"Yeah, and some of us do target shooting and never draw a firearm on another human being. Gun ownership != violent minded."
Amen. I am a gun owner and avid target shooter. I have never hunted or shot at any living creature with a firearm. I just like to shoot cardboard tagets.... Now if I was ever forced to react in self-defense, all the practicing I have done on the cardboard targets may come into play...
But I hate people who think every gun owner is a "gun nut". (So called "liberals" who can't stand the freedom to smoke or own guns.) That would be like saying anyone who is slightly religious is a brainwashed cultist zealot.
I would lose more sleep worrying about Spam than rape or murder. The odds of me getting Spam are 100% while the likelyhood of rape or murder is ridiculously low...
"However I believe that spamming should not be a crime. In the grand scheme of things... robbing someone is much worse."
Ok, then look at it this way. This spammer robbed businesses of millions of dollars in lost time. There, now he is a "real" criminal in your eyes and can be punished as such. Do you really think taking $20 from someone personally is somehow worse than robbing thousands of people using a computer?? That logic makes no sense...
I will have to Just Say No to Internet Socialism. And there is an excuse for someone to have 300,000 domains. He came up with - 1) the idea to buy them and 2) the cash. And that's all the excuse one needs...
If you don't know that type of behavior only strengthens the sterortype of the elitist Mac user, GTFO.
If you aren't sick to death of seeing this stupid message in every discussion, GTFO.
Accent schmackscent. (said with a thick Brooklyn accent) It's more about who's pocket the news is in. With the BBC you have a better idea, with corporate dollars who knows, confidentiality is always the first clause in any contract. Laws aren't secret once they become law. At least you know what you are dealing with. I know what agenda the government has, and to me, the known is always less scary than the unknown. Perhaps I've read too many horror novels...
Not saying any news from any country is perfect, but (as an American) I prefer to get my news about America from more than just American news programs. The more sources the better picture you can paint for yourself.
I've never really considered Hillary a true Democrat anyways. She is so "middle-of-the-road-so-afraid-to-offend" that how she stands depends on which way the wind blows. She has absolutely none of the charisma her husband has, and every time she opens her mouth she offends people on both sides of the political spectrum.
And the Dems don't need any help screwing things up for themselves. Not that the republicans aren't trying though. I don't consider myself a Democrat or Republican, (I just don't see much difference anymore - both sides are more concerned about re-election than issues) but would like to see the country swing the pendulum to the left a bit more. But if Hillary is the best the Democrats have to offer, it is a sad state of affairs...
DISCLAIMER - I am from Minnesota and we did elect a wrestler for a governer at one point. But it also shows that if people are fed up enough, and you use a good strategy, a third party candidate does sometimes have a chance. Around here, we are all way "out" there...
Being registered doesn't mean he voted. You can register to vote at any time, regardless if there is an election or not. Unless he filed an official Change of Address form in Chicago, he is still registered there. How would Chicago knew he moved unless he let them know?
And exactly where do you live where all races, creeds, and colors live homogeneously in an equal distribution everywhere??
Oh yeah, FantasyLand. Population - You
It must get really lonely up there on your pedestal by yourself all the time.
They are not segregated moron, but some schools attract more of one race than the other.
Personally, I think the BC has a little more integrity, as they are not a for-profit business. It does not have to serve the interests of advertisers, or produce a return for shareholders. That gives them a little more freedom on what they report. IMNSHO, the corporate leash is tighter, and much less transparent than the government one. At leaset with real censorship it is a law that is out in the open. Who knows what kind of things get buried by corporations...
They are your own words. If you don't like them, blame yourself. Adding the rest of the quote wouldn't have made a difference to the fact that you still contradicted yourself. I just found it funny and ironic that you would say something is "sick" and in the very next sentence claim you aren't passing judgement.
I mean, I'm not racist, I just hate everyone that isn't white.
Hey, Burning Man takes place out in the desert every year and is full of executive types by day running around half naked and on hallucinogens. The reason the engineers did it is because they claimed it allowed them to approach a problem in an unconventional manner, and try to solve it differently. Don't recall exactly which type of hallucinogens, but think it was something like MDMA or DOC or one of the "designer" hallucinogens.
As to which one I am on, well, those days are behind me now, life is strange enough as it is...
*LOL* Social Security will be completely bankrupted by the baby boomers by the time I can draw. I am relying on getting ZERO from Social Security. I have my own retirement plan that I believe I can mannage much better than the government, thank you. Besides, if I put away 10% of what I would spend on kids every year, I'd still come out miles ahead...
Social Security and tax deductions are no reason to have children.
