Somewhere in the airlines rules there must be some rule stating that the passengers' lives are to be guarded carefully.
If you refuse to go thru the extra security check, you are a potential threat to the other passengers (who knows if you have a gun hidden somewhere?). But you DO have a choice: Either go to the extra security check, or go elsewhere.
Now perhaps the issue is not about the extra security check, but about humilliation / economical losses due to this extra security check (why would i have to be humilliated / lose additional money if i paid for the service anyway?) - case in which you could sue the airline.
I say humilliation because of the recent trend of "see-thru-clothes" devices. I'm sure that if people are given the choice between walking through the devices or be thoroughly examined, people wouldn't mind about being seen naked with an x-ray machine. It is their choice.
So, if the passengers are given a choice, there shouldn't be any fuzz about anything, don't you think?
Whenever someone starts mincing words ("copyright infringement" vs "stealing") it's in a (feeble) attempt to justify their sins. File sharing is morally wrong: you know that.
I think that Google is leaving the door ajar for political dissenters this way. Google will say HOW and WHERE they're censored, in other words: "I didn't censor OTHER ways of communication, wink wink, nudge nudge".
Double speech and steganography cannot be censored by Google, so the dissenters will have the option to communicate thru this. After all, why should google have to censor "Our trip to the lake" photo album?:)
If your getting something for nothing that you are supposed to pay for, then it is called stealing.
Wrong! Stealing = Taking the property of someone without permission (Destruction of others' property is taken into account, too). The overinflated prices the RIAA sets on music do NOT make that money their property. Besides their prices are on the labelled, stamped, colored, decorated, copy-protected, and maybe even autographed CD's - but not on the music itself. And even that is nothing compared to the "additional costs" that are nothing but price fixing.
So what this guy stole are actually one or two dollars, who rightfully belong to the music groups. Why then do the courts make him pay so much to the recording labels? This doesn't make sense at all.
I got this game because it was produced by the creators of "Another World". But it turned out to be much better. The visuals, the story, and the gameplay were all great, but what I liked the most was the music.
A friend of mine is an amateur street racer. He likes racing movies, racing games, racing comics, etc.
However, the races he participates in are done carefully, at specific hours at night, and the friends of the competitors block the streets to prevent innocent drivers from getting hurt in those races.
I wonder if Need for Speed has accidents like this one happen in the game, or the requirement that you'll need to organize your team to block the streets so you won't lose the race, get your car trashed, die or kill someone and go to jail because of an unexpected car.
You know, I'd really like games like this to have pictures of the guys going to jail because of car crashes, or a car wreck shown (just as cigarrette warnings), and the police taking the corpses to the morgue. A banner would be superimposed on the screenshots, saying: "Real people get KILLED in street races. Life is NOT a game."
So basically, it doesn't propogate worms, it doesn't propogate viruses. It doesn't hurt everyone and it probably will help sell at least a few more copies.
Does that mean that Windows antispyware does NOT protect vs. worms or viruses?:(
I think Mr. Nash didn't understand the point i was trying to make.
An infected illegal copy of windows can infect LEGAL copies, and spread spyware, malware, etc. Very few people I know, are aware of the existance of Windows Antispyware. Heck, most people are not even aware of antispyware at all.
In other words, what Mr. Nash is saying is: If you come to us and are registered, we can protect you. But you better do it before someone with an unregistered copy of windows infects your machine.
I wouldn't give a cent if unregistered machines were the ONLY ones affected. But they also affect registered machines, and don't stop there: They affect DNS servers, e-mail servers, and web servers - whether they're using registered copies of windows or not. Botnets are NOT A MYTH. They are a reality, and I'm sick tired of getting SPAM spread by those.
Last week one of our webservers (it was a shared host, NOT owned by us) began spreading javascript viruses which exploited the Windows() vulnerability. Have you considered that this infection could have come from an unregistered machine? If that machine had automatically downloaded (yes, for free) Windows Antispyware, we wouldn't have to worry about viruses spreading to the office's network.
