I think you are looking for fark.
I think you are looking for fark.
So I can just walk into an apple store and grab an adapter from the bucket on the counter with the big "free" sign on it?
I didn't think so.
Then, they are not free.
Is there anything dumber than a bag of hammers?
I say aggressively prosecute everyone you can prove was in on it, top to bottom.
I couldn't agree more. Certainly a criminal investigation involving 5300 employees should be able to provide enough evidence to prove that the managers were involved, or at least cognizant of the crime, enough managers should be able to point fingers up the stack as well, and bring some serious penalties against the senior management.
All of these people should be doing time, and/or should be banned from employment in a position of trust. The higher up the stack should also involve some hefty fines too.
So does that mean speaking, writing or otherwise commenting on a copyrighted subject is now a violation of copyright.
It's the same thing.
Call me when I can change the battery in this thing every three years like a real watch. Otherwise it's a bit fucking pointless.
Yes, many parts of the world did fine without bees for a long time, but that was before those parts of the world were trying to sustain billions of people, and I'm sure those parts of the world will continue just fine without european honeybees after all the people have starved to death.
I think they need to roll DHS and TSA into one super department, and they could change to name so that anyone could immediately recognize it for that it is: Komitet Gosudarstvennoi Bezopanosti.
So, if I have this right: A bunch of useless cunts can't figure out how to exploit their own talents to make money, but god forbid anyone else should know how to do it.
So called intellectual property is an artificial monopoly to begin with, and it is becoming more and more clear that it is not suitable in the digital era. Just as the popularization of the printing press created a need for reformed perceptions and essentially the founding the intellectual property principles, the digital revolution requires some radical changes in perceptions.
The most balanced approach would probably some form of mandatory licensing. If you are the producer of a creative work, you must apply for a copyright registration, and set a value to your work. If someone wishes to use it, they can purchase a license for that value or not. No registration, no copyright. That essentially creates a free market for creative works while still protecting the creators rights. At the same time it protects the consumer from the anti-competetive behaviours we see with "exclusive distribution rights" etc. Any party has an equal opportunity to access any media.
This does not completely cut out the middle-man, but makes that role much more competitive and puts the power back in the hands of the artists, while putting more money back in the pockets of the artists.
I don't know about the UK, but In Canada private investigators need a license. This definitely fits the definition:
“private investigator” means a person who investigates and furnishes information for hire or reward, including a person who
(i) searches for and furnishes information as to the personal character or actions of a person, or the character or kind of business or occupation of a person...
All that said, it doesn't change the fact that if buying a gun wasn't as simple as buying a pack of cigarettes, the deranged idiots wouldn't have guns.
I can point to several billion good examples (being pretty much the global population OUTSIDE the USA.)
So go build your own strawman somewhere else.
One of the mysteries of the universe is that anti-religious people such as myself tend to support freedom of religion much more than religious people do.
The answers to that question can probably be found here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu...
TL;DR: "Religious people" are to too stupid to understand a different viewpoint.
No matter how big your company is, directly interfering in a nation's politics is not a long term winning strategy.
Riiiight. Directly interfering with a nation's politics has had such a detrimental effect on Oil, Pharma, and Banking.
Doesn't the DMCA have some anti-circumvention measures in there? While the FBI may be immune to that sort of thing, I'm pretty sure that circumventing encryption for profit is not exempt, aside from being a criminal offence. Despite the fact that the phone belonged to an alleged criminal, afaik it is still illegal for a private individual to hack into it.
Most intelligent people realize that there is no such thing as a free lunch, so the question is: "how is this getting paid for?" Any service that is promoting itself as "free" is misrepresenting itself, and that needs to be addressed.
Corporations should be required to reveal all the data being collected and how it is used, and consumers should have an option to decline data collection. Furthermore, refusal to offer service to someone that has declined data collection should be considered discrimination and made illegal.
The better solution to this is to take the $100M and put it out for competition to competitive bidders. Stipulate minimum service levels, required coverage areas AND require a matching investment from the bidder.
An even better solution to this might be an armed uprising. Take all though fucking guns that you Americans are so proud of, and show us you know what they are for.
It seems that more and more mathematicians are using a new, high level language named "research student".