I think that, if you want to compete with his technical advantage, chopping your own legs off and wearing similar prosthetics is a viable option. Maybe a biotechnology or prosthetics manufacturer will pay to put logos on your jersey.
Also, through RTFA, we see: 1) wasn't a bridge to nowhere, but from Ketchikan to Gravina Island. 2) funds already allocated to Alaska. 3) Governor Palin killed the project.
As for the Woodstock Museum, someone else can speak on that.
Comcastic - adj., possessing an attribute of being extremely bad and yet seemingly unavoidable, due to being a monopolistic local utility providing a needed service: Our cable service is horribly intermittent. It's really comcastic!
See similar items:
that's just like the anti-licensing argument.
you give lexmark money for a cheaper toner cartridge
they give you a printer cartridge in a box
the box says that, among other things, by opening it, you agree not to try to refill
the cartridge, but to mail it back to lexmark for refill.
OR
you give microsoft money for software
they give you software in a box
box says that, among other things, you can't make unauthorized copies.
you gave them money for something licensed, not sold
YOU surrender ownership of the money - it now belongs to the licensor.
Apple, in this case, licenses you the phone, and doesn't lose ownership.
I'm in the process of applying for a patent on "A Process for Identifying Products and Services which Fail to Meet Acceptable Standards of Customer Satisfaction, Service, and Communication", and creating a document for presentation to the ISO outlining standards for service. I've also already applied for the process patent on applying for these process patents.
The crux of this flake's argument is that people are required to defend their "copyright" in a court of law; failure to do so makes the theft legitimate.
I say bull.
I favor the Rumble Defense. Whomever brings the most big guys with clubs and stones to the parking lot behind the malt shop after midnight on Saturday, and inflicts the most pain on the other side before the Pigs show up and bust us all, wins.
Well, perhaps somewhat more seriously, Copyright should extend to Ten years beyond fabrication of the work, and that's it. Ownership of the Copyright should be assigned to an actual person, no incorporeal entities (i.e. "God" or "Corporation X" allowed). Too many people
contributed? Pick one. Theft of Copyright = forfeiture of all assets to infringed party. Trade and service marks should not be copyrightable or registerable, except for emblems - no words or multi-word phrases. Patents extended only to physical objects and not monkeys/typewriters concoctions such as algorithms (my mother's recipe for chess pie, or the source code for PhotoShop). Shrinkwrap
licenses should be invalid, as well.
Paying attorney's fees for litigants in vacated suits? What's next?
I, for one, welcome the RIAA eventually paying everyone to download members'
music from peer-to-peer sites... ... largely because pop music is crapola. Hmmm.. payola/crapola?
Which begs the question, how would the RIAA know whom to pay? Would they
invest as much time trying to find
the rightful recipients?;)
It's daft simple to get a cellphone without using your own real, personal information.
I recommend leaving one of these phones in the bin at the TSA checkpoint in a US airport.
Then call to send the signal to set the phone on scream.
TFA is not even a thinly-veiled advertisement for Mindshare Interactive Campaigns.
It's a full-on advertisment, organized as a press release from said company,
intended to drum-up business by promoting itself as the only solution for what
it wrongly states is a ruling.
Foul on you.
That a company dealing in "compliance issues" calls itself "Mindshare" is foo,
anyhow, presuming one knows what "mindshare" means. This doesn't take a lawyer
to realize its fallacy, just someone with a brain and a reasonable reading
comprehension level.
I just ask that readers please stop posting promotional ads as "articles".
It puts one on the level of Wiki editors who work as Congressional staffers,
who edit their bosses (and political opponents') articles for political purposes.
The whole thing smacks of a church,
upon advice from God, suing the creators
of the paper clip, on the premise it infringes
upon the patent for malleability of the
metals involved,...
and the courts, wise or unwise, siding with
the church.
Patents for use of web interface and hyperlink-based
technology are bad. People who support them
are bad. Laws providing for such should be changed.