My point was being proactive, but apparently Microsoft is more interested in getting money than in providing a good product in the first place.
my dad used to play "summer games" on the Commodore64 with us. They were fun:)
We also had a bunch of different and simple games, one was about a clown that had to hold balloons, if you dropped a balloon you lost. The game was hilarious.
See, it all depends. Some games are designed to be played in team (2 or more players). Others are designed to be played by only one person. I really miss the "you lose your life, it's the next player's turn" feature on today's games.
Evolution / natural selection is as simple as this. "What can be, will be." Yes, that's it. This is the principle behind life. Why? If an organism / combination of proteins / grey goo / etc. can multiply, it will. If two different entities need one same resource to multiply, the stronger will get it. Why? If it can get it before the other, it will.
Applying this to the origin of life, a combination of aminoacids which can self-replicate will flourish in comparison of those that don't. In those replications there are flaws, changes or mutations. Those that can multiply, will.
Proteins are nothing but a composition of aminoacids. Aminoacids can be produced "spontaneously" in the right conditions. I'm sure that at some point, enough different aminoacids were present so that a simple chemical reaction (thunder, UV light) would bond them together.
Why is it difficult to believe in the primordial soup? Let's think about it. According to Ramsey's Theorem in an infinite discrete space, any specific combination of words can be found (this is also known as the infinite monkeys with typewriters writing a work of Shakespeare). So, what happens if we get enough proteins all mixed together, waiting for yet another catalyst?
(I can testify something about the Ramsey's theorem. I know a guy who based a computer research paper on it for pattern recognition. And the thing worked.)
200 million years could be enough time for simple microorganisms to form. The earch is 4.5 billion years old. Think about it.
Have you guys noticed how the book of Genesis starts with... "and the Spirit of God floated above the waters"? I was taught in school that the first lifeforms on earth originated on the surface of the sea.
Maybe the problem with creationists is not that they don't believe in evolution, but that they find it to be physically impossible. Lack of faith perhaps? I wonder, why is it so easy for them to believe that God made Adam and Eve out of a pile of mud, and yet so difficult that God let the aminoacids combine and form simple organisms that would later combine and evolve?
Creationists/ID believers try to use science to disprove evolution, like "aminoacids can be left and right handed, but some of those are poisonous". Well, these areguments can be easily rebated. I googled 5 minutes ago and found David C. Wise's page with a pascal program called "MONKEY", that demonstrates how effective random generation can be.
What's stopping the "cool" kids (who are already active) from preventing the obese kids (mostly uncool due to aforementioned obesity) from playing?
In other words, will the obese be ASHAMED of playing? i.e. if you have to go DDR, it's because YOU'RE FAT! (Insert nelson quote here)
I think that what we'd need is to get more physical education classes and give those kids a healthy balanced diet.
Hey yeah, why not having a "nutriology 101" course at the first semester?:) That'd dispel all those best-seller theorists getting rich with people's fatness, and go straight to the basics.
Microsoft wasn't acting to comply with local laws. They wanted to PLEASE the chinese government by doing something they weren't FORCED to do. They deleted a webpage OUTSIDE China, and they did it by their own initiative.
I'd have kinda agreed if the only thing Microsoft did was blocking access to the chinese blog from China. But they DELETED the blog. They had ABSOLUTELY NO OBLIGATION, heck, not even the RIGHT to do that.
It was Kirby Dick's documentary entitled "This Film is not yet rated". The thing is that he had EXPLICITELY asked them NOT to make copies of the movie.
Slashdot Mirror
This guy hit the nail in the head.
Somewhere in the airlines rules there must be some rule stating that the passengers' lives are to be guarded carefully.
If you refuse to go thru the extra security check, you are a potential threat to the other passengers (who knows if you have a gun hidden somewhere?). But you DO have a choice: Either go to the extra security check, or go elsewhere.
Now perhaps the issue is not about the extra security check, but about humilliation / economical losses due to this extra security check (why would i have to be humilliated / lose additional money if i paid for the service anyway?) - case in which you could sue the airline.
I say humilliation because of the recent trend of "see-thru-clothes" devices. I'm sure that if people are given the choice between walking through the devices or be thoroughly examined, people wouldn't mind about being seen naked with an x-ray machine. It is their choice.
