Canada and the rest of the socialist countries have less protections than the US. You think the Patriot Act is bad, go look at the standing laws in those other countries. No country on the planet protects your right more than the US. That's why the Patriot Act looks bad in the first place.
LOL. Maybe the only thing he gets is that you pirates will steal his work regardless of how he protects it. What you don't get is that the sales of this album is basically meaningless to Sir Paul's savings account.
DRM-free does not reduce piracy. Stealing someone's property, no matter how effortless, is eternally wrong.
The change we need is not the removal of DRM, but your lack of ethics and monkey-morals.
THIRTY FREAKING YEARS and you guys just don't get it. Apple sells hardware. Without the proprietary OSes, Apple's hard ware is no differnt from other hardware. Open Sourcing the OS is JUST PLAIN STUPID if you are trying to profit from your business.
Besides, saving lives for the sake of saving laws is not agood reason to do something. For example: in the USA there are over 800,00 abortions a year. If you subtract fetal, infant and child mortality rates, 720,000 of those fetuses would have lived to be 19 yrs old. We are killing the equivilent of 10 years of Vietnam Vets EVERY YEAR.
So if you want to "just do it" as one idiot exclaimed, then you should just call for an end to abortion. You'll have 720,000 additional Americans every year... that need eduction, healthcare, socials services, and parking spaces.
Of course. There are already regular cycles for obtaining parent input to school curriculum already. A teacher already has to submit what he is teaching before the semester and it must be adhere to the what the community has decided to teach. Ads are content. What if the local church wants to put an ad on the test!? I would guess a smart ass like you hates religion and wouldn't stand for it. Parents and administration need to create guidelines and criteria for content.
A teacher simply does not have the authority to start a program like this nor the authority to introduce unapproved content.
But the more important issue is that these are on TESTS. Not only is it a distraction from the test content, but its presence on the test implies that this subjective content is objective like the rest of the test material.
The study found that drivers were most often distracted by something outside their vehicle (29.4 percent) followed by adjusting a radio or CD player (11.4 percent). Other specific distractions included talking with other occupants (10.9 percent), adjusting vehicle or climate controls (2.8 percent), eating or drinking (1.7 percent), cell-phone use (1.5 percent) and smoking (0.9 percent).
A study by AAA says that the cell phone is #20 on the list of distractions with the radio being the number one distraction - for around 40 years! Banning the radio and passengers will do more good for safety.
Distraction does not equal accident. It doesnt even mean an increase likelihood. Only increased potential. While I support the hands free law here in CA, it's fairly totalitarian to out right ban the cell phone. If you want useful statistics look at the number of people who drive *successfully* while using cell phones. It's a staggering, overwhelming majority.
Its a distraction form the test and the learning process. PLUS, as a tax funded institution, no content should be allowed without the prior approval of the parents.
As an alternative, get the advertisers to supply students with backpacks of materials and supplies at the start of the semester. They can slap a sticker on everything.
Why are you guys even arguing about corporate taxes??? This is a personal income tax issue. 10% (the top wage earners) of the US paid 71% of income taxes in 2007.... 30% (the lowest wage earners) paid a net-zero income tax. Something is really out of wack when you have a sever minority carrying the weight of the US's budget.
I say the this loan situation is OK because if only rich people can afford the autos, we are spending their money on it - not ours.
Its one thing to have your actions known by your family and friends, its another to have a corporation or government tracking you non-stop.
In a small community the "trackers" also have to live up to scrutiny and their use of the data they collect is also monitored. That changes when the trackers are virtually anonymous and their behavior and use of the data can be exploitative (as it always seems to be exploitative when the government is tracking us).
Corporate exploitation of data is a slightly different beast. On one hand it can lead to higher satisfaction of the consumer.
Why do we insist on trying to sanitize the realities of life!? There is no ethic in killing people. Its either necessary or unnecessary. War should be as brutal and as ugly as possible. That way we would have to deeply consider if war is the answer to the situation.
Well, no, you don't achieve the same thing. You don't achieve a new revenue stream. Cell phones come with monthly usage costs... its not a one time fee.
By legalizing a controlled cell phone (contraband) you devalue the illegal cell phone. Jamming may accomplish this, but you are also interrupting legitimate communications for the staff of the prisons.
Additionally, prisoners using the cells for legit reasons (although illegal) lose their connection to those who can help them cope with prison life and maintain ties to family. Our prisons disconnect people and make them less capable of living in society. Ultimately making them career criminals.
There are already cell phones with designated phones. The technology already exists. This isnt an R&D issue, its a licensing and branding issue....And our prisons need money that taxes cannot provide.
