The middle class in America does have a standard of living on par with Mexico. There's just alot more poor people. And, if something isn't done about the steady accumulation of wealth by the richest people, there will be here, too. This has nothing to do with govt regulation or the lack thereof. Bahrain, one of the richest countries in the world, is also one of the most regulated and has more state owned enterprises than here. In fact, I think most enterprises are state owned. What does this mean. Much like your reply, nothing.
Your reply is just the old conservative comeback to the concept of the people owning things instead of a small group of rich assholes.
I say we nationalize the network infrastructure and get rid of these assholes once and for all. I for one am sick of Bell South or Time Warner digging up my property without compensation. Every time someone else put a house in this area, I get another "public-use easement" attached to my deed so they can come in and charge these people monopolistic rates for access to a network that has been bought and paid for and buried on their own property.
Have you ever looked under Tools.Folder Options in Explorer. There's a tab that allows one to very easily change what programs are associated with what file types. You really need to RTFM.
Please read the book for a better description... But to sum up, there are two kinds of employees: Hourly and Salaried. Hourly employees *must* be paid at least time-and-a-half overtime pay. Period. They can't be compensated with "comp time" or bribed with Rice Krispy Treats. No, as I understand it, the employer must pay 1.5 x Hourly Pay for every hour worked overtime during a week. That little poster in the break room just about sums it up. To compensate for less (or not at all, like some posters are infering) is illegal.
Not all employees must be paid overtime. There are exclusions for "highly" paid workers. I don't know what the cutoff is, but I haven't received overtime since my second programming contract out of school.
The problem with this whole issue is that Americans want to rule the world by being friends with everyone while the Chinese know that the real way to rule is to manipulate people and maintain opressive control
It's obvious that we don't want to rule the world. How's that you say? Japan still exists as a country, as does Germany and Italy. We could have been like the Soviets and just not left after WWII. We could have annexed Japan and most of western europe if we were truly an expanionist country.
Who cares what the rest of the world thinks. You don't like us spying on you, do something about it. Destroy our vast spy satellite network, our planes, our human spies, our radio receivers. Good luck.
And, of course we all know that Chinese news is not manipulated.
How is that a joke? Just an observation, but I thought jokes were supposed to be funny.
2. Inform China that none of their ships will not be allowed to dock and unload in the US.
3. Inform China that for every day this drags on, these restrictions will exist for one year, regardless of when the standoff ends.
Why won't this happen? Because corporate execs sit around in circle jerks and dream of seeling each and every Chinaman an air conditioner or a washing machine. The truth of course is that China never intends to be an equitable trading partner. They want to sell us stuff and steal our technology.
I did business in Hong Kong and the PRC in the 80's and they were the worst business partners I ever had. They lied, cheated and stole.
I can't see why anyone would want to trade with them.
Could it be that the RIAA is only setting up legal precedent by attacking an easy to find and easy to target adversary? If it is found that the sharing of music is not protected, wouldn't if be easier to seek criminal and civil actions against individuals involved in the alternative systems, like Freent and Gnutella?
How easy would it be for law enforcement to determine who each user is and arrest/charge that person? Do these alternatives provide any sort of anonymity? If I'm hosting files on my cable modem, which anyone can access, how hard am I to identify? Not too hard.
If the RIAA pushes hard enough, wouldn't the authorities have to get involved. This is illegal after all.
Finally, how many of you folks would step to the plate for a file sharing system which focused on the dissemination of child pornography or individual private information?
I wonder how many people would go to bat for Napster if, instead of music, they facilitated the sharing of child pronography or the private information of humans.
Sounds like you are also against logic. How can you be against censorship and also against a web site, regardless of what it promotes.
The use of drugs is a consensual act (as in consensual sex or consensual suicide) and therefore, none of your clueless business. If more people would concentrate on there own lives and leave others alone, this country would be so much more bearable.
Stay out of other people's private lives and you will find yourself alot happier.
