This is an example of what a Nanny Government is in basic form. Violence should be 'regulated'? How about regulating the influence of useless bureaucrats?
In my opinion, they aren't showing enough - News programs should be showing what REALLY happens, and not censoring out the truth of what goes on. Like on whats going on in the Middle EAST, stop giving us watered down accounts of what happened, just show us what really happened.
It's different for TV programs, because they are not reporting real-life events. However, just because something is graphical or violent doesn't mean it should be regulated. If it become regulated, program guidelinnes will be set and approved by a panel of people, and that is where you get runaway regulation and truly stupid rules.
Even so, if you don't want to see violence on your TV, change the channel. If you can't find a channel that you like, then go do something else besides watch TV.
I should be able to choose what I want to watch and what I don't want to watch - NOT Big Brother.
If anything should be regulated on TV, it should be commercials. Nothing worse than having a commercial for a laxative or acne product when I'm trying to eat dinner.
Sooner or later, the Care Bears and Dora The Explorer will be the only programs the government will have not deemed "Inappropriate".
I thnk they took a hint and left you have a post rating of 2.
BTW, I believe the technical term for the filter you proposed is called a Country Club.
ZING!
Political correctness is for people with serious personal issues. I never understood why PC people think it is politically correct to force their viewpoints on people who don't share their opinions. Tolerance means tolerating intolerance. Stereotypes don't happen for no reason.....
Isn't this coming from the same state that decided to spend (read: waste) $320 million to build a bridge to a village with a population of 8,900, despite the fact that it ALREADY had a functioning ferry system already in place?
Apparently, the people in Alask are more fussy than we Kalifornians about their driving: They thought $320 million was a good price to avoid the 20 minute wait and $6 toll. We pay between $4 (Bay Bridge and $5 (Golden Gate), and wait about an hour in line, if you decide to commute at rush hour. Plus, you could probably write the $6 toll of as a cost of living expense.
So, if the entire population of the town crossed the bridge twice (to and from) every day, it would pay for itself after: 8,900 x 2 = 1780 crossings per day) = $10,680 dollars in tolls collected per day 320,000,000 / 10680 = 29962 days until cost paid off 29962 / 365 = 82.08 years until paid off, provided the entire population paid to cross the bridge every day of the year, for 82.08 years.
Now, if Alaskan senators think that that is SUCH a good idea to waste money on, then it is no wonder they are spending their time thinking up more crap legislation like this.
Maybe they want to head off any future incidents of polar bears molesting children. "Hey! It's Global Warming, stupid!"
Yarrr, matey! A thousand gold dubloons will be paid to the scalleywags who bring me the first release of a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD ripper! Yo ho and a bottle of Yoo-Hoo!
I guess now any defendant can point to this as a way of showing that the prosecutor's case is *not* beyond a resonable doubt.
Now you could argue that they cops may have actually been looking at someone else instead of you:
"Judge, the cop was actually looking at the other guy's ISP, not mine!"
That excuse, I'm certain, has been used as effectively as "My dog ate me homework." when given by people in speeding cases. But now, thanks to the RIAA, they proposed doubt for you.
#1 - Someone who observes a crime = Witness #1 - Videotape = Evidence. #2 - Videotape in his possesion = Evidence in his possession. #3 - Subpoena = Court Order #4 - Disregarding Court Order = Contempt Of Court. #5 - Contempt Of Court = Jail/The Big House/The Can/ The Clink/Up State/Up The River/The Pen/All-expenses paid vacation at the Fed Hotel
Add all the points together and you get:
(Jail) for (contempt of court) by (refusing a court order) to turn over (evidence of a crime) that (is in his possession) that (he witnessed).
What's so hard to figure out? The guy had evidence of a possible crime by either the police or protesters. Technically, he has evidence of a possible crime that the Feds want to investigate, like any law enforcement agency should be doing.
So what. Journalists are not above the law, and certainly not above the law when it comes to witholding evidence. He deserves to be in prison just as much as anybody else who 1) withold evidence of a crime from Authorites, and 2) Refuses to comply with the law.
