Seriously, shouldn't we be able to move on? Your assumption with Cuba is only true if you believe the cold war has ended.... it certainly hasn't yet; KGB/FSB still very much active in US.
If you ask me, that's what's kept Castro and his friends in power for so long. You mean, like Saddam and Kim Jong Il? You are giving US too much credit.
premises of self-delusion in believing "Google Be Good; Microsoft Do Evil" rearing its ugly head once again when closer to true reality is neither of them are fucking Saints.
What did that skinny dude from India once said? "Action expresses priorities."
[dazed]...when i look at a light saber and only see a sword of some kind... [empty stare into air]...i don't belong in these kinds of conversations. [walks away]
Light saber; because we live among freaking jedi???
Invisibility; will that reduce the chance of innocent bystanders getting shot at and blown up???
Force field; yes, because it's just next logical step to do so with technology that made light saber and invisibility possible can now be combined to create a freaking invisible force field which will only let my light saber to pass and stab you while your freaking has-been century old pistol with 120mm exploding pallets just won't be able to touch me.
but does he run linux? ah-HA! he writes his own OS!.. oh.. wait... never mind...
Well, beside the joke, IMHO, he's too bright for his own good or my constitutional right at least. This douchebag brought up national id card to congress, and i think, he's still endorsing it.
Again, he's a bright scientist and engineer (and very successful businessman). However I just need a representative who knows what constitution stands for and represent common man/woman's view. Ability to write code in assembly is cute and amusing thing I care less about when voting for a congress person.
What a flashback! As i remember and understand, this is rather to do with separation of power between Judge and Jury. If the evidence and testimony (hearsay rule) were to be crossed examined, the jury must be provided with "facts." After all, one can argue, evidence to be sufficient in submitting in court must be disclosed before the jury.
*1796, a statute in North Carolina made it unlawful, "in delivering a charge to the petit-jury, to given an opinion whether a fact is fully or sufficiently proved," since that was "the true office and province of the jury." In the nineteenth century, a number of state statutes took away the judge's right to comment on evidence.**
*Laws N. Car. 1796, ch. 4 **L.M. Friedman's A History of American Law (published 1973, 1985, 2005)
"This is the first time anyone has had electrodes planted in the brain which have been shown to improve memory."
Well, consequently it's first time anyone tried to plant electrodes in the brain to treat obesity either. Yeah, I guess, you can call that an "accident"!
"I went to a fat camp, and all i got was an electrode in my brain and this lousy T-shirt."
"You are guilty in the eyes of the law until proven innocent."
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed..." - 6th Amendment of the United States Constitution
I can't see no "presumption" that court must give prosecuted the benefit of doubt with presumption of "innocent" nor presumption of "guilty". Matter of fact, that would be prejudice in both regards.
Why else would they arrest someone and hold them in jail awaiting the trial.
Once you are in "the system", meaning due process, YOU ARE IN THE PROCESS regardless you are "presumed" guilty OR innocent.
how can one say that "we presume you to be innocent, yet we must believe that you are guilty otherwise we wouldn't be trying to prove that you were guilty"
Prosecutors will say, you are guilty, the court of law will say, "it doesn't give a shit either way." Jury of your peer will say, "Hmm... this jury duty really sucks." And you will say, "Fuck, I need a better lawyer to prove the accusation is false."
See, how being guilty or innocent has NOTHING to do with due process?
I'll make sure, I'll pay only 50% of my bill since 5% of users are using up my "internet". If the cable company demands 100% of the bill, then I surely can reply; "You are using too much of my money. Oh and when I disown your bill, you have to pickup your cable modem off of my property."
I don't see problem with copyright protection or fair use. I see problem with punishment due to copyright violation. In retrospect, copyright law is heading toward colonial era when witchcraft and runaway slave is an offense punishable enough to be burned at the stake.
Detention is assigned in our schools after appropriate warnings are given, if students continue to engage in non-academic activities or fail to follow a teacher's directive during class time discipline can and will be assigned.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, shouldn't we be able to move on? ... it certainly hasn't yet; KGB/FSB still very much active in US.
Your assumption with Cuba is only true if you believe the cold war has ended.
If you ask me, that's what's kept Castro and his friends in power for so long.
You mean, like Saddam and Kim Jong Il? You are giving US too much credit.
I was too lazy to re-install Windows. ...honestly. One day, I said, "That's it. I'm done." The rest is history.
premises of self-delusion in believing "Google Be Good; Microsoft Do Evil" rearing its ugly head once again when closer to true reality is neither of them are fucking Saints.
What did that skinny dude from India once said? "Action expresses priorities."
And we all know what Google's priorities are.
interestingly enough, neither do "terrorist."
[dazed]...when i look at a light saber and only see a sword of some kind... [empty stare into air] ...i don't belong in these kinds of conversations. [walks away]
Light saber; because we live among freaking jedi???
