I've seen commercials too... in the DC area the anchors from all of the local news broadcasts (including non-English broadcasts) are featured in one commercial where they tell you to go to dtvanswers.com to get your coupon.
Also, I just did a Google product search and found a couple ATSC converters for about $160... also found a few DVD/VCR combos that have the ATSC tuner as well for about $300.
Moderators! This is not an attempt to make a case for creationists! I am just trying to make sense of this.
Now to my question:
If time was faster in the beginning of the universe than it is now, could it then be possible that the universe was created only a few thousand years ago? And now that perception of time has changed it appears that the universe is older because the rate of time has changed for us?
If an event would have been measured as taking 1000 years "back then," it would have been perceived as 1000 years to an observer in that time, but if it could be measured against our current perception of the rate of time it would have been only 100 years.
Did I get that right?
Like where 1000 units of changing-rate-time occurs in the same span as 100 units of constant-rate-time.
I believe that should be broken up differently to put it in context for the argument.
they actually make two arguments
1) he was breaching copyright by ripping and putting on his shared drive
"Defendant admitted that he converted these sound recordings from their original format to the.mp3 format for his and his wifes use. . Once Defendant converted Plaintiffs recording into the compressed.mp3 format "
2) he was breaching copyright by sharing the mp3s on Kazaa
(this follows immediately from the previous quote) "and they are in his shared folder, they are no longer the authorized copies distributed by Plaintiffs. Moreover, Defendant had no authorization to distribute Plaintiffs copyrighted recordings from his KaZaA shared folder." I don't believe that they are trying to get him for ripping the CDs to MP3, but rather sharing them through KaZaA. But once they had something for which to go after him, they may have started to go too far.
The way I see it, this is not a problem: "Once Defendant converted Plaintiffs recording into the compressed.mp3 format..."
This is where the problem starts: "...and they are in his shared folder..."
The Fair Use argument was negated when he shared them on KaZaA - RTFA, and look at page 15 that is even mentioned in the summary.
But let me point out what I believe ruins the Fair Use argument (IANAL):
Once Defendant converted Plaintiffs' recording into the compressed.mp3 format and they are in his shared folder, they are no longer the authorized copies distributed by Plaintiffs. Moreover, Defendant had no authorization to distribute Plaintiffs' copyrighted recordings from his KaZaA shared folder.
Each of the 11 sound recordings on Exhibit A to Plaintiffs' Complaint were stored in the.mp3 format in the shared folder on Defendant's computer hard drive, and each of these eleven files were actually disseminated from Defendant's computer.
And the angel of the Lord came unto me, snatching me up from my place of slumber, and took me on high, and higher still until we moved in the spaces betwixt the air itself. and he bore me unto a vast farmland of our own midwest, and as we descended cries of impending doom rose from the soil. one thousand, nay, a million voices full of fear. and terror possessed me then. and I begged,
"Angel of the Lord, what are these tortured screams?" And the angel said unto me, "These are the cries of the carrots, the cries of the carrots. You see, reverend Maynard, tomorrow is harvest day and to them it is the holocaust." And I sprang from my slumber drenched in sweat like the tears of one millions terrified brothers and roared, "Hear me now, I have seen the light, they have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul. damn you! let the rabbits wear glasses, save our brothers...can I get an amen? can I get a hallelujah? thank you, Jesus.
I don't believe that it it state-sponsored, unless the state in question is the Vatican.
It's plausible if you think about it, and you consider the ubiquitous comment about technology being driven by the porn industry.
May not be the Vatican... could be the Mormons (not to pick on them, but they aren't hurting for money), or any other extremely fundamentalist group out there. They could be waiting for the bot-net to become powerful enough to destroy the modern version of
Sodom and Gomorrah (at least in their eyes).
I know we're discussing free web-based e-mail, but this is worthy of note:
MS Outlook will let you send "potentially harmful" attachments, but it won't let you receive them. Try sending a MS Access.mdb file to someone that uses Outlook as a client... It's blocked unless they change the file extension. MS help recommends "file.mdb_EXTRA" then have the recipient remove the "_EXTRA"
I am surprised that I have not seen anyone comment on the CIA's recruiting commercials that have a dragonfly flying around through the length of the commercial...
