Even if it is a replacement, we're still years behind where we would be if the hicks didn't insist that we throw out the unused embryos. The reality is that we've got plenty of embryonic stem cells available without creating any more. Which really ought to be where the morals come into it. As it stands we're destroying the extra stem cells from IVF instead of using them because the right won't allow scientists to use them.
Because it's the "Christians" that are the sole arbiters of what is and is not family friendly, duh. But seriously, there's a lot of small minded bigots out there that like to use things like this to erase as many traces of things they might have to think about as possible.
Yes, but Google in doing so has abused it's market position for it's own benefit. Theoretically the DoJ ought to be investigating the abuse of power. But then again, the DoJ ought to have used the Clayton Antitrust Act to prevent them from gaining so much control of the online advertising space in the first place.
This is precisely why the DoJ is supposed to screen mergers and say no when it would result in insufficient competition. Had the DoJ said no to Google buying Doubleclick, it's much less likely that this would've happened as Google wouldn't be controlling most of the entire market.
What they really need is to hire a crapload of new workers to examine the patents being submitted. One of the problems they're having is that since pretty much every patent is granted, there's a lot of them being submitted which wouldn't have been in the past. Meaning that by rubber stamping patents they're probably making the workload worse.
Consequently they need to hire a huge number of people to handle the work load and probably raise the standards substantially. Perhaps fine companies that willfully file bad patents to help pay for the extra staff.
It's probably because they aren't delivering the content via Flash and the HTML5 version doesn't yet support ads. Meaning that those were probably videos where the person uploaded it requiring ads and they can't presently show ads with HTML5. I'm not sure why all mobile devices are blocked, but I'm guessing it has to do with the fact that most Android phones don't support flash properly or at all.
Not saying that's necessarily the case, but it's not necessarily them being mean and short sighted.
Probably because he is racist. People with issues related to bigotry like to couch it in ways like the GGP does in order to legitimize it. But he's blocking emails on a blanket basis for his users and I doubt very much that the country in question is really spamming any more than other countries.
This is the sort of thinking which leads Latinos in the US to be arrested more often following traffic stops than white folks. Despite similar rates of compliance with police instructions.
Demonstrably false. There are plenty of after market resellers for Ford products. They don't sell stuff for Chevy or Chrysler, yet the managed to stay in business. Can Shell switch to be a gas company that only sells to Fords. Sure they can. It'd be a much less profitable business through.
No, the GP is correct. Shell stations sell something that is useful in any brand of vehicle whereas the aftermarket resellers sell things which are designed for use specifically in Ford products as in they could sell them to owners of other makes of vehicle, but they wouldn't fit.
Because we effectively had that for years and all that happened was stagnation in the browser market. I remember when I first moved over to Firefox back before it was Firefox and it was a challenge at times getting things done because so many sites were hardwired to only work with IE. Sure they didn't formally block other browsers, but they might as well have given that they'd use tricks which were wholly unusable on other browsers and they'd use plug ins which weren't available beyond Windows.
I didn't own a Power Glove, or any NES stuff at the time, but I have a hard time believing that it was possible for it to live up to the hype that came with The Wizard. That scene with Lucas bringing it out and suiting up pretty much killed any chance of it ever living up to the hype.
Convenience. Just like with convenience foods typically costing more than doing it yourself. Of course, that's more the rationale than the reasoning. The reason is that they can get away with it.
Personally, I like ebooks, but I do expect to be able to use them as I please. I like the way that O'reilly media handles their ebooks. The specifics depends a bit on the book, but most of the recent books are available via several different formats, including epub. My main complaint is that if you buy the book through their store rather than the android market that there seems to be no way of converting between the two.
The fact that it's limited to one 14 day loan if the publisher agrees to it. But, OTOH why miss a chance to bash people for not bending over for whatever the corporate masters want.
So, you're one of those people that believe in spontaneous wealth generation. Under the fair tax proposal, the rich would pay essentially nothing, and the revenues wouldn't be replaced. Seems a bit fantastic to me. Either you'd have to cut services or you'd have to raise taxes. The only other option is to rack up massive government debt. Fair tax is pretty much just a hoax to take advantage of the incompetent.
It's arrogance and ignorance. A lot of people assume that because the Democrats had majorities in both houses and that the Senate had 60 votes with the independents, that the Republicans weren't responsible for anything. The problem is that for the last 2 years, the Republican party has refused to have any involvement in pretty much anything. And with 60 votes in the Senate you need absolutely ever one on every vote, and each and every Senator is the one that made the difference.
They had their chance to contribute to the healthcare bill, for instance, and not only did they opt out, but they chose to make up outlandish lies like the death panel lie and do whatever they could to kill the bill.
