If the IOC had been smart, they would have also trademarked the factorization (2 * 19 * 53) to ensure than any year derived from any of those was also kept in check. Heck, just trademark the number "1"…
I'd be interested to view the same statistics framed in a per-capita context to see whether it's just because population is rising (and thus there's a corresponding rise in output). I suspect that, even looking at the per-capita stats, one would still see a rise, but it would be helpful to have that included.
The filing runs only two pages but is loaded with adjectives.
The two-page, bare-bones Summons With Notice accuses the newspaper of "falsely, maliciously, recklessly, slanderously, libelously and irresponsibly publicly stating in the interactive website www.lohud.com that plaintiff First Impression LLC is a licensed handgun owner."
I presume you're talking about the surfeit of adverbs?
My first thought was to use the star+digits (e.g. *57 or whatever) for reporting after the call. Thich is both easy and reasonable for the telcos to implement. Issues I saw:
- marketing that the feature is available. This can be addressed with money which the telcos certainly seem to rake in hand-over-fist. I still remember *69 from the telco advertising back in the 80s.
- pranksters that report people. This could be mitigated by the telcos maintaining a "this phonenumber/source has received more than N complaints from more than M recipients" tally, and only take action against those that exceed a certain threshold.
It's not to say that the periodicals' prices aren't ludicrous TOO, it's just to say that an institution of higher learning are at a pretty lousy place to complain about compounding prices.
27-28% isn't nearly as much as the 6-year increase at 1987 which was +76% total (and a jump of almost +90% of base tuition). No wonder academic publishers figured ridiculous pricing hikes were the norm. For Harvard to complain that it "far exceeds not only the consumer price index, but also the higher education and the library price indices" sounds a bit rich to me. Literally.
Prices for online content from two providers have increased by about 145% over the past six years, which far exceeds not only the consumer price index, but also the higher education and the library price indices
I mean, Havard's total student cost (PDF) has only gone up 27-28% in the last 6 years. How's a poor university to cope?
Even after the Mickey Mouse Copyright Extension expires, I suspect Disney will lean on the Mickey/Steamboat Willy trademarks to come down hard on anybody who has the audacity to use "their" works.
it's just the visual analog to audio-sampling which is clearly legal! Oh, wait. Nope, never mind. The music folks have pressed hard to demonstrate that sampling is not legal.
But it's just in the background, not the primary focus of the video! Oh, nope. Forgot about arguments in Lenz v. Universal.
Um, give me a bit more time and I can tell you why this is different from the others...oh wait, because it's the recording industry being sued, instead of doing the suing!
My protozoan ancestors originally designed this "evolution" thing and you "evolvees" are merely coasting on minor tweaks in their original design. Pay up, you parasitic primates!
my first thought on reading this article was "Hmm, there's a business opportunity here for somebody to set up an auto-request-extensions business because this judge isn't meeting the needs of his government customers..."
Which is why the redaction-of-the-final-letter(s) case interested me :) Does one treat it as if the terminal "s" is there, or does one treat it as if it's not an "s", or is there some peculiar exception for redacted letters?
From your first two links, it sounds like either is acceptable as long as one is consistent. :)
commnet.edu: "Some writers will say that the -s after Charles' is not necessary and that adding only the apostrophe (Charles' car) will suffice to show possession. Consistency is the key here: if you choose not to add the -s after a noun that already ends in s, do so consistently throughout your text."
purdue.edu: "James' hat is also acceptable."
Personally, I'm from the Strunk & White category that would use "James's" (or in this case, the original "Mr. Smarta**'s" as was in the post), but I can't see things like that without at least wondering about it.
Even if you wanted to argue that it's somehow "good for the economy" to artificially prop up pharma companies with longer and stronger patents, if it comes at the expense of public health, that's not going to help the economy at all. A healthy population is a consuming population. Letting people die around the world is not good for the economy.
Do you have any studies backing this? My gut feeling is that people with endangered health assume a "whatever it costs" desperation, even if it means driving them to the brink of bankruptcy (or over the edge). And if the poor are a burden on society's coffers, their deaths free up funds to better stimulate the economy.
Unless of course, there are causes more important than a free market... :-)
Re: Happy new year
If the IOC had been smart, they would have also trademarked the factorization (2 * 19 * 53) to ensure than any year derived from any of those was also kept in check. Heck, just trademark the number "1"…
Curious about per-capita changes
I'd be interested to view the same statistics framed in a per-capita context to see whether it's just because population is rising (and thus there's a corresponding rise in output). I suspect that, even looking at the per-capita stats, one would still see a rise, but it would be helpful to have that included.
