I've had it even worse. We thought we had renewed, but the place we had "renewed" our domain with wasn't an actual registrar; they just took our money.
Then, when we paid someone we *thought* was a real registrar, it turns out they were another scammer.
Meanwhile, some Malaysian jerks bought up our domain, and were incommunicado. They weren't even holding it for ransom or anything, just stuck some porn/spam stuff on there and collecting the ad revenue.
We eventually recovered the money from the first two spammers, but as for the domain, we ended up having to re-brand and change our domain from.com to.ca
But buying drugs is not the same as buying a house.
To make your analogy more accurate, it would be like the government forcibly LEASING the rights to have the highway over the property.
If the government were to forcibly BUY the rights to the drug (at a "market value" for the rights, whatever that is), it would be able to produce it itself at the cost of production, not at the market price for the end product.
I was involved in a libel suit awhile back, and the court was not thrilled with the whole anonymous thing. Was this in the US? Was the judge elected?
If so, then clearly the judge knew what he was talking about, because the majority of the electorate that voted for him/her did so anonymously, and obviously were wrong to do so!
Here's the source code of your average Snopes page, starting at the top with no omissions.
If your html coding experience is as meagre as mine, and you were wondering how they did it, it's in the last couple lines before the <html> tag, near the end of the quote:
<script type="text/javascript"> <!-- var casaleD=new Date();var casaleR=(casaleD.getTime()%8673806982)+Math.random(); var casaleU=escape(window.location.href); var casaleHost=' type="text/javascript" src="http://as.casalemedia.com/s?s='; document.write('<scr'+'ipt'+casaleHost+'81847&u='); document.write(casaleU+'&f=1&id='+casaleR+'"><\/scr'+'ipt>'); //--> </script>
<SCRIPT language="JavaScript"> if (window!=top){top.location.href=location.href;} </script>
<script type="text/javascript"> <!-- var omitformtags=["input", "textarea", "select"] omitformtags=omitformtags.join("|") function disableselect(e){ if (omitformtags.indexOf(e.target.tagName.toLowerCase())==-1) return false } function reEnable(){ return true } if (typeof document.onselectstart!="undefined") document.onselectstart=new Function ("return false") else{ document.onmousedown=disableselect document.onmouseup=reEnable } --> </script> <HTML> <HEAD> <TITLE>Urban Legends Reference Pages: Coca-Cola Carbonated by Accident</TITLE> ...
D'oh! Quite true; however, even though the FAS site itself might be considered credible, none of the text on that page on the site discusses the KH-11's appearance, size, etc., so it would still not be considered a reference for that particular part of the Wikipedia article.
There is an image of the satellite, but the only text referencing it talks about how the image was create, and not why they believe the KH-11 looks similar to the Hubble.
FTAS:
but Wikipedia claims that US spy satellites in the KH-11 class, launched up to the mid-90s, are about the size of the Hubble The part of the wikipedia article on KH-11 (unlinked in TFAS) that claims a resemblance to the HST is uncited; however, the article itself (as of Jan 2, 2008 to now) lists three references.
- One is a book, which I unfortunately don't have a handy copy of; - a second looks like a military conspiracy fansite (though perhaps because it's from 2000) and only mentions "Hubble" once in a nonsubstantive manner; and - the third is from GlobalSecurity.org, and seems to at least be humble about its accuracy with a nice, up-front disclaimer.
Would it have been so hard to simply link to this third site instead of claiming Wikipedia as an authority? That aside, I'm quite confident that Wikipedia, as an organization (WikiMedia notwithstanding), doesn't "claim" anything about the KH-11. At least say, "the Wikipedia article on KH-11 says that..."
Methinks someone's highschool English teacher was a bit too lenient.
It means if all the mobile users dial at the same time, you get a network busy tone. A side point, but if everybody is dialing out, then there is nobody with an idle line for any of these people to try to call.
Yes, that's the Free Market that Americans and right-wingers the world over show so much affection for: they will charge you as much as you're willing to pay.
The difference is that Zombo.com has only been since 1999, and therefore does not fall into the same category as the sites in TFA, whereas purple.com has been around since 1994.
1. Purchase Critical Thinking textbook 2. Memorize Critical Thinking textbook 3. Reproduce responses from Critical Thinking textbook's sample exam in closed-book text 4. Receive Critical Thinking credits.
Universities are there to teach you to produce an obedient workforce and keep you from questioning authority--the exact antithesis to their ostensible goals. Universities today exist for the students no more than newspapers do for the readers.
This "Repress U" DHS stuff is just another bit of evidence that supports this argument.
The first month I used AT&T's mobile broadband - I received a $5000 dollar bill. I'm lucky, I was able to get a service plan that specifies unmarked fives and tens.
