I agree entirely, I wasn't going to touch on the fact that spying on your kids will destroy their trust in you. A lot of parents (particularly those that would install an app like this) don't care whether their kids trust them.
If you want to spy on your kids then install an app that doesn't try to hide itself, but does tell you if it's uninstalled. The same goes for any other "legitimate" use of software like this.
Presumably, the printers will be sold at a discount which the manufacturers will make up for with the "ink", so expect the cartridge to be worth around 10x its weight in gold. The ink required to build a car will be about $1 million, if you print in black & white. </sarcasm>
I click on Google ads all the time, because sometimes the ad is actually exactly what I'm looking for. Google text ads don't get blocked. Everything else does, because there's no simple way to filter out the moving, noisy ads from the others.
I click ads, I have significant disposable income, but the advertising industry has decided they're not interested in my business. And yes, I have bought things solely because I saw a relevant ad for them on Google. I've also refused to ever buy from businesses that had particularly annoying ads. I used to be involved in this business. Advertisers will do anything to increase click-through, no matter what effect it has on page views (harder to measure the negative effect of an ad on page views). They'll take 2% CTR on 1000 hits/day instead of 1% on 10,000 hits/day easily.
Of course, in this case the effect on page views might be more noticeable, just measure the number of hits that never get past the captcha (though they won't care if it's more profitable even with fewer readers). The whole online advertising system is broken anyway. The idea of advertising is to put your brand and product in everyone's head, not to hope they'll buy a $1000 laptop on impulse.
1) The page has a video that is set to auto-play (even though you may not have come to the page for that video) 2) The video starts with an advertisement which disables the pause button
Best example of this is the page for House (the Fox show). I go there to check if I missed a show, not to see a preview. Instead it immediately plays a loud, unstoppable ad every time you go there. Thankfully there's Wikipedia.
If it's proven that the child was responsible, then obviously the financial liability rests with the parents. Since the parents didn't themselves commit the act they can't be directly sued for it. This mother (who was in this case "supervising") has a child, she is responsible for that child's actions. It's hardly the old woman's fault that the mother has a child or allowed that child to race a bike down a sidewalk. If your kid breaks my window, I don't care if they're 1 or 4 or 12, you're paying for it. I don't care if you were or weren't properly supervising them, they're your responsibility. Likewise, if it had been the mother's dog that attacked the old woman the dog would be put down and the mother held liable for medical costs. The reason the child can be sued is that it can testify and via certain legal mechanisms a child can even own property (typically held in trust).
Yes, the ruling can be made to sound odd, but it makes perfect sense.
They were captured on foreign territory. We were in that territory without the consent of said foreign government (until we replaced it). If war has to be declared first then there hasn't been an American POW since 1945. Where they are now (be it in the hands of Americans in the Middle East, on a Military Base leased from Cuba, or in the U.S.) does not alter their status. The Department of Veterans Affairs seems to believe that there were POWs in the conflicts in North Korea and Vietnam (http://www.publichealth.va.gov/vethealthinitiative/pow.asp).
Of course, if we returned them to their own country (e.g. if a Guantanamo prisoner has Iraqi citizenship) then that's entirely different, they might be considered an ordinary criminal and might even be subject to extradition by the United States. Of course, then we would have to meet the standard of proof that our society has deemed necessary in order to deprive someone of their liberty.
I suppose northern canada (away from the lakes) could, but exporting snow that would otherwise melt into the great lakes might break the Great Lakes Compact. Same reason we here in Rochester won't be shipping any water down to Arizona anytime soon.
How much do you suppose those employees pay in tax? More than they should need to, Google even pays some of them extra to cover the taxes Uncle Sam unjustly charges them on benefits for their domestic partners (those that have them). What would you like Google to cut in order to pay the amount of tax you want them to? Research? Salaries? More than 22% of my paycheck goes to the federal government (I don't work for Google), I haven't gotten a tax refund in years, and I don't have a problem with what Google is doing. They're paying exactly as much tax as the law says they should. I suppose since I'm only paying as much tax as the law says I should, you think I should pay more? How much? Would 50% do?
