Twitter is as useless as all the rest of the "social" "media" crap out there. It's a massive waste of your time.
Exactly! Why can't all those people using twitter do something constructive with their time? You know, like posting smug AC comments on Slashdot.
Why do I get flu symptoms whenever I get the flu shot?
Because the flu shot contains antigens from the influenza virus which can trigger a reaction in your immune system similar to that of contracting the actual virus.
Why does the CDC claim that vaccines do not prevent the illness?
Because no vaccine is 100% effective and they don't want to get sued by litigious idiots that don't understand math.
Why should I allow a foreign object to penetrante my body without my consent?
For the same reason you're not allowed to drive your car on a public street as fast as you feel like: because it makes you a danger to those around you.
Are the ingredients in these vaccines safe?
Yes.
Why are there no longterm studies in the effects of vaccines, if there are what are these effects on humans?
Where is all the money going from vaccine revenues?
Where do the revenues from anything go? To the people that manufacture and sell the stuff. Just because the company that makes seat belts turns a profit doesn't necessarily make seat belts a scam.
Anything else you'd like to know?
Assuming the summary is correct (I know, I know), the legislation doesn't require payment by Google, it only allows the original publisher to collect payment from Google. If the small publishers want to have links to their sites show up in Google News without Google paying them, all they would have to do is send a letter to Google granting them permission. It would be up to each publisher to decide which way they want to go.
From what I've read the Spanish law specifically does not allow publishers to opt out.
"If you are a digital editor that publishes with a copyleft license, like myself, and you minimally understand how the internet actually works, you cannot decide to not charge Google News. It is compulsory. More than a right it is an obligation. Therefore, Google cannot exclude sites requiring payment from Google News. It would still need to pay for those it includes, even if they do not want to be compensated."
I think that we need to fundamentally change the web so that Google and Facebook share their profits with us. They are after all making profits by selling your data. Now obviously they do lots of complicated analysis which is where a lot of the value added is but the raw resource is your data. You should be compensated for it.
You are being compensated just not monetarily. You get free access to search engines and social networking sites.
Why should they be forced to lease it at less than optimal rates to a competitor? They built the network. It's their capital. No, that is an unacceptable infringement of economic liberty and property rights.
Why should I be forced to allow ATT to run cables for their network across my property? ATT wants to claim that it's their network and they should be free to do whatever they want with it? Fine, no more legal right-of-ways for you. You want to bury cables on my property? Pay me rent.
Old Testament allows men to have female children as brides, so does Islam, so do the Vedic religions.
The old testament also allows for stoning people for being "a stubborn and rebellious son". That does not, to my mind, make it a good idea.
that is why we have dmca safe harbor laws the one good part of the dmca. its why gmail isn't shutdown for facilitating drug sales as well
I could be wrong but I think the safe harbor provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act only applies to copyright infringement. It's not a blanket protection against all criminal acts.
What I'm trying to get at is that employers - as a group represented in the media - are schizophrenic or at least do not know what the fuck they want.
Yeah, it's almost as if "employers" referred to some vast group of different people with different goals and motivations...
Yes you're correct. I didn't over Tor. Perhaps I misunderstood that signing up over Tor was a requirement.
GGP: "I would never give Google or anyone else my cell phone number"
GP: "You cant sign up without giving them your number anymore."
Me: "Yes you can."
I have not tested it but I'm entirely willing to believe that account creation over Tor is more difficult.
You cant sign up without giving them your number anymore.
That's just not true. I just tested this and I was able to create a new Gmail account without specifying either a phone number or an alternate email address. Go try it yourself. There's a phone number field on the form but it's not mandatory.
This is obviously a harmful security feature. It locks people out of their accounts by assuming that they always have access to a cell phone.
Yeah if they'd been thinking at all they would have made this an optional feature that you're under no obligation to use....oh wait they totally did that. *eye roll*
Or did you never want to be able to travel abroad?
You can also print out a list of codes ahead of time to take with you when travelling abroad if you so desire. But...you know...don't let the facts get in the way of your rant.
...or you could do it yourself, BASH is open source.
Maybe the GP is not a programmer and is thus not able to do it himself. Open source is great but it's not a magic panacea.
I suppose he could hire someone to do it for him but complaining on
There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.