Elected representatives who support such crippling
legislation should be removed from office.
... or is it that he, a retired felon, has to support
the position of M$ as part of his release agreement?
The guy has no real significance; about the only impressive
thing he ever accomplished was become referenced on dozens of
2600 covers.
The idea of Mitnick, while it may have inspired thousands of people (to do what, I have no idea;), is worth more than any of his own ideas.
Move along. Nothing to see here. Mod parent down.
from
http://www.riaa.com/about/members/default.asp>
Both Nettwork Records and their US/international
distributor, BMG/Arista Records (well, all divisions
of BMG, I figure), are reporting members of the RIAA.
So, what are the ramifications of a portion of the RIAA
suing itself? Maybe it's somewhat like the RIAA isn't really
polling its members to obtain their views, so that it can
accurately reflect and represent them?
At this point, I'd just like to add that,
aside from the bickering about whose got the
biggest example of stupidity...
We also have allowed the example of humans
used as live error checkers in a mission-critical
environment (the early-warning system controllers
in the nuke story) to be presented.
I find it humorous that, in this age, we're often
presented with the Orwellian as commonplace,
and perhaps in five years, we'll actually ignore
several instances in the media of politicians
asking the public, "What are you going to believe?
what you see, or what we tell you is the truth?"
Oh, and thank God(tm) there's no peer review at Wired.
I mean, how else would it be the world's most-widely-read
computer-savant satire magazine? If those guys actually
knew about what they were talking, I'd be worried;)
Given that a prominent (former) Kansan (who now claims residence
in his wife's new "home state" of North Carolina) is a famous
proponent of remedies for "E.D.", I favor the latter selection.
This film should have been made eight years ago, in the style of the original comic.
Why?
It's a cross between what became Batman Begins
(after some flakes rewrote Batman's origin
to include the League of Assassins)
and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, complete
with philosophical interludes, grand fable
storytelling, and dramatic romance.
For those who have NFC, Shang Chi was a warrior poet raised in the house of his father, Fu Manchu (the character reference for Ra'as alGhul in the Batman films) who
left to find himself and later joined those
who stood opposed to Fu Manchu's schemes. Think the old classic Fu Manchu and not the Peter Sellers comedy one, btw.
Now, I don't understand why some people are
so against this ten-picture deal. Lest
ye forget, "Blade" was a third-tier character
with limited potential from a second-rate
Marvel title, "Tomb of Dracula" in the early
1970s who received a minor brush-up, about
fifteen years ago, and nobody even thought
to link him to martial arts until Wesley
Snipes took interest. It was a poor concept
taken in a new direction and got turned into
three action films which made plenty of
money (and at least the first one was
entertaining enough that, during which, I didn't feel compelled leave the theater).
I can understand how some people might look at
Daredevil and just see the Ben Affleck
role, or the Eric Bana Hulk, and say,
"Marvel needs to stop making movies like these," but with good acting and direction, a good script, and a novel twist here-or- there, Marvel's tremendous store of pre-
developed character ideas and plots just
begs for screen development.
Heck, change enough things, and...
Hey, didn't "Mutant X", a Marvel property
derived loosely from the X-Men (but without
the "silly" costumes and code names)
run for four seasons?
It was a Marvel property, and evidently didn't
make people too upset.;)
Which is why I don't believe in shrinkwrap licences.
Look. If you provide a physical object for me to take into my possession, and I didn't sign a contract expressly giving someone rights to re-obtain it, vis-a-vis a lease or rental agreement...
Slashdot Mirror
I think that, if you want to compete with his technical advantage, chopping your own legs off
and wearing similar prosthetics is a viable option. Maybe a biotechnology or prosthetics
manufacturer will pay to put logos on your jersey.
The modern Olympic Games is overrated, anyhow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravina_Island_Bridge
First, there's no hyphen in "nowhere".
Also, through RTFA, we see:
1) wasn't a bridge to nowhere, but from Ketchikan to Gravina Island.