He is in jail for violating the law. A violation of journalistic ethics? Pfff. Unfortunately for him, 'Journalistic Ethics' is NOT the law and does not dictate such. Freedom of the press means you can print whatever you want as long it is consistent with free speech and does not violate the law (You can't incite riots, print slanderous articles, or print nudity in a newspaper, etc.). He is not publishing anything - that is not the issue. He can publish whatever he wants.....nobody is arguaing against that and that is not why he is being jailed. It has NOTHING to do with publishing. The issue is that he is in possesion of a videotape that may contain evidence of the commission of crimes. Therefore, the judge has every right and obligtion, both ethically and legally, to force Mr. Wolf to turn over the videotape in question. And, by refusing to obey the order, Mr. Wolf he BROKE THE LAW.
So what the hell is he complaining about? It was completely his choice. 'Journalists Ethics' - Pfff. Is it ethical for a journalist to refuse to turn over evidence of a crime? Nope. Is it ethical for a judge to tell him to turn over the tape to the police for investigation of a crime? Yes. The government is trying to do its job the way it should be. It is being responsible. The police are trying to do their job. They are being responsible. The Feds are trying to do their job. Mr. Wolf is not doing his job by refusing the court order. His job is a journalist, and refusing to comply with the law is not a demonstration of 'Journalistic Ethics'. I don't think that selectively complying with the law to suit your beliefs is a demonstration of 'Journalistic Ethics', and I'm pretty sure it violates it. Ask Mr. Wolf if witholding evidence, contempt of court, obstruction of justice, and hindering an investigation are part of 'Journalistic Ethics'. Also, ask him if it is 'Journalistically Ethical' to selectively comply with the law.
He says that it is a violation of the Freedom Of The Press, yet he is violating the law by witholding evidence. Well, he is not publishing anything. He is witholding evidence. Since this isn't about something he published, it's not a violation of press freedom. He is the only one breaking the law. The Feds made the proper request, and a judge found that the request was legitimate and founded, and therefore signed it, and issued the supoena for the evidence. Unless there is a paperwork or procedural error, then he has no right to complain for being punished for not complying with the law. This isn't a case of the "Government is out to silence dissent and eliminate press freedom.". If it was, then we would all be in jail and not speaking freely in the papers or on the Internet. The vst majority of journalists comply with the law, yet *DON'T* wind up in prison. Hmmmmm.....
Lets give an analogy: You are at a protest. I beat you up. Someone videotapes the entire scene - protest and beating. The person videotapig it then sells footage of the pro
"The difference here (and the rub) lies in the fact that in a ghetto status can mean the difference between "alive" and "dead", whereas said corp VP (or most anyone on./) can usually afford to burn a little status/karma on NOT having the latest car or NOT appearing to enjoy the very latest in entertainment."
Not true. You are confusing necessity with luxury. Alive or dead is not determined by what 'bling' someone has. The biggest causes of gang violence are drugs (and the associated violence), 'colors' (the color har or shirt the person is wearing, 'disrespect', turf wars, police action (I'm not gonna complain), gang affiliation, or being in the wrong part of town (read: hell).
Just because someone was wearing an Armani jacket, gold chain, Luis Vutton handbag, or $300 sneakers isn't going to keep them alive. It is more likely that they will be either beaten or killed because someone wanted to steal the 'bling' tha they were weaing.
Here is a little test you can do: Walk through Compton wearing a Rolex, blue shirt, red baseball cap, black jeans, a big gold chain, Air Jordans, gold teeth ('grill'. Why anybody is stupid enough to want one is beyond me) while driving an Escalade with a laptop, IPod, cell phone, $5,000 stereo in it and see how long you last at the first stop sign you come to. Do you think that all that 'bling' will keep you alive, regardless of your race? I doubt it, yet people buy it. If they buy it to keep themselves alive, then it should have kept you alive.
It's not a question on wheather or not you *need* it, it a question of if it is something you can truly afford. An Exec VP-yes. Someone on welfare-No, and if they have it, then they should be forced to give me back my tax dollars, because if they can buy gold teeth, then they don't need welfare-they can buy food instead. There is a difference between necessity and entitlement. Is a new cell phone or gold chain a good idea if you are so poor that you are on welfare or live in the ghetto? No. You should save your money and make a better spending decision instead, like food. Food will keep you alive alot longer than gold.