So, if the passengers are given a choice, there shouldn't be any fuzz about anything, don't you think?
Whenever someone starts mincing words ("copyright infringement" vs "stealing") it's in a (feeble) attempt to justify their sins. File sharing is morally wrong: you know that.
No, I believe it is morally right, and I think you're only supporting the status quo with your statement.
I think that Google is leaving the door ajar for political dissenters this way. Google will say HOW and WHERE they're censored, in other words: "I didn't censor OTHER ways of communication, wink wink, nudge nudge".
:)
Double speech and steganography cannot be censored by Google, so the dissenters will have the option to communicate thru this. After all, why should google have to censor "Our trip to the lake" photo album?
If your getting something for nothing that you are supposed to pay for, then it is called stealing.
Wrong! Stealing = Taking the property of someone without permission (Destruction of others' property is taken into account, too). The overinflated prices the RIAA sets on music do NOT make that money their property. Besides their prices are on the labelled, stamped, colored, decorated, copy-protected, and maybe even autographed CD's - but not on the music itself. And even that is nothing compared to the "additional costs" that are nothing but price fixing.
So what this guy stole are actually one or two dollars, who rightfully belong to the music groups. Why then do the courts make him pay so much to the recording labels? This doesn't make sense at all.
Tell me, who's the one really stealing?
Copyright infringement is NOT STEALING!!!!
Grrr...
Well, maybe K'Breel will think humans can now live in space :P
:(
BTW, what happened to your Mars "Late news" articles? I missed today's
I wonder what K'breel, speaker for the Council of Elders, thinks about this. It'd be interesting to know :)
http://membres.lycos.fr/cyxdown/reminiscence/
:( bummer.
The only bad thing i have with this is that i can't roll as easily as i used to. It's as if the down key would get stuck
I got this game because it was produced by the creators of "Another World". But it turned out to be much better. The visuals, the story, and the gameplay were all great, but what I liked the most was the music.
How many of you guys have played it?
I still like the idea of burying it under the white house..
:-S
No way! Can you imagine what will happen if we get a radioactivity-fed BushZilla?
A friend of mine is an amateur street racer. He likes racing movies, racing games, racing comics, etc.
However, the races he participates in are done carefully, at specific hours at night, and the friends of the competitors block the streets to prevent innocent drivers from getting hurt in those races.
I wonder if Need for Speed has accidents like this one happen in the game, or the requirement that you'll need to organize your team to block the streets so you won't lose the race, get your car trashed, die or kill someone and go to jail because of an unexpected car.
You know, I'd really like games like this to have pictures of the guys going to jail because of car crashes, or a car wreck shown (just as cigarrette warnings), and the police taking the corpses to the morgue. A banner would be superimposed on the screenshots, saying: "Real people get KILLED in street races. Life is NOT a game."
So basically, it doesn't propogate worms, it doesn't propogate viruses. It doesn't hurt everyone and it probably will help sell at least a few more copies.
:(
Does that mean that Windows antispyware does NOT protect vs. worms or viruses?
I think Mr. Nash didn't understand the point i was trying to make.
An infected illegal copy of windows can infect LEGAL copies, and spread spyware, malware, etc. Very few people I know, are aware of the existance of Windows Antispyware. Heck, most people are not even aware of antispyware at all.
In other words, what Mr. Nash is saying is: If you come to us and are registered, we can protect you. But you better do it before someone with an unregistered copy of windows infects your machine.
I wouldn't give a cent if unregistered machines were the ONLY ones affected. But they also affect registered machines, and don't stop there: They affect DNS servers, e-mail servers, and web servers - whether they're using registered copies of windows or not. Botnets are NOT A MYTH. They are a reality, and I'm sick tired of getting SPAM spread by those.
Last week one of our webservers (it was a shared host, NOT owned by us) began spreading javascript viruses which exploited the Windows() vulnerability. Have you considered that this infection could have come from an unregistered machine? If that machine had automatically downloaded (yes, for free) Windows Antispyware, we wouldn't have to worry about viruses spreading to the office's network.