2) funds already allocated to Alaska.
3) Governor Palin killed the project.
As for the Woodstock Museum, someone else can speak on that.
That's because he was a board member of the corporation which held the patent on fish and copyright on recipe for bread, you troll.
Verizon is Comcastic!
See similar items:
I've had hard evidence of a crow named Cheney who's been using a tool for...
that's just like the anti-licensing argument.
you give lexmark money for a cheaper toner cartridge
they give you a printer cartridge in a box
the box says that, among other things, by opening it, you agree not to try to refill the cartridge, but to mail it back to lexmark for refill.
OR
you give microsoft money for software
they give you software in a box
box says that, among other things, you can't make unauthorized copies.
you gave them money for something licensed, not sold
YOU surrender ownership of the money - it now belongs to the licensor.
Apple, in this case, licenses you the phone, and doesn't lose ownership.
I'm in the process of applying for a patent on "A Process for Identifying Products and Services which Fail to Meet Acceptable Standards of Customer Satisfaction, Service, and Communication", and creating a document for presentation to the ISO outlining standards for service. I've also already applied for the process patent on applying for these process patents.
The crux of this flake's argument is that people are required to defend their "copyright" in a court of law; failure to do so makes the theft legitimate.
I say bull.
I favor the Rumble Defense. Whomever brings the most big guys with clubs and stones to the parking lot behind the malt shop after midnight on Saturday, and inflicts the most pain on the other side before the Pigs show up and bust us all, wins.
Well, perhaps somewhat more seriously, Copyright should extend to Ten years beyond fabrication of the work, and that's it. Ownership of the Copyright should be assigned to an actual person, no incorporeal entities (i.e. "God" or "Corporation X" allowed). Too many people contributed? Pick one. Theft of Copyright = forfeiture of all assets to infringed party. Trade and service marks should not be copyrightable or registerable, except for emblems - no words or multi-word phrases. Patents extended only to physical objects and not monkeys/typewriters concoctions such as algorithms (my mother's recipe for chess pie, or the source code for PhotoShop). Shrinkwrap licenses should be invalid, as well.
But it's your game; play it how you will.
uh...
no.
Paying attorney's fees for litigants in vacated suits?
... largely because pop music is crapola. Hmmm.. payola/crapola?
;)
What's next? I, for one, welcome the RIAA eventually paying everyone to download members'
music from peer-to-peer sites...
Which begs the question, how would the RIAA know whom to pay? Would they
invest as much time trying to find the rightful recipients?
Michael Moore is a slender REED,...
compared to Rush (whiny) Limbaugh.
It will also make Americattle easier to round-up, when the Evil Alien Warlords reveal themselves. I, for one, welcome our new master-cards. ;)
It's daft simple to get a cellphone without using your own real, personal information.
I recommend leaving one of these phones in the bin at the TSA checkpoint in a US airport.
Then call to send the signal to set the phone on scream.
Enjoy:)
TFA is not even a thinly-veiled advertisement for Mindshare Interactive Campaigns. It's a full-on advertisment, organized as a press release from said company, intended to drum-up business by promoting itself as the only solution for what it wrongly states is a ruling. Foul on you. That a company dealing in "compliance issues" calls itself "Mindshare" is foo, anyhow, presuming one knows what "mindshare" means. This doesn't take a lawyer to realize its fallacy, just someone with a brain and a reasonable reading comprehension level. I just ask that readers please stop posting promotional ads as "articles". It puts one on the level of Wiki editors who work as Congressional staffers, who edit their bosses (and political opponents') articles for political purposes.
The whole thing smacks of a church, upon advice from God, suing the creators of the paper clip, on the premise it infringes upon the patent for malleability of the metals involved,... and the courts, wise or unwise, siding with the church. Patents for use of web interface and hyperlink-based technology are bad. People who support them are bad. Laws providing for such should be changed. Elected representatives who support such crippling legislation should be removed from office.
... or is it that he, a retired felon, has to support
;), is worth more than
the position of M$ as part of his release agreement?