It's because it's a bunk argument. MS is more or less stuck in WA state because they use our courts. They have chosen in recent years not to pay their taxes, except for the property taxes and what sales tax they can't avoid. But they owe the state a huge amount of money in back taxes. The number is somewhere around $1 billion or so at present.
Sigh, it always amazes me that people are this willfully ignorant.
Fair tax isn't what they're suggesting. This is a way of allowing Billionaires to pay even less tax than they do currently. Under it you'd pay absolutely no tax on investment income or income of other sorts. Meaning that as long as you don't spend it you don't pay tax.
The problem with that is that at some point somebody has to pay taxes. This is the same sort of incompetent tax policy that the GOP has been pushing for years. Cut your taxes and then we'll all have more money. The problem is that you can't cut taxes and have an out of control military budget. You get one or the other, not both.
The best plan I've heard that we could reasonably see implemented was Steve Forbes' flat tax proposal. The tax as I understand it is actually lower than what most folks pay now, with generous rebates for people in lower income brackets that are behaving responsibly.
MS wasn't affected by the move. MS as an entity pays basically no tax in WA state, except on property. Very few employees at MS make enough to be covered by the tax. Pretty much the only ones that weren't exempted from it are top level execs.
Steve ought to be really mindful of pissing off the state as the next move is probably going to be for our Attorney General to sue MS for failing to pay the state taxes that they've been required to pay for the last several years. They may have opted to license their software through a division located in Nevada, but for legal reasons they're still liable for taxes in WA state as MS has a major presence here.
How it is that you were modded insightful is beyond me.
My HD TV does, but it's not really meant to be used. Basically it's just there for servicing the unit, and I have no idea what they actually do with it.
It's the size of the industry that dictates that. We produce more crap than pretty much everybody except India combined. It's just that we also produce more gems and the crap tends to be forgotten fairly quickly. Unfortunately the same doesn't work with music as we're still stuck with Bieber.
On a side note, he's Canadian, can't we just revoke his papers for being a public nuisance and send him back anywhere other than here?
The results aren't particularly ground breaking. We already knew that once people gain guaranteed healthcare that Americans live longer than most other nations. The problem is that since we don't have universal health care our folks almost certainly hit that age in worse condition than other developed nations since we don't have any right to preventative treatment. We also fixate more on the length of life than the quality of life.
More likely than not this is a white wash study to justify rolling back the changes we've made. The implication with this sort of study is that we have something that works, whereas they're just hedging out the parts that are most broken. With the kind of money we're spending on health care we should be getting a hell of a lot more than what we are.
That has changed recently with the health care overhaul bill, but it's going to take decades before the improvements are seen, even after the bill finished phasing in in 2014.
On a side note, the health care bill is here to stay, the only glimmer of hope that the Republicans have is that the courts will overturn it. But even there it's not likely to last. Now that Americans have some real rights we're not going to want to go back to what we've had. And the longer they wait to repeal it the less likely it is that we won't go back to comprehensive reform.
The judges are a bigger problem. Expert witnesses are supposed to inform the jurors of the necessary science involved and whatever else, but it's the Judge who ultimately is responsible for making sure that the attorneys and witnesses adhere to the law.
By that I mean that judges are the ones that ultimately give the jury their instructions when it gets to deliberations and it's easy to accidentally make a manifest error of law and if that doesn't get caught by somebody the wrong party may very well win the case.
In the past that might have worked. Back when it took a huge effort to copy a book or a song, that might have worked. These days however, most copyright infringement is done by amateurs who aren't making money off of it. What you're suggesting is more or less the same thing as looking the other way and hoping that the industry finds a way of making money anyways.
That's not going to work. While I do agree that the law suits have gotten a bit silly and that they ought to be filed in small claims court for low sums of money, abolition of copyright penalties has it's own problems.
That's why we have statutory awards. You can't prove that in any reasonable way other than tapping the accused's connection and letting them continue. What we need is reform in how the statutory awards are calculated to bring them back into some semblance of reality.
Well no, the GP is correct. Return sane terms to copyright and cap the punishment at something reasonable. I'm not sure it's reasonable, but capping it at a years labor would be enough to deter anybody. Make them pay a years labor plus whatever proceeds they made and that's enough.
Abolishing copyright on the other hand would ultimately hurt everybody. It's really hard to make a $100m movie as it is when you have a mechanism to collect. Try financing it without anyway of forcing people to either pay or not watch it.
Even on a smaller scale, some people would let their work get out into the public domain and some would keep it secret because there'd be no way of making any sort of informed choice about how and where it would be distributed.