I don't see much use of Java on the desktop these days (aside from a few specific applications), but I certainly see it used a lot in server environments. I suppose Apple will also apply this to OS X server? So if you want an Apple server you can't run the applications you've been running up to this point? They're going to shrink their already small server share.
Also, Slashdot, I set this account to use the "classic" interface, why are you making me click buttons to see comments now?! I just want to see the page, not have to keep clicking "show more". This comment entry box is terrible too, the "Reply" button is too close to the box itself.
I'm not a Comcast Shill, I don't like a comcast area, and I can definitively say that is not how DNS SEC works. Checking against a database like that would be the worst possible security system imagined since autorun-based DRM.
Actually, they need an App Store. Let the providers set the price and the cable company provides a marketplace. Cable company can take a 30% cut. If the provider wants to raise the price they get to fight with the customers. Of course the cable company would still get a base service charge that would include the free channels (QVC, Local Access and I assume PBS) as well as the actual cable connection and maintenance. The current system sounds gasp, socialist by comparison.
... That's exactly why the BBC is better than any news network in the U.S. It was cool when they broadcast the election to the whole world, I do wish they would give the U.S. more access to their content.
I admit I know nothing of Finnish law, but in the U.S. (and I believe most other Western countries) you CAN get an actual marriage from the government. It's real and carries the exact same legal weight as a marriage. I'm not talking about a civil union, that's totally different. You can be married by a justice of the peace, it's done at city halls and the like every weekday in every city. However, when gays tried to get married they were refused marriage licenses. In some areas it was found that this had no basis in law. In others (including NY where I live) it was found that the state could refuse marriage licenses but couldn't refuse to recognize out-of-state marriages.
A civil union is not and never will be the same, they don't survive across state lines, let alone national borders (try having a civil union from New Jersey recognized in Canada, or even Massachusetts).
In my area CableCards cost about $15 more per month than the rental box. Sure, Time Warner Rochester says it's only $2, then you ask what the service is: $70. What is it for the cable box/cable bundle? $58....
Ought to be illegal for the CableCard to cost more than the box.
I assure you I am well aware of politics. The U.S. does not control Europe, certainly not Japan or Sweden. They act in their own interests, the fact that the interests of many Western countries are similar does not mean one controls the others.
Schumer is an NY senator, guess where Wall Street is? Schumer loves the media though, has them follow him wherever he goes. I guess when you're a senator in a big state the best way to get votes is just to keep yourself in the news. Not that I mind though, I'll vote for him next month and I'm sure he'll win by a landslide again. Not sure why he needs campaign contributions, I don't think he has to run ads anymore.
The networks should have started doing this a decade ago before people got DVRs. Commercials are so loud you *have* to turn down the volume, so why not just fast forward past it instead? Marketing jerks preferred to annoy customers and claim they got more attention out of it, now DVRs are killing them. So much for self-regulation. This bill is a bit late, but it will still be nice to have if it happens.
Roads are fine, why do we need electrical subsidies? I don't care if oil prices go up. Police are fine too. That's half of your list right there, get rid of them and then tell me what my taxes are. If it's still 27.27% then you need to keep cutting. If I get a $1000 raise the government will take 44.5% of it and charge my employer an additional 7.65%. The "services" I receive from the federal government (tax rate: 22.08%) are not worth what I am paying for them. Since my state pays more in federal taxes than we get back, we could cut taxes simply by banning the federal government from giving money to the states. They use that power to control state laws anyway. Sorry, New Mexico and Mississippi residents, your taxes will increase by at least your federal tax rate (so you'll be paying it twice). Sure, the federal government would still need money, but at least we would know exactly how much.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree entirely, I wasn't going to touch on the fact that spying on your kids will destroy their trust in you. A lot of parents (particularly those that would install an app like this) don't care whether their kids trust them.
If you want to spy on your kids then install an app that doesn't try to hide itself, but does tell you if it's uninstalled. The same goes for any other "legitimate" use of software like this.