The guy has no real significance; about the only impressive
thing he ever accomplished was become referenced on dozens of
2600 covers.
The idea of Mitnick, while it may have inspired thousands
of people (to do what, I have no idea
any of his own ideas.
Move along. Nothing to see here. Mod parent down.
on the side of the barn, again? There oughtta be a
law against pigs and painting, anyhow.
What kind of world is that? Not one for us, I think.
from
http://www.riaa.com/about/members/default.asp>
Both Nettwork Records and their US/international
distributor, BMG/Arista Records (well, all divisions
of BMG, I figure), are reporting members of the RIAA.
So, what are the ramifications of a portion of the RIAA
suing itself? Maybe it's somewhat like the RIAA isn't really
polling its members to obtain their views, so that it can
accurately reflect and represent them?
Pondersome.
...zzzz....
All this, just to say the scientists can now _see_ the virus?
I guess that tricky wavelegnth of visible light thing had them befuddled.
No sig.
No sig necessary.
At this point, I'd just like to add that,
;)
aside from the bickering about whose got the
biggest example of stupidity...
We also have allowed the example of humans
used as live error checkers in a mission-critical
environment (the early-warning system controllers
in the nuke story) to be presented.
I find it humorous that, in this age, we're often
presented with the Orwellian as commonplace,
and perhaps in five years, we'll actually ignore
several instances in the media of politicians
asking the public, "What are you going to believe?
what you see, or what we tell you is the truth?"
Oh, and thank God(tm) there's no peer review at Wired.
I mean, how else would it be the world's most-widely-read
computer-savant satire magazine? If those guys actually
knew about what they were talking, I'd be worried
Given that a prominent (former) Kansan (who now claims residence in his wife's new "home state" of North Carolina) is a famous proponent of remedies for "E.D.", I favor the latter selection.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/TV/10/18/apontv.sa turdays.dead.ap/index.html
Funny; this seems like exactly the type of thing
Americans need to have available for Saturday evening
viewing.
;)
This film should have been made eight years ago,
;)
in the style of the original comic.
Why?
It's a cross between what became Batman Begins
(after some flakes rewrote Batman's origin
to include the League of Assassins)
and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, complete
with philosophical interludes, grand fable
storytelling, and dramatic romance.
For those who have NFC, Shang Chi was a
warrior poet raised in the house of his
father, Fu Manchu (the character reference
for Ra'as alGhul in the Batman films) who
left to find himself and later joined those
who stood opposed to Fu Manchu's schemes.
Think the old classic Fu Manchu and not the
Peter Sellers comedy one, btw.
Now, I don't understand why some people are
so against this ten-picture deal. Lest
ye forget, "Blade" was a third-tier character
with limited potential from a second-rate
Marvel title, "Tomb of Dracula" in the early
1970s who received a minor brush-up, about
fifteen years ago, and nobody even thought
to link him to martial arts until Wesley
Snipes took interest. It was a poor concept
taken in a new direction and got turned into
three action films which made plenty of
money (and at least the first one was
entertaining enough that, during which, I
didn't feel compelled leave the theater).
I can understand how some people might look at
Daredevil and just see the Ben Affleck
role, or the Eric Bana Hulk, and say,
"Marvel needs to stop making movies like
these," but with good acting and direction,
a good script, and a novel twist here-or-
there, Marvel's tremendous store of pre-
developed character ideas and plots just
begs for screen development.
Heck, change enough things, and...
Hey, didn't "Mutant X", a Marvel property
derived loosely from the X-Men (but without
the "silly" costumes and code names)
run for four seasons?
It was a Marvel property, and evidently didn't
make people too upset.
Which is why I don't believe in shrinkwrap licences.
Look. If you provide a physical object for me to take into my possession, and I didn't sign a contract expressly giving someone rights to re-obtain it, vis-a-vis a lease or rental agreement...
Screw off. It's mine.
Caveat Vendor.