"Mythbusters, the most reliable source of modern science, did a study of the effects of alcohol vs. cell phones. They found talking on a cell phone was more dangerous while driving than being legally drunk."
Agreed...on all points actually. I love Mythbusters.
But the point of the article was that the drugs in the guys systems were downplayed, or barley even mentioned.
Operating while under the influence = dangerous. Operating on the phone = more dangerous. Simple math shows: operating under the influence + on the phone = even more dangerous.
But lets make sure we don't blame this one all on the phone, since it was just one variable in the equasion.
"i need to look into patenting this parenting this thing, it could make me millions!"
Nah, no one ever uses it. It'd be the only patent that's not being infringed.
And Jake... seriously man. Time to switch to decaf.
And while I hate busting on people's speech/typing, I can't let the hypocrisy go. "…have they ever encouraged the choice of making sure you can communicate in English?????” You do know that one question mark will do, right? Just checking.
The original point of the Area Code wasn't just a geographical indicator, it was to make sure there were enough numbers. In a 7-digit number (where the first number cannot be 0) there are only so many combinations. I know there is some kind of math function that can figure that out, but I'm tired. Don't feel like digging.
Anyway, while the answer to "how many numbers can there be" is a pretty big figure, it's still only a fraction of phone users in the nation. Therefore, we need a way to repeat some of those numbers while not duplicating them. In other words, we need more numbers. Find that math figure and add area codes into the mix. See how big that gets.
Area codes will always be here, unless we just stop calling the AC's and all go around w/ a 10-digit number.
The phone is the bread. The PB and J are just the two things that go on the bread (phone).
Everyone alread has the bread (phone). We- the two companies doing the service here- are supplying the stuff to put on that bread. I'm Jiffy Peanut Butter, you're Smucker's Jelly. Neither one of us makes the bread.
See? My analogy still works!
And no, I'm not going to expand this to figure out who's the knife with which the PB&J are spread on the bread. I'm not stoned enough for that level of thinking. ;)
How about a link to something like Consumer Reports? You know... a firm that reviews things for a living?
This company that's doing the scanning is obviously going to be handling the process for reading the pic of the barcode, then looking that item up in a database. Why not partner with someone like Consumer Reports to put the info into that database?
If I'm specialized in peanut butter, and you're specialized in jelly... hell, we could make some great sammiches together.
Maybe not jumping out of the airplane, but I can see a pilot in the cockpit asking the copilot "where is this turbulance coming from? we shouldn't be rocking this bad."
No... they know why noone goes to the theaters. It's all those illegal downloader's faults that the movie-going industry is suffering.
If nothing else, we can thank the chatty lady for yet another dead fish with which we can smack the movie industry upside the head. Not that they'll listen...
What if it was washed as well as the dishwasher washes it, and the coffee pot explodes? Is it the manuf.'s fault that I use a dishwasher instead of washing by hand and verifying that things are clean?
Or conversely, if the coffee pot was extremely well washed, causing the water to superheat and explode violently? If it was a design flaw that lead to the explosion, absolutly. But if it were a freak accident that could have happened to any glassware... protection from that would fall outside of the "reasonable and prudent" dutys of the manuf. They can't forsee everything.
Or do manufacturers have a responsibility to build more accessible products? Again, no they don't. If Can Company A makes something that my grandmother can't open, it's time to buy from Company B. But it's not their responsibility to provide for my convenience. You're making it sound like starvation would be the result of a difficult jar. There's other food out there. Not to sound like a smartass, but bread is pretty easy to open.
With the HP thing, yes. You're hitting on something that could be a manuf.'s resposibility. Except for one small detail. A pool is a luxury item. It's my risk to have one. There's noone telling me to get one and it's not required for my livelyhood.
For the household cleaners, yes, that's the manuf's responsibility to make sure the consumer understands that the intended use of the product could be dangerous if not used with certain precautions that would be unknown to a reasonable and prudent person.
For the doctors; that's a negligence issue and they are responsible for intentional misdeeds, or intentional laziness.
Alas, this will be last post on this for the day. I have enjoyed the debate immensly, but it's friday night. Party time. If you want to contiune this outside of the list, send to my name (with no spaces) at yahoo-dot-come.
