No. A mutually agreed upon price is fine too. It just has to be agreed upon before the trip. Don't be so knee-jerky.
But things can go into the public domain after a time, which is what the post was referring to.
Well, I forgot to add that your Mickey Mouse Protection Act doesn't even apply here anyway. Unfortunately determining the details of what is/isn't public domain is still difficult: http://www.digitalnz.org/make-...
but none of that means that it's a myth.
Project Gutenburg would be a counter-proof.
Well, in NZ the drivers have to have both a passenger license, and a private hire license, which is more than a taxi driver needs. The main issue is that you can either be paid by the hour, agreed before-hand, or you charge using a licensed meter. Uber does neither.
> Then users will slowly realize that the Google's search results are not trustworthy and they will move away from Google as the search engine. The market will correct itself.
And that's why we need people questioning what they're doing, so that people have more information available to determine whether they should trust Google or not.
Someoneo nce called word processors (in the early days before everyone had them) "automatic weapons for inter-corporation turf wars."
I've also heard "word processors process words like food processors process food."
They covered all that in the article. Not just how to turn it on, but why it's not on by default/exposed in the UI yet. Seriously, you can't fail to RTFA and then be all "I had to look this up" and "you need to be in a special club to use this" when it explains what's going on right there in front of you.
10.04 is not "old", it is old. It was released over 5 years ago and is now out of support, and you're expecting developers to target things that far back? If you want that, you need to find someone to step up and do that support for you.
I just had a 3.6 here. Should I submit a new story for it?
I think it's more saying "we have a security gizmo so that if you manage to run code here, it can't get out", and using a flaw to get out.
The place to fix this is not at the employee level, by taking away their right to negotiate. The place to fix this is at the HR level, by firing them if they discriminate.
But, if one group of people is less willing to negotiate, discrimination from HR doesn't come into it really. You can't force people to negotiate.
I think you're right that it shouldn't have to be fixed at the employee level, I just can't really see another place that'd work (I'm no expert though.)
What you said to do will not work. It's weird to think it even will. It's like you're expecting everyone to become a rational actor with a tiny push, which is not going to happen.
It didn't take much googling to find similar examples.