But you are depriving the original owner of something which they own. Their right to receive an amount which they establish for use of their intellectual property. Just because one thinks that amount is excessive or not properly allocated doesn't give anyone the right to steal. In the case of music, if you don't want to pay for the work of others, then make your own. How lazy and spoiled have we become? We must have the great artist's work, it pleases us, but we refuse to pay for it because we are entitled to this pleasure.
You can dance around the issue all that you like with words, but in the end it's theft. Please tell me how point two is not fulfilled. Are you saying that the artist does not own his art?
While it is true that art would be created regardless of money, artists themselves would be even hungrier if they were not rewarded for their art. And while I'm quite sure that Linus would agree that art for art's sake would thrive, as if his opinion has any bearing on this, I doubt that he would advocate the use of someone's art without their permission.
Just on a side note, I find that most people who don't believe in intellectual property rights don't really contribute much in the way of intellectual property to the world.
Your first "fact" is a very interesting rationalization. Sociopathic, but interesting. The artists choose to give the record company the rights that they have. No guns are used. And I'll bet that you were not part of the negotiations either.
Making an unauthorized copy of intellectual property is theft. And those who do it are theives. No amount of argument or rationalization will change that fact. Call yourself a pirate if it makes you feel that you are doing something romantic. But you are just a thief and you are the real scum.
And then we get the comment "Religion and freedom have never really gotten along." Nice tie, but it doesn't explain a few people like Gangis Kahn, Napolean, or Hitler (who prosecuted the Jewish RACE much more so than the religion).
Actually, those characters were very devout followers of whatever religion was prevalent at the time. Napoleon's rise to power was even blessed by the church when he was crowned. Why would religion get invovled with these people. Because it was expedient? It served the power hunger of the religious.
Most people don't live with a "severely outdated, extermely prejudicial" view of the religious. Their views are quite correct; history defends their views and present religious behavior does little to change those views. Religion hasn't changed much since the days when it was actually "allowed" to murder. Nowadays, it tries to kill the spirits of free thinkers just as in days past it would kill their bodies. If it weren't for the rise of democracy and the individual, Christians would still be killing people for heresy and blasphemey. (Jehovah, Jehovah, Jehovah!!!)
Religion is the refuge of the weak minded; those who are unable to think for themselves.
Oh, and speaking of delusions; try an all powerful god, who nobody has seen and who makes no effort to prove his existence because our faith in him is our redemption. And if you don't have this faith, or fail to convince others that you do, you will be killed. And if you should try to convince others that god doesn't exist, hooah, DEAD! Not only are christians simple minded, they are unable to detect an obvious lie.
Smith told the agency that he was not going to comply with its onerous regulations and refused to take down his website. Informed by an FEC attorney that he ran the risk of having legal action taken against him, Smith basically dared the agency to try. "I told them that I was definitely not going to take my site down, I was not going to file the reports and I was not going to post my name on the site," he said. "I told them that from a free speech standpoint, they were totally out of line."
I love this guy! He's my hero! Most people would have rolled over. This guy's telling them to come and get him.
I'm starting a website right now to try and get this guy on the 2000 presidential ticket. www.eat_sh*t_feds.org Does anyone know where I can get the PAC forms from the FEC?
I didn't say he was evil, just greedy. And delusional, if the title and excerpts of his book (or should I say, advertisemnt) are indicative of the entire contents.
And as for the other things, my point was that he wasn't doing anything revolutionary, contrary to what his self promoting book states. Unless you think that downloading sotware, writing some install shells, and mass producing CDs is ground breaking.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, without law enforcement, the cars could just go ahead and run over your traffic jam causing bike riding ass!
The middle class in America does have a standard of living on par with Mexico. There's just alot more poor people. And, if something isn't done about the steady accumulation of wealth by the richest people, there will be here, too. This has nothing to do with govt regulation or the lack thereof. Bahrain, one of the richest countries in the world, is also one of the most regulated and has more state owned enterprises than here. In fact, I think most enterprises are state owned. What does this mean. Much like your reply, nothing.