But keep in mind that if you're a doctor you're obligated to stop and provide help and the good samaritan laws generally don't apply because you've had sufficient medical training. Well, hopefully one's extensive medical training would have explained a medical professional's responsibility in that kind of situation.
"Doctor, aren't you going to help?"
"No, ma'am, some guy on slashdot said I didn't have to."
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't you get the memo? First Posts are old news.
If you want to get noticed, you have to be First American Post.
- RG>
I've had it even worse. We thought we had renewed, but the place we had "renewed" our domain with wasn't an actual registrar; they just took our money.
.com to .ca
Then, when we paid someone we *thought* was a real registrar, it turns out they were another scammer.
Meanwhile, some Malaysian jerks bought up our domain, and were incommunicado. They weren't even holding it for ransom or anything, just stuck some porn/spam stuff on there and collecting the ad revenue.
We eventually recovered the money from the first two spammers, but as for the domain, we ended up having to re-brand and change our domain from
- RG>
But buying drugs is not the same as buying a house.
To make your analogy more accurate, it would be like the government forcibly LEASING the rights to have the highway over the property.
If the government were to forcibly BUY the rights to the drug (at a "market value" for the rights, whatever that is), it would be able to produce it itself at the cost of production, not at the market price for the end product.
- RG>
No, that's the *human* digestive system. This is the RIAA we're talking about!
- RG>
I haven't RTFA either, but is this "certified" as in most electronic devices are certified by Underwriters Laboratories and have a UL logo on them?
- RG>
If so, then clearly the judge knew what he was talking about, because the majority of the electorate that voted for him/her did so anonymously, and obviously were wrong to do so!
- RG>
It's news on Slashdot... because it's news on Slashdot? It helps to think of it this way:
A dupe is newsworthy IFF the dupe refers to the fact it's a dupe.
- RG>
If your html coding experience is as meagre as mine, and you were wondering how they did it, it's in the last couple lines before the <html> tag, near the end of the quote: - RG>
D'oh! Quite true; however, even though the FAS site itself might be considered credible, none of the text on that page on the site discusses the KH-11's appearance, size, etc., so it would still not be considered a reference for that particular part of the Wikipedia article.
There is an image of the satellite, but the only text referencing it talks about how the image was create, and not why they believe the KH-11 looks similar to the Hubble.
- RG>
- RG>
Dude, if their cleaning regimen is bad enough that they don't see it, I would want to go in there once, much less twice a month!
- RG>
- One is a book, which I unfortunately don't have a handy copy of;
- a second looks like a military conspiracy fansite (though perhaps because it's from 2000) and only mentions "Hubble" once in a nonsubstantive manner; and
- the third is from GlobalSecurity.org, and seems to at least be humble about its accuracy with a nice, up-front disclaimer.
Would it have been so hard to simply link to this third site instead of claiming Wikipedia as an authority? That aside, I'm quite confident that Wikipedia, as an organization (WikiMedia notwithstanding), doesn't "claim" anything about the KH-11. At least say, "the Wikipedia article on KH-11 says that..."
Methinks someone's highschool English teacher was a bit too lenient.
(I know, I must be new here...)
- RG>
I know, not what you meant...
- RG>
It's clear that its current function is a deviation from its original goal, even if it ostensibly remains for its original purpose.
- RG>
Yes, that's the Free Market that Americans and right-wingers the world over show so much affection for: they will charge you as much as you're willing to pay.
- RG>
According to the North Korean propaganda, Kim Jong Il got tree holes-in-one the first time he ever tried playing golf.
- RG>
Actually, Kim Jong Il got two, because he got a hole in one the first time he tried using it.
- RG>
The difference is that Zombo.com has only been since 1999, and therefore does not fall into the same category as the sites in TFA, whereas purple.com has been around since 1994.
- RG>
All IE8 needs to pass the Acid2 test is a simple LenPEG variant.
"If page = acid2 test, render http://www.webstandards.org/files/acid2/reference.html"
It can't fail!
- RG>
1. Purchase Critical Thinking textbook
2. Memorize Critical Thinking textbook
3. Reproduce responses from Critical Thinking textbook's sample exam in closed-book text
4. Receive Critical Thinking credits.
Universities are there to teach you to produce an obedient workforce and keep you from questioning authority--the exact antithesis to their ostensible goals. Universities today exist for the students no more than newspapers do for the readers.
This "Repress U" DHS stuff is just another bit of evidence that supports this argument.
- RG>
OTOH, it also gives credit to the argument that they're incompetent.
- RG>
I don't know about you, but I know I'd have gone mad if I grew up in a house without Windows.
Or a backdoor.
- RG>
- RG>
That's the thing. So many cell phones have so many features, you need someone to help you find the one or two in the store that is just a phone!
- RG>
"Doctor, aren't you going to help?"
"No, ma'am, some guy on slashdot said I didn't have to."
- RG>