Perhaps a good defence would be to hand over a CD with 27 audio files saying just that (make sure you get the file size correct by padding the end with sufficient random white noise). It would be good to get some audio file of "RIAA are fucking arseholes" heard as evidence in court.
I presume, as part of discovery, the defendant could ask for a copy of the files the RIAA downloaded?
If you could demonstrate a personal loss as a result of the RIAA hosting the iddy porn, then yes, you're welcome to launch a civil suit. I don't think, however, that the average Joe-Citizen is able to launch a criminal case against anyone.
What I find interesting (from a thermodynamics viewpoint) about the melting of the polar ice cap, is that if it was atmospheric warming, and the ice was melting from the top down, you'd expect to see rivers of liquid water. Since this hasn't been reported (so I presume it isn't occuring), I can only assume that the melting is taking place from the bottom up. This means that warm ocean currents travelling underneath the sea ice must be the energy transport mechanism. Now, surely changes in ocean current flow or temperature would have to be significant to change the thermodynamic balance (obviously there are seasonal cycles). Wouldn't the ocean temperature changes and/or flow velocity changes be measureable?
No. Your suggestion seems much more indirect. You'd have the lag between consumer demand and the marketing bods listening. And unless some renegade manufacturer was going to produce and promote minimalist packaging, then the status quo would remain.
How many people do you know who contacted manufacturers to request products with less packaging, just so they could save rooom in their wheelie-bin?
The demand for gasoline is relatively inelastic. If you raise the price, demand does not fall all that much. So, raising the price often means you would make more money. It's a typical monopoly tactic to restrict the supply of something and artifically raise the price against an inelastic demand, and thus gain more revenue. (See also: Windows.)
I'm not sure where you live, but apart from the two oil crises of the 1970s, there is never a shortage of gasoline, so I can't see how you think the oil companies are restricting supply.
On the other hand, there is usually a healthy dose of competition between gas stations, with each gas station watching the competitors price boards with their eagle-eyes. In order to get attract customers to a particular gas station, prices are reduced by a miniscule amount. This starts a price ware, with progressive discounting till it hurts the profits. At this point discounts are then removed and prices rise to their pre price-war levels. It's a game to see who can last the longest with the cheaper prices, to capture the most traffic. The cycle then repeats.
I think you'll find that the sulfur reduction is aimed at reducing diesel particulate emissions. Catalyic converters are ineffective against particulate carbon (soot), which would otherwise require particulate filters (a high maintenance item). The primary effect of reducing the sulfur content is reduction of particulate formation during combustion. The other effect is reduction of lubricity, thus requiring additives to compensate.
In Australia, one of the oil majors obtained dispensation against the interim 500ppm sulfur diesel fuel standard, by using an alternative additive.
You're assuming that the guy who runs out of steam is irreplaceable. The fact that the article remains open after the edit war defeat, means that someone else can step in and continue the fight. Just like the War on TourismTM
Your argument is somewhat simplistic. Your recommendation to purchase another (presumably second-hand) vehicle for the same value of the repair cost + salvage value, neglects a number of subtlties. Firstly, the unknowns of the replacement vehicle (compared with the known history of your current vehicle). Secondly, you ignore the premium you will probably pay if you purchase through a used car dealer (or the aggro of locating a private sale). Thirdly, you are ignorning the costs associated with disposal of your existing vehicle (particularly if it is a non-runner). Fourthly, you are neglecting the costs associated with transfer of title for your replacement vehicle (which, where I come from, is not insignificant).
When the cost of repairs excede the value of the car, sure.
This is false economy. You shouldn't compare the repair costs with the value of the car you have. Rather, compare the repair costs (and expected life of the repair) with the expected depreciation and running costs of the new car you propose to purchase.
Always factor in the expected depreciation of the newer vehicle. The depreciation amount on a new replacement can pay for a lot of repairs to the present vehicle.
Hear hear! I've always thought that government subsidised and provided drugs would eliminate most of the violent crime usually associated with the distribution.
I'm not missing the point at all. Poverty is a relative thing. If you have a read of The Truth About Markets by John Kay, you'll discover that inflationary economies (read, easy credit) result in economic inequity. Those with net positive cashflow benefit. Deflationary economies (credit scarcity) moderate the opportunity for debt creation, in addition to limiting investment opportunities for the wealthy. In this mode, social equity tends to flourish. Excessive and unmanageable debt breeds poverty, so if you want to avoid poverty, do what it takes to stay cash-flow positive.
No, seriously, spare us the elitism. You could be the most responsible person on earth and have money saved up to pay 6 years worth of bills and still be in serious trouble from an accident, a job loss, or medical problems not covered by insurance.
By definition, these events are relatvely rare, so your comment goes nowhere in explaining why the majority of people live from paycheck to paycheck, and a significant percentage do that with their credit maxxed.
From a supply-demand perspective, I'm not sure why an employer would want to artificially and arbitrarily limit the supply of potential employees. Such action would serve only to increase wage costs.
So, just because that formula doesn't work instantly, you should never start saving? Seems like a pretty short-sighted excuse to me. The sooner you realise that depreciation of your chattles means that your true balance sheet may still be moving toward the red, even if your immediate cashflow is balanced.
Or better, to use something like a Gigabyte i-RAM battery backed ramdisk for such nefarous activities, and back the data up onto removable (and "disposable") flash media.