If you want to spend money on increasing you social status, then that's your problem. If you want to spend all your money on looking good, then go ahead. But don't complain about where you live, your children's education, and the environment your family lives in.
Which is more important: Being poorer while living in a safe neighborhood, or, being glamorous in a more dangerous area? If you picked the latter, you already spent your right to complain on shiny trinkets.
Well, if the money goes to benefit artists who have theri music downloaded illegally, then why not start up your own private business as a performer/producer and get compensation that way. Then, when you buy memory sticks/cards, claim that you are exempt from the tax since they are being used to store information other than copyrighted music.
Taxing memory sticks to compensate music 'artists' is like taxing paper to compensate people who are vicitms of plagarism. Why not tax blank DVDs to compensate the MPAA?
Practically every kind of consumer item has been counterfeited: Jet engine parts, aircraft parts, car parts, computer parts, electronics, microchips, microprocessors, machine parts, bolts, software, pharmaceuticals, dietary supplements/herbals, DVDs, CDs, appliances, heavy equipment, heavy machinery, watches, jewelry, T-shirts, clothing, firearm parts, and tires. This could easily turn into a way to tax everything that can be counterfeited or illegally copied.
Remember, at the bottom of the slippery slope, there is a very high cliff.
Obviously, you haven't seen all of the 'poor' kids struggling to get through life in the ghetto, yet spend their money on gold teeth, gold and silver chains, PDAs, cell phones, CDs, stereos, chromed-out 'pimp-mobiles' (although very few have a 'pimp-mobile', or car for that matter.), and other pointless "bling".
If they spent their money on things that weren't so expensive and meaningless, maybe they would have more money available for more essential things, like getting out of the slum. Gold, silver, and stereos are not essential. No 'status' symbols are.
If you poor, I will help you as much as I can. If you are poor with gold teeth and/or gold chains, I couldn't care less about you.
I think MicroShaft has developed a new form of advertising: Strong-Arm Advertising.
Now they will be able to punish you for not looking at their ads. I smell a rat, and it's heading toward the next EULA revision. If they sneak this into their EULA, they will be able to reposses your computer or OS because you either didn't look at their ads or installed anti-ad software.
Jesus, advertising is starting to spiral wayyy out of control, to the point where companies are now using blatant intimidation tactics and threats to force you to look at their advertisements. I'm not one for more laws, but this is a hole that needs some patching.....fast!
I don't care who sits next to you or where you or they are. I have had the same experience - over and over - time and time again. I hate having to try and gues what the other person is saying. I speak comprehendible and clearly understandible ENGLISH, not Hindi, Chinese, Swahili, Russian, French, or Martian. Americans don't care if it is actually an 'American' voice- We just care about being able to understand what they are saying and not having to stand over a codebook trying to decipher what they are saying. Unfortunately, we keep getting routed to India (at least in my cases, the only foreign tech support people sounded Indian).
The person was making a point saying that he didn't like having to speak with people who he couldn't understand.
Would YOU want to explain to someone that their product burned down your house because of their product if they couldn't speak a lick of English? I'm not talking King's English here, I just mean and version of English that could be understood without having to guess at what's being said.
Companies should consider it an act of courtesy by the company towards the consumer that the individuals who the consumer will be dealing with can speak English to a degree of conversation that is much higher that the current standard of "Hi Sir, my name is Joe Average." Customers have enough problems-That is why they are calling Tech Support in the first place. Customers also know there is little to no chance of fixing their problem when they can't understand the person on the other end.
how in the hell did that happen?! Kinda ironic that giving someone props was a bad thing.....especially on SlashDot where viewpoints are supposed to be freely expressed.
Uh-oh.....
I hear my karma slipping because I criticized some crotchety old SlashDot 'moderator'.
Good point. The article becomes clearer with your concept of a 'Cold Account' of sorts. You could count that as the absense of heat below 0 C as a negative value, adn the opposite as a positive value. My only problem was the use of the term 'cold' as if it were something.