My point was being proactive, but apparently Microsoft is more interested in getting money than in providing a good product in the first place.
my dad used to play "summer games" on the Commodore64 with us. They were fun :)
We also had a bunch of different and simple games, one was about a clown that had to hold balloons, if you dropped a balloon you lost. The game was hilarious.
See, it all depends. Some games are designed to be played in team (2 or more players). Others are designed to be played by only one person. I really miss the "you lose your life, it's the next player's turn" feature on today's games.
Evolution / natural selection is as simple as this. "What can be, will be." Yes, that's it. This is the principle behind life. Why? If an organism / combination of proteins / grey goo / etc. can multiply, it will. If two different entities need one same resource to multiply, the stronger will get it. Why? If it can get it before the other, it will.
/ID believers try to use science to disprove evolution, like "aminoacids can be left and right handed, but some of those are poisonous". Well, these areguments can be easily rebated. I googled 5 minutes ago and found David C. Wise's page with a pascal program called "MONKEY", that demonstrates how effective random generation can be.
Applying this to the origin of life, a combination of aminoacids which can self-replicate will flourish in comparison of those that don't. In those replications there are flaws, changes or mutations. Those that can multiply, will.
Proteins are nothing but a composition of aminoacids. Aminoacids can be produced "spontaneously" in the right conditions. I'm sure that at some point, enough different aminoacids were present so that a simple chemical reaction
(thunder, UV light) would bond them together.
Why is it difficult to believe in the primordial soup? Let's think about it. According to Ramsey's Theorem in an infinite discrete space, any specific combination of words can be found (this is also known as the infinite monkeys with typewriters writing a work of Shakespeare). So, what happens if we get enough proteins all mixed together, waiting for yet another catalyst?
(I can testify something about the Ramsey's theorem. I know a guy who based a computer research paper on it for pattern recognition. And the thing worked.)
200 million years could be enough time for simple microorganisms to form. The earch is 4.5 billion years old. Think about it.
Have you guys noticed how the book of Genesis starts with... "and the Spirit of God floated above the waters"? I was taught in school that the first lifeforms on earth originated on the surface of the sea.
Maybe the problem with creationists is not that they don't believe in evolution, but that they find it to be physically impossible. Lack of faith perhaps? I wonder, why is it so easy for them to believe that God made Adam and Eve out of a pile of mud, and yet so difficult that God let the aminoacids combine and form simple organisms that would later combine and evolve?
Creationists
Oops, sorry. Where's the darn edit button? Oh, right.
This way you can explicitly put there alcoholic beverages, cigarrettes, pornography and violent videogames in the same category.
What's stopping the "cool" kids (who are already active) from preventing the obese kids (mostly uncool due to aforementioned obesity) from playing?
:) That'd dispel all those best-seller theorists getting rich with people's fatness, and go straight to the basics.
In other words, will the obese be ASHAMED of playing? i.e. if you have to go DDR, it's because YOU'RE FAT! (Insert nelson quote here)
I think that what we'd need is to get more physical education classes and give those kids a healthy balanced diet.
Hey yeah, why not having a "nutriology 101" course at the first semester?
IBM is open sourcing all its abandoned garage projects.
Is it good? Is it bad? Who knows.
The question is, who would try to clone such an impossible to understand and bad developed SO [sic]???
These guys would.
But I really don't have a clue of WhoTF Jack Wagner is, so I can't tell whether you're sarcastic or not :-/
This is the *PERFECT* use for a technology like this! :)
Microsoft wasn't acting to comply with local laws. They wanted to PLEASE the chinese government by doing something they weren't FORCED to do. They deleted a webpage OUTSIDE China, and they did it by their own initiative.
I'd have kinda agreed if the only thing Microsoft did was blocking access to the chinese blog from China. But they DELETED the blog. They had ABSOLUTELY NO OBLIGATION, heck, not even the RIGHT to do that.
"SONY Acquires SOCOM Developer". I had to click TFA to realize that SCEA = SONY.
It was Kirby Dick's documentary entitled "This Film is not yet rated". The thing is that he had EXPLICITELY asked them NOT to make copies of the movie.