AC: "what most of you twentysomethings and singletons don't understand is that most parents need help; we no longer live in the day and age when parents are home to monitor their kids activity;"
And the point isn't to have you home to monitor your kids 24/7. The point is to instill (preferrably from a young age) a sense of right and wrong so that these kids can make informed and responsible decisions on thier own.
Will they screw up? You betcha. I did some really stupid things as a kid even though my parents were very good with the whole right/wrong thing. I slashed up a storage room door in my apartment building with a friend just to see who's knife was sharper. We tore that thing all kinds of up. Stupid thing? Yup. Did I know better? Yeah. Did I feel bad afterwards? Damn right, especially after my mom drove home the "we taught you better than that" lesson.
The important things, tho, like "don't talk to strangers who want to touch you in bad places"... yeah. That's a no-brainer. "Don't steal that box of candy from the store?" OK, sure, they may have to learn that one the hard way. But as a parent, are you going to hold the store responsible for putting th candy out there to be stolen? No. It's your responsibility to teach them, not the store's responsibility to enforce morality on your child.
And I know the argument has/is going to be made about "what if my kids to avoid strangers, but are molested because some predator found them". First and fore-most, you'd have my sympathy. Second, it's the fault of the molester. Not the fault of the owner/facilitator of the forum through which the predator found your child. The predator's parents should have done a better job raising the bastard. The bastard knows right from wrong in situations like this and chooses to do what they do.
Dorpus: What if a rat bites the alarm clock power cord, starts an electrical fire, and you die? Whose responsibility is it then? No one's responsibility. Perhaps mine for not maintaining a pest control program for my house? That far into a hypothetical requires a bit more info to quantify the situation. It’s not the alarm clock manufacturer’s fault that the rat got into my house. As far as the cord catching fire when bit… there’s risk involved with anything that uses electricity.
If a poorly washed coffee pot develops a steam bubble that spontaneously explodes, sending glass fragments that damage your eye, is it your fault or the maker's fault? That one would be my fault... "poorly washed".
Upkeep of items that I purchase is my responsibility. That's why insurance excludes losses for damage caused by lack of maintenance/upkeep.
The condiments illustration was more along the lines of 'biting into a burger and squirting mustard on myself'. Sorry that I wasn't more clear on that. That one was my bad.
...does not the manufacturer bear a reasonability to make more accessible products?
No. Such a responsibility does not reside anywhere. The only requirement on a manufacturer's part is to make a safe product. Such that the item is used "as intended by a reasonable and prudent person". In the ‘rat biting the power cord’ analogy above, a “reasonable & prudent person” would keep his/her house clean of vermin and would make sure they could not create a fire hazard. "Reasonable" and "prudent" are the bywords here. Sure, they're fuzzy as hell, but those are the terms used in legal enforcement of negligence.
As consumers, it is our responsibility to educate ourselves on what we are consuming. In your example about hypersensitivity pneumonitis, it is our responsibility to make a "reasonable effort" (there's that word again) to educate ourselves on what we're getting into. True, H.P. (sorry, long word) seems to be a rare thing (I’ve never heard of it), but it's not a pool manufacturer's responsibility to make sure we're aware of a possible risk like that.
Unfortunately, by allowing lawsuits like this to stand, we force that responsibility on manufacturers. Hence the Ergonomic Warnings on keyboards, monitors, and desks that we see now a days. It shouldn't be a keyboard manufacturer's responsibility to warn us about the risks involved in using their product... I could drop a keyboard on my foot (hey, it’s a risk), but it’s my fault if I do so. But fear of a lawsuit against them has caused them to accept the responsibility anyway.
Perhaps it would be best if we step back and boil it down here. What we’re talking about here is ‘who’s responsible’. Ok. That would be the party that would be guilty of negligence. Negligence is simple to illustrate, but difficult to prove. Here are the requirements for it:
1)There must be a “reasonable and prudent” duty to act or perform (or not act or perform, depending on the situation) 2)There must be a breach of that duty (proof that the party failed to act when it should, or vise versa) 3)There must be actual damage caused (easy to show, but usually hard to quantify) 4)There must be an unbroken chain of events linking the original failure-to-act to the damage caused. (usually referred to as “proximate cause”)
In any one of your illustrations, apply the situation to these 4 criteria and see if it fits. If it does, then the party would be considered responsible.
