If they convicted everyone there who was a thief, who would be left?
It's only illegal if you get caught.
I got my first mobile phone in 1999. It was because the job required it. The very first day I had the phone, my car broke down and I the phone was a rather very convenient device.
I was a phone luddite. I didn't want to be strung to the rest of the world by the hip. Dude, you can turn the phone off any time. I don't have to use it.
Now, 11 years on. I have a Galaxy Nexus, I run My Tracks almost every day, I browse web sites, take photos and videos, do navigation and occasionally make a phone call.
I get to do what I want to do better. Sweet!
I've noticed lately that google isn't nearly as sharp at finding the results I want. If I search for terms 'x', 'y', and 'z', google will sometimes give me a page with terms 'x' and 'y' but not 'z'. 'z' is on pages that link to the results, but google doesn't tell me this. If there are no pages with 'x', 'y', and 'z' on them then so be it, but don't give me pages that I don't want.
You can "fix" this. You can type +x +y +z and it will only give results that contain all of x, y and z. There are a few other "operators" you can use.
If you truly care about your son, you will take the time to get informed as the CJS can screw with an AS sufferer in ways that will make you sick.
... But I think I'm a bit wiser today, having maybe learned that the bleeding edge is sometimes literal.
I'm not exactly sure what you think you maybe learned but both shuttle disasters were caused by management overriding engineers and making engineering decisions.
It's not uncommon that managers in stressful situations somehow loose faith in engineers and make their own engineering decisions. All too often this happens, perhaps the consequences are often not dire but it regularly causes major issues. There is an endless list of them. Google for "challenger bhopal engineering management" and you will find endless discussions on them. Needless to say the report on the Challenger disaster points its finger directly at the management - alas it did little to remedy the situation having another shuttle disaster happen only a few years later again with management not listening to engineers and overriding their recommendations.
... Easily worth the trade off.
The question is not whether vaccination should be abolished, the question is whether the vaccination regime should be changed to avoid complications.
Perhaps we can introduce a vaccination regime where we gradually vaccinate for one disease at at time rather than the cocktail done now.
Perhaps we can wait to vaccinate until signs of autism should be apparent.
There also seems to be newer tools for diagnosing autism, perhaps we can study these before and after vaccinations.
I'd like to know if these types of alternatives have been considered rather than this black/white vaccinate/not rant.
How many children will die or suffer lifelong complications from preventable diseases because their parents got scared of vaccines by his unethical greed?
Probably very few if not none.
- Google fesses up to it's mistake, Microsoft fights. If it was not for Google owning up to the error, no-one would have known, while Microsoft tried hard to keep quiet comments like "Knife the Baby".
- Google made no financial advantage from this while Microsoft made a whole business by killing competitors using it's monopoly advantage.
- Google did not intend to breach privacy laws, Microsoft knew and were warned on previous occasions that they were to stop the practice.
- It's not really clear that Google really breached the law, the information they collected was in the clear, i.e. if you go yelling you account numbers and passwords from the rooftops and someone with taking a family video records inadvertently, I suggest that it's hard to prove that the cameraman is at fault. Microsoft was found guilty and convicted of its crime.
I think it's important to compare like cases if you don't want to be marked a troll.
Real estate agents in Australia are a cowboys compared to the agents I dealt with in the US and yes, I have experience with both.
Actually, from what I've heard, this is pretty standard in patent infringement cases. They may not be shooting for it, but they'll use it as a bargaining position.
That's only copyright cases, not patent cases. Patents are free to be read and researched and in fact it is encouraged. That's the basis of patent law, to promote innovation. Copyright on the other hand is for limiting the right to copy and hence extends to the demand to destroy existing copies. The remedy in patents is usually to prevent from using or selling infringing product.