the journalists are about to experience what "artists" (particularly musicians and actors) have been experiencing ... having all of the money that's supposed to be going to them diverted into publishers' coffers instead?The journalists might want to watch what they say, lest Voss alter the deal to reflect a model based on the academic publishing industry.
It didn't make the funniest of the week, but btr1701 had a spittake-worthy response to an AC's comment that mentioned Monica Lewinsky during a discussion about journalism:
Monica Lewinsky wasn't a whistleblower, genius.
... and who's telling me it's broken?
Where is John Galt when we need him? Oh... I'm sorry, you must not have heard. Poor Mr. Galt passed away after a long battle with salmonellosis, small-cell carcinoma, and black-lung disease. (To be fair, though, it was his own fault for not realizing that his meds were just re-labeled tic-tacs... caveat emptor :)
And now we've got prosecutors trying to join police unions.
The NYPD also claimed the Glomar response was valid because -- and let me see if I can get this straight -- the described deployment of cell tower spoofers against protesters would violate the law. I don't know how the NYPD imagined this stunted, malformed argument might work in court...
Were they maybe going for some sort of half-witted 5th Amendment dodge here?
My problem with this is that you're being over-broad with your you definition of libertarianism, conflating left & right varieties... which is like saying that Ayn Rand & Gene Roddenberry were peas in a pod ;)
I don't care what the results might say on Sunday, this is my winner for Funniest of the Week.
Thanks for the assist-clarification on my post, AC. Back in the day, I developed a policy for myself of never using s's by being sure that any use of sarcasm I employed was "dripping to the point of a steady flow" in nature. Unfortunately, my continued adherence to that rule doesn't seem to work in the current climate of self-satirizing government and ubiquitous Poe-etry.
As a rule, those who break laws and those who remain quiet while witnessing others break laws live peaceful, prosperous lives because they have money and are not targeted by people. Another rule is that there exist people who are too self-aware to enjoy "peace and prosperity" while living lives of pants-shitting cowardice and slavery.
the Commission believes that, in an abundance of caution, it should move for an extension to ensure that attorneys may fully prepare for argument.
To be fair to the FCC, it is hard to get ready to appear in court when you're hit with a lawsuit outta nowhere, unexpectedly, and without any sort of warning.
I'm gonna go with "he's extremely critical of abuses committed by law enforcement, and rightly so".
I dunno, I think the AC's got a pretty good analogy there: most of the radio stations I listen to play two-second samples of songs and then tell me where I can go to get a full-length, fully-licensed version.
Article 15: all EU citizens granted an annual, Google-funded, two weeks paid holiday in Mountain View California.
Pai has made it fairly clear by now that he sees government consumer protection oversight as largely unnecessary
I've actually gotta disagree with this, or at least how it's phrased. I would say that Pai sees government consumer protection as being very necessary: if it wasn't so important to so many people, helping to destroy it wouldn't be earning him that big payday when he returns to the private sector. In other words, I don't think Pai's some sort of free market utopia true-believer with a warped perspective; he's just a run of the mill greedy sociopath who knows exactly what he's doing.
The relevant legal term is "puffery": "[a] term frequently used to denote the exaggerations reasonably to be expected of a seller as to the degree of quality of his product, the truth or falsity of which cannot be precisely determined." Little known fact: the term originated in the Faroe Islands, where street vendors were known to rip off tourists by selling low-grade seagull meat as "roasted auk".
I think you may be looking at the idea of "testimony" too concretely. One's biometric markers being able to unlock a device would be considered, I believe, a "testimonial action" in the sense that it speaks to ownership/control of the item; whether you're conscious or not when (e.g.) your fingertip passes over a scanner is immaterial.
OK, 1.7K miles must be driving distance. Still, a rhumb line between Napierville and Henderson is longer than a great circle route by... a bit. So technically, my joke is still valid because, er, common law? Something like that.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Neither, but anti-American, pro-globalist, p
Better be careful, you're laying into btr pretty hard there and we all know what happens when you give someone a fit and there's nobody around to hook up a defrembulator. Their mind. Blown.