You're right and wrong... A child is a gift... no argument there. But it is also a responsibility. Bringing a child into this world gives you the responsibility to make sure that the child is a self-sufficient and responsible member of society.
When this discussion talks about whose responsibility it is, we're talking about whose responsibility it is to monitor your children. Yours or service-providers.
Yay. My 2 cents to be lost in the shuffle of all these pennies... and I think I saw a dime over there.
Dorpus... you seem to be implying that it should be everyone else's responsibility for what I do. -When I wake up in the morning late for work, it's the alarmclock maker's fault that the alarm wasn't loud enough. -When I burn myself on the coffee pot rushing out the door, it's Mr. Coffee's fault for having a hotplate. -When I'm in too much of a rush backing out of my driveway and nick a neighbor's mailbox, it's the mailbox maker's fault for not making them more damage resistant or the car's manufacturer's fault for not making a warning system -When I run over some girl's little doggy on my way out of the neighborhood, it's the municipality's fault for not enforcing a stricter leash-law -When I spill condiments on my clothes from my drive-thru food, it’s the food establishment’s fault for not providing better food packaging that I can use as a plate in the car
Or, maybe... just maybe its: -My fault for staying up too late the night before or not having the alarm clock closer to my bed -My fault for not watching what I was doing while putting the coffee pot back on the burner -My fault for not watching where I was backing -My fault for not paying attention to the road -My fault for eating food in a car on the road
It’s sure as hell not the government’s fault for any of this. And shifting the blame back to where it’s supposed to be (me); that’s not going to dissolve the government or civilization and it’s not going to plunge us into anarchy.
I know the examples I put above are nowhere near the severity and level of child molestation. But I molest a child, whose fault is it? It’s mine. That’s all.
I don’t know where we got this idea that everyone in our lives has to monitor what we do and serve as a conscience for us. Aren’t we supposed to be capable of, and responsible for, our own moral decisions? Doesn’t it strike anyone as worrisome that we seem to be giving other people control over what we shouldbe considering as right and wrong?
Maybe if the government wasn’t so damned busy answering the misplaced and unnecessary call of the irresponsible and the self-proclaimed blameless… maybe they could move on to fixing other problems that are their responsibility.
The government is what we make it and what we allow it to become. Holy sh** have we screwed something up somewhere.
I think we're confusing the TM laws even more here.
In the case of the 49'ers shirts... Not being able to print up shirts using the "official" 49'ers logo is not a matter of trademark. That's a copyright. That logo is actual "property".
I can go around and write 49 anywhere I want to. Hell, I can write 49ers if I want to. I just can’t use that actual logo and make money off of it – and so long as I don’t try to associate myself with the actual 49’ers franchise.
Race fans can put "3" or "42" or whatever on their cars without having to purchase "official stickers". All of that is no problem.
We have two things here:
1)Trademark, which is supposed to keep me from using someone else's name or phrase (or what have you) in such a way as to identify myself as that name...
2)Copyright, which is supposed to keep me from profiting off of your "intellectual property" (logo, et al) without your permission (and usually without giving you a cut).
I've had a solution to this kind of thing in mind for quite some time now: Remove all warning labels and let the problem fix itself.
If you can't figure out that you shouldn't stop a chainsaw blade "with your hands or genitals" (no, I’m not making this up), they you don't deserve to live. You have zero potential to enhance the species with your presence here, so buh bye.
If you can't figure out that you shouldn’t blow-dry your hair while sitting in the tub... you deserve to get lit up like a xmas tree.
Why do we cater to the lowest common denominator? Where did we get this "everyone should be treated equally" crap? We were founded under the idea that everyone has equal opportunity. If you choose to asshat out and screw up your potential and opportunity through stupidity, it's not society's responsibility to cater to you.
Yes, everyone screws up. Yes, it's nice when your fellow man (or woman) helps you back up and helps you dust off. But it should not be legally fu**ing required for everyone to protect you from yourself. It's evolution baby. Let's stop making the gene pool more hospitable to algae.
Tiffany... on ebay? I mean come on. Aren't these buyers at least a little wary of what they're buying?
Sure, my ebay status is in the low 30's, which means I haven't doen a whole lot of transactions. But I do have the common sense that buying something from someone I've never met, