They can cut off your electricity, as it's enabling you to use illegal content. They can garnish your wages, as it was earned applying knowledge aquired illegally. They can remove the blood in your veins and sell it, as that was produced using food you purchased with money from your job using knowledge acquired illegally. Next time, PAY for your pr0n
I don't know what you're doing with YOUR porn, but porn usually depletes my precious bodily fluids. It definitely doesn't increase my supply.
cohibaVancouver: "mmm, that was some good Merlot. Thanks for the glass, honey". cohiba's wife: "Thanks dear. You give the best massages. The kids have been sleeping for an hour now, do you want to make love? cohibaVancouver: "You need not ask..."
Make love? Need not ask?
If they talk like that they deserve each other. Whatever happened to good old fashioned fucking?
Will you Americans and Canadians stop using this fine word?
Actually it makes you sound really smart so keep on using it. (- irony)
That's not irony either anonymous. That's sarcasm.
Oh, I get it. You're being ironic.
irony, n.
1. A figure of speech in which the intended meaning is the opposite of that expressed by the words used; usually taking the form of sarcasm or ridicule in which laudatory expressions are used to imply condemnation or contempt.
Skye (note the odd spelling, something you wouldn't know unless communication was in writing)
Whoa there Bogie, take it easy. If someone told me their name was Skye, that's the first spelling I would guess. It's not an odd spelling, it's the normal spelling of that name in English (as in the Isle of Skye, and Skye terriers).
As an exercise imagine imagine a strawman that has nothing to do with what anyone is actually talking about, but that I can easily show is absurd.
FTFY.
You have fantasy for your argument. I have the actual history of the US economy from 1954 to 1980 (though as one poster pointed, the top bracket was lowered by Kennedy to 77% in 1960--I had forgotten that).
The fact that the rates on the people who provide the jobs are going up because Obama doesn't want to extend the existing rates is, basically, a dishonest way of getting the tax increases he promised wouldn't happen.
Only if you're retarded. He always said he would raise taxes on incomes over 250k. Which is exactly what he's continued to say he wants to do. There's nothing dishonest about doing it this way--it's what he's always said, in pretty plain English, that he would do.
, who do you think will provide investments that create jobs if you tax the rich at 90%? Government?
The same kinds of people who created them from 1954 to 1980 when the top tax brackets was 91%.
Your entire argument fails when I point at the 1954 tax code, signed into law by Eisenhower. There were still rich people. There was still investment. There was still job creation. There was still opposition to the government.
You're crazier than Glen Beck if you actually think a 90% tax bracket would have any of the consequences you're hinting at.
I wonder how a house with airplane wings for roofs will fair in a major storm?
It's in Malibu. This is not a concern. How a house with airplane wings for a roof will fair under the wrath of the homeowners organization is a much bigger concern than the weather.
Alistair Huxley laid out how such a society COULD be brought into existence using (effectively) eugenics and drugs to control the population, but the very idea that was laid out gave me such heebie-jeebies that I couldn't finish "Brave New World". That's not any sort of life I'd want to participate in.
Aldous. Aldous Huxley. And it's a shame you didn't finish the book, since the punchline is that it's not the sort of life anyone would really want.
As your AC replier said with less gumption: do you even know how an incandescent bulb works? I mean, you do know that when a circuit is inefficient the wasted power is HEAT right? And, you must also know of course, that with an incandescent bulb all of the non-wasted power is...HEAT, right? What I'm trying to say is that an incandescent bulb is nearly 100% efficient (or nearly 100% inefficient, since all power is radiated as waste heat).
The FBI isn't going to charge you in a Texas court when you've killed a federal agent. That is a federal crime, and you'll be charged in federal court, under federal law.
In short, no it does not matter at all what state you are in. Killing an FBI agent sends you to Leavenworth.
Slashdot Mirror
They can cut off your electricity, as it's enabling you to use illegal content. They can garnish your wages, as it was earned applying knowledge aquired illegally. They can remove the blood in your veins and sell it, as that was produced using food you purchased with money from your job using knowledge acquired illegally. Next time, PAY for your pr0n
I don't know what you're doing with YOUR porn, but porn usually depletes my precious bodily fluids. It definitely doesn't increase my supply.
'well over 99%' means 'we've never heard of a contrary case, but can't be arsed to find out whether or not one actually happened.'