Torture your underage sex slave, get 20yr. Release documents, get 35yr…
Story here. Sigh. This country is so messed up.
-gumnos
Adjectives vs. adverbs? :-)
I presume you're talking about the surfeit of adverbs?
Re: This is ridiculous.
My first thought was to use the star+digits (e.g. *57 or whatever) for reporting after the call. Thich is both easy and reasonable for the telcos to implement. Issues I saw:
- marketing that the feature is available. This can be addressed with money which the telcos certainly seem to rake in hand-over-fist. I still remember *69 from the telco advertising back in the 80s.
- pranksters that report people. This could be mitigated by the telcos maintaining a "this phonenumber/source has received more than N complaints from more than M recipients" tally, and only take action against those that exceed a certain threshold.
Re: Re: Harvard's cost inflation can't keep pace with the journals'?
Fair enough. But the 145% is about 16% per year for each of the 6 years, which is what I seem to remember is decent for credit-card interest :-)
But for Harvard to complain "it's gone up an average of 16% over the last 6 years" doesn't sound nearly as dramatic.
Re: Harvard's cost inflation can't keep pace with the journals'?
It's not to say that the periodicals' prices aren't ludicrous TOO, it's just to say that an institution of higher learning are at a pretty lousy place to complain about compounding prices.
Re: Harvard's cost inflation can't keep pace with the journals'?
27-28% isn't nearly as much as the 6-year increase at 1987 which was +76% total (and a jump of almost +90% of base tuition). No wonder academic publishers figured ridiculous pricing hikes were the norm. For Harvard to complain that it "far exceeds not only the consumer price index, but also the higher education and the library price indices" sounds a bit rich to me. Literally.
Harvard's cost inflation can't keep pace with the journals'?
Another "definitive" post, this time on CISPA?
A while back, Techdirt posted a definitive post on why SOPA and PIPA are bad ideas. Perhaps a similar post on the point-by-point issues with CISPA would help raise awareness on this latest troublemaker.
Dear Courts
Because litigating against me is a choice, by choosing to proceed with any litigation against you agree the terms as laid out below:
1) I win
2) you pay me for my time at a rate of $500/hr
If you choose not to accept these terms, you can opt out by preventing litigation against me.
Disney gearing up to do the same?
Even after the Mickey Mouse Copyright Extension expires, I suspect Disney will lean on the Mickey/Steamboat Willy trademarks to come down hard on anybody who has the audacity to use "their" works.
But wait...
it's just the visual analog to audio-sampling which is clearly legal! Oh, wait. Nope, never mind. The music folks have pressed hard to demonstrate that sampling is not legal.
But it's just in the background, not the primary focus of the video! Oh, nope. Forgot about arguments in Lenz v. Universal.
Um, give me a bit more time and I can tell you why this is different from the others...oh wait, because it's the recording industry being sued, instead of doing the suing!
Protect Consumers and Our Troops - Support H.R. 3261
How about "Give our troops something worth protecting: freedom. Vote against HR-3261"?
Re: Innovation
My protozoan ancestors originally designed this "evolution" thing and you "evolvees" are merely coasting on minor tweaks in their original design. Pay up, you parasitic primates!
:)
I know I've been reading Techdirt too long when...
my first thought on reading this article was "Hmm, there's a business opportunity here for somebody to set up an auto-request-extensions business because this judge isn't meeting the needs of his government customers..."
Re: Possessives and redaction...
Which is why the redaction-of-the-final-letter(s) case interested me :) Does one treat it as if the terminal "s" is there, or does one treat it as if it's not an "s", or is there some peculiar exception for redacted letters?
Re: Possessives and redaction...
From your first two links, it sounds like either is acceptable as long as one is consistent. :)
commnet.edu: "Some writers will say that the -s after Charles' is not necessary and that adding only the apostrophe (Charles' car) will suffice to show possession. Consistency is the key here: if you choose not to add the -s after a noun that already ends in s, do so consistently throughout your text."
purdue.edu: "James' hat is also acceptable."
Personally, I'm from the Strunk & White category that would use "James's" (or in this case, the original "Mr. Smarta**'s" as was in the post), but I can't see things like that without at least wondering about it.
Possessives and redaction...
Am I the only one who wondered whether the possessive form should be "Mr. Smarta**'" instead of "Mr. Smarta**'s"?
Death is not(?) good for the economy...
Do you have any studies backing this? My gut feeling is that people with endangered health assume a "whatever it costs" desperation, even if it means driving them to the brink of bankruptcy (or over the edge). And if the poor are a burden on society's coffers, their deaths free up funds to better stimulate the economy.
Unless of course, there are causes more important than a free market... :-)