Your reply is just the old conservative comeback to the concept of the people owning things instead of a small group of rich assholes.
I say we nationalize the network infrastructure and get rid of these assholes once and for all. I for one am sick of Bell South or Time Warner digging up my property without compensation. Every time someone else put a house in this area, I get another "public-use easement" attached to my deed so they can come in and charge these people monopolistic rates for access to a network that has been bought and paid for and buried on their own property.
Spray paint works for me. It really helps with the red light cameras too. ATM cameras are the easiest for the neophyte.
Have you ever looked under Tools.Folder Options in Explorer. There's a tab that allows one to very easily change what programs are associated with what file types. You really need to RTFM.
Please read the book for a better description... But to sum up, there are two kinds of employees: Hourly and Salaried. Hourly employees *must* be paid at least time-and-a-half overtime pay. Period. They can't be compensated with "comp time" or bribed with Rice Krispy Treats. No, as I understand it, the employer must pay 1.5 x Hourly Pay for every hour worked overtime during a week. That little poster in the break room just about sums it up. To compensate for less (or not at all, like some posters are infering) is illegal.
Not all employees must be paid overtime. There are exclusions for "highly" paid workers. I don't know what the cutoff is, but I haven't received overtime since my second programming contract out of school.
I have to give that an 11 on the speculation scale.
The problem with this whole issue is that Americans want to rule the world by being friends with everyone while the Chinese know that the real way to rule is to manipulate people and maintain opressive control
It's obvious that we don't want to rule the world. How's that you say? Japan still exists as a country, as does Germany and Italy. We could have been like the Soviets and just not left after WWII. We could have annexed Japan and most of western europe if we were truly an expanionist country.
Who cares what the rest of the world thinks. You don't like us spying on you, do something about it. Destroy our vast spy satellite network, our planes, our human spies, our radio receivers. Good luck.
And, of course we all know that Chinese news is not manipulated.
How is that a joke? Just an observation, but I thought jokes were supposed to be funny.
1. Freeze ALL chinese assets in the US.
2. Inform China that none of their ships will not be allowed to dock and unload in the US.
3. Inform China that for every day this drags on, these restrictions will exist for one year, regardless of when the standoff ends.
Why won't this happen? Because corporate execs sit around in circle jerks and dream of seeling each and every Chinaman an air conditioner or a washing machine. The truth of course is that China never intends to be an equitable trading partner. They want to sell us stuff and steal our technology.
I did business in Hong Kong and the PRC in the 80's and they were the worst business partners I ever had. They lied, cheated and stole. I can't see why anyone would want to trade with them.
I remember there was a ban on "atomics" as they called them.
I'm waiting until you learn the difference between a cliche and a word.
Could it be that the RIAA is only setting up legal precedent by attacking an easy to find and easy to target adversary? If it is found that the sharing of music is not protected, wouldn't if be easier to seek criminal and civil actions against individuals involved in the alternative systems, like Freent and Gnutella?
How easy would it be for law enforcement to determine who each user is and arrest/charge that person? Do these alternatives provide any sort of anonymity? If I'm hosting files on my cable modem, which anyone can access, how hard am I to identify? Not too hard.
If the RIAA pushes hard enough, wouldn't the authorities have to get involved. This is illegal after all.
Finally, how many of you folks would step to the plate for a file sharing system which focused on the dissemination of child pornography or individual private information?
I wonder how many people would go to bat for Napster if, instead of music, they facilitated the sharing of child pronography or the private information of humans.
Sounds like you are also against logic. How can you be against censorship and also against a web site, regardless of what it promotes.
The use of drugs is a consensual act (as in consensual sex or consensual suicide) and therefore, none of your clueless business. If more people would concentrate on there own lives and leave others alone, this country would be so much more bearable.
Stay out of other people's private lives and you will find yourself alot happier.