Fool me seven times or fewer, shame on you. Fool m eight or more times, shame on me.
cohibaVancouver: "mmm, that was some good Merlot. Thanks for the glass, honey".
cohiba's wife: "Thanks dear. You give the best massages. The kids have been sleeping for an hour now, do you want to make love?
cohibaVancouver: "You need not ask..."
Make love? Need not ask?
If they talk like that they deserve each other. Whatever happened to good old fashioned fucking?
I dunno. If only we had a word for this....something like the line that a bee would travel...
So long as it's not the Crushinator, you ALWAYS sleep with the farmer's daughter.
or having a glass of wine with your wife after you've read the kids bedtime stories and tucked them in
Ah, a true /.er who doesn't know what he SHOULD be doing with that wife.
Your post can be boiled down to "back up religiously." If you're not already doing that, you deserve what you get.
Fortunately the Constitution has something to say about copyrights.
Nothing that hasn't already been liberally ignored by Congress and the Courts.
That's because you haven't tried it.
the first-sale doctrine will eventually be held to include digital goods
Out of curiousity, which illegal smoked pharmaceutical gave you that idea?
Our corporate overlords will never allow it. Even judges are only as good as the corporations pay for.
It's more like arresting someone
No it's not, because a corporation is not a person in Canada.
To be fair, a broiled edition sounds delicious.
DDoSed
That word...I do not think it means what you think it means.
Mandelbrat is Soylent Green!
That is not irony.
Will you Americans and Canadians stop using this fine word?
Actually it makes you sound really smart so keep on using it. (- irony)
That's not irony either anonymous. That's sarcasm.
Oh, I get it. You're being ironic.
irony, n.
1. A figure of speech in which the intended meaning is the opposite of that expressed by the words used; usually taking the form of sarcasm or ridicule in which laudatory expressions are used to imply condemnation or contempt.
Skye (note the odd spelling, something you wouldn't know unless communication was in writing)
Whoa there Bogie, take it easy. If someone told me their name was Skye, that's the first spelling I would guess. It's not an odd spelling, it's the normal spelling of that name in English (as in the Isle of Skye, and Skye terriers).
As an exercise imagine imagine a strawman that has nothing to do with what anyone is actually talking about, but that I can easily show is absurd.
FTFY.
You have fantasy for your argument. I have the actual history of the US economy from 1954 to 1980 (though as one poster pointed, the top bracket was lowered by Kennedy to 77% in 1960--I had forgotten that).
The fact that the rates on the people who provide the jobs are going up because Obama doesn't want to extend the existing rates is, basically, a dishonest way of getting the tax increases he promised wouldn't happen.
Only if you're retarded. He always said he would raise taxes on incomes over 250k. Which is exactly what he's continued to say he wants to do. There's nothing dishonest about doing it this way--it's what he's always said, in pretty plain English, that he would do.
So, you must be retarded.
, who do you think will provide investments that create jobs if you tax the rich at 90%? Government?
The same kinds of people who created them from 1954 to 1980 when the top tax brackets was 91%.
Your entire argument fails when I point at the 1954 tax code, signed into law by Eisenhower. There were still rich people. There was still investment. There was still job creation. There was still opposition to the government.
You're crazier than Glen Beck if you actually think a 90% tax bracket would have any of the consequences you're hinting at.
I wonder how a house with airplane wings for roofs will fair in a major storm?
It's in Malibu. This is not a concern. How a house with airplane wings for a roof will fair under the wrath of the homeowners organization is a much bigger concern than the weather.
Alistair Huxley laid out how such a society COULD be brought into existence using (effectively) eugenics and drugs to control the population, but the very idea that was laid out gave me such heebie-jeebies that I couldn't finish "Brave New World". That's not any sort of life I'd want to participate in.
Aldous. Aldous Huxley. And it's a shame you didn't finish the book, since the punchline is that it's not the sort of life anyone would really want.
Umm...*sigh*
As your AC replier said with less gumption: do you even know how an incandescent bulb works? I mean, you do know that when a circuit is inefficient the wasted power is HEAT right? And, you must also know of course, that with an incandescent bulb all of the non-wasted power is...HEAT, right? What I'm trying to say is that an incandescent bulb is nearly 100% efficient (or nearly 100% inefficient, since all power is radiated as waste heat).
It is widely known, but everyone except the /. editors.
The FBI isn't going to charge you in a Texas court when you've killed a federal agent. That is a federal crime, and you'll be charged in federal court, under federal law.
In short, no it does not matter at all what state you are in. Killing an FBI agent sends you to Leavenworth.