It was kind of like what my mom used to say when I would leave the front door open in the summer: Shut the $@&% door or you'll let the cold out!
It never made much sense to me because I didn't (and still don't) believe that cold is something that could be let out-cold air maybe. But I always have thought of cold as a 'thermal vaccuum'.
Good explaination of your point though! It makes more sense with your idea of 'Accounting'. than the way the article was written and explained.
No..... An ice box works because it removes the heat from inside the box. You are not storing anything. You are removing heat. You are not even storing anything because 'cold' is nothing. 'Cold' is the absensce of heat. 'Cold' is not energy-heat is.
It is not reasonable to think of it as storing cold, because you are not storing anything, no energy or heat. Cold is not a temperature difference-cold is the absence of heat, not the presence of cold. Heat is a temperature difference, because it is the measurement of heat energy, while cold is the vaccuum cause by the absence of heat, and not the presence of 'cold', becuase cold is, again, the absence of heat.
You can't store "cold". The concept of 'cold' is just a simpler way to describe a thermal vaccuum - or a 'heat vaccuum. O Kelvin is just the thermal equivalent of a perfect vaccuum. The quantity of heat energy in a given space is what determines how cold-or hot- something is. Heat is the measured energy, and 'cold' is simply the absense of heat. Therefore, you cannot store the absense of something.
Wheather something feels cold or hot to us is measured by how hot or cold it feels. But, regardless of how cold it feels, there is still heat present-evein in ice or frozen ammonia. Heat content only reaches zero at 0 degrees Kelvin.
I'm not a physicist, but I think of the concept of 'cold' or 'coldness' by defining 'cold' as a "Thermal Vaccuum".
Anybody who saw the two stooges who actually put up the signs would realize that these are two unbelievably stupid individuals who should have been drowned by their mothers long ago.
However, the executive shouldn't have resigned over this, unless he specifically told the two idiots what to do, what to put up, and where. Anybody who was directly involved in the erroneous placement of the ads are the only people who should either be resinging or fired. If the exec told Wingus and Dingus to go out and do exactly what they did, then, yes, he should resign. But if he didn't then why should he be at fault? I'm more than certain that there are more individuals who were far more involved in the actual scandal than he was. To play devil's advocate, he probably just said "We need to promote this movie. It's popular for the market segment we are targeting, so figure out a good way to advertise it."
Honestly, that's probably where his involvement ended. The two idiots who carried it out should be forced to bear all of the costs for the whole fiasco and fined into oblivion, along with their supervisor, but only if he specifically told them to do it that way.
I don't care how popular videogames are these days, nothing will ever be as socially and culturally ubiquitous and omnipresent as the Lego brick.
Video games have nothing on Tinker Toys, Lincoln Logs, Legos, Lionel Train sets, Erector sets, Chemistry sets, and Capsela sets. I'm not old, but I still remember all of those with *MUCH* more fondness than finite "cookie-cutter" video games.
Nowadays, toys have becoe just ways for manufacturing conglomerates to make more money - They don't care how little fun it is as long as it generates $$$$$. None of those toys were expensive (except Lionel sets - those still run into the hundreds and thousands for the super-duper-ulta-real engines and cars. I used my dad's engines.), and you could do or build anything you wanted to - until my Mom took them away when I was 16.
When I have kids (God forbid they turn out like I did), I'd gladly buy them any of those before I bought them a video game or a computer game.
A video game only lasts for a few dozen hours, and isn't all that much interactive and mentally stimulating as the 'old-fashioned' toys I played with as a kid.
Oh wait.....I still do.
Good Name For Script Correction.....
on
Yahoo Pipes
·
· Score: 1
They should come out with an add-on program that corrects errors called Yahoo! Pipe-Cleaners.
Slashdot Mirror
This is an example of what a Nanny Government is in basic form. Violence should be 'regulated'? How about regulating the influence of useless bureaucrats?
In my opinion, they aren't showing enough - News programs should be showing what REALLY happens, and not censoring out the truth of what goes on. Like on whats going on in the Middle EAST, stop giving us watered down accounts of what happened, just show us what really happened.