Presumably, the printers will be sold at a discount which the manufacturers will make up for with the "ink", so expect the cartridge to be worth around 10x its weight in gold. The ink required to build a car will be about $1 million, if you print in black & white.
</sarcasm>
I click on Google ads all the time, because sometimes the ad is actually exactly what I'm looking for. Google text ads don't get blocked. Everything else does, because there's no simple way to filter out the moving, noisy ads from the others.
I click ads, I have significant disposable income, but the advertising industry has decided they're not interested in my business. And yes, I have bought things solely because I saw a relevant ad for them on Google. I've also refused to ever buy from businesses that had particularly annoying ads. I used to be involved in this business. Advertisers will do anything to increase click-through, no matter what effect it has on page views (harder to measure the negative effect of an ad on page views). They'll take 2% CTR on 1000 hits/day instead of 1% on 10,000 hits/day easily.
Of course, in this case the effect on page views might be more noticeable, just measure the number of hits that never get past the captcha (though they won't care if it's more profitable even with fewer readers). The whole online advertising system is broken anyway. The idea of advertising is to put your brand and product in everyone's head, not to hope they'll buy a $1000 laptop on impulse.
What I really hate is the following combination:
1) The page has a video that is set to auto-play (even though you may not have come to the page for that video)
2) The video starts with an advertisement which disables the pause button
Best example of this is the page for House (the Fox show). I go there to check if I missed a show, not to see a preview. Instead it immediately plays a loud, unstoppable ad every time you go there. Thankfully there's Wikipedia.
If it's proven that the child was responsible, then obviously the financial liability rests with the parents. Since the parents didn't themselves commit the act they can't be directly sued for it. This mother (who was in this case "supervising") has a child, she is responsible for that child's actions. It's hardly the old woman's fault that the mother has a child or allowed that child to race a bike down a sidewalk. If your kid breaks my window, I don't care if they're 1 or 4 or 12, you're paying for it. I don't care if you were or weren't properly supervising them, they're your responsibility. Likewise, if it had been the mother's dog that attacked the old woman the dog would be put down and the mother held liable for medical costs. The reason the child can be sued is that it can testify and via certain legal mechanisms a child can even own property (typically held in trust).
Yes, the ruling can be made to sound odd, but it makes perfect sense.
They were captured on foreign territory. We were in that territory without the consent of said foreign government (until we replaced it). If war has to be declared first then there hasn't been an American POW since 1945. Where they are now (be it in the hands of Americans in the Middle East, on a Military Base leased from Cuba, or in the U.S.) does not alter their status. The Department of Veterans Affairs seems to believe that there were POWs in the conflicts in North Korea and Vietnam (http://www.publichealth.va.gov/vethealthinitiative/pow.asp).
Of course, if we returned them to their own country (e.g. if a Guantanamo prisoner has Iraqi citizenship) then that's entirely different, they might be considered an ordinary criminal and might even be subject to extradition by the United States. Of course, then we would have to meet the standard of proof that our society has deemed necessary in order to deprive someone of their liberty.
Sueing isn't a word... suing is.
I suppose northern canada (away from the lakes) could, but exporting snow that would otherwise melt into the great lakes might break the Great Lakes Compact. Same reason we here in Rochester won't be shipping any water down to Arizona anytime soon.
How much do you suppose those employees pay in tax? More than they should need to, Google even pays some of them extra to cover the taxes Uncle Sam unjustly charges them on benefits for their domestic partners (those that have them). What would you like Google to cut in order to pay the amount of tax you want them to? Research? Salaries? More than 22% of my paycheck goes to the federal government (I don't work for Google), I haven't gotten a tax refund in years, and I don't have a problem with what Google is doing. They're paying exactly as much tax as the law says they should. I suppose since I'm only paying as much tax as the law says I should, you think I should pay more? How much? Would 50% do?
I don't see much use of Java on the desktop these days (aside from a few specific applications), but I certainly see it used a lot in server environments. I suppose Apple will also apply this to OS X server? So if you want an Apple server you can't run the applications you've been running up to this point? They're going to shrink their already small server share.