What is the damage? No access to a private company's service doesn't seem like damage to me.
Can't Napster ban whomever they choose for whatever reason they choose? Do they even have to have a reason?
Don't patronize them then.
Funny that everything on that website is copyrighted.
But you are depriving the original owner of something which they own. Their right to receive an amount which they establish for use of their intellectual property. Just because one thinks that amount is excessive or not properly allocated doesn't give anyone the right to steal. In the case of music, if you don't want to pay for the work of others, then make your own. How lazy and spoiled have we become? We must have the great artist's work, it pleases us, but we refuse to pay for it because we are entitled to this pleasure.
You can dance around the issue all that you like with words, but in the end it's theft. Please tell me how point two is not fulfilled. Are you saying that the artist does not own his art?
While it is true that art would be created regardless of money, artists themselves would be even hungrier if they were not rewarded for their art. And while I'm quite sure that Linus would agree that art for art's sake would thrive, as if his opinion has any bearing on this, I doubt that he would advocate the use of someone's art without their permission.
Just on a side note, I find that most people who don't believe in intellectual property rights don't really contribute much in the way of intellectual property to the world.
Your first "fact" is a very interesting rationalization. Sociopathic, but interesting. The artists choose to give the record company the rights that they have. No guns are used. And I'll bet that you were not part of the negotiations either.
Making an unauthorized copy of intellectual property is theft. And those who do it are theives. No amount of argument or rationalization will change that fact. Call yourself a pirate if it makes you feel that you are doing something romantic. But you are just a thief and you are the real scum.
And then we get the comment "Religion and freedom have never really gotten along." Nice tie, but it doesn't explain a few people like Gangis Kahn, Napolean, or Hitler (who prosecuted the Jewish RACE much more so than the religion).
Actually, those characters were very devout followers of whatever religion was prevalent at the time. Napoleon's rise to power was even blessed by the church when he was crowned. Why would religion get invovled with these people. Because it was expedient? It served the power hunger of the religious.
Most people don't live with a "severely outdated, extermely prejudicial" view of the religious. Their views are quite correct; history defends their views and present religious behavior does little to change those views. Religion hasn't changed much since the days when it was actually "allowed" to murder. Nowadays, it tries to kill the spirits of free thinkers just as in days past it would kill their bodies. If it weren't for the rise of democracy and the individual, Christians would still be killing people for heresy and blasphemey. (Jehovah, Jehovah, Jehovah!!!)
Religion is the refuge of the weak minded; those who are unable to think for themselves.
Oh, and speaking of delusions; try an all powerful god, who nobody has seen and who makes no effort to prove his existence because our faith in him is our redemption. And if you don't have this faith, or fail to convince others that you do, you will be killed. And if you should try to convince others that god doesn't exist, hooah, DEAD! Not only are christians simple minded, they are unable to detect an obvious lie.
Smith told the agency that he was not going to comply with its onerous regulations and refused to take down his website. Informed by an FEC attorney that he ran the risk of having legal action taken against him, Smith basically dared the agency to try. "I told them that I was definitely not going to take my site down, I was not going to file the reports and I was not going to post my name on the site," he said. "I told them that from a free speech standpoint, they were totally out of line."
I love this guy! He's my hero! Most people would have rolled over. This guy's telling them to come and get him.
I'm starting a website right now to try and get this guy on the 2000 presidential ticket. www.eat_sh*t_feds.org Does anyone know where I can get the PAC forms from the FEC?
I didn't say he was evil, just greedy. And delusional, if the title and excerpts of his book (or should I say, advertisemnt) are indicative of the entire contents.
And as for the other things, my point was that he wasn't doing anything revolutionary, contrary to what his self promoting book states. Unless you think that downloading sotware, writing some install shells, and mass producing CDs is ground breaking.
RDISK is a Win32 app, and I don't think it supports creating an ERD remotely.
And, I'm not sure about this, but I think that the ERD is tied to a specific machine. Anybody?