It's different for TV programs, because they are not reporting real-life events. However, just because something is graphical or violent doesn't mean it should be regulated. If it become regulated, program guidelinnes will be set and approved by a panel of people, and that is where you get runaway regulation and truly stupid rules.
Even so, if you don't want to see violence on your TV, change the channel. If you can't find a channel that you like, then go do something else besides watch TV.
I should be able to choose what I want to watch and what I don't want to watch - NOT Big Brother.
If anything should be regulated on TV, it should be commercials. Nothing worse than having a commercial for a laxative or acne product when I'm trying to eat dinner.
Sooner or later, the Care Bears and Dora The Explorer will be the only programs the government will have not deemed "Inappropriate".
I predict Windows machines will have a problem with retaining water.....
Water Logic, Spaghetti Code, String Theory.....What's next?
I thnk they took a hint and left you have a post rating of 2.
BTW, I believe the technical term for the filter you proposed is called a Country Club.
ZING!
Political correctness is for people with serious personal issues. I never understood why PC people think it is politically correct to force their viewpoints on people who don't share their opinions. Tolerance means tolerating intolerance. Stereotypes don't happen for no reason.....
Isn't this coming from the same state that decided to spend (read: waste) $320 million to build a bridge to a village with a population of 8,900, despite the fact that it ALREADY had a functioning ferry system already in place?
Apparently, the people in Alask are more fussy than we Kalifornians about their driving: They thought $320 million was a good price to avoid the 20 minute wait and $6 toll. We pay between $4 (Bay Bridge and $5 (Golden Gate), and wait about an hour in line, if you decide to commute at rush hour. Plus, you could probably write the $6 toll of as a cost of living expense.
So, if the entire population of the town crossed the bridge twice (to and from) every day, it would pay for itself after:
8,900 x 2 = 1780 crossings per day) = $10,680 dollars in tolls collected per day
320,000,000 / 10680 = 29962 days until cost paid off
29962 / 365 = 82.08 years until paid off, provided the entire population paid to cross the bridge every day of the year, for 82.08 years.
Now, if Alaskan senators think that that is SUCH a good idea to waste money on, then it is no wonder they are spending their time thinking up more crap legislation like this.
Maybe they want to head off any future incidents of polar bears molesting children. "Hey! It's Global Warming, stupid!"
Well, someone had the foresight to implat the chip in 222 people, and avoid the bad PR by implanting it in 666 people.....
Yarrr, matey! A thousand gold dubloons will be paid to the scalleywags who bring me the first release of a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD ripper! Yo ho and a bottle of Yoo-Hoo!
Signed,
Blu-Beard The Pirate
In Soviet Russia, the Black Hole makes YOU.
(Moderator: It is O.K. to mod this post as Flamebait, as it is a bad joke.)
I guess now any defendant can point to this as a way of showing that the prosecutor's case is *not* beyond a resonable doubt.
Now you could argue that they cops may have actually been looking at someone else instead of you:
"Judge, the cop was actually looking at the other guy's ISP, not mine!"
That excuse, I'm certain, has been used as effectively as "My dog ate me homework." when given by people in speeding cases. But now, thanks to the RIAA, they proposed doubt for you.
#1 - Someone who observes a crime = Witness
#1 - Videotape = Evidence.
#2 - Videotape in his possesion = Evidence in his possession.
#3 - Subpoena = Court Order
#4 - Disregarding Court Order = Contempt Of Court.
#5 - Contempt Of Court = Jail/The Big House/The Can/ The Clink/Up State/Up The River/The Pen/All-expenses paid vacation at the Fed Hotel
Add all the points together and you get:
(Jail) for (contempt of court) by (refusing a court order) to turn over (evidence of a crime) that (is in his possession) that (he witnessed).
What's so hard to figure out? The guy had evidence of a possible crime by either the police or protesters. Technically, he has evidence of a possible crime that the Feds want to investigate, like any law enforcement agency should be doing.
So what. Journalists are not above the law, and certainly not above the law when it comes to witholding evidence. He deserves to be in prison just as much as anybody else who 1) withold evidence of a crime from Authorites, and 2) Refuses to comply with the law.