Slashdot Mirror
Even if it is a replacement, we're still years behind where we would be if the hicks didn't insist that we throw out the unused embryos. The reality is that we've got plenty of embryonic stem cells available without creating any more. Which really ought to be where the morals come into it. As it stands we're destroying the extra stem cells from IVF instead of using them because the right won't allow scientists to use them.
Because it's the "Christians" that are the sole arbiters of what is and is not family friendly, duh. But seriously, there's a lot of small minded bigots out there that like to use things like this to erase as many traces of things they might have to think about as possible.
Yes, but Google in doing so has abused it's market position for it's own benefit. Theoretically the DoJ ought to be investigating the abuse of power. But then again, the DoJ ought to have used the Clayton Antitrust Act to prevent them from gaining so much control of the online advertising space in the first place.
This is precisely why the DoJ is supposed to screen mergers and say no when it would result in insufficient competition. Had the DoJ said no to Google buying Doubleclick, it's much less likely that this would've happened as Google wouldn't be controlling most of the entire market.
What they really need is to hire a crapload of new workers to examine the patents being submitted. One of the problems they're having is that since pretty much every patent is granted, there's a lot of them being submitted which wouldn't have been in the past. Meaning that by rubber stamping patents they're probably making the workload worse.
Consequently they need to hire a huge number of people to handle the work load and probably raise the standards substantially. Perhaps fine companies that willfully file bad patents to help pay for the extra staff.
Well to be fair, Eric Schmidt is concerned about getting any of it on him.
It's probably because they aren't delivering the content via Flash and the HTML5 version doesn't yet support ads. Meaning that those were probably videos where the person uploaded it requiring ads and they can't presently show ads with HTML5. I'm not sure why all mobile devices are blocked, but I'm guessing it has to do with the fact that most Android phones don't support flash properly or at all.
Not saying that's necessarily the case, but it's not necessarily them being mean and short sighted.
Probably because he is racist. People with issues related to bigotry like to couch it in ways like the GGP does in order to legitimize it. But he's blocking emails on a blanket basis for his users and I doubt very much that the country in question is really spamming any more than other countries.
This is the sort of thinking which leads Latinos in the US to be arrested more often following traffic stops than white folks. Despite similar rates of compliance with police instructions.
Demonstrably false. There are plenty of after market resellers for Ford products. They don't sell stuff for Chevy or Chrysler, yet the managed to stay in business. Can Shell switch to be a gas company that only sells to Fords. Sure they can. It'd be a much less profitable business through.
No, the GP is correct. Shell stations sell something that is useful in any brand of vehicle whereas the aftermarket resellers sell things which are designed for use specifically in Ford products as in they could sell them to owners of other makes of vehicle, but they wouldn't fit.
Because we effectively had that for years and all that happened was stagnation in the browser market. I remember when I first moved over to Firefox back before it was Firefox and it was a challenge at times getting things done because so many sites were hardwired to only work with IE. Sure they didn't formally block other browsers, but they might as well have given that they'd use tricks which were wholly unusable on other browsers and they'd use plug ins which weren't available beyond Windows.
I didn't own a Power Glove, or any NES stuff at the time, but I have a hard time believing that it was possible for it to live up to the hype that came with The Wizard. That scene with Lucas bringing it out and suiting up pretty much killed any chance of it ever living up to the hype.
Convenience. Just like with convenience foods typically costing more than doing it yourself. Of course, that's more the rationale than the reasoning. The reason is that they can get away with it.
Personally, I like ebooks, but I do expect to be able to use them as I please. I like the way that O'reilly media handles their ebooks. The specifics depends a bit on the book, but most of the recent books are available via several different formats, including epub. My main complaint is that if you buy the book through their store rather than the android market that there seems to be no way of converting between the two.
The fact that it's limited to one 14 day loan if the publisher agrees to it. But, OTOH why miss a chance to bash people for not bending over for whatever the corporate masters want.
So, you're one of those people that believe in spontaneous wealth generation. Under the fair tax proposal, the rich would pay essentially nothing, and the revenues wouldn't be replaced. Seems a bit fantastic to me. Either you'd have to cut services or you'd have to raise taxes. The only other option is to rack up massive government debt. Fair tax is pretty much just a hoax to take advantage of the incompetent.
It's arrogance and ignorance. A lot of people assume that because the Democrats had majorities in both houses and that the Senate had 60 votes with the independents, that the Republicans weren't responsible for anything. The problem is that for the last 2 years, the Republican party has refused to have any involvement in pretty much anything. And with 60 votes in the Senate you need absolutely ever one on every vote, and each and every Senator is the one that made the difference.
