt many bans are permanent. Whereas if you were to engage in the sort of behaviour typical of the slashdot troll (that isn't banned from this website) on television or radio, I'm pretty sure all but the freest nations would ban you from appearing on television or radio for a set period of time. Or at least make it financially impossible for you to.
Because the Daily Show is probably more informative and less biased
I watch the Daily Show, I enjoy it for the most part. But it is not less biased. More factually correct? Quite possibly. But it is extremely biased. It can be used to define what bias is.
Problem is, it's most likely shares your biases so you'll allow yourself to be convinced it isn't biased.
Non-commercial depends on how much money you have, how big the business is that provided the content under the license, and whether or not they're bored.
Slashdot Mirror
Pretty easy to work out what they'd do in the case of China (especially given their past actions). But I'm guessing you just wanted to bash Google rather then have a serious discussion.
Actually I'll stick with Windows XP I think :P (which I own a legal copy of). I did enjoy how you and the AC troll assumed I used Linux though.
Apparently that happened about 2,000 years after the Earth was first formed. Considering that happened 4.57 billion years ago I find it appalling that only now are they attempting to translate the numerous languages that resulted from the Tower of Babel travesty. I mean, how lazy can you get? What have they been doing all this time?
Whenever I hear blood diamonds I expect them to actually be red. I'm always dissapointed :(
Hey, they invented an alternative to Da Beers diamonds for cheapskates like you ages ago. It's artificially created as well`
1. Making lists of what the standard slashdot responses are.
Given how long copyright terms exist, I find it difficult to feel sorry for copyright holders who take advantage of the ridiculously long copyright term limits.
That's funny. Many have refuted that claim, pointing out when the Democrats were in power the Daily Show concentrated on the lambasting the media with the occassional ribbing of the Democrats. Now that the Republicans are in power it concentrates on lambasting the Republicans, with the occassional ribbing of the media. That's a bias against the Republicans no matter how you cut it.
Any time Bush or the Republicans makes a valid point, the Daily Show either ignores it, ridicules the point regardless, or make ad hominem attacks. It is not unbiased. No matter how much you try to convince yourself otherwise.
Actually it's the slashdot submitter who complains about the USA. Quite possibly an American himself.
Problem is, it's most likely shares your biases so you'll allow yourself to be convinced it isn't biased.
Non-commercial depends on how much money you have, how big the business is that provided the content under the license, and whether or not they're bored.