He is in jail for violating the law. A violation of journalistic ethics? Pfff. Unfortunately for him, 'Journalistic Ethics' is NOT the law and does not dictate such. Freedom of the press means you can print whatever you want as long it is consistent with free speech and does not violate the law (You can't incite riots, print slanderous articles, or print nudity in a newspaper, etc.). He is not publishing anything - that is not the issue. He can publish whatever he wants.....nobody is arguaing against that and that is not why he is being jailed. It has NOTHING to do with publishing. The issue is that he is in possesion of a videotape that may contain evidence of the commission of crimes. Therefore, the judge has every right and obligtion, both ethically and legally, to force Mr. Wolf to turn over the videotape in question. And, by refusing to obey the order, Mr. Wolf he BROKE THE LAW.
So what the hell is he complaining about? It was completely his choice. 'Journalists Ethics' - Pfff. Is it ethical for a journalist to refuse to turn over evidence of a crime? Nope. Is it ethical for a judge to tell him to turn over the tape to the police for investigation of a crime? Yes. The government is trying to do its job the way it should be. It is being responsible. The police are trying to do their job. They are being responsible. The Feds are trying to do their job. Mr. Wolf is not doing his job by refusing the court order. His job is a journalist, and refusing to comply with the law is not a demonstration of 'Journalistic Ethics'. I don't think that selectively complying with the law to suit your beliefs is a demonstration of 'Journalistic Ethics', and I'm pretty sure it violates it. Ask Mr. Wolf if witholding evidence, contempt of court, obstruction of justice, and hindering an investigation are part of 'Journalistic Ethics'. Also, ask him if it is 'Journalistically Ethical' to selectively comply with the law.
He says that it is a violation of the Freedom Of The Press, yet he is violating the law by witholding evidence. Well, he is not publishing anything. He is witholding evidence. Since this isn't about something he published, it's not a violation of press freedom. He is the only one breaking the law. The Feds made the proper request, and a judge found that the request was legitimate and founded, and therefore signed it, and issued the supoena for the evidence. Unless there is a paperwork or procedural error, then he has no right to complain for being punished for not complying with the law. This isn't a case of the "Government is out to silence dissent and eliminate press freedom.". If it was, then we would all be in jail and not speaking freely in the papers or on the Internet. The vst majority of journalists comply with the law, yet *DON'T* wind up in prison. Hmmmmm.....
Lets give an analogy: You are at a protest. I beat you up. Someone videotapes the entire scene - protest and beating. The person videotapig it then sells footage of the pro
"The difference here (and the rub) lies in the fact that in a ghetto status can mean the difference between "alive" and "dead", whereas said corp VP (or most anyone on ./) can usually afford to burn a little status/karma on NOT having the latest car or NOT appearing to enjoy the very latest in entertainment."
Not true. You are confusing necessity with luxury. Alive or dead is not determined by what 'bling' someone has. The biggest causes of gang violence are drugs (and the associated violence), 'colors' (the color har or shirt the person is wearing, 'disrespect', turf wars, police action (I'm not gonna complain), gang affiliation, or being in the wrong part of town (read: hell).
Just because someone was wearing an Armani jacket, gold chain, Luis Vutton handbag, or $300 sneakers isn't going to keep them alive. It is more likely that they will be either beaten or killed because someone wanted to steal the 'bling' tha they were weaing.
Here is a little test you can do: Walk through Compton wearing a Rolex, blue shirt, red baseball cap, black jeans, a big gold chain, Air Jordans, gold teeth ('grill'. Why anybody is stupid enough to want one is beyond me) while driving an Escalade with a laptop, IPod, cell phone, $5,000 stereo in it and see how long you last at the first stop sign you come to. Do you think that all that 'bling' will keep you alive, regardless of your race? I doubt it, yet people buy it. If they buy it to keep themselves alive, then it should have kept you alive.
