How will the software on the neural chip be licensed? If under GPL, will that make other parts of my brain "derivative works", because they are going to be, you know, quitely literally "linked" together?
What the Chinese government did in the past or what they may do in the future is irrelvant to the purpose of the story.
Uh, ever heard of "credit history"? Or some dude complaining "gotta pay 200 bucks more for the car insurance this year because of all the 78 speeding tickets from last year!"
Employers have the right to fire people on spot for any reason at all. The reason why I am agaisnt suing is because its unfair that blue collar workers such as myself have no right at all and get paid 1/5th what the upper middle class white collar workers do which do sue for wrongfull termination. We have no rights at all and have to sign contracts making us employed at will.
I'm confused by your reasoning there. It seems to me that, if you don't have any right to sue while some others do, you should strive for your right to sue, rather than asking others not to.
Not John W. Rogers Jr. The CEO of Ariel Capital Management LLC doesn't use the Internet at work or at home. The 47-year-old Princeton University grad thinks the Net is largely a waste of time. Assistants print out e-mails for him and researchers give him paper copies of Wall Street analysts reports from the Web.
Yeah, I would sneer Internet usage to death too if I had "assistants and researchers" to do that for me - and note the plurals!
First Amendment - You have the right to speech, press, religion, and assembly. The restrictions are that you do not have those rights while on base, in uniform, or on duty.
Good, so tell me, if a marine is viewing web sites on a military computer, how much chance would it be that he is on base, in uniform, or on duty?
China believes certain religious, political, and economic philosophies constitute a grave danger to their society. And actually, they have that correct, in that at least on the political and economic front, those banned ideas will eventually destroy their existing government.
There goes down the toilet your whole argument - ideas destroying "their society" are not necessarily those that would destroy "their existing government". What's interesting is, it's usually a government that's afraid of being overthrown would attempt to sneak in and substitute the two words and make its citizens believe that "the government is the society."
You should tell that to the ID people, because that's exactly the reasoning _they_ are following: science can't explain how bees fly => there must have been a designer.
The myth here is that science never ever said there _couldn't have been_ an Intelligent Designer. All science is saying is, "look, we can explain these things without resorting to a designer - whether there has been one or not, we dont _need_ him."
While your recount of the security procedure at the National Archives is informative and interesting, there are a few differences between the National Archives and an average company:
1. The NA can afford to spend a lot on the security, while a company has to watch the bottom line.
2. It's acceptable for the NA to annoy or even "piss off" some visitors with an overly stringent security proecess, whereas a company usually wouldn't want to offend guests or employees.
3. A company needs to balance between productivity and security.
You used the word "they" as if they are all on one side, so I'm not sure you understand that, in any trial, it's part of the "they" that compete against the rest of the "they" in leading these "sheeple". And do you realize that that is the whole point of having an impartial jury to begin with?
If they bought it, they can choose to do with it what they wish. Which lends credence to the theory that any published study of Microsoft products that is paid for by Microsoft (substitute any organization paying for reviews/studies of its own products really) is by its very nature biased and untrustworthy.
Wait, that's a little bit of jumping to the conclusion there. Let's assume MS has buried all the studies against them and published those in favor. That only leads to the conclusion that the collective image presented by these published studies is very biased and untrustworthy, but not that any individual of them, as implied by the way you phrased it above, is biased and untrustworthy.
Just for the record, my message wasn't intended to troll on any political figure. It would be OT and Flamebait. It means exactly what it states - 'steal' does not necessarily only apply to physical articles.
a very careful contrivance on the part of these industries to demonize those that do it.
You see, that's the fundamental difference between you/Parent and me. I don't think the choice of words here actually demonizes the behavior. In other words, I don't think "infringing" is necessarily lesser of a moral issue than "stealing". For example, which is worse? a hungry guy who stole a loaf of bread, or somebody making 3 times the average salary who still plays pirated games? No matter how you want to twist the words, or pull the "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" excuse, the bottom line here is plain and simple - and same in both cases - you didn't pay for what you get.
OK, I guess the US President Election is also something tangible that people can sneak into where it's stored at night and take it away in their pocket, otherwise why do I keep hearing people saying "that SoB stole the election!"
I mean, don't you people have better ways to defend stealing - ok, infringing - than playing word games?
Slashdot Mirror
How will the software on the neural chip be licensed? If under GPL, will that make other parts of my brain "derivative works", because they are going to be, you know, quitely literally "linked" together?
We want to see flying saucers!
Somehow I feel better seeing that my stuff is physically etched into a piece of paper... I guess I am just old... 8-)
I'd be interested to know what kind of container they used to hold the gas.
Good, so tell me, if a marine is viewing web sites on a military computer, how much chance would it be that he is on base, in uniform, or on duty?
The myth here is that science never ever said there _couldn't have been_ an Intelligent Designer. All science is saying is, "look, we can explain these things without resorting to a designer - whether there has been one or not, we dont _need_ him."
Big deal, it's not like my browser is part of the operating system. /wink
And he says lol yeah its me, how do I know it is my dog?
1. The NA can afford to spend a lot on the security, while a company has to watch the bottom line.
2. It's acceptable for the NA to annoy or even "piss off" some visitors with an overly stringent security proecess, whereas a company usually wouldn't want to offend guests or employees.
3. A company needs to balance between productivity and security.
In China, CCTV stands for China Central TeleVision.
Blame Canada! Blame Canada!
You used the word "they" as if they are all on one side, so I'm not sure you understand that, in any trial, it's part of the "they" that compete against the rest of the "they" in leading these "sheeple". And do you realize that that is the whole point of having an impartial jury to begin with?
Sorry I would write more were it not for my Carpal Tunnel Syndrom...
Just for the record, my message wasn't intended to troll on any political figure. It would be OT and Flamebait. It means exactly what it states - 'steal' does not necessarily only apply to physical articles.
I mean, don't you people have better ways to defend stealing - ok, infringing - than playing word games?