Actually, I read a story a few years back about how some of the tightly-wound type A engineers in Silicon Valley would sometimes go out into the dessert in a group and take hallucinogens to do creative problem solving if they had a particularly tough problem that wasn't being solved the conventional ways. Pretty sure they were doing lower level doses - otherwise they spend to much time looking at their fingers and saying the same word over and over again until it loses all meaning...
No thanks. With my plan I just didn't have the kids. I have a house, 2 cars, motorcycle and have no problem putting food on the table - all for less than 50K a year! I have all the time in the world to pursue my "higher goals", and without the ulcer of "How am I going to put 3 kids through college?"
A software company is a little different. A programmer would not make the same money as a large company if he developed and sold his own software (although he wouldn't have to spend as much either). The software company spends money on production, packaging, distribution, etc. that the average person wouldn't have access to. If a programmer wants to develop his own software, he knows he isn't going to do it by working for a software company. Plus, usually more than one programmer work on a piece of software, so they can't all claim exclusive rights to it.
And there really isn't a double standard - everything is negotiated in contracts. If you don't like the arrangement you have made, you can only blame yourself for agreeing to it.
It isn't automatic that the photographer would get the rights, it depends on the contract. In both cases, a contract would be signed by both parties agreeing on who owns what beforehand. While it is standard for companies hiring prorammers to own the rights to the software developed, it is much less standard for people hiring photographers to own the rights to the images. Otherwise if you own the rights to an image, you could resell that image over and over and the photographer wouldn't get squat. The only thing stopping someone from doing this is the copyrights to the image. That is why most photographers would not give up the rights. Now a wedding is a little different, because nobody is going to want to buy pictures of someone else's wedding (unless it is a celebrity or something.), so in some cases the photographer may give you the negatives, but it will always cost more that way due to the fact that is the last money the photographer will ever make from the shots.
Slashdot Mirror
"Yeah, and some of us do target shooting and never draw a firearm on another human being. Gun ownership != violent minded."
Amen. I am a gun owner and avid target shooter. I have never hunted or shot at any living creature with a firearm. I just like to shoot cardboard tagets.... Now if I was ever forced to react in self-defense, all the practicing I have done on the cardboard targets may come into play...
But I hate people who think every gun owner is a "gun nut". (So called "liberals" who can't stand the freedom to smoke or own guns.) That would be like saying anyone who is slightly religious is a brainwashed cultist zealot.
I would lose more sleep worrying about Spam than rape or murder. The odds of me getting Spam are 100% while the likelyhood of rape or murder is ridiculously low...
"However I believe that spamming should not be a crime. In the grand scheme of things... robbing someone is much worse."
Ok, then look at it this way. This spammer robbed businesses of millions of dollars in lost time. There, now he is a "real" criminal in your eyes and can be punished as such.
Do you really think taking $20 from someone personally is somehow worse than robbing thousands of people using a computer?? That logic makes no sense...
I will have to Just Say No to Internet Socialism. And there is an excuse for someone to have 300,000 domains. He came up with - 1) the idea to buy them and 2) the cash. And that's all the excuse one needs...
If you don't know that type of behavior only strengthens the sterortype of the elitist Mac user, GTFO.
If you aren't sick to death of seeing this stupid message in every discussion, GTFO.
Jerry Falwell tried that arugment and look what happened to him...
Accent schmackscent. (said with a thick Brooklyn accent) It's more about who's pocket the news is in. With the BBC you have a better idea, with corporate dollars who knows, confidentiality is always the first clause in any contract. Laws aren't secret once they become law. At least you know what you are dealing with. I know what agenda the government has, and to me, the known is always less scary than the unknown. Perhaps I've read too many horror novels...
Not saying any news from any country is perfect, but (as an American) I prefer to get my news about America from more than just American news programs. The more sources the better picture you can paint for yourself.
I've never really considered Hillary a true Democrat anyways. She is so "middle-of-the-road-so-afraid-to-offend" that how she stands depends on which way the wind blows. She has absolutely none of the charisma her husband has, and every time she opens her mouth she offends people on both sides of the political spectrum.
And the Dems don't need any help screwing things up for themselves. Not that the republicans aren't trying though. I don't consider myself a Democrat or Republican, (I just don't see much difference anymore - both sides are more concerned about re-election than issues) but would like to see the country swing the pendulum to the left a bit more. But if Hillary is the best the Democrats have to offer, it is a sad state of affairs...
DISCLAIMER - I am from Minnesota and we did elect a wrestler for a governer at one point. But it also shows that if people are fed up enough, and you use a good strategy, a third party candidate does sometimes have a chance. Around here, we are all way "out" there...
