Comment Re:I believe it because.. (Score 1) 291
Nonsense.
I took my son to his uncle's wedding four national borders and 4000 miles away when he was 15 months old, and that took no noticeable extra effort.
Nonsense.
I took my son to his uncle's wedding four national borders and 4000 miles away when he was 15 months old, and that took no noticeable extra effort.
Market share is not capital.
Hachette is also well known here in its home country France for its frequent and long-standing collusion with the state. It holds an all-but-in-name monopoly over most schoolbooks, the purchase of which is mandated by the public education system. In 2011 the European Commission started investigating Hachette, Penguin, Georg von Holzbrinck, Harper&Collins and a couple other big publishers for abuse of dominant market position and anticompetitive practices, especially in the electronic book market. Hachette also is forcing DRM onto e-book authors even in their outside deals with other publishers.
It's fine by me if someone wants every mention of him/herself removed from a search engine. I have an issue with selectively removing just the choice stuff which they object to, though.
So this politician wants some details of his professional conduct unreported in a Google search ? Welcome to internet-non-existence. Your reelection-platform website, twitter campaign account and commentary blog get tossed along into a black hole.
And in any case, someone who really wants the information will find it eventually.
For an entertaining take, see Greg Egan's Distressed novel, which has a whole subplot about a rich family whose members have their entire DNS replaced by a "translated" equivalent made of artifical, new nucleobases, complete with updated enzymatic machinery. As a side-effect it turns their skin jet black and allows them to survive on a diet of tire rubber.
They then plan to release a superbug on their fellow humans (it cannot affect them since they have become, in effect, complete aliens) and keep the Earth for themselves.
In a hundred years, bigsexyjoeJr will be ranting on
> The first sentence of TFA and TFS says "The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that police can stop and search a driver based solely on an anonymous 911 tip."
Adorable.
> I haven't read the decision myself
Perhaps you should.
> so I could be wrong,
You are.
> but that's what it says here.
Adorable.
Allow me. From the decision
Syllabus
A California Highway Patrol officer stopped the pickup truck occupied by petitioners because it matched the description of a vehicle that a 911 caller had recently reported as having run her off the road. As he and a second officer approached the truck, they smelled marijuana. They searched the truck's bed, found 30 pounds of marijuana, and arrested petitioners. Petitioners moved to suppress the evidence, arguing that the traffic stop violated the Fourth Amendment. Their motion was denied, and they pleaded guilty to transporting marijuana. The California Court of Appeal affirmed, concluding that the officer had reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigative stop.
Held: The traffic stop complied with the Fourth Amendment because, under the totality of the circumstances, the officer had reasonable suspicion that the truck's driver was intoxicated. Pp. 3-11
"And remember: Evil will always prevail, because Good is dumb." -- Spaceballs