Actually, he may very well be more right. The following quote does not just apply to carbon dating, but any scientific experiment or testing:
"But what our scientist does not realize is that every time he makes a measurement, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage."
Of course, being an open-minded Pastafarian, I reserve the right to change my mind based on the presentation of new evidence.
"The desert launch location was very Tatoine-like (with the second sun hidden, of course)."
I hope it was very Tatooine-like... the sail barge scenes were filmed not too far from Plaster City.
From imdb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086190/trivia): "Jabba's sail barge was filmed in Yuma, Arizona. The film crew had problems avoiding the 35,000 dune buggy enthusiasts in the area. To preserve secrecy, the producers claimed to be making a horror film called "Blue Harvest" with the tagline "Horror beyond imagination", and even had caps and t-shirts made up for the crew. A chain-link fence and a 24-hour security service could not prevent die-hard fans from entering the set and sneaking some photographs."
I believe what JumperCable was trying to get at was the "common" availability of high-speed internet access competition, or better put, competition as visible to common people.
Yes there are options out there if you want to spend thousands of dollars to pay for it, but that is not competition for the common person.
Where I live, my common choices are: Company A (dial-up or DSL) or Company B (satellite). Could I start a contract with my local telco to get my own T1 or DS3? Sure. Would the common consumer do that? No. Therefore, no common competition for high-speed internet access.
In addition to that, in most areas you cannot choose between multiple cable or DSL providers. And if you can, the company that installed the lines wants a cut of the money somewhere along the line.
I want to be able to choose from several different high-speed providers at a reasonable cost, and I believe that's what most people want as well.
My problem with lawyers is the ones who go for the big payouts in the frivolous lawsuits. But I have just as much problem with the people that go after the "big bad companies" as I do with the lawyers. I am thinking here about the McDonald's coffee and "I didn't know cigarettes were bad for me" type lawsuits. I am not an economist, but I would bet that these companies would have to recoup their costs from these frivolous lawsuits, and how would they do that? Raise prices of their products, lower the wage they pay their employees, fire employees, etc.
There are legitimate lawsuits, like the one you mention about lead paint (I know it was an example), where people are harmed by other's negligence.
As for the media, the problem I have with them is when they sensationalize stories. There are legitimate newsworthy stories, but when I see a video on CNN of a couple kids knocking down a sandcastle, and they dedicate most of the programming that day to that story, with "think of the children" being spouted out every few minutes, I see a story that had been sensationalized beyond what would normally be newsworthy.
It is one thing to report a story, but quite another to put a spin on it, fail to report the complete story, or fail to properly research the story so that one side or the other is unfairly shown as the "bad guy" as is commonly seen in the media (and quite often in the comments here on/.).
But that's the beauty of this article. There is no story that got through the firehose!
And not in a Matrix "there is no spoon" kind of way. There is no link to an article, study, or any kind of backing data in any way.
This troll got their question in on a slow news day over a holiday weekend (at least in the U.S.) when there would be plenty of geeks online, instead of grilling up a nice steak (though I happen to be at work, damnit), to argue over their assertion.
Funny thing is, I have to admit I have been leaning more and more libertarian in recent years.
Slashdot Mirror
I've seen commercials too... in the DC area the anchors from all of the local news broadcasts (including non-English broadcasts) are featured in one commercial where they tell you to go to dtvanswers.com to get your coupon.
Also, I just did a Google product search and found a couple ATSC converters for about $160... also found a few DVD/VCR combos that have the ATSC tuner as well for about $300.
Moderators! This is not an attempt to make a case for creationists! I am just trying to make sense of this.
Now to my question:
If time was faster in the beginning of the universe than it is now, could it then be possible that the universe was created only a few thousand years ago? And now that perception of time has changed it appears that the universe is older because the rate of time has changed for us?