The prisons should start making and selling cell phones that can only dial 3 predefined numbers that can be vetted for being family members. And two phones can have the same numbers unless the prisoners are family.
All calls are routed through a cell tower on a designated frequency at the prison which the prison staff have authority to monitor. The prison can block all other frequencies.
This an opportunity for the prison system to generate revenue AND control cell phone use.
"Can we expect anyone who followed a warrantless wiretap from the Bush administration to also be fired then? I mean, they violated our privacy as well."
The employees were fired because they didn't have the authority nor permission to snoop Obama's records. Not only is a wiretap a different action, those employees were instructed to do the wiretaps...
Do you normally fire employees for following policy and instruction!? Your logic is diluted by your hate for Bush. Are you going to be just as angry when the wiretaps continue under Obama?
"because a neutral network works better than a non-neutral one"
That's an extremely subjective comment. Especially when we look to other aspects of our society with non neutral paths: car pool lanes, speed limits on on trucks that are lower, express trains, buses, and lanes; affirmative action, and illegal immigration. All of the fore-mentioned allow users to skip ahead of others based on an established criteria. If load balancing or whatever the term is for biased net traffic worked in our favor, I doubt we would complain. I am sure students would not complain if their status as student granted them the privilege of faster downloads and faster media downloads over business traffic.
I think a neat experiment like this might lend some insight: Example: What if AT&T loaded balanced only subscribers to AT&T net access - while allowing non-AT&T subscribers a neural experience on their tubes. This way, the user gets to purchase privileges access through AT&T or choose neutrality by not choosing AT&T for access. Overtime we will see which system is preferred, or "works better" from the consumer point of view.
All this boils down to the have-nots wanting what the haves can afford - yet are unwilling to compensate for the preferred experience.
Slashdot Mirror
After all, we have to blame someone. Since Democrats _do_ nothing, we can can't blame them...
lol jk Happy Holidays
Canada and the rest of the socialist countries have less protections than the US. You think the Patriot Act is bad, go look at the standing laws in those other countries. No country on the planet protects your right more than the US. That's why the Patriot Act looks bad in the first place.
Jamming cell phones is a federal crime.
LOL. Maybe the only thing he gets is that you pirates will steal his work regardless of how he protects it. What you don't get is that the sales of this album is basically meaningless to Sir Paul's savings account.
DRM-free does not reduce piracy. Stealing someone's property, no matter how effortless, is eternally wrong.
The change we need is not the removal of DRM, but your lack of ethics and monkey-morals.
THIRTY FREAKING YEARS and you guys just don't get it. Apple sells hardware. Without the proprietary OSes, Apple's hard ware is no differnt from other hardware. Open Sourcing the OS is JUST PLAIN STUPID if you are trying to profit from your business.
Unfortunately the Internet is festering with fanboys and human propaganda zombies. Hitler would have conquered the world faster with fewer bullets.
Besides, saving lives for the sake of saving laws is not agood reason to do something. For example: in the USA there are over 800,00 abortions a year. If you subtract fetal, infant and child mortality rates, 720,000 of those fetuses would have lived to be 19 yrs old. We are killing the equivilent of 10 years of Vietnam Vets EVERY YEAR.
So if you want to "just do it" as one idiot exclaimed, then you should just call for an end to abortion. You'll have 720,000 additional Americans every year ... that need eduction, healthcare, socials services, and parking spaces.
Look for past issues of How Magize (I believe 2007) They did a series articles that answer your questions.
Of course. There are already regular cycles for obtaining parent input to school curriculum already. A teacher already has to submit what he is teaching before the semester and it must be adhere to the what the community has decided to teach. Ads are content. What if the local church wants to put an ad on the test!? I would guess a smart ass like you hates religion and wouldn't stand for it. Parents and administration need to create guidelines and criteria for content.
A teacher simply does not have the authority to start a program like this nor the authority to introduce unapproved content.
But the more important issue is that these are on TESTS. Not only is it a distraction from the test content, but its presence on the test implies that this subjective content is objective like the rest of the test material.
Who cares about two families fueding?
The study found that drivers were most often distracted by something outside their vehicle (29.4 percent) followed by adjusting a radio or CD player (11.4 percent). Other specific distractions included talking with other occupants (10.9 percent), adjusting vehicle or climate controls (2.8 percent), eating or drinking (1.7 percent), cell-phone use (1.5 percent) and smoking (0.9 percent).
http://www.aaafoundation.org/multimedia/index.cfm?button=disdrv
A study by AAA says that the cell phone is #20 on the list of distractions with the radio being the number one distraction - for around 40 years! Banning the radio and passengers will do more good for safety.
