1.) A patdown search for weapons if they feel threatened. 2.) A detailed search of a PERSON when that person enters custody. 3.) A search of the "wingspan" of a person when they enter custody. 4.) A cursory search of the premises in which someone was arrested if they have reason to believe an accomplice is hiding. 5.) When the owner consents to the search.
Wow. You resorted to name calling that fast? And you wonder why people are dissrespectful? The fact is, kids under 18 don't have a choice in whether they can attend or not. But that is mostly irrelevant compared to the other points I wish to convey.
You are paid to teach. Part of teaching is coming up with -effective- lesson plans, which you are not doing. Do what you are paid to do, or quit your job. You also ask why the "cowardly fucks" sit towards the back? Perhaps it is to be as far from you as possible, not due to cowardice, but because they have no reason to be near you. They know their input IS ok, its just you discard it regardless.
I completely agree. The "series of tubes" is probably the best and most accurate part of the speech he gave, the REST of the speech is what concerns me, he talks about waiting several days for an internet to be delivered.
Well the supreme court did say that the government CAN regulate movies. In response the MPAA was formed so the government didn't need to. I imagine video games would be rated the same way.
Actually, it takes MORE energy for a liquid crystal to BLOCK light than it does to let it pass completely, thus for an LCD, black is -SLIGHTLY- less energy efficient than white.
Wait, what? I thought mages drank heavily, don't they use "recharging mana" as an excuse, infact they drink so much that they can pull their drinks out of seemingly nothingness (they claim they magically conjure it, but I know better)? Sounds like we need a brance of the AA just for mages, I think yours would fit in just fine.
I think it's interesting how people work hard to find ways to circumvent copy protection, move files in sureptitious ways that violate the spirit of the law, but not the law itself, to avoid being sued, disabling logs so you can't track who visited a site, etc., to cover up the true behavior which is illegal file sharing.
However, despite this you blast RIAA anytime it tries a new way of getting at the information it needs to proceed with its mission of preventing file sharing. I don't agree with all their tactics, but if a file sharer has the right to get creative and try things, why shouldn't they?
I agree with a lot of you about fair use. I like having my music on a server so I can get to it wherever I am. But I think we all know that people who put their music on-line (maybe even passowrd protected) for their own use and prevent others from copying it is really the minority and the bulk of the traffic, torrents, etc., is really people just stealing music. You have a file (video, music, whatever) that you didn't pay for? It's wrong, regardless if you can prove through legal loopholes that the way you did it isn't illegal, or that you did it in a way that couldn't be tracked.
Trying to constantly one-up 'the man' by cracking all encryption, circumventing logs, etc., in the pursuit of acquiring that which you didn't pay for is wrong and to persist in this will one day result in some very draconion or strange move on the industry's part that will really make it hard for everyone. Remember when Mom &/or Dad said, "Well, if you can't be trusted with that responsibilty then we'll just take it away altogether." It'll probably have initial effects we don't predict. Example: The loss in revenue and pressure from stock holders results in music companies only signing the most popular acts who generate such volume that even with illegal downloading they'll generate enough revenue anyway. This would result in more 'watered down cookie cutter' type artists or groups that have the widest appeal and shutout creative and experimental artists trying something new (you like your up-and-coming indepedent artists too right?). We could enter an 'Orwellian' era where the only options are American Idol winners and runners up stocking the shelves. For access you could imagine something where they goto a streaming-on-demand model involving subscriptions or pay-to-play, perhaps encrypting them with some kind of time-sensitive key, rather than letting you get files or even CDs, or giving you files but tying them to a USB dongle with your permissions on it. I realize these technical hurdles I toss out might all be solvable by good hackers, but the idea is to point out that there may be some model that allows them to generate revenue while also reallly hampering file loading.
The argument that DRM treats the consumer like a criminal is true and I agree. But if you keep behaving in a criminal way. . .
>outright dismisses the survival or our species and places money before the advancement of man in the bigger picture.
Yeah, no.
He is right. Look at what oil companies are doing, they want money now, not caring that they will be broke in another generation. We will wither at that logic until we are unable to build such a spaceship.
Pfft, ask anyone in college, a microwave is neither for heating things up nor cooking things. Its for like making lightbulbs go whoa! and like awsome colors man.
Bad idea.
Something similar was implimented in the sims online. Basically if you got scammed/spammed/etc... by someone you could place a "bad mark" on them, and people can see how many bad marks someone has. Eventually, there was a "mafia" that sprung up, threatening to mark someone with alot of bad marks unless they would pay money. And if the mafia did mark someone, everyone would assume that person was a scammer or spammer.
Note: this may be innacurate or old, as this is what I read in a magazine. Don't sue if I'm wrong, but this seems logical, and seems to be what would happen if Blizzard implimented banishment.
Slashdot Mirror
Shatter is around 80x last I checked. 52x has them warble.
Well excuse me princess.
Well, computer code is becoming simpler and simpler to understand, unlike law.
We started with Assembly, and then went to C, then C++, then java, and so on.
No, this is not the case, atleast not in the USA.
Without a warrant officers are limited to
1.) A patdown search for weapons if they feel threatened.
2.) A detailed search of a PERSON when that person enters custody.
3.) A search of the "wingspan" of a person when they enter custody.
4.) A cursory search of the premises in which someone was arrested if they have reason to believe an accomplice is hiding.
5.) When the owner consents to the search.
Actually, it doesn't weigh 12 grams exactly. Don't forget, neutrons weigh SLIGHTLY more than one atomic unit.