They had their chance to contribute to the healthcare bill, for instance, and not only did they opt out, but they chose to make up outlandish lies like the death panel lie and do whatever they could to kill the bill.
It's because it's a bunk argument. MS is more or less stuck in WA state because they use our courts. They have chosen in recent years not to pay their taxes, except for the property taxes and what sales tax they can't avoid. But they owe the state a huge amount of money in back taxes. The number is somewhere around $1 billion or so at present.
Sigh, it always amazes me that people are this willfully ignorant.
Fair tax isn't what they're suggesting. This is a way of allowing Billionaires to pay even less tax than they do currently. Under it you'd pay absolutely no tax on investment income or income of other sorts. Meaning that as long as you don't spend it you don't pay tax.
The problem with that is that at some point somebody has to pay taxes. This is the same sort of incompetent tax policy that the GOP has been pushing for years. Cut your taxes and then we'll all have more money. The problem is that you can't cut taxes and have an out of control military budget. You get one or the other, not both.
The best plan I've heard that we could reasonably see implemented was Steve Forbes' flat tax proposal. The tax as I understand it is actually lower than what most folks pay now, with generous rebates for people in lower income brackets that are behaving responsibly.
MS wasn't affected by the move. MS as an entity pays basically no tax in WA state, except on property. Very few employees at MS make enough to be covered by the tax. Pretty much the only ones that weren't exempted from it are top level execs.
Steve ought to be really mindful of pissing off the state as the next move is probably going to be for our Attorney General to sue MS for failing to pay the state taxes that they've been required to pay for the last several years. They may have opted to license their software through a division located in Nevada, but for legal reasons they're still liable for taxes in WA state as MS has a major presence here.
How it is that you were modded insightful is beyond me.
My HD TV does, but it's not really meant to be used. Basically it's just there for servicing the unit, and I have no idea what they actually do with it.
It's the size of the industry that dictates that. We produce more crap than pretty much everybody except India combined. It's just that we also produce more gems and the crap tends to be forgotten fairly quickly. Unfortunately the same doesn't work with music as we're still stuck with Bieber.
On a side note, he's Canadian, can't we just revoke his papers for being a public nuisance and send him back anywhere other than here?
The results aren't particularly ground breaking. We already knew that once people gain guaranteed healthcare that Americans live longer than most other nations. The problem is that since we don't have universal health care our folks almost certainly hit that age in worse condition than other developed nations since we don't have any right to preventative treatment. We also fixate more on the length of life than the quality of life.
More likely than not this is a white wash study to justify rolling back the changes we've made. The implication with this sort of study is that we have something that works, whereas they're just hedging out the parts that are most broken. With the kind of money we're spending on health care we should be getting a hell of a lot more than what we are.
That has changed recently with the health care overhaul bill, but it's going to take decades before the improvements are seen, even after the bill finished phasing in in 2014.
On a side note, the health care bill is here to stay, the only glimmer of hope that the Republicans have is that the courts will overturn it. But even there it's not likely to last. Now that Americans have some real rights we're not going to want to go back to what we've had. And the longer they wait to repeal it the less likely it is that we won't go back to comprehensive reform.
The judges are a bigger problem. Expert witnesses are supposed to inform the jurors of the necessary science involved and whatever else, but it's the Judge who ultimately is responsible for making sure that the attorneys and witnesses adhere to the law.
By that I mean that judges are the ones that ultimately give the jury their instructions when it gets to deliberations and it's easy to accidentally make a manifest error of law and if that doesn't get caught by somebody the wrong party may very well win the case.
In the past that might have worked. Back when it took a huge effort to copy a book or a song, that might have worked. These days however, most copyright infringement is done by amateurs who aren't making money off of it. What you're suggesting is more or less the same thing as looking the other way and hoping that the industry finds a way of making money anyways.
That's not going to work. While I do agree that the law suits have gotten a bit silly and that they ought to be filed in small claims court for low sums of money, abolition of copyright penalties has it's own problems.
That's why we have statutory awards. You can't prove that in any reasonable way other than tapping the accused's connection and letting them continue. What we need is reform in how the statutory awards are calculated to bring them back into some semblance of reality.
Well no, the GP is correct. Return sane terms to copyright and cap the punishment at something reasonable. I'm not sure it's reasonable, but capping it at a years labor would be enough to deter anybody. Make them pay a years labor plus whatever proceeds they made and that's enough.
Abolishing copyright on the other hand would ultimately hurt everybody. It's really hard to make a $100m movie as it is when you have a mechanism to collect. Try financing it without anyway of forcing people to either pay or not watch it.
Even on a smaller scale, some people would let their work get out into the public domain and some would keep it secret because there'd be no way of making any sort of informed choice about how and where it would be distributed.