I would have thought that the RIAA would have to have something specific they are looking for. The IP address that they are waiving around must have been associated with a particular action and a particular file. Otherwise the discovery in this case is tantamount to self incrimination.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps a good defence would be to hand over a CD with 27 audio files saying just that (make sure you get the file size correct by padding the end with sufficient random white noise). It would be good to get some audio file of "RIAA are fucking arseholes" heard as evidence in court.
I presume, as part of discovery, the defendant could ask for a copy of the files the RIAA downloaded?
If you could demonstrate a personal loss as a result of the RIAA hosting the iddy porn, then yes, you're welcome to launch a civil suit. I don't think, however, that the average Joe-Citizen is able to launch a criminal case against anyone.
What I find interesting (from a thermodynamics viewpoint) about the melting of the polar ice cap, is that if it was atmospheric warming, and the ice was melting from the top down, you'd expect to see rivers of liquid water. Since this hasn't been reported (so I presume it isn't occuring), I can only assume that the melting is taking place from the bottom up. This means that warm ocean currents travelling underneath the sea ice must be the energy transport mechanism. Now, surely changes in ocean current flow or temperature would have to be significant to change the thermodynamic balance (obviously there are seasonal cycles). Wouldn't the ocean temperature changes and/or flow velocity changes be measureable?
No. Your suggestion seems much more indirect. You'd have the lag between consumer demand and the marketing bods listening. And unless some renegade manufacturer was going to produce and promote minimalist packaging, then the status quo would remain.
How many people do you know who contacted manufacturers to request products with less packaging, just so they could save rooom in their wheelie-bin?
On the other hand, there is usually a healthy dose of competition between gas stations, with each gas station watching the competitors price boards with their eagle-eyes. In order to get attract customers to a particular gas station, prices are reduced by a miniscule amount. This starts a price ware, with progressive discounting till it hurts the profits. At this point discounts are then removed and prices rise to their pre price-war levels. It's a game to see who can last the longest with the cheaper prices, to capture the most traffic. The cycle then repeats.
I think you'll find that the sulfur reduction is aimed at reducing diesel particulate emissions. Catalyic converters are ineffective against particulate carbon (soot), which would otherwise require particulate filters (a high maintenance item). The primary effect of reducing the sulfur content is reduction of particulate formation during combustion. The other effect is reduction of lubricity, thus requiring additives to compensate.
In Australia, one of the oil majors obtained dispensation against the interim 500ppm sulfur diesel fuel standard, by using an alternative additive.
You're assuming that the guy who runs out of steam is irreplaceable. The fact that the article remains open after the edit war defeat, means that someone else can step in and continue the fight. Just like the War on Tourism TM
Your argument is somewhat simplistic. Your recommendation to purchase another (presumably second-hand) vehicle for the same value of the repair cost + salvage value, neglects a number of subtlties. Firstly, the unknowns of the replacement vehicle (compared with the known history of your current vehicle). Secondly, you ignore the premium you will probably pay if you purchase through a used car dealer (or the aggro of locating a private sale). Thirdly, you are ignorning the costs associated with disposal of your existing vehicle (particularly if it is a non-runner). Fourthly, you are neglecting the costs associated with transfer of title for your replacement vehicle (which, where I come from, is not insignificant).
Always factor in the expected depreciation of the newer vehicle. The depreciation amount on a new replacement can pay for a lot of repairs to the present vehicle.
I bet JFK wished he had one of those. ...Oh, you said cubical, not cuban.
Too much forehead slapping. You can eliminate one headache by keeping your hands above your navel.
Hear hear! I've always thought that government subsidised and provided drugs would eliminate most of the violent crime usually associated with the distribution.
I'm not missing the point at all. Poverty is a relative thing. If you have a read of The Truth About Markets by John Kay, you'll discover that inflationary economies (read, easy credit) result in economic inequity. Those with net positive cashflow benefit. Deflationary economies (credit scarcity) moderate the opportunity for debt creation, in addition to limiting investment opportunities for the wealthy. In this mode, social equity tends to flourish. Excessive and unmanageable debt breeds poverty, so if you want to avoid poverty, do what it takes to stay cash-flow positive.
No wonder it didn't parse. I forgot the closing flag.
From a supply-demand perspective, I'm not sure why an employer would want to artificially and arbitrarily limit the supply of potential employees. Such action would serve only to increase wage costs.
Budget Status:
UK, deficit, 3.1% GDP
Denmark, surplus 2.3% GDP
Germany, deficit, 3.7% GDP
France, deficit, 3.6% GDP
US, deficit, 5.7% GDP
Methinks you Americans need to pay more tax
So, just because that formula doesn't work instantly, you should never start saving? Seems like a pretty short-sighted excuse to me. The sooner you realise that depreciation of your chattles means that your true balance sheet may still be moving toward the red, even if your immediate cashflow is balanced.
Shouldn't you pay cash for air tickets too?
Er, yeah. He forgot that GNU/Linux didn't include the BSOD API.
Or better, to use something like a Gigabyte i-RAM battery backed ramdisk for such nefarous activities, and back the data up onto removable (and "disposable") flash media.
I would have thought that the RIAA would have to have something specific they are looking for. The IP address that they are waiving around must have been associated with a particular action and a particular file. Otherwise the discovery in this case is tantamount to self incrimination.
CLIPPY: "Hello, it looks like you are fucking up a verb conjugation again..."
Running on top of a Vista OS?
Yeah, his CRT monitor, and the other tube is, er... his vas deferens.