Also, Slashdot, I set this account to use the "classic" interface, why are you making me click buttons to see comments now?! I just want to see the page, not have to keep clicking "show more". This comment entry box is terrible too, the "Reply" button is too close to the box itself.
Bleh, sorry, that should have said "I don't live in a Comcast area".
I'm not a Comcast Shill, I don't like a comcast area, and I can definitively say that is not how DNS SEC works. Checking against a database like that would be the worst possible security system imagined since autorun-based DRM.
No one can be this stupid, GTFO troll.
Actually, they need an App Store. Let the providers set the price and the cable company provides a marketplace. Cable company can take a 30% cut. If the provider wants to raise the price they get to fight with the customers. Of course the cable company would still get a base service charge that would include the free channels (QVC, Local Access and I assume PBS) as well as the actual cable connection and maintenance. The current system sounds gasp, socialist by comparison.
... That's exactly why the BBC is better than any news network in the U.S. It was cool when they broadcast the election to the whole world, I do wish they would give the U.S. more access to their content.
I admit I know nothing of Finnish law, but in the U.S. (and I believe most other Western countries) you CAN get an actual marriage from the government. It's real and carries the exact same legal weight as a marriage. I'm not talking about a civil union, that's totally different. You can be married by a justice of the peace, it's done at city halls and the like every weekday in every city. However, when gays tried to get married they were refused marriage licenses. In some areas it was found that this had no basis in law. In others (including NY where I live) it was found that the state could refuse marriage licenses but couldn't refuse to recognize out-of-state marriages.
A civil union is not and never will be the same, they don't survive across state lines, let alone national borders (try having a civil union from New Jersey recognized in Canada, or even Massachusetts).
He owes them nothing other than what he pays in taxes.
In my area CableCards cost about $15 more per month than the rental box. Sure, Time Warner Rochester says it's only $2, then you ask what the service is: $70. What is it for the cable box/cable bundle? $58....
Ought to be illegal for the CableCard to cost more than the box.
I assure you I am well aware of politics. The U.S. does not control Europe, certainly not Japan or Sweden. They act in their own interests, the fact that the interests of many Western countries are similar does not mean one controls the others.
Did I miss something? Did the U.S. conquer Japan, Europe and the Middle East while I was sleeping?
*Looks up map of U.S. on Wikipedia*
Nope, I guess the I, K and M servers are safely controlled by NON-US organizations.
I'll agree the U.S. probably has too many of them, but aside from the military I'll assume the other orgs know what they're doing.
Stop spreading FUD.
Schumer is an NY senator, guess where Wall Street is? Schumer loves the media though, has them follow him wherever he goes. I guess when you're a senator in a big state the best way to get votes is just to keep yourself in the news. Not that I mind though, I'll vote for him next month and I'm sure he'll win by a landslide again. Not sure why he needs campaign contributions, I don't think he has to run ads anymore.
The networks should have started doing this a decade ago before people got DVRs. Commercials are so loud you *have* to turn down the volume, so why not just fast forward past it instead? Marketing jerks preferred to annoy customers and claim they got more attention out of it, now DVRs are killing them. So much for self-regulation. This bill is a bit late, but it will still be nice to have if it happens.
The price of gasoline is much higher in Europe than it is here, their society has yet to collapse.
Roads are fine, why do we need electrical subsidies? I don't care if oil prices go up. Police are fine too. That's half of your list right there, get rid of them and then tell me what my taxes are. If it's still 27.27% then you need to keep cutting. If I get a $1000 raise the government will take 44.5% of it and charge my employer an additional 7.65%. The "services" I receive from the federal government (tax rate: 22.08%) are not worth what I am paying for them. Since my state pays more in federal taxes than we get back, we could cut taxes simply by banning the federal government from giving money to the states. They use that power to control state laws anyway. Sorry, New Mexico and Mississippi residents, your taxes will increase by at least your federal tax rate (so you'll be paying it twice). Sure, the federal government would still need money, but at least we would know exactly how much.
The U.S. also taxes those who leave the country and renounce their citizenship. If you keep your citizenship, you're taxed for that too.