perhaps they simply believe that the government should not be regulating every last aspect of our lives? not to defend lawyers but plain and simple, 90% of science research these days is abused by the government to instill extra regulation fees taxes and fines.
That would be the industries point, Sure everyone knows how bad it is, HOWEVER until those super smart scientists put it in a journal, its only what WE know, not what science knows, at least in the eyes of the law i believe but IANAL
it seems as if my attempt at comedy has failed. Clearly it looks as if there will be some potential ethical violations, if they arent in writing they are in reason.
you arent too far off, I dont know about others, but I cant even remember my own house phone number (although i know my grandparents number that they have had since the 60s)
plain and simple, there is no need to memorize strings of numbers when a phone will hold them all for me, and this was pre smart phone just simply cell phone
Not just that, But math is not history, math books dont NEED to be reprinted every few years in the way that other subjects need to be rewritten (im talking grade school)
and which of those technologies is still in use as opposed to the alternatives? thats like saying betamax was better than VHS, look at how great sony is....
simple, via civil unions or commonmarriage laws (where you are living together for XX years and therefore the state deems you dependant on each other)
marriage, as a term should be strictly religious IMO and the state should not even be involved, that way if a man and a woman want to be "married" they can be, in a church, if a gay couple wants to be "married" they can, somewhere other than a church. if 2 friends want to share a house together than they can be "married"
by married, i mean get the same benifits as a married couple does today, not the actual term "married"
I do believe there is one step missing that will avoid this from happening in the future. Simply have real humans check out all automated hits before the takedowns are sent to youtube. I dont expect humans to watch every last video posted, I DO however expect them to review every video they claim they own.
Perhaps we should set a law up where a false takedown results in a 5000 dollar fine, paid to the person who posted the video you tried to claim you own. I bet the false takedowns would stop REAL fast.
Simply put once the automation does find a hit, It should be required to be viewed by humans BEFORE the takedown is sent to youtube. There is no excuse for what has happened in the first place if this was policy from the beginning. The worst part is that rumblefish claims that it had people listen to it and they claim it was copy-written. Clearly no one did listen to it, or if they did you need to find better employees that know the difference between a bird and an instrument.
MY question is who decided it was hovering over the highway, the hunters, the activists, an unpartial 3rd party. Plain and simply if the activists were crazy enough to send in a drone, they are likely to lie about where it was to make them look better. not saying they did just that its possible.
Slashdot Mirror
well played sir
30 years ago no one had cell phones... things havent gotten THAT much more important in 30 years
I disagree, That simply means he can be unethical because he knows the legal side of it
perhaps they simply believe that the government should not be regulating every last aspect of our lives? not to defend lawyers but plain and simple, 90% of science research these days is abused by the government to instill extra regulation fees taxes and fines.
That would be the industries point, Sure everyone knows how bad it is, HOWEVER until those super smart scientists put it in a journal, its only what WE know, not what science knows, at least in the eyes of the law i believe but IANAL
it seems as if my attempt at comedy has failed. Clearly it looks as if there will be some potential ethical violations, if they arent in writing they are in reason.
perhaps he was never really working for the FTC to begin with, in fact, I dont even believe that this man exists!
really? the original enV was marketed as a feature phone from the very beginning and i got that if IIRC around 05 or 06
Actually tony, They call those "feature phones" these days, not a "dumb phone" but not a "smart phone"
since when is 46% the majority?? has there been some new math findings i am unaware of?
you arent too far off, I dont know about others, but I cant even remember my own house phone number (although i know my grandparents number that they have had since the 60s)
plain and simple, there is no need to memorize strings of numbers when a phone will hold them all for me, and this was pre smart phone just simply cell phone
pass
Not just that, But math is not history, math books dont NEED to be reprinted every few years in the way that other subjects need to be rewritten (im talking grade school)
and which of those technologies is still in use as opposed to the alternatives? thats like saying betamax was better than VHS, look at how great sony is....
to be fair, I personally find both bush and obama to be to the left of me as a libertarian
simple, via civil unions or commonmarriage laws (where you are living together for XX years and therefore the state deems you dependant on each other)
marriage, as a term should be strictly religious IMO and the state should not even be involved, that way if a man and a woman want to be "married" they can be, in a church, if a gay couple wants to be "married" they can, somewhere other than a church. if 2 friends want to share a house together than they can be "married"
by married, i mean get the same benifits as a married couple does today, not the actual term "married"
seriously, no one "lets me" keep my guns except for me
and it is good to hear it is dead, but on the other hand, the man pulling the strings will most likely be pushing for something else.
weill be a good idea to keep an eye on what this guy/group pushing this is up to
I do believe there is one step missing that will avoid this from happening in the future. Simply have real humans check out all automated hits before the takedowns are sent to youtube. I dont expect humans to watch every last video posted, I DO however expect them to review every video they claim they own.
Perhaps we should set a law up where a false takedown results in a 5000 dollar fine, paid to the person who posted the video you tried to claim you own. I bet the false takedowns would stop REAL fast.
Simply put once the automation does find a hit, It should be required to be viewed by humans BEFORE the takedown is sent to youtube. There is no excuse for what has happened in the first place if this was policy from the beginning. The worst part is that rumblefish claims that it had people listen to it and they claim it was copy-written. Clearly no one did listen to it, or if they did you need to find better employees that know the difference between a bird and an instrument.
wouldnt a wireless connection make more sense and have the phone act as the remote?
MY question is who decided it was hovering over the highway, the hunters, the activists, an unpartial 3rd party. Plain and simply if the activists were crazy enough to send in a drone, they are likely to lie about where it was to make them look better. not saying they did just that its possible.
You mean preparing students for what they will see when they get out of school is not right??
you mean "the happening" was a warning and not a story of fiction???
P3P, Im still trying to master P2P!