...That the internets know where they are? Seriously we don't need to be fortune tellers to find out that they are in Massachusetts, they list it on their website. I've got a friend who runs in those circles, maybe I can get a meet and greet and talk some sense into them, since they obviously can't tell how bad of an outcome this will be.
Just pointing out a correction, the postal service has plenty of money. Congress is making them pay ridiculous amounts of money to pad a budget shortfall. Take away paying for 75 years worth of benefits in 10 years and they are in the black.
You realize that analytical modeling is the same method that RIAA, MPAA and the BSA go about tallying losses due to piracy correct? Also where does it say empirical evidence? Did the article change? Analytical modeling is also how they push the boundaries of science. You can disagree with the assumptions made but that doesn't make the headline a lie and the missed part actually refutes your point of view. It says lowered piracy decreases sales.
1.If he didn't want it known he would take it off his Amazon store.
2. If he was outraged he could simply have followed the procedure to have it removed, the link to contact them is at the top of every page.
3. Rupert Murdoch and his family are being investigated for hacking a cell phone. If they were treated the same as anyone without money they'd be in prison. Maybe someone should have advised him that having money does not mean you're entirely above the law.
4. I live in America, I have every right to rag "on" him. You do not have a right to not be offended and your salty tears sustain me.
5. A book published in the 1950s could easily be within the public domain if the copyright was not renewed. This book was renewed so is under copyright until the 1940s but they are still a library an libraries are able to lend books, even copyrighted ones. Especially since the people who wrote the original laws were the ones to create the library system. I guess those pesky founding fathers couldn't see the benefit of closing off information since an informed public is key to a healthy republic. Are you full of so much chutzpah as to tell Ben Franklin how to run a country?
I suppose Sony should take down it's Playstation network since it's been hacked again, I suppose VC should stop happening since the majority of money spent does not come back. I suppose baseball players should stop playing if they don't hit a home run every time at bat. See how calling something a failure for not working like it was intended makes you look like an idiot. Fact of the matter is, more people now know about this work due to that list than at any time in the past, and because of MM you now know about the book. So I'd say it works pretty well, but I guess you could claim that copyright lawyers are the champions here because they would have found the book if they had nothing to gain...oh right, no they wouldn't have. Get a name if you're going to have a conversation, it's makes you a douche not to at least create a pseudonym or should we just call you darryl?
Apparently it's not a surprise anymore. I was thinking very similar thoughts to your own. I wonder if there are any studies that have public perception of corruption alongside actual known corruption statistics to see if there is a correlation.
Netflix stated that the price increase was in no way related to increases in costs on the supply side. They stated that they were increasing prices to make more money and felt the price was still a good value, which it was, honestly. Splitting the company is their fault. The stockholders don't like it and the consumers don't like it. It's a bad move all around and needs to be rectified.
It would seem logical that if the current governance believes that retroactive copyright is promoting the goals of progress, should they not abandon public domain altogether? Why would they take steps that seem to only act as a step towards creating a complacent culture. Giving false hope of a logical and reasonable expectation of a creative work benefiting the public seems damaging to morale and at best dishonest at worst negligent. I would suggest that the goals of stagnation, job loss and creative vacuum could be far faster achieved and should be considered. Please extend this to the logical conclusion EU, abandon public domain and increase taxation of goods on your society, this is the most opportune time to do so, with the high unemployment, they will have to choose between creative signs and wooden stakes and pitchforks. Obviously signs are more a value to them except, of course, if they write a previously used slogan.
I am way too skeptical about this to be elated. The track record of the current and former administrations elicits a need to temper our joy until all the moves by all sides have played out. As much as I would love to believe that functions of the government have started to be restored, there is a lot of money paid to prevent just this kind of legal action. Perhaps we have reached the requisite tipping point to where the public starts reasserting our rights, but the disaffected state of so many and the need of involvement from those in the largest portions of our society makes me believe we still have farther to go before sanity is restored.
So in your estimation arguing for anything but more restrictive rights is excuse for a police state? Police are NOT a reflection of society in any way, in fact the exact opposite is more likely true. The less enforcement the more people are expected to be responsible...to a point. Police are only meant to be an impartial force to de-escalate violence, otherwise why have them? We could easily go back to the days of lawlessness where you protected your own person.
You know that rights are what you are entitled to by law correct? There is no act involved. Also you analogy is flawed. The protest is itself the effect caused by police overstepping their authority in excessive force against children.
Please continue to offer flawed logic. This was far too easy an exercise.
"Yes, and they all had to pay for a permit to set up shop."
To sell products and act as a business entity yes. Churches routinely have public bake sales facing private streets, many times without proper documentation through ignorance and no police are called on them.
"He was "protesting" in a way that would cause problems, so he could be the big internet star that day. Still an ass."
Your use of air quotes around the word protesting is inappropriate since he was indeed protesting, regardless of your opinion of it.
One could say your inflammatory posts and aggressive language would make you fall into your own category as you have a far larger audience than Ean, could ever hope at a limited venue.
"And again, you didn't see the point at all. If he was around the corner, NOT in a permit controlled 'public' market, it would be different. What's the point of protesting something to nobody that cares or has any idea what you are protesting? If he interfered with people's right to free movement, what would be the point of protesting by harassing people who had nothing to do with what he was protesting about? What happened to the good old days where you actually WENT to the people who did the act that you are protesting about?"
So you say he was protesting something no one knew or cared about, yet he shouldn't be raising awareness to public who isn't aware of it? Who precisely should he be talking to then? He was protesting on a street adjoining the state building in an area of high traffic and offering free lemonade to essentially anyone since he had no way of verifying employment status. Since when is sharing food that has passed safety standards a crime? I think you fail to see the point of protesting, in general. Raising awareness to an audience is a major portion of protest. People don't just spontaneously get angry over issues without provocation. By your standards of protest the sit-ins of the civil rights movement would make them television "stars of the day" and "still an ass".
I've read through most of your posts and wanted to give you extra thanks for your intelligent and knowledgeable posts on this topic. It's members of this community like you that truly make this a great place to come and truly understand the topics of the day. As has been said before it's the users that make the community as good as it is and it is appreciated.
No one's worried about the country defaulting. We know it won't but the downgrade has a real and tactile affect on the population, especially those already on the edge. Make no mistake this is bad in real dollars and once again the poor and middle class are going to bear the brunt of it.
Also how does using one experts opinion as fact based upon evidence change anything about our system? This is done throughout scientific communities, the preponderance of evidence says that asbestos is bad so it is made into law, the preponderance of evidence says that cigarettes are bad so we make it into law. The preponderance of evidence says investing in AAA rated institutions is the least amount of risk, especially for those most at risk. Not really different than anyone else, there are a lot of actuaries behind the downgrade and they deal in numbers.
Conveniences? I have to live over an hour from any jobs just to be able to afford to live. There aren't enough jobs to go around and raising prices on the poor isn't going to give them homes. It's not like they'd be able to afford houses without the jobs that the cities provide. Apartments ARE too expensive, comparative to houses they have gone up in value not down. More homeless? Raise apartment prices.
The real tragedy is that they STILL won't relaunch Firefly, we still haven't gotten another Librarian installment and there isn't any good show with space travel.
Also when everyone tells me what they've done at Disneyland it still sounds like paying a ton of money to wait in line, why is a company that makes waiting in line something to pay lots of money for called a creative company?