Harder means more complex. And with more complexity comes more possibilities for medicine and genetic treatment. Sounds like a reason for celebration to me.
Coverage a problem? 3 words: Mothership Warehouse Zeppelins.
Like it or not, mobile software is tightly-coupled to the hardware, and the warranty. I expect the manufacturers consider this more akin to wiping the firmware on your TV, microwave, or car.
while the summary is laudatory, fawning, even, it is not central to the decision
Funny, I had the same reaction when I read it. He seemed like a salesman for Google or something.
I would like to retain your services in this matter. Please list your bank account information so that I may transfer a retainer payment to you. Thank you. Sincerely, Prince Bernard Koffi Austine Nigeria
Dear Prince Bernard,
If you're talking about my bank account, you're barking up the wrong tree
So, if this stands does this mean it's lawful for Google to make the full text available of these books, or not?
Fair use cases are very fact specific. If you start monkeying with the facts, Judge Chin might not feel the same way about it.
If google can legally copy books (even when profit is involved) then why can't I do the same?
Wouldn't I get hammered with copyright infringement problems if I scanned in books I did not author myself?
I don't know but please hire me as your lawyer when you do.
This is as good a place as any to recommend Rocket Surgery Made Easy. As someone with absolutely no knowledge of usability testing, this was a great introduction to the art.
So essentially we've gotten nothing from fracking
Did you even RTFA^HS^HHeadline? "We" have leverage over Iran. Which is generally recognized as a good thing (feel free to argue).
Whether or not it's worth the vast environmental damage is for you to decide, but don't display your stupidity by claiming there are absolutely no upsides.
All websites must be designed for use by rural Kentuckians.
So if a kidnapper releases his victim after a few years, all's good?
I'm not taking issue with the anti-death-penalty stance, I'm taking issue with the simplistic "if we we do it,how are we better?" argument. There are clear differences between killing a mugging victim/hit target/cheating wife, and killing a killer. Arguing they're the same is only going to convince your opponents that you're dumb enough to believe it, and drive them further from your point of view.
And how does imprisoning them make us better than kidnappers? Free them all!