The US and, in particular, California are a far cry from not having any significant workers' rights enshrined in law. Also, none of these people were above working elsewhere if the pay they got at Apple was really that awful for the hours they were putting in. Slavery and indentured servitude take away that choice. Capitalism doesn't suck. People bitching about their dream job not paying overtime sucks.
That's an outdated statistic. It was reported back in February that the number of Usenet users tripled during the second half of 2007. Since that report was released publicly, Usenet has experienced almost geometric growth. The latest studies report that the number of Usenet users today is over 530 times what it was on this date last year.
For anyone who is unaware, Gnus is a Usenet news reader written in Emacs Lisp. As a result, it has ten thousand times the features of a decent reader, but is slower and more awkward. (From a happy Gnus user, mind you.)
It could be. And if it is, then that's fine by me. For me, it's all about how much they are stretching reality and/or stretching the contract's wording in order to say that something violates the contract. Probably the only person who's ever even read the entire contract was the lawyer who wrote it. It's kind of like two people who haven't read the Bible other than a chapter or two arguing about exactly what it says about premarital sex. And all I'm saying is that we should open the book up before we point any fingers in either direction.:)
No, they claim that P2P traffic violates the contract between them and their customers. The OP made the (mostly valid) point that AT&T can impose whatever rules it wants to on its network. I pointed out the limitation of that: They can only do so within the bounds of their contract. The question is what the contract actually says. It may be worded so as to exclude all P2P traffic, or to exclude any unlawful traffic, or to exclude any traffic that AT&T deems as 'excessive' regardless of type. The point is that the wording does matter, since the Slashdot blurb says that AT&T is claiming that all P2P traffic violates the contract.
There's a difference between imposing rules and reinterpreting a contract that you've already entered into. If there is a contract term that actually does cover lawful P2P usage, that's imposing a rule. If there is a contract term that prohibits using their network to infringe anyone's copyright and they claim that lawful P2P usage falls within that prohibition, that's different.
I thought Polaroid died out because of the advent of the consumer-grade digital camera, which made Polaroid's innovation obsolete. Did I miss something where they had a vision that could compete with digital photography?
Now they will have to post the judgment in Missed Connections.
You: A worldwide free classified ad website that has become something of an internet phenomenon, posting furniture, prostitutes, musician-wanted, and dating ads all in one convenient place.
Me: The judgment issued the other day when you defaulted on your court appearance to defend against my issuance.
You must be new here. Moderators can't read the summary just like meta-moderators can't read the comment whose moderation they're meta-moderating. Similarly, editors aren't permitted to read the article.
That's like saying that a US Senator standing up in the middle of a debate on the Iraq war and yelling obscene racial slurs at the top of his lungs is his way of generating discussion. Yes, there will be lots of discussion, but none of it will be at all relevant to anything of substance to the Senate.
I'll get modded down by all the grammar nazi nazis, but it has to be said: Correct capitalization of the abbreviation "vs." would have made the title of this article much more readable. But that would have required editing.
I was aware of the original languages, but not of an early Latin translation being spread at the time the mostly-Greek original was first going around. The Wikipedia article you linked to makes no mention of this, either.
Do you have sources for all this? I had always been under the impression that Koine Greek was used specifically because everyone spoke it, essentially the same way that close enough to everyone speaks English today.
I hope you have a good toque, eh? And yes, I know what you mean - the US has been going to extreme measures for some time now. I wonder, though, why the Internet makes things all that much more difficult than, say, a bank in the Caribbean.
I just meant that by way of comparison, so you'd know that the US has been doing this by federal law for years and that you're not alone up there in Canadia.:)
One of the biggest parts of the PATRIOT Act was to counter money laundering. Cash deposits over a certain amount, for instance, get handled differently in the USA this decade than they did in the past one.
On a side note: I missed the irony in Flooz's money laundering. Can anyone explain?
Slashdot Mirror
The US and, in particular, California are a far cry from not having any significant workers' rights enshrined in law. Also, none of these people were above working elsewhere if the pay they got at Apple was really that awful for the hours they were putting in. Slavery and indentured servitude take away that choice. Capitalism doesn't suck. People bitching about their dream job not paying overtime sucks.
You should have spelled it right the first time. :P I'd wait and see if Aurora takes off before getting too bent out of shape.
I've heard of people having luck with Turtle Wax on audio CDs. I have never tried any of these methods myself, though.
That's an outdated statistic. It was reported back in February that the number of Usenet users tripled during the second half of 2007. Since that report was released publicly, Usenet has experienced almost geometric growth. The latest studies report that the number of Usenet users today is over 530 times what it was on this date last year.
For anyone who is unaware, Gnus is a Usenet news reader written in Emacs Lisp. As a result, it has ten thousand times the features of a decent reader, but is slower and more awkward. (From a happy Gnus user, mind you.)
Thanks. =)
IAAL, and I never read my own contracts. I only read contracts when I can bill someone for the time. Want me to read yours? :P
It could be. And if it is, then that's fine by me. For me, it's all about how much they are stretching reality and/or stretching the contract's wording in order to say that something violates the contract. Probably the only person who's ever even read the entire contract was the lawyer who wrote it. It's kind of like two people who haven't read the Bible other than a chapter or two arguing about exactly what it says about premarital sex. And all I'm saying is that we should open the book up before we point any fingers in either direction. :)
No, they claim that P2P traffic violates the contract between them and their customers. The OP made the (mostly valid) point that AT&T can impose whatever rules it wants to on its network. I pointed out the limitation of that: They can only do so within the bounds of their contract. The question is what the contract actually says. It may be worded so as to exclude all P2P traffic, or to exclude any unlawful traffic, or to exclude any traffic that AT&T deems as 'excessive' regardless of type. The point is that the wording does matter, since the Slashdot blurb says that AT&T is claiming that all P2P traffic violates the contract.
There's a difference between imposing rules and reinterpreting a contract that you've already entered into. If there is a contract term that actually does cover lawful P2P usage, that's imposing a rule. If there is a contract term that prohibits using their network to infringe anyone's copyright and they claim that lawful P2P usage falls within that prohibition, that's different.
I thought Polaroid died out because of the advent of the consumer-grade digital camera, which made Polaroid's innovation obsolete. Did I miss something where they had a vision that could compete with digital photography?
Now they will have to post the judgment in Missed Connections.
You: A worldwide free classified ad website that has become something of an internet phenomenon, posting furniture, prostitutes, musician-wanted, and dating ads all in one convenient place.
Me: The judgment issued the other day when you defaulted on your court appearance to defend against my issuance.
You must be new here. Moderators can't read the summary just like meta-moderators can't read the comment whose moderation they're meta-moderating. Similarly, editors aren't permitted to read the article.
No, because a girl would have messed up the math while distracted due to a smudge in her make-up and botched the results. Duh.
I agree. He should have used "whom" as the object of "than." :P
That's like saying that a US Senator standing up in the middle of a debate on the Iraq war and yelling obscene racial slurs at the top of his lungs is his way of generating discussion. Yes, there will be lots of discussion, but none of it will be at all relevant to anything of substance to the Senate.
That's no excuse for space rudeness!
I'll get modded down by all the grammar nazi nazis, but it has to be said: Correct capitalization of the abbreviation "vs." would have made the title of this article much more readable. But that would have required editing.
I was aware of the original languages, but not of an early Latin translation being spread at the time the mostly-Greek original was first going around. The Wikipedia article you linked to makes no mention of this, either.
Somehow, kdawson just seeks out the worst submissions with the most errors and posts them. He has an excellent track record at this.
Do you have sources for all this? I had always been under the impression that Koine Greek was used specifically because everyone spoke it, essentially the same way that close enough to everyone speaks English today.
I hope you have a good toque, eh? And yes, I know what you mean - the US has been going to extreme measures for some time now. I wonder, though, why the Internet makes things all that much more difficult than, say, a bank in the Caribbean.
I just meant that by way of comparison, so you'd know that the US has been doing this by federal law for years and that you're not alone up there in Canadia. :)
One of the biggest parts of the PATRIOT Act was to counter money laundering. Cash deposits over a certain amount, for instance, get handled differently in the USA this decade than they did in the past one.
On a side note: I missed the irony in Flooz's money laundering. Can anyone explain?
Science ignorance on the rise
I love it when people think they know everything and don't even see if these scientists even considered the issue. So, correction:
Reader ignorance on the rise.
You must be new here.