If an event would have been measured as taking 1000 years "back then," it would have been perceived as 1000 years to an observer in that time, but if it could be measured against our current perception of the rate of time it would have been only 100 years.
Did I get that right?
Like where 1000 units of changing-rate-time occurs in the same span as 100 units of constant-rate-time.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news... Nixon passed away. Back in 1994. I didn't want to be the one to tell you.
1) he was breaching copyright by ripping and putting on his shared drive
"Defendant admitted that he converted these sound recordings from their original format to the
2) he was breaching copyright by sharing the mp3s on Kazaa
(this follows immediately from the previous quote)
"and they are in his shared folder, they are no longer the authorized copies distributed by Plaintiffs. Moreover, Defendant had no authorization to distribute Plaintiffs copyrighted recordings from his KaZaA shared folder." I don't believe that they are trying to get him for ripping the CDs to MP3, but rather sharing them through KaZaA. But once they had something for which to go after him, they may have started to go too far.
The way I see it, this is not a problem:
"Once Defendant converted Plaintiffs recording into the compressed
This is where the problem starts:
"...and they are in his shared folder..."
The Fair Use argument was negated when he shared them on KaZaA - RTFA, and look at page 15 that is even mentioned in the summary.
.mp3 format and they are in his shared folder, they are no longer the authorized copies distributed by Plaintiffs. Moreover, Defendant had no authorization to distribute Plaintiffs' copyrighted recordings from his KaZaA shared folder. .mp3 format in the shared folder on Defendant's computer hard drive, and each of these eleven files were actually disseminated from Defendant's computer.
But let me point out what I believe ruins the Fair Use argument (IANAL):
Once Defendant converted Plaintiffs' recording into the compressed
Each of the 11 sound recordings on Exhibit A to Plaintiffs' Complaint were stored in the
Not exactly a dupe... this time scientists were able to recreate the toxin.
No...
He killed a giant cockroach in a movie.
He turned down the other roach:
http://www.starpulse.com/news/index.php/2006/12/01/will_smith_turned_down_tom_cruise_s_invi
Not if they were trying to beat Google in scanning more books...it's about quantity, not quality.
Unless the entire neighborhood removes the street numbers from their houses, I don't think the situation you describe will be that significant.
Wow! It's a schooner.
To reference a popular verse:
And the angel of the Lord came unto me,
snatching me up from my
place of slumber,
and took me on high,
and higher still until we
moved in the spaces betwixt the air itself.
and he bore me unto a
vast farmland of our own midwest,
and as we descended cries of
impending doom rose from the soil.
one thousand, nay, a million
voices full of fear.
and terror possessed me then.
and I begged,
"Angel of the Lord, what are these tortured screams?"
And the angel said unto me,
"These are the cries of the carrots,
the cries of the carrots.
You see, reverend Maynard, tomorrow is harvest day
and to them it is the holocaust."
And I sprang from my slumber drenched in sweat
like the tears of one millions terrified brothers
and roared,
"Hear me now,
I have seen the light,
they have a consciousness,
they have a life,
they have a soul.
damn you!
let the rabbits wear glasses,
save our brothers...can I get an amen?
can I get a hallelujah? thank you, Jesus.
I don't believe that it it state-sponsored, unless the state in question is the Vatican.
It's plausible if you think about it, and you consider the ubiquitous comment about technology being driven by the porn industry.
May not be the Vatican... could be the Mormons (not to pick on them, but they aren't hurting for money), or any other extremely fundamentalist group out there. They could be waiting for the bot-net to become powerful enough to destroy the modern version of Sodom and Gomorrah (at least in their eyes).
I had to look it up to be sure...
http://www.bttf.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-29642.html
Yes they did...
and it was discussed here 18 months ago:
http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/06/04/26/1536212.shtml
Sharp's was here last month:
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/03/1721208
I know we're discussing free web-based e-mail, but this is worthy of note:
.mdb file to someone that uses Outlook as a client... It's blocked unless they change the file extension. MS help recommends "file.mdb_EXTRA" then have the recipient remove the "_EXTRA"
MS Outlook will let you send "potentially harmful" attachments, but it won't let you receive them. Try sending a MS Access
I'll stick with GMail on my Mac.