Never mistakenly attribute to "evil genius" what you can attribute to "plain stupidity"...
Being registered doesn't mean he voted. You can register to vote at any time, regardless if there is an election or not. Unless he filed an official Change of Address form in Chicago, he is still registered there. How would Chicago knew he moved unless he let them know?
And exactly where do you live where all races, creeds, and colors live homogeneously in an equal distribution everywhere??
Oh yeah, FantasyLand.
Population - You
It must get really lonely up there on your pedestal by yourself all the time.
They are not segregated moron, but some schools attract more of one race than the other.
Well, if the Democrats decide Hillary is their candidate, the Republicans won't even need to resort to any underhanded tricks to win...
</opinion>
Or maybe that IS their strategy and she is really one of them! What do they say about the person who appears least likely is often the suspect??
Personally, I think the BC has a little more integrity, as they are not a for-profit business. It does not have to serve the interests of advertisers, or produce a return for shareholders. That gives them a little more freedom on what they report. IMNSHO, the corporate leash is tighter, and much less transparent than the government one. At leaset with real censorship it is a law that is out in the open. Who knows what kind of things get buried by corporations...
I hate to say this, but you spelled "grammar" wrong.
Sheesh... the liberal pukes are definitely running the show here at Slashdot.
Well, as a consolation, your chickenhawk conservatives are running the country.
Or should I say ruining the country...
Yeah, I heard Ann Coulter voted twice. Once as a male, and once as a dog...
They are your own words. If you don't like them, blame yourself. Adding the rest of the quote wouldn't have made a difference to the fact that you still contradicted yourself. I just found it funny and ironic that you would say something is "sick" and in the very next sentence claim you aren't passing judgement.
I mean, I'm not racist, I just hate everyone that isn't white.
"I'll go ahead and draw a line in the sand to assert that it's sick. I'll stop just short of passing judgment "
Oops, too late. I think the former statement contradicts the later.
And apparently I was on too many mushrooms to even notice the second "s" in my first post...
Hey, Burning Man takes place out in the desert every year and is full of executive types by day running around half naked and on hallucinogens. The reason the engineers did it is because they claimed it allowed them to approach a problem in an unconventional manner, and try to solve it differently. Don't recall exactly which type of hallucinogens, but think it was something like MDMA or DOC or one of the "designer" hallucinogens.
As to which one I am on, well, those days are behind me now, life is strange enough as it is...
*LOL* Social Security will be completely bankrupted by the baby boomers by the time I can draw. I am relying on getting ZERO from Social Security. I have my own retirement plan that I believe I can mannage much better than the government, thank you. Besides, if I put away 10% of what I would spend on kids every year, I'd still come out miles ahead...
Social Security and tax deductions are no reason to have children.
Actually, I read a story a few years back about how some of the tightly-wound type A engineers in Silicon Valley would sometimes go out into the dessert in a group and take hallucinogens to do creative problem solving if they had a particularly tough problem that wasn't being solved the conventional ways. Pretty sure they were doing lower level doses - otherwise they spend to much time looking at their fingers and saying the same word over and over again until it loses all meaning...
No thanks. With my plan I just didn't have the kids. I have a house, 2 cars, motorcycle and have no problem putting food on the table - all for less than 50K a year! I have all the time in the world to pursue my "higher goals", and without the ulcer of "How am I going to put 3 kids through college?"
A software company is a little different. A programmer would not make the same money as a large company if he developed and sold his own software (although he wouldn't have to spend as much either). The software company spends money on production, packaging, distribution, etc. that the average person wouldn't have access to. If a programmer wants to develop his own software, he knows he isn't going to do it by working for a software company. Plus, usually more than one programmer work on a piece of software, so they can't all claim exclusive rights to it.
And there really isn't a double standard - everything is negotiated in contracts. If you don't like the arrangement you have made, you can only blame yourself for agreeing to it.
It isn't automatic that the photographer would get the rights, it depends on the contract. In both cases, a contract would be signed by both parties agreeing on who owns what beforehand. While it is standard for companies hiring prorammers to own the rights to the software developed, it is much less standard for people hiring photographers to own the rights to the images. Otherwise if you own the rights to an image, you could resell that image over and over and the photographer wouldn't get squat. The only thing stopping someone from doing this is the copyrights to the image. That is why most photographers would not give up the rights. Now a wedding is a little different, because nobody is going to want to buy pictures of someone else's wedding (unless it is a celebrity or something.), so in some cases the photographer may give you the negatives, but it will always cost more that way due to the fact that is the last money the photographer will ever make from the shots.