Exactly. All of these NeoCons are more "down" than "right", and most Dems these days are leaning "down" too, though they are still more true to their liberal roots than Reps are to their conservative.
And what is this NeoCon/"down" position called? Authoritarian.
This is why people are so confused by Ron Paul and asking if he's running in the right party. He may lean Libertarian ("up"), but he's more Republican than any of those other bozos.
There are lights around here where, if you are travelling at about the speed limit it is perfectly possible to get caught in the no-win situation I described. And I seriously doubt they will extend the yellow length (though that (and extending the all-red length) is what SHOULD be done) for the same reason that they love those red light cameras - $$$. Gotta generate that revenue or else we'll NEVER be able to make that budget work!!32!!eleventy1!.
If you hit the brakes to try and stop, and fail, then you've failed to correctly predict your car's braking distance - another basic skill of driving. You should have kept going
What if by continuing to go, you would have run the red light? Should you still keep going? Or should you attempt to stop and be slightly past the line?
I did not read all 50 states, but for instance my state, Tennessee, does not specify searching personal property (the goods you just bought), but instead refers to detaining me. That leads me to believe that they have no right to search my belongings (disclaimer: IANAL). And even the detaining requires s "probable cause" which includes:
(1) Personal observation, including observation via closed circuit television or other visual device; (2) Report of such personal observation from another merchant; (3) Activation of an electronic or other type of mechanical device designed to detect theft; or (4) Personal observation of dressing rooms, including observation via closed circuit television, two-way mirrors, or other visual devices shall be limited to observation by a person of the same sex as the person being observed. No such observation shall be lawful unless notices are posted in such dressing rooms that such monitoring may occur.
In other words, unless they watched me from the time I touched the merchandise until the time I exit the store, they have no probable cause more likely than not.
bitch about cashiers checking who ask for photo ID when they take your credit card. Every merchant account contract I've signed or read explicitly prohibits this. You aren't even supposed to match signatures according to the contract.
(See PDF pages 33 and 34 (those are material pages 28 and 29).)
Two things: 1)The store MAY ask for ID, but they can NOT decline the sale if the customer refuses. 2)You ARE supposed to match the receipt signature with the card signature.
Also, the one one time that you SHOULD ask for ID is when the card is not signed (blank or simply has written "see id"). In that case you are supposed to have the customer sign the card in full view and compare that signature with the signature on their ID. You should NOT accept the card until it is signed. Also, if permissible by law in your state, you should write the ID's serial number and expiration date on the sales receipt prior to finalising the transaction.
it doesn't change the fact that banning smoking in private establishments is bullshit
As a non-smoker, I for one appreciate (greatly) any establishment that bans smoking, especially restaurants. I don't particularly want my $20 steak tasting like cigarettes, thank you very much.
I've never understood that whole "vote thrown away" mentality, becuase - by extension of its own logic - even voting for the "major party" that LOST is a vote thrown away or wasted.
But see, the thing is, with legal stuff, it isn't about what the INTENT is, it is about what the letter of the law says. So if a law says "no copyrighted material" then it means none, period.
Even leechers in cafes can actually help business. Oft times if a place looks popular, it becomes popular. So all of the people sitting around not spending a cent give the shop an image of popularity which draws in other new customers.
I saw someone else mentioned that they would go with a local reseller. While that's ok, I say go a step further and support a local builder who will build it from the metal up. Unless you're going for the absolute bottom-of-the-line, then the local guys usuly can get close to or even beat The Big Guys' prices. And, in my book, the local's reliability and support can't even be touched by Dell et all. Unless you LIKE speaking to call center drone #9487 from the Philippines who isn't even ALLOWED to deviate from their script and whose solution to everything is to wipe and reinstall windows. Or unless you LIKE your computers to explode.
Usually when people say something is in "legally murky territory" or other such "grey area" phrases, it simply means that it IS illegal, but they want desperately to rationalize it and make it seem, at least, "somewhat ok".
Cases in point: 1) Fan-subbed anime. 2) The mythical "24 hour rule" on ROMs.
Bingo! You've got it exactly. Sadly, most companies seem more interested in the last group - the shareholders - than either of the others. Even worse, if I understand the legalities right, they HAVE to be most interested in them.
I'm with packet8 and my only complaint is that I cannot manage voicemail online. Oh, and their site sucks. Maybe worth mentioning (I don't know how Vonage, etc do it): fees (of the federal variety) are not included in the price. They add about an extra $4 or so to my bill FWIW.
I absolutely agree. I have been hoping and preying that FF13 would hit the 360, as that was the only game left on the PS3 making me crave one. If it truly does come to 360 my investment will be decided. Otherwise, I may only have a Wii until late in this generation when console prices are finally bottoming out.
It's economically infeasible to monitor clips, keep track of which ones have been C&D'd already, and then file suit for every infringement that comes back to them per section 512.
What's so hard about it? All it would take is a five column spreadsheet:
Content Name, Infringing URL, Date of DMCA Notice, Date of 512, Suit filed?(y/n).
Perhaps they could get fancy and add a column for the "infringer's" name. Having created this, to finding info is only a CTRL-F away. This is exactly the sort of thing that computers make very, very EASY to keep track of.
I would be interested in seeing more of that forum design you have going on there, if you don't mind sharing. It looks very interesting. (Though, to be honest, I'm not completely sold. I would have a big concern that it would space content too much and end up making the page a chore to read. All the more reason I'd like to see more if it! I'd love to be wrong.)
If you have a customer that cancels their account with you, take that as being an opt-out! If they cancel and then a month or so later receive an email from you, they will more likely than not just mark it as spam (with the other couple messages that got through their filters) rather than bother with opening your large, image-filled email just to click a link to go to your slow website to politely stop receiving your email.
1) While I see your point about interpretation of the words, I think a clear enough legal definition COULD be reached. Of course this probably presumes that it is a group of reasonable people reaching that decision which is, very likely, an unreasonable assumption.:)
2) The best way I see to enforce it would be for ICANN* to write in rules for use of the COM, etc TLD specifically stating that erotic content is to be placed on the XXX domain. Repercussions for breaking said rules could come in the form of fees against either the webhost or the registrar and/or fees against the domain holder and/or revocation of the domain name. The first would provide registrars/hosts incentive to react to finding someone breaking the terms without placing an inordinately large burden on any one group for policing an entire TLD.
*unless I need to take another look at who would be in charge of the XXX TLD. If so, then my whole plan falls to pieces.;)
As long as it is tasteful, artful, or technical in nature and not erotic, it's ok to be on a.COM TLD; otherwise, it is required to be on a.XXX TLD.
Obviously (or so I would hope) when most people refer to pornography, they are referring to content that is erotic. IMHO, it is completely possible to have nude or sexual artwork that is not erotic and should not be relegated to a category such as "porn".
If you are confused as to the definitions of "tasteful", "artful", "technical", and/or "erotic", please refer to a dictionary.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. All of these NeoCons are more "down" than "right", and most Dems these days are leaning "down" too, though they are still more true to their liberal roots than Reps are to their conservative.
And what is this NeoCon/"down" position called? Authoritarian.
This is why people are so confused by Ron Paul and asking if he's running in the right party. He may lean Libertarian ("up"), but he's more Republican than any of those other bozos.
I actually rent *MORE* movies with redbox than I ever did before (with either Netflix or Blockbuster).
Well then maybe you should use a REAL dictionary:
Jock:
2. [n] a person trained to compete in sports
Athlete:
[n] a person trained to compete in sports
It's shocking, obviously (I thought), because that is the proper public posturing.
From the above link: Now tell me again, WHICH ones exactly are the "top three" "major candidates"?
There are lights around here where, if you are travelling at about the speed limit it is perfectly possible to get caught in the no-win situation I described. And I seriously doubt they will extend the yellow length (though that (and extending the all-red length) is what SHOULD be done) for the same reason that they love those red light cameras - $$$. Gotta generate that revenue or else we'll NEVER be able to make that budget work!!32!!eleventy1!.
What if by continuing to go, you would have run the red light? Should you still keep going? Or should you attempt to stop and be slightly past the line?
Curse my slow typing! ;)
http://preventshoplifting.com/shoplifting_law_by_
I did not read all 50 states, but for instance my state, Tennessee, does not specify searching personal property (the goods you just bought), but instead refers to detaining me. That leads me to believe that they have no right to search my belongings (disclaimer: IANAL). And even the detaining requires s "probable cause" which includes:
(1) Personal observation, including observation via closed circuit television or other visual device;
(2) Report of such personal observation from another merchant;
(3) Activation of an electronic or other type of mechanical device designed to detect theft; or
(4) Personal observation of dressing rooms, including observation via closed circuit television, two-way mirrors, or other visual devices shall be limited to observation by a person of the same sex as the person being observed. No such observation shall be lawful unless notices are posted in such dressing rooms that such monitoring may occur.
In other words, unless they watched me from the time I touched the merchandise until the time I exit the store, they have no probable cause more likely than not.
http://usa.visa.com/download/merchants/rules_for_
(See PDF pages 33 and 34 (those are material pages 28 and 29).)
Two things:
1)The store MAY ask for ID, but they can NOT decline the sale if the customer refuses.
2)You ARE supposed to match the receipt signature with the card signature.
Also, the one one time that you SHOULD ask for ID is when the card is not signed (blank or simply has written "see id"). In that case you are supposed to have the customer sign the card in full view and compare that signature with the signature on their ID. You should NOT accept the card until it is signed. Also, if permissible by law in your state, you should write the ID's serial number and expiration date on the sales receipt prior to finalising the transaction.
Hope I've been able to shed some light.
As a non-smoker, I for one appreciate (greatly) any establishment that bans smoking, especially restaurants. I don't particularly want my $20 steak tasting like cigarettes, thank you very much.
I've never understood that whole "vote thrown away" mentality, becuase - by extension of its own logic - even voting for the "major party" that LOST is a vote thrown away or wasted.
But see, the thing is, with legal stuff, it isn't about what the INTENT is, it is about what the letter of the law says. So if a law says "no copyrighted material" then it means none, period.
They're making a comeback. They're usually called "LAN Centers" or "Gaming Centers" or perhaps throw in a "Cafe" somewhere.
http://www.igames.org/FindCenter.asp
Even leechers in cafes can actually help business. Oft times if a place looks popular, it becomes popular. So all of the people sitting around not spending a cent give the shop an image of popularity which draws in other new customers.
I saw someone else mentioned that they would go with a local reseller. While that's ok, I say go a step further and support a local builder who will build it from the metal up. Unless you're going for the absolute bottom-of-the-line, then the local guys usuly can get close to or even beat The Big Guys' prices. And, in my book, the local's reliability and support can't even be touched by Dell et all. Unless you LIKE speaking to call center drone #9487 from the Philippines who isn't even ALLOWED to deviate from their script and whose solution to everything is to wipe and reinstall windows. Or unless you LIKE your computers to explode.
Usually when people say something is in "legally murky territory" or other such "grey area" phrases, it simply means that it IS illegal, but they want desperately to rationalize it and make it seem, at least, "somewhat ok".
Cases in point:
1) Fan-subbed anime.
2) The mythical "24 hour rule" on ROMs.
Bingo! You've got it exactly. Sadly, most companies seem more interested in the last group - the shareholders - than either of the others. Even worse, if I understand the legalities right, they HAVE to be most interested in them.
Route - [v] divert in a specified direction;
SkyPE... "Sky Pocket Edition"?
I'm with packet8 and my only complaint is that I cannot manage voicemail online. Oh, and their site sucks. Maybe worth mentioning (I don't know how Vonage, etc do it): fees (of the federal variety) are not included in the price. They add about an extra $4 or so to my bill FWIW.
I absolutely agree. I have been hoping and preying that FF13 would hit the 360, as that was the only game left on the PS3 making me crave one. If it truly does come to 360 my investment will be decided. Otherwise, I may only have a Wii until late in this generation when console prices are finally bottoming out.
It's economically infeasible to monitor clips, keep track of which ones have been C&D'd already, and then file suit for every infringement that comes back to them per section 512.
What's so hard about it? All it would take is a five column spreadsheet:
Content Name, Infringing URL, Date of DMCA Notice, Date of 512, Suit filed?(y/n).
Perhaps they could get fancy and add a column for the "infringer's" name. Having created this, to finding info is only a CTRL-F away. This is exactly the sort of thing that computers make very, very EASY to keep track of.
I would be interested in seeing more of that forum design you have going on there, if you don't mind sharing. It looks very interesting. (Though, to be honest, I'm not completely sold. I would have a big concern that it would space content too much and end up making the page a chore to read. All the more reason I'd like to see more if it! I'd love to be wrong.)
There's a major one missing:
If you have a customer that cancels their account with you, take that as being an opt-out! If they cancel and then a month or so later receive an email from you, they will more likely than not just mark it as spam (with the other couple messages that got through their filters) rather than bother with opening your large, image-filled email just to click a link to go to your slow website to politely stop receiving your email.
1) While I see your point about interpretation of the words, I think a clear enough legal definition COULD be reached. Of course this probably presumes that it is a group of reasonable people reaching that decision which is, very likely, an unreasonable assumption. :)
;)
2) The best way I see to enforce it would be for ICANN* to write in rules for use of the COM, etc TLD specifically stating that erotic content is to be placed on the XXX domain. Repercussions for breaking said rules could come in the form of fees against either the webhost or the registrar and/or fees against the domain holder and/or revocation of the domain name. The first would provide registrars/hosts incentive to react to finding someone breaking the terms without placing an inordinately large burden on any one group for policing an entire TLD.
*unless I need to take another look at who would be in charge of the XXX TLD. If so, then my whole plan falls to pieces.
That's a crazy definition that they have.
.COM TLD; otherwise, it is required to be on a .XXX TLD.
I propose the following:
As long as it is tasteful, artful, or technical in nature and not erotic, it's ok to be on a
Obviously (or so I would hope) when most people refer to pornography, they are referring to content that is erotic. IMHO, it is completely possible to have nude or sexual artwork that is not erotic and should not be relegated to a category such as "porn".
If you are confused as to the definitions of "tasteful", "artful", "technical", and/or "erotic", please refer to a dictionary.