It's not a question on wheather or not you *need* it, it a question of if it is something you can truly afford. An Exec VP-yes. Someone on welfare-No, and if they have it, then they should be forced to give me back my tax dollars, because if they can buy gold teeth, then they don't need welfare-they can buy food instead. There is a difference between necessity and entitlement. Is a new cell phone or gold chain a good idea if you are so poor that you are on welfare or live in the ghetto? No. You should save your money and make a better spending decision instead, like food. Food will keep you alive alot longer than gold.
If you want to spend money on increasing you social status, then that's your problem. If you want to spend all your money on looking good, then go ahead. But don't complain about where you live, your children's education, and the environment your family lives in.
Which is more important: Being poorer while living in a safe neighborhood, or, being glamorous in a more dangerous area? If you picked the latter, you already spent your right to complain on shiny trinkets.
Well, if the money goes to benefit artists who have theri music downloaded illegally, then why not start up your own private business as a performer/producer and get compensation that way. Then, when you buy memory sticks/cards, claim that you are exempt from the tax since they are being used to store information other than copyrighted music.
Taxing memory sticks to compensate music 'artists' is like taxing paper to compensate people who are vicitms of plagarism. Why not tax blank DVDs to compensate the MPAA?
Practically every kind of consumer item has been counterfeited: Jet engine parts, aircraft parts, car parts, computer parts, electronics, microchips, microprocessors, machine parts, bolts, software, pharmaceuticals, dietary supplements/herbals, DVDs, CDs, appliances, heavy equipment, heavy machinery, watches, jewelry, T-shirts, clothing, firearm parts, and tires. This could easily turn into a way to tax everything that can be counterfeited or illegally copied.
Remember, at the bottom of the slippery slope, there is a very high cliff.
Obviously, you haven't seen all of the 'poor' kids struggling to get through life in the ghetto, yet spend their money on gold teeth, gold and silver chains, PDAs, cell phones, CDs, stereos, chromed-out 'pimp-mobiles' (although very few have a 'pimp-mobile', or car for that matter.), and other pointless "bling".
If they spent their money on things that weren't so expensive and meaningless, maybe they would have more money available for more essential things, like getting out of the slum. Gold, silver, and stereos are not essential. No 'status' symbols are.
If you poor, I will help you as much as I can. If you are poor with gold teeth and/or gold chains, I couldn't care less about you.
I think MicroShaft has developed a new form of advertising: Strong-Arm Advertising.
Now they will be able to punish you for not looking at their ads. I smell a rat, and it's heading toward the next EULA revision. If they sneak this into their EULA, they will be able to reposses your computer or OS because you either didn't look at their ads or installed anti-ad software.
Jesus, advertising is starting to spiral wayyy out of control, to the point where companies are now using blatant intimidation tactics and threats to force you to look at their advertisements. I'm not one for more laws, but this is a hole that needs some patching.....fast!
I don't care who sits next to you or where you or they are. I have had the same experience - over and over - time and time again. I hate having to try and gues what the other person is saying. I speak comprehendible and clearly understandible ENGLISH, not Hindi, Chinese, Swahili, Russian, French, or Martian. Americans don't care if it is actually an 'American' voice- We just care about being able to understand what they are saying and not having to stand over a codebook trying to decipher what they are saying. Unfortunately, we keep getting routed to India (at least in my cases, the only foreign tech support people sounded Indian).
The person was making a point saying that he didn't like having to speak with people who he couldn't understand.
Would YOU want to explain to someone that their product burned down your house because of their product if they couldn't speak a lick of English? I'm not talking King's English here, I just mean and version of English that could be understood without having to guess at what's being said.
Companies should consider it an act of courtesy by the company towards the consumer that the individuals who the consumer will be dealing with can speak English to a degree of conversation that is much higher that the current standard of "Hi Sir, my name is Joe Average." Customers have enough problems-That is why they are calling Tech Support in the first place. Customers also know there is little to no chance of fixing their problem when they can't understand the person on the other end.
how in the hell did that happen?! Kinda ironic that giving someone props was a bad thing.....especially on SlashDot where viewpoints are supposed to be freely expressed.
Uh-oh.....
I hear my karma slipping because I criticized some crotchety old SlashDot 'moderator'.
Hypocrites.....