Invisibility; will that reduce the chance of innocent bystanders getting shot at and blown up???
Force field; yes, because it's just next logical step to do so with technology that made light saber and invisibility possible can now be combined to create a freaking invisible force field which will only let my light saber to pass and stab you while your freaking has-been century old pistol with 120mm exploding pallets just won't be able to touch me.
oh snap! did i just hurt your feeling, Jedi boy?
1. Bomb Iran ...
2. Disposable Nuclear Reactor
3.
4. Profit!
I'm John McCain, and I approve this message.
but does he run linux? ah-HA! he writes his own OS!.. oh.. wait... never mind...
Well, beside the joke, IMHO, he's too bright for his own good or my constitutional right at least. This douchebag brought up national id card to congress, and i think, he's still endorsing it.
Again, he's a bright scientist and engineer (and very successful businessman). However I just need a representative who knows what constitution stands for and represent common man/woman's view. Ability to write code in assembly is cute and amusing thing I care less about when voting for a congress person.
1. Terror ...
2. Religion
3.
4. Profit!
I'm John McCain, and I approve this message.
Atlantic vs Dangler
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDFfull.asp?filename=atlantic_dangler_071023DecisionDenyDefaultJudgmentMotion
I am not sure how useful, but hopefully this ruling may be relevant.
What a flashback! As i remember and understand, this is rather to do with separation of power between Judge and Jury. If the evidence and testimony (hearsay rule) were to be crossed examined, the jury must be provided with "facts." After all, one can argue, evidence to be sufficient in submitting in court must be disclosed before the jury.
*1796, a statute in North Carolina made it unlawful, "in delivering a charge to the petit-jury, to given an opinion whether a fact is fully or sufficiently proved," since that was "the true office and province of the jury." In the nineteenth century, a number of state statutes took away the judge's right to comment on evidence.**
*Laws N. Car. 1796, ch. 4
**L.M. Friedman's A History of American Law (published 1973, 1985, 2005)
That must be compared to what American culture turned Chinese delicacies into; the fast food junk that we know and eat for less than 5 buck a meal.
Popularism doesn't always mean right as Elitism doesn't always mean the best.
"If bits don't fit, err... you must fsck!"
search for keyword...
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Abulk.resource.org%2Fcourts.gov%2F+Google
or search PDF file...
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Abulk.resource.org%2Fcourts.gov%2F+filetype%3Apdf+Google
I think, it's a compromise until there is a better way.
A#1: (no answer) Writer's Strike
E.T = Extra-Terrorist
I mean, can we pay for this like how GoogleMap does it? Every Pay-Per-Click for `terrrrist` receives 2 cents. I see future in this.
accepting monopolistic business practice gets extra credit! mymonopoly.com owned by Microsoft coming soon! *(with "Jail" removed from the game)
"This is the first time anyone has had electrodes planted in the brain which have been shown to improve memory."
Well, consequently it's first time anyone tried to plant electrodes in the brain to treat obesity either. Yeah, I guess, you can call that an "accident"!
"I went to a fat camp, and all i got was an electrode in my brain and this lousy T-shirt."
"You are guilty in the eyes of the law until proven innocent."
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed..." - 6th Amendment of the United States Constitution
I can't see no "presumption" that court must give prosecuted the benefit of doubt with presumption of "innocent" nor presumption of "guilty". Matter of fact, that would be prejudice in both regards.
Why else would they arrest someone and hold them in jail awaiting the trial.
Once you are in "the system", meaning due process, YOU ARE IN THE PROCESS regardless you are "presumed" guilty OR innocent.
how can one say that "we presume you to be innocent, yet we must believe that you are guilty otherwise we wouldn't be trying to prove that you were guilty"
Prosecutors will say, you are guilty, the court of law will say, "it doesn't give a shit either way." Jury of your peer will say, "Hmm... this jury duty really sucks." And you will say, "Fuck, I need a better lawyer to prove the accusation is false."
See, how being guilty or innocent has NOTHING to do with due process?
I'll make sure, I'll pay only 50% of my bill since 5% of users are using up my "internet". If the cable company demands 100% of the bill, then I surely can reply; "You are using too much of my money. Oh and when I disown your bill, you have to pickup your cable modem off of my property."
I don't see problem with copyright protection or fair use. I see problem with punishment due to copyright violation. In retrospect, copyright law is heading toward colonial era when witchcraft and runaway slave is an offense punishable enough to be burned at the stake.
"Consequently, a lot of what they put down is open to interpretation."
common law is anything but "open to interpretation".
and rocket fueled jet pack.
"The Big Switch: Rewiring the World, From Edison to Google"... funny how Google runs their own Solar Power.
Detention is assigned in our schools after appropriate warnings are given, if students continue to engage in non-academic activities or fail to follow a teacher's directive during class time discipline can and will be assigned.
Enough said. Move along... Nothing to see here.