Distraction does not equal accident. It doesnt even mean an increase likelihood. Only increased potential. While I support the hands free law here in CA, it's fairly totalitarian to out right ban the cell phone. If you want useful statistics look at the number of people who drive *successfully* while using cell phones. It's a staggering, overwhelming majority.
Its a distraction form the test and the learning process. PLUS, as a tax funded institution, no content should be allowed without the prior approval of the parents.
As an alternative, get the advertisers to supply students with backpacks of materials and supplies at the start of the semester. They can slap a sticker on everything.
Why are you guys even arguing about corporate taxes??? This is a personal income tax issue. 10% (the top wage earners) of the US paid 71% of income taxes in 2007. ... 30% (the lowest wage earners) paid a net-zero income tax. Something is really out of wack when you have a sever minority carrying the weight of the US's budget.
I say the this loan situation is OK because if only rich people can afford the autos, we are spending their money on it - not ours.
Its one thing to have your actions known by your family and friends, its another to have a corporation or government tracking you non-stop.
In a small community the "trackers" also have to live up to scrutiny and their use of the data they collect is also monitored. That changes when the trackers are virtually anonymous and their behavior and use of the data can be exploitative (as it always seems to be exploitative when the government is tracking us).
Corporate exploitation of data is a slightly different beast. On one hand it can lead to higher satisfaction of the consumer.
Its always OK to be racist if its towards whites. Whites should be shackles and forced to work in the fields.
Many new developments in San Jose, CA paid for the internal and connecting T1 lines etc... About 10-14 years ago.
Why do we insist on trying to sanitize the realities of life!? There is no ethic in killing people. Its either necessary or unnecessary. War should be as brutal and as ugly as possible. That way we would have to deeply consider if war is the answer to the situation.
Well, no, you don't achieve the same thing. You don't achieve a new revenue stream. Cell phones come with monthly usage costs... its not a one time fee. By legalizing a controlled cell phone (contraband) you devalue the illegal cell phone. Jamming may accomplish this, but you are also interrupting legitimate communications for the staff of the prisons. Additionally, prisoners using the cells for legit reasons (although illegal) lose their connection to those who can help them cope with prison life and maintain ties to family. Our prisons disconnect people and make them less capable of living in society. Ultimately making them career criminals. There are already cell phones with designated phones. The technology already exists. This isnt an R&D issue, its a licensing and branding issue. ...And our prisons need money that taxes cannot provide.
The prisons should start making and selling cell phones that can only dial 3 predefined numbers that can be vetted for being family members. And two phones can have the same numbers unless the prisoners are family.
All calls are routed through a cell tower on a designated frequency at the prison which the prison staff have authority to monitor. The prison can block all other frequencies.
This an opportunity for the prison system to generate revenue AND control cell phone use.
"Can we expect anyone who followed a warrantless wiretap from the Bush administration to also be fired then? I mean, they violated our privacy as well."
The employees were fired because they didn't have the authority nor permission to snoop Obama's records. Not only is a wiretap a different action, those employees were instructed to do the wiretaps...
Do you normally fire employees for following policy and instruction!? Your logic is diluted by your hate for Bush. Are you going to be just as angry when the wiretaps continue under Obama?
"because a neutral network works better than a non-neutral one"
That's an extremely subjective comment. Especially when we look to other aspects of our society with non neutral paths: car pool lanes, speed limits on on trucks that are lower, express trains, buses, and lanes; affirmative action, and illegal immigration. All of the fore-mentioned allow users to skip ahead of others based on an established criteria. If load balancing or whatever the term is for biased net traffic worked in our favor, I doubt we would complain. I am sure students would not complain if their status as student granted them the privilege of faster downloads and faster media downloads over business traffic.
I think a neat experiment like this might lend some insight: Example: What if AT&T loaded balanced only subscribers to AT&T net access - while allowing non-AT&T subscribers a neural experience on their tubes. This way, the user gets to purchase privileges access through AT&T or choose neutrality by not choosing AT&T for access. Overtime we will see which system is preferred, or "works better" from the consumer point of view.
All this boils down to the have-nots wanting what the haves can afford - yet are unwilling to compensate for the preferred experience.
Balmer is a quack who ranks up there with Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Because Haliburton is related to Bush and Republicans... even though IBM or some other company announced a similar thing a few weeks ago...
Democracy put a constitutional ban on gay marriage in California. Democracy would have banned abortion, women voting, and kept slavery legal.
The US is a democratic republic - someday you'll have to accept that.