So, a cop sees you doing something he doesn't like (say maybe dancing, or listening to music) and decides you're not "respecting his authority" - it gives him the right to come over to you and harrass you?

fuck that.

This cop had a choice - he could have just ignored it. The female cop that was talking to the protester has no problem, why did Officer Bubbles have to stick his nose in it?

And how much of that will be due to the last, rather than the first two items?

Jesus, you sound like the adverts for sugar-laden cardboard which claim their product is "part of this healthy breakfast"..

Why is math education important in public schools?

The vast majority of students will not be mathematicians or accountants, and will not have any opportunity to reinforce the information they learn, and hence will forget it all by the time they are 20.

--OR--

Why is english education important in public schools?

The vast majority of students will not be writers, and will not have any opportunity to reinforce the information they learn, and hence will forget it all by the time they are 20.

--OR--

Why is history education important in public schools?

The vast majority of students will not be historians, and will not have any opportunity to reinforce the information they learn, and hence will forget it all by the time they are 20.

--OR--

Why is physical education important in public schools?

The vast majority of students will not be althletes, and will not have any opportunity to reinforce the information they learn, and hence will forget it all by the time they are 20.

You can apply this argument to pretty much every school subject - so your question is really "why do we send children to school"?

Which doesn't mean it's not unsecured. It just means that it's unsecured on purpose.

Supposed you have a bicycle. You chain it to a lamppost. It is now secured.
Supposed you take the same bicycle and decide purposely to not chain it to anything. Just because you decided not to chain it doesn't make it magically secured. It's still unsecured, you just made the decision not to secure it.

Of course it can - make sure you have 1/2 tank of gas, and have someone whack the rear bumper with a sledgehammer. I'm sure parts of the pinto will reach 96mph. :)

And you are clearly completely unaware of the contracting world.

I have yet to meet a contractor that knows much of anything about screwdrivers or any other tool than a hammer. On the other hand the majority of them have complained about how hard it is to drive screws with the hammer.

They ALL do this. You're telling thousands of contractors to change how they do things, and honestly, not for the better. They know how to use a hammer and know how to drive nails.

A large portion of them took contracting because it was supposed to make them a lot of money, these people don't even use 1/10th of the functionality provided by a hammer, lets not try to make them learn another entirely different tool skill set, ok?

Even if you're currently working in contracting supply and are like "Oh, no, our contractors have access to all this stuff and they would never do that". Trust me, they do. It all ends up pounded by a hammer somewhere eventually.

Bullshit.

So - because some CC-licensed music is non-commercial, then *ALL* CC-licensed music is illegal on an ad-supported blog?

Logic. You fail it.

No. They said you cannot use Creative Commons licensed music, some of which (as you have already pointed out) does not forbid commercial use.

No, that would be you.

But the fact that they'd be in the air means they'd have more space, so accidents would go down!

I'm reminded of this quote from WKRP in Cincinnati:

"Les, you can't even ride your scooter to work without getting into an accident. What makes you think you think you could pilot a helicopter?"

"Well, there's so much less to hit up there."

Wrong question. The right question is "Do you think anyone will want to invest in stocks if the republicans get power?"

With an increase in capital gains taxes, people will still buy stocks. What will change is that they will hold on to them longer, which can only be a good thing.

With more "long" investors, corporations can begin to invest in long-term strategy, rather than focusing solely on short-term profits that cannibalize future profits.

Increasing capital gains taxes will have a negative impact on daytrading leeches, possibly forcing them to lose their gravy train and making them have to do something constructive.

This is pretty much a win-win-win-win scenario for workers, corporations, investors, innovators, and the economy.

Why not? If his tax rate is 90%, he's making $100,000 after paying the $9,000 to his employees. (Remember, it's income tax, not gross sales before expenses tax.

The whole "rich people shouldn't be taxed as much because otherwise they won't create jobs" is pure, unmitigated bullshit.

Also known as "the Monty Python and the Holy Grail" sequence. :)

Yup, that's why the London Stock Exchange sued MS after the entire fscking exchange went down in flames, right?

Oh, wait - no they didn't. They licked their wounds and switched to Linux.

Methinks your premise is flawed.

No.

A company with a long history in the industry is annoyed because IMDB won't list their pre-production film.

It's different because they *do* have a history of releases behind them.

Your problem is that you're parroting the IMDB's response, and ignoring reality.

Or maybe you're just really good at what you do, and other people recognize it.

Linkedin are just a bunch of spammers anyway.

I got an email from them, claiming that someone I knew wanted me to join. It was a spammer - the "custom message" that was included was a single link to a spam site in China.

The email had a "if this is spam..." report button, so I used it, and noted to linkedin that I didn't know the person, and it was *obviously* spam (the link was to a spam site.) Their automated system thanked me for reporting the abuse, and I thought that was the end of it.

Two weeks later, I receive a "helpful reminder" from Linkedin, telling me that I hadn't confirmed or rejected the invitation. Not only had they not taken any action, they helpfully included the spam link, and seemed blissfully unaware that I had reported this spammer's account two weeks prior.

Linkedin are just a bunch of scummy spammers. I blocked all email from their domain since.