Good point. The article becomes clearer with your concept of a 'Cold Account' of sorts. You could count that as the absense of heat below 0 C as a negative value, adn the opposite as a positive value. My only problem was the use of the term 'cold' as if it were something.
It was kind of like what my mom used to say when I would leave the front door open in the summer: Shut the $@&% door or you'll let the cold out!
It never made much sense to me because I didn't (and still don't) believe that cold is something that could be let out-cold air maybe. But I always have thought of cold as a 'thermal vaccuum'.
Good explaination of your point though! It makes more sense with your idea of 'Accounting'. than the way the article was written and explained.
I wonder how long a video criticizing that nutjob Scientology cult would last.
Purely ridiculous.
What if they argued that the photos were inadmissable because they were a violation of their 5th amendment rights? Just a thought.....
No..... An ice box works because it removes the heat from inside the box. You are not storing anything. You are removing heat. You are not even storing anything because 'cold' is nothing. 'Cold' is the absensce of heat. 'Cold' is not energy-heat is.
It is not reasonable to think of it as storing cold, because you are not storing anything, no energy or heat. Cold is not a temperature difference-cold is the absence of heat, not the presence of cold. Heat is a temperature difference, because it is the measurement of heat energy, while cold is the vaccuum cause by the absence of heat, and not the presence of 'cold', becuase cold is, again, the absence of heat.
You can't store "cold". The concept of 'cold' is just a simpler way to describe a thermal vaccuum - or a 'heat vaccuum. O Kelvin is just the thermal equivalent of a perfect vaccuum. The quantity of heat energy in a given space is what determines how cold-or hot- something is. Heat is the measured energy, and 'cold' is simply the absense of heat. Therefore, you cannot store the absense of something.
Wheather something feels cold or hot to us is measured by how hot or cold it feels. But, regardless of how cold it feels, there is still heat present-evein in ice or frozen ammonia. Heat content only reaches zero at 0 degrees Kelvin.
I'm not a physicist, but I think of the concept of 'cold' or 'coldness' by defining 'cold' as a "Thermal Vaccuum".
mod parent up!
I hears that Miss Cleo and David Copperfield checked themselves into a Mental Health facility after the news broke.
Apparently, they can't handle being frauds.
Anybody who saw the two stooges who actually put up the signs would realize that these are two unbelievably stupid individuals who should have been drowned by their mothers long ago.
However, the executive shouldn't have resigned over this, unless he specifically told the two idiots what to do, what to put up, and where. Anybody who was directly involved in the erroneous placement of the ads are the only people who should either be resinging or fired. If the exec told Wingus and Dingus to go out and do exactly what they did, then, yes, he should resign. But if he didn't then why should he be at fault? I'm more than certain that there are more individuals who were far more involved in the actual scandal than he was. To play devil's advocate, he probably just said "We need to promote this movie. It's popular for the market segment we are targeting, so figure out a good way to advertise it."
Honestly, that's probably where his involvement ended. The two idiots who carried it out should be forced to bear all of the costs for the whole fiasco and fined into oblivion, along with their supervisor, but only if he specifically told them to do it that way.
I don't care how popular videogames are these days, nothing will ever be as socially and culturally ubiquitous and omnipresent as the Lego brick.
Video games have nothing on Tinker Toys, Lincoln Logs, Legos, Lionel Train sets, Erector sets, Chemistry sets, and Capsela sets. I'm not old, but I still remember all of those with *MUCH* more fondness than finite "cookie-cutter" video games.
Nowadays, toys have becoe just ways for manufacturing conglomerates to make more money - They don't care how little fun it is as long as it generates $$$$$. None of those toys were expensive (except Lionel sets - those still run into the hundreds and thousands for the super-duper-ulta-real engines and cars. I used my dad's engines.), and you could do or build anything you wanted to - until my Mom took them away when I was 16.
When I have kids (God forbid they turn out like I did), I'd gladly buy them any of those before I bought them a video game or a computer game.
A video game only lasts for a few dozen hours, and isn't all that much interactive and mentally stimulating as the 'old-fashioned' toys I played with as a kid.
Oh wait.....I still do.
They should come out with an add-on program that corrects errors called Yahoo! Pipe-Cleaners.