I am surprised that I have not seen anyone comment on the CIA's recruiting commercials that have a dragonfly flying around through the length of the commercial...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fg4_MuV4MpY
Actually, he may very well be more right. The following quote does not just apply to carbon dating, but any scientific experiment or testing:
"But what our scientist does not realize is that every time he makes a measurement, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage."
Of course, being an open-minded Pastafarian, I reserve the right to change my mind based on the presentation of new evidence.
"The desert launch location was very Tatoine-like (with the second sun hidden, of course)."
I hope it was very Tatooine-like... the sail barge scenes were filmed not too far from Plaster City.
From imdb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086190/trivia):
"Jabba's sail barge was filmed in Yuma, Arizona. The film crew had problems avoiding the 35,000 dune buggy enthusiasts in the area. To preserve secrecy, the producers claimed to be making a horror film called "Blue Harvest" with the tagline "Horror beyond imagination", and even had caps and t-shirts made up for the crew. A chain-link fence and a 24-hour security service could not prevent die-hard fans from entering the set and sneaking some photographs."
Babysitter?
/. party...
My kids will be inviting their friends over to have a LAN party while the wife and I head out to our local
"get your fees paid for by DirecTV."
I believe what JumperCable was trying to get at was the "common" availability of high-speed internet access competition, or better put, competition as visible to common people.
Yes there are options out there if you want to spend thousands of dollars to pay for it, but that is not competition for the common person.
Where I live, my common choices are: Company A (dial-up or DSL) or Company B (satellite). Could I start a contract with my local telco to get my own T1 or DS3? Sure. Would the common consumer do that? No. Therefore, no common competition for high-speed internet access.
In addition to that, in most areas you cannot choose between multiple cable or DSL providers. And if you can, the company that installed the lines wants a cut of the money somewhere along the line.
I want to be able to choose from several different high-speed providers at a reasonable cost, and I believe that's what most people want as well.
My problem with lawyers is the ones who go for the big payouts in the frivolous lawsuits. But I have just as much problem with the people that go after the "big bad companies" as I do with the lawyers. I am thinking here about the McDonald's coffee and "I didn't know cigarettes were bad for me" type lawsuits. I am not an economist, but I would bet that these companies would have to recoup their costs from these frivolous lawsuits, and how would they do that? Raise prices of their products, lower the wage they pay their employees, fire employees, etc.
/.).
There are legitimate lawsuits, like the one you mention about lead paint (I know it was an example), where people are harmed by other's negligence.
As for the media, the problem I have with them is when they sensationalize stories. There are legitimate newsworthy stories, but when I see a video on CNN of a couple kids knocking down a sandcastle, and they dedicate most of the programming that day to that story, with "think of the children" being spouted out every few minutes, I see a story that had been sensationalized beyond what would normally be newsworthy.
It is one thing to report a story, but quite another to put a spin on it, fail to report the complete story, or fail to properly research the story so that one side or the other is unfairly shown as the "bad guy" as is commonly seen in the media (and quite often in the comments here on
Enough of this, time for coffee.
Funny... I thought he sounded like Carl Sagan. Watch the Cosmos series and you;ll hear what I mean.
But that's the beauty of this article. There is no story that got through the firehose!
And not in a Matrix "there is no spoon" kind of way. There is no link to an article, study, or any kind of backing data in any way.
This troll got their question in on a slow news day over a holiday weekend (at least in the U.S.) when there would be plenty of geeks online, instead of grilling up a nice steak (though I happen to be at work, damnit), to argue over their assertion.
Funny thing is, I have to admit I have been leaning more and more libertarian in recent years.
This is exactly the distinction I was asking about.
Do VOIP conversations have the same legal protection that PSTN conversations have?
(Maybe I should have asked it like that the first time)