And also remember that roughly 2/3 of the Sony fanboys have the feat: deformity (Obese) from BoVD. The extra con will make them harder to kill.
Not SEX only SEX that SEX, it SEX is SEX possible SEX to SEX use SEX this SEX to SEX type. SEX isn't SEX that SEX wonderful?
Wow. You resorted to name calling that fast? And you wonder why people are dissrespectful? The fact is, kids under 18 don't have a choice in whether they can attend or not. But that is mostly irrelevant compared to the other points I wish to convey. You are paid to teach. Part of teaching is coming up with -effective- lesson plans, which you are not doing. Do what you are paid to do, or quit your job. You also ask why the "cowardly fucks" sit towards the back? Perhaps it is to be as far from you as possible, not due to cowardice, but because they have no reason to be near you. They know their input IS ok, its just you discard it regardless.
I completely agree. The "series of tubes" is probably the best and most accurate part of the speech he gave, the REST of the speech is what concerns me, he talks about waiting several days for an internet to be delivered.
Well its quite hard to know what it will look like, considering the huge gaping hole in what we know about the format.
Sadly, I can't understand that analogy, perhaps a car analogy would be more appropriate here.
That is setting up a network differently to make something faster. What we are worried about is setting up a network to make everything ELSE slower.
Well the supreme court did say that the government CAN regulate movies. In response the MPAA was formed so the government didn't need to. I imagine video games would be rated the same way.
Wow, a redneck? I thought rednecks were only interested in trucks. And the internet is not a truck. Its a series of tubes.
Actually, it takes MORE energy for a liquid crystal to BLOCK light than it does to let it pass completely, thus for an LCD, black is -SLIGHTLY- less energy efficient than white.
Its about a bridge, and where do trolls live? DUH!
Hey, I just realized, I'm too stupid and uneducated as a person to post comments, please take this away from me.
Al Capone wasn't arrested for bootlegging, but for not paying taxes.
Wait, what? I thought mages drank heavily, don't they use "recharging mana" as an excuse, infact they drink so much that they can pull their drinks out of seemingly nothingness (they claim they magically conjure it, but I know better)? Sounds like we need a brance of the AA just for mages, I think yours would fit in just fine.
I think it's interesting how people work hard to find ways to circumvent copy protection, move files in sureptitious ways that violate the spirit of the law, but not the law itself, to avoid being sued, disabling logs so you can't track who visited a site, etc., to cover up the true behavior which is illegal file sharing.
However, despite this you blast RIAA anytime it tries a new way of getting at the information it needs to proceed with its mission of preventing file sharing. I don't agree with all their tactics, but if a file sharer has the right to get creative and try things, why shouldn't they?
I agree with a lot of you about fair use. I like having my music on a server so I can get to it wherever I am. But I think we all know that people who put their music on-line (maybe even passowrd protected) for their own use and prevent others from copying it is really the minority and the bulk of the traffic, torrents, etc., is really people just stealing music. You have a file (video, music, whatever) that you didn't pay for? It's wrong, regardless if you can prove through legal loopholes that the way you did it isn't illegal, or that you did it in a way that couldn't be tracked.
Trying to constantly one-up 'the man' by cracking all encryption, circumventing logs, etc., in the pursuit of acquiring that which you didn't pay for is wrong and to persist in this will one day result in some very draconion or strange move on the industry's part that will really make it hard for everyone. Remember when Mom &/or Dad said, "Well, if you can't be trusted with that responsibilty then we'll just take it away altogether." It'll probably have initial effects we don't predict. Example: The loss in revenue and pressure from stock holders results in music companies only signing the most popular acts who generate such volume that even with illegal downloading they'll generate enough revenue anyway. This would result in more 'watered down cookie cutter' type artists or groups that have the widest appeal and shutout creative and experimental artists trying something new (you like your up-and-coming indepedent artists too right?). We could enter an 'Orwellian' era where the only options are American Idol winners and runners up stocking the shelves. For access you could imagine something where they goto a streaming-on-demand model involving subscriptions or pay-to-play, perhaps encrypting them with some kind of time-sensitive key, rather than letting you get files or even CDs, or giving you files but tying them to a USB dongle with your permissions on it. I realize these technical hurdles I toss out might all be solvable by good hackers, but the idea is to point out that there may be some model that allows them to generate revenue while also reallly hampering file loading.
The argument that DRM treats the consumer like a criminal is true and I agree. But if you keep behaving in a criminal way. . .
I think that Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft wouldn't ALLOW a game to be published that isn't ESRB rated.
>outright dismisses the survival or our species and places money before the advancement of man in the bigger picture. Yeah, no. He is right. Look at what oil companies are doing, they want money now, not caring that they will be broke in another generation. We will wither at that logic until we are unable to build such a spaceship.
Yeah, because noone EVER uses the phone on a bus.
Pfft, ask anyone in college, a microwave is neither for heating things up nor cooking things. Its for like making lightbulbs go whoa! and like awsome colors man.
Bad idea. Something similar was implimented in the sims online. Basically if you got scammed/spammed/etc... by someone you could place a "bad mark" on them, and people can see how many bad marks someone has. Eventually, there was a "mafia" that sprung up, threatening to mark someone with alot of bad marks unless they would pay money. And if the mafia did mark someone, everyone would assume that person was a scammer or spammer. Note: this may be innacurate or old, as this is what I read in a magazine. Don't sue if I'm wrong, but this seems logical, and seems to be what would happen if Blizzard implimented banishment.