His opinion completely overlooks the fact that it's my intellectual property right to choose whatever licensing I want for my product, and if I *choose* to release it to the public domain OR under any other terms, that is my right.
The OP is right... but it's interesting.
For ordinary agreements you need offer (contractee) and acceptance (contractor), in a ToS acceptance and assent to the terms is implied by some form of conduct. TOSAmend seeks to make a unilateral contract (one to the world) bilateral (between parties) with no real chance or form of agreement.
I would say that the website's permitting him to log-in is a pretty clear sign of acceptance.
Consider what happens if your first revised term is: "Providing web services constitutes acceptance of our revised TOS"
Couldn't one of your terms be, "Granting access to your site constitutes acceptance of our modified TOS"?
If your dick is > 1 inch, then why do you kowtow to the Blueshirts at the airport?
Well, yeah. See the Government only gets to do things which demonstrably secure the aircraft from dangerous weapons.
This mandate is fulfilled by the magnetometers and x-raying of handheld luggage. The body scanners and strip-searches have not been shown to provide any more security than that, and therefore are unconstitutional.
"History's Greatest Monster!"
There's quite a bit of editorializing in the OP...
Don't you understand that when you take a job, you negotiate for a "Total Compensation" package. If the value of that is $100,000, and $25,000 of it is in 'benefits', if you cut the 'benefits' by $10,000 you need to INCREASE TAKE HOME PAY by ten grand PLUS the lost tax benefit...
In other words, you don't SAVE any money by cutting benefits, because unless your goal is to FUCK PEOPLE OVER, then you're going to be increasing their take home, so your "Total Comp" package remains the same....
Ok Blofeld, we'll get right on that...
TBD
Problem solved.
We now return you to your discussion of version 322a8b034003c0d46d39af85bf24fee27b902f48, currently in progress...
differentiate between the/a statistically rare miscreant who happens to wear a badge,
I dispute the claim that "Bad Cops" are statistically rare. Simply put, any Cop who KNOWS about a Bad Cop, but doesn't 'retire' them, is a Bad Cop, too.
Campaign Contributors?
If you let your staff horde information and don't actually pay for cross-training time, it's not their fault there's a single-point-of-failure, it it?
Any program which runs right is obsolete.
