Anytime you try to combine two devices to get a "best of both worlds" solution, you usually end up getting a "less than mediocre worlds" product. I can't speak for the Pandora personally because I have never used one, but am speaking in generalizations.
Not as delusional as "These addictive drugs are legal because johnny law-man says so, but johnny law-man doesn't get money from lobbyists for this drug so therefore it is illegal." and using that as an absolute argument. The fact a law exists doesn't make a discussion about it irrelevant, especially when it is a stupid law proven to fail.
And BTW the dictionary.com definition of "crook" says nothing about simple law breakers. The closest it comes is "a dishonest person, esp. a sharper, swindler, or thief." so unless the drug dealer is dishonest (some are, some aren't) they are by no means a "crook". Unless they stole their stash from someone else.
"In fact, media studies show Fox News as the most centrist news media."
In a study conducted by Fox News. But seriously, cite please? Nobody could really say that with a straight face.
Just because a kook you know reads DailyKos doesn't make Fox balanced.
I never stated or implied that they were. My only comment was there are no repercussions for adultery in divorce court if you live in a no-fault state.
If I ever marry again, I am going to have a pre-nup that states if there is any infidelity, that party gets no communal property.
I wasn't saying adultery should be illegal, but if my ex wanted to screw other people, she shouldn't be entitled to 50% of all of our stuff. She screwed up the marriage, and then asked for the divorce. I didn't do anything wrong as far as the marriage was concerned, that is what I was saying didn't matter in the divorce.
Yeah, I got exactly 50% of her zero. I also got her bad credit as I was co-signer on her college loans she is defaulting on. Thanks Honey!
Adultery doesn't even matter in court if you live in a no-fault divorce state. My ex-wife cheated on me and it amounted to exactly jack squat in court. She still ended up getting a settlement for half my retirement fund...
He may not have been sued, but he is facing being permanently disbarred for this - which will probably ultimately cost him more in the long run. At least if you are sued, you can still use your trade to make more money. Poor old Jack won't be able to do that anymore (and with good reason).
Any court in any country can reject a filing. Nothing Spain does is any different. Do you think every meritless case in every other country is heard, no matter how foolish or a waste of the court's time it may be?
Whether or not the mention pertains to the discussion is irrelevant. Also, there is not a negative connotation about Godwin's Law, as many people believe. So many people misinterpret Godwin's by thinking if what they say is true or fits the situation somehow, it isn't Godwin's. It still is, you just don't know the actual law. So here it is:
Godwins Law
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
Except for the fact that unless you have a brick and mortar location in a state as well, internet sales do not need to charge state taxes on purchases.
No it wouldn't. Most SPAM are sent from zombie networks, not by computers owned by legitimate individuals. Open relays and trojans are what makes spam possible. All that would result is that grandma would receive a bill for $87,000 for all the "emails" her computer has sent out.
# 4 has worked wonderfully on the War on Drugs (or should I say the War On Drugs That Huge Pharmaceuticals Don't Profit From). All we had to do was let out all the violent criminals to make room for the casual drug users. I say let the rapists back out into the streets and lock up the people who buy things from spammers!!
Yes because everyone knows that overreacting with deadly force to a relatively minor crime is ALWAYS the solution. Now would everyone please join my campaign to have jaywalkers drawn and quartered?
Really, 1% of SPAM results in a sale? Because I have had literally thousands of SPAM ads sent to me, and so far I have resisted purchasing even 1 single product from them. But according to you, I should be buying one product for every 100 emails offers I receive. But I may be an exception because my p3n1s isn't small, and I don't need to buy any prescription drugs online....
You think people in the US are real happy about the lawsuits here? And don't say there aren't any protesters here - I live in Minneapolis and just made it through the RNC with all the police action and rioters. There are plenty of protesters in the US - they just happen to be protesting much bigger issues presently.
Really? You think their lawyers suggested that messing with packets was legal and a good idea? And if so, why is the FCC telling them to stop? See, corporate lawyers aren't always right - hence the reason corporations sometimes even lose lawsuits against them... It doesn't take a lawyer to figure this out.
If that is true, they are responsible for the content they serve up. They should be nailed by the RIAA, MPAA, and FBI for child porn if they are exempt from Common Carrier status.
Slashdot Mirror
Anytime you try to combine two devices to get a "best of both worlds" solution, you usually end up getting a "less than mediocre worlds" product. I can't speak for the Pandora personally because I have never used one, but am speaking in generalizations.
Not as delusional as "These addictive drugs are legal because johnny law-man says so, but johnny law-man doesn't get money from lobbyists for this drug so therefore it is illegal." and using that as an absolute argument. The fact a law exists doesn't make a discussion about it irrelevant, especially when it is a stupid law proven to fail.
And BTW the dictionary.com definition of "crook" says nothing about simple law breakers. The closest it comes is "a dishonest person, esp. a sharper, swindler, or thief." so unless the drug dealer is dishonest (some are, some aren't) they are by no means a "crook". Unless they stole their stash from someone else.
"In fact, media studies show Fox News as the most centrist news media."
In a study conducted by Fox News. But seriously, cite please? Nobody could really say that with a straight face.
Just because a kook you know reads DailyKos doesn't make Fox balanced.
For our younger readers: Stay off of my damn lawn!!
I never stated or implied that they were. My only comment was there are no repercussions for adultery in divorce court if you live in a no-fault state.
If I ever marry again, I am going to have a pre-nup that states if there is any infidelity, that party gets no communal property.
I wasn't saying adultery should be illegal, but if my ex wanted to screw other people, she shouldn't be entitled to 50% of all of our stuff. She screwed up the marriage, and then asked for the divorce. I didn't do anything wrong as far as the marriage was concerned, that is what I was saying didn't matter in the divorce.
Yeah, I got exactly 50% of her zero. I also got her bad credit as I was co-signer on her college loans she is defaulting on. Thanks Honey!
Adultery doesn't even matter in court if you live in a no-fault divorce state. My ex-wife cheated on me and it amounted to exactly jack squat in court. She still ended up getting a settlement for half my retirement fund...
He may not have been sued, but he is facing being permanently disbarred for this - which will probably ultimately cost him more in the long run. At least if you are sued, you can still use your trade to make more money. Poor old Jack won't be able to do that anymore (and with good reason).
Any court in any country can reject a filing. Nothing Spain does is any different. Do you think every meritless case in every other country is heard, no matter how foolish or a waste of the court's time it may be?
Unclonable? That's unpossible!
This is why I propose something new.
Whirly's Law
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of someone misinterpreting Godwin's Law approaches infinity."
Because goatse is NEVER the answer.
Whether or not the mention pertains to the discussion is irrelevant. Also, there is not a negative connotation about Godwin's Law, as many people believe. So many people misinterpret Godwin's by thinking if what they say is true or fits the situation somehow, it isn't Godwin's. It still is, you just don't know the actual law. So here it is:
Godwins Law
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
That is the entirety of it.
Well, at least it wasn't as embarrassing as rocket scientists doing the math wrong...
Except for the fact that unless you have a brick and mortar location in a state as well, internet sales do not need to charge state taxes on purchases.
They actually have 49 registrars involved in illicit activities.
No it wouldn't. Most SPAM are sent from zombie networks, not by computers owned by legitimate individuals. Open relays and trojans are what makes spam possible. All that would result is that grandma would receive a bill for $87,000 for all the "emails" her computer has sent out.
"What if someone were to blow up the Directi building?
They would clean up on insurance, and move into a nicer, bigger building. Any other questions?
# 4 has worked wonderfully on the War on Drugs (or should I say the War On Drugs That Huge Pharmaceuticals Don't Profit From). All we had to do was let out all the violent criminals to make room for the casual drug users. I say let the rapists back out into the streets and lock up the people who buy things from spammers!!
Yes because everyone knows that overreacting with deadly force to a relatively minor crime is ALWAYS the solution. Now would everyone please join my campaign to have jaywalkers drawn and quartered?
Really, 1% of SPAM results in a sale? Because I have had literally thousands of SPAM ads sent to me, and so far I have resisted purchasing even 1 single product from them. But according to you, I should be buying one product for every 100 emails offers I receive. But I may be an exception because my p3n1s isn't small, and I don't need to buy any prescription drugs online....
You think people in the US are real happy about the lawsuits here? And don't say there aren't any protesters here - I live in Minneapolis and just made it through the RNC with all the police action and rioters. There are plenty of protesters in the US - they just happen to be protesting much bigger issues presently.
Really? You think their lawyers suggested that messing with packets was legal and a good idea? And if so, why is the FCC telling them to stop? See, corporate lawyers aren't always right - hence the reason corporations sometimes even lose lawsuits against them... It doesn't take a lawyer to figure this out.
If that is true, they are responsible for the content they serve up. They should be nailed by the RIAA, MPAA, and FBI for child porn if they are exempt from Common Carrier status.
Nobody has ever been fired for buying IBM.