I'm forever protected from this dilemma by virtue of being a Brown's fan.
The sad reality is, Canadians are not ashamed of protectionism. That was clear within days of moving to Toronto. The radio stations are required to play a certain percentage of songs by Canadian artists (I think it's 10%) and you can always tell when one comes on. Not just because it sucks, but because it sounds just enough like a song you haven't heard from a band you like that you listen to it for a minute before concluding, no, this just sucks, and you change the station.
It may not make much difference considering the opposition that showed even with anti-net neutrality wording, but I wonder what the results would be if they phrased it, "slow down the speeds of services that don't pay an extra fee.
No, you don't need arrest reports, news reports, or whatever. All you need to know is the shape of an Iphone and a few simple obvious basics about how a gun works to know that it never happened. And will never happen.
The partisanship that is starting to creep into Techdirt articles is annoying, from Tim Geigner and his stupid Global Warming posts to now this.
The most damaging cases of public officials using private emails are all Democrats, but somehow Justin can only think of Republicans for his examples, one of them entirely made up. There's no evidence Sarah Palin used private email accounts to conduct official business and the article Justin links to doesn't accuse her of it.
Enough with the partisan politics bullshit, Techdirt should stick with what it does best.
" The US government isn't supposed to be a commercial enterprise. "
This gets to the heart of the Trademark issue. Since when does the military sell its equipment and clothing? I know there are Army/Navy stores, but SFAIK, they aren't actually supplied by the military.
So on what grounds do they claim trademark rights?
Just like the drug courier profile that amounts to "a black guy in a nice car driving the speed limit" or the airport profile that is little more than a grab-bag of traits and habits that all of us have to some degree, these things aren't about objectively assessing a situation and identifying the dangerous characters. They are about wrapping an agent's hunches in a veneer of science to protect the system from criticism.
It's not really science? So what, it wasn't meant to be.
Since most users of non-Google search engines are deliberately choosing a non-Google tool, I doubt many of them would undermine their own statement by referring to the search as "googling." I google things on Google. I search for things on other search engines.
As with 15 years ago, I am disgusted with the habitual overvaluation of internet companies that have difficulty turning profits. Twitter does many thing right and I wish them well, but I will not be buying their stock.
MS Word has an auto-summary feature that is disturbingly good, but just because software can create a summary doesn't mean it can recognize a good one.
The day they write software that can recognize and appreciate a pun is the day they can dream about writing software that can recognize and appreciate a sound argument.
This sounds more like the kind of dumbing down we get from standardized testing. And I suppose if they really do want to reduce our children to mindless drones, then this is another step in the right direction
I know what the court would say in disagreeing with me; nevertheless, IMO selling (or even publishing) someone's criminal record constitutes a punishment not determined by the jury and is therefore unconstitutional.