From intelligently written blog post:
Stagehands, makeup artists, and costume designers are only a few of the crafts served by IATSE. These hardworking, middle-class Americans are real people who are facing the all-too-tangible consequences of online theft: disappearing jobs, declining pensions, and diminished health and retirement benefits.
Ahh, OK. So you're saying that my wife, my 8yo son and my 6yo daughter all must buy separate accounts instead of just using mine? If my daughter wants to watch shaun the sheep in the morning she has to log off of my account and log in to hers else she's committing a felony, amirite? Makes perfect sense.
From the article:
She also limited the results of discovery to "Outside Counsel Eyes Only," meaning neither Apple nor its in-house counsel will get a peek at the phones or related marketing materials.
The sun does far more damage to kids than any radio waves ever will. And that's a proven fact. Maybe we should ban it or ban going outside. Europe could build a great big sun shield and protect everyone from the evil sun!
At one point in time you could find good deals and bargains on ebay (back when amateur and garage sale type sellers were mixed in with the volume sellers). These days that's rare because ebay has been overrun by the volume sellers. Most times I can find identical items on alternate sites for less than what I'd pay on ebay.
Mike, you really need to quote the part of the original article that points out that he printed out the list and distributed it at the school.
Maybe go read the original, linked article?
The list ranked 50 female students and in describing them, rated their body parts and used racial slurs. The teen also is being accused of printing out the list and passing it around during lunch periods at the high school on Jan. 14 , the Tribune reported."
Nope.
How dense do you have to be to plagiarize a blog post about plagiarism?
That post is copied verbatim from the link at the bottom which links sends you to this page:
http://www.plagiarism.org/plag_article_what_is_plagiarism.html
Is this considered proper citation?
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090210/1014293724.shtml
While I don't think he should be charged criminally here, seems to me the parents could have grounds for a civil suit against him. Did they authorize the use of their children in his video?
I read the article. Is the connection to social media the fact that he met her through facebook? I'm confused as to how social media caused a deranged man to throw acid in a woman's face.
That was my first thought after looking at the picture.
So am I safe to assume you'd be OK with Claire McCaskill being punished in this way for her call for Americans to take up pitchforks if tax cuts were extended?
I have kids. Some days they're talkative and playful. Other days they're an absolute handful and seemingly downright evil. Still other days they're reserved and quiet and want to be left alone. They are, after all, human beings; not robots.
Agreed. And the child's parents should be arrested for allowing the child to use the seats as his own personal jungle gym.
He calls himself an asshole.
http://www.genesimmons.com/pages/solo.html
So is that why we have a bunch of scientists trying to prove god doesn't exist?
Proving a theory wrong can kill the theory sure. But do we have a theory about life in the universe? We've got a single observable instance of life arising on a planet. Based on that there's no way we can make a valid theory that says any temperate earth-like planet has life on it. There's not enough observable evidence to warrant the theory!
Stating that another planet is sure to have life on it is an extraordinary claim that requires like evidence. If you're going to claim that there's a 100% chance for life on Gliese 561g, you've most certainly got to defend that with more than "where there's water on earth, there's life".
Good point. After re-reading the quote perhaps this is what they meant. At least I hope so. It's just when taken in context with the 100% claim makes me skeptical of anything they say.
Re: meh
Actually you're buying the bandwidth it takes to get the bits that comprise the file to your device. They are providing you with nothing in the way of a "product", at least as it is strictly defined. A transfer service is what they're providing. The sad part about the whole thing is that at $0.99 per song the industry makes a killing as the bandwidth to transfer said song costs next to nothing.
If the owners of the songs sold them drm free for 10x the cost of the bandwidth I'd bet they would make a killing as it would probably be worth it for me to buy music that way than rip it from the CD I bought it on 20 years ago. However, at 0.99 per song it is cost prohibitive. Therefore I simply rip my old CDs. In fact, often enough it's cheaper for me to buy a used CD for $3 and rip the songs off of it than buy them as MP3s.