They were using the pokemon name and likenesses, if Nintendo, or game freak didn't come out to say, "Hey, knock that off" then they can't claim the trademark anymore. Use it/enforce it.. or lose it. Honestly I like this model (to a point of course). The outrage I'm seeing in the world just because "it's big mean corpo thugs!!!111" instead of indie du jour is dumb.
I do sort of which there was some form of statute of limitations on this sort of thing. Like if Nintendo goes under and doesn't pass off the IP to another group that will be producing new content from it.. great, it's now public. Or if they abandon it for x amount of time, also great, public domain. What's that timeframe though? 5 years, 10 years?
or add a background check for owning an automatic rifle.
no issue with most of your post, but throwing this in (being that it is 100% false) could undermine peoples perception of the rest of it, as you appear to be outraged by things you don't understand.
Volkswagen - "diesel-powered plug-in hybrid" - 2015 - "and produces emissions of 21 g/km of CO2" - $146,000
my guess is that they realized they couldn't sell that particular lie at that cost.
to be fair, it WAS at one time regulated, this article is somewhat specific in saying that it going away didn't cause FOX news, but it does point out that if it had been extended to cable television things MIGHT have been different.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-ch...
honestly, i do think that anything purporting it's self to be "news" SHOULD have some form of the fairness doctrine applied to it. Sure, we might lose some stories about a dog that likes lasagna or something, but I like to think that the value gained would be far more important. In today's media, you can't survive without making everything sound worse than it is to get those eyeballs.
opinion pieces should be required to be clearly stated as opinion pieces, and if a company decides to run opinion pieces, they should have to give equal time to a rebuttal if requested and a proper expert can be vetted (and provide documentation on why no expert could be found on demand, should that be the case)
those freaky socio-medical shows need some of that as well.. some form of requirement on sharing alternate research against their juice cleanses and diatomaceous earth eating madness. Or again clearly cite that there has been no counter research.
If you put a political ad or public service/health announcement into any form of media, you should be required to be a public company (so people can see your investors) or an open public non profit (that shares donor information) or a private citizen. and that information needs to be clearly visible, and disclosed with the advert.
holy crap. I can't guarantee that i haven't been, indirectly or directly, influenced by these. I like to think i look at everything on the internet as fake until it's been verified multiple times by multiple sources, but I am far more worried about how much further back they go than this representative set. I'd be terrified if was facebook right now looking at/for other "faction" ads that might not be represented here. Thus far I've found the alt right, the alt left, BLM, LGBTQ as being targeted (and it seems like they target you not by challenging you, but agreeing with your existing world view, and slowly ramping up to extremist posts over time)
really, we americans need to look at this and learn from it. Maybe the current extent of our adversarial internal view has been created completely by this campaign, or maybe it has just been magnified. But if you honestly read through a few hundred of these things and don't see an image, or read something that has been forwarded to you or just sitting in the background of a post or page in some form or fashion you really haven't been on the internet.
they are insanely subtle in some cases, an example is a bundle targeting people who liked or followed college humor showing "dumb memes" I couldn't figure out the connection until i realized, every single one had a poster's picture that was a black person, and/or featured a black person. like downright insanity.
as a people(not just americans), we need to stop and think about how much of our opinion is shaded by the internet if not outright based on it. It's easy to say.. meh, nutjob post, or pfft, ad - next.. but seeing these things, for years of your life can make changes happen that you aren't aware of. This isn't a right wing, or left wing, or racial, issue.. this is a human issue. Until there is a technical fix, we really need a mental short circuit that allows us to step back from our own extreme 100% held beliefs and say.. hey what's the other person's stance.. no matter how strongly we disagree.
At least you are able to admit that your ignorance is willful, I feel we made some progress here.
Looks like you cracked the case.. the NRA intended for the FBI to not actually bother to look at the information submitted to them requesting a background check.
That darned NRA, I hear they require the FBI to wear blind folds while they are runner stamping background checks.
well then, I guess i can just leave this here and point to question 11 a-i.
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/d...
lemme get this right, the government safeguards against a crazy person getting a gun fail.. and your answer is.. we need more government safeguards? yeah.. im sure this time it'll be enough.
Maybe we start looking at this "recent" "uptick" in this crap and start looking for actual reasons it's happening now that we(the US) are the most regulated when it comes to firearms that we've ever been in the past? Maybe it's parenting drugs that are basically low dose meth(yeah, we win the award for most prescribed and abused in the world there too), maybe it's socio-economic breakdown starting to show its teeth, maybe the painkillers that we handed out like pez a few years back caused birth defects, maybe it's some guy in the clouds that forgot to hit the rapture switch. I don't know, but this "regulating the tools of evil" stance people seem to be taking is just insane.
it's like taking mustangs off the road to prevent traffic deaths.. I'm sure 90% of the people that drive mustangs drive like idiots, so if we remove those darned cars from the equation the kids will all live.
not entirely sure how a 3 year old military ROE document falls into the discussion, but hey, I'll bite.
Yes, that is what we'd like to have happen, but it's sort of superseded by the evading arrest portion that happened before the split second of video that is getting shown.
it also maintains in that document that the protection of the unit as a whole is objective #1.. a suspect you have been pursuing across multiple back yards stopping in the shadows and pulling something out of their pocket is not useful towards that goal. could you wait and see if someone on your side of the engagement gets hurt, sure. you'd have a much better case defending your use of force to the public.
it really sucks that this guy decided he needed to put himself and others into the situation that caused this outcome.
it should have gone like this in a perfect world
officer: hey we heard someone is breaking into cars out here, you seen anyone doing that?
guy: well that's me, I just really like breaking windows
officer: well, we're gonna have to take you in, others don't like you doing that
guy: aw, that sucks.. ok, well let's get this handled so i can go about my business
officer: not breaking into cars i hope
both: hahahahaha
I mean it's California, he MIGHT have spent a night in jail at most. Maybe he had to get to work early and thought getting arrested might have caused him to be late?
So, what we see in the UK is that mass killings a) generally aren't via gun, b) guns aren't particularly extra efficient.
UK homicide rate: 0.92 per 100K
swiss homicide rate 0.69 per 100k
US homicide rate: 4.88 per 100K
So what we see is that guns are about 5 times as efficient.
lemme just perspective that for ya.
you have to look at all of the numbers, not just the ones that back your argument
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
when you place these lists side by side it paints a weird picture (to be fair, looking at these lists is about all i've actually done here other than hear people ranting on both sides about data they don't seem to show 100%) so go find your bags of salt and take a look for yourself. maybe wikipedia isn't the most accurate place for the data. maybe all of the data is wrong because each country reports this stuff differently (example, in the uk numbers are reported based on convictions if I remember correctly, and the US reports based on reports, so the same murder could count three times if three people are brought to trial.. i could have that backwards, but at the end of the day, these numbers really mean eff all because there is no standard for reporting that is world wide recognized)
using research to come to a conclusion.. this is slashdot, that kind of tomfoolery won't be tolerated here
yeah, after he ran there from 6 police units and a freaking helicopter chasing him.
this was the end of a chase.. if you are being chased by the police, and suddenly decide.. you know what, I made it home, I'm going to give up now, you don't turn around to face them and whip out your phone. you lie down and spread your arms out and do your best to prove to them that you are not looking to fight or run anymore.
you can't casually stroll up to a person that has been chasing you for an hour, whose job it is to apprehend you, and say, "sup"? And if you are chasing a person who has broken the law, and ran.. do you assume, "oh hey, they are just standing there, i think they're done." no you assume they are cornered and ready to go unless they are indicating otherwise. now, the officers absolutely should have followed up the shots with medical aid MUCH faster, and that should certainly be investigated especially since I seem to remember sacramento having an issue with that in the past.
it sucks that a person is dead over something so stupid, but THEY started that stupid train, and rather than stop it, tried to jump off.
heh.. executive in jail..
Work is the crab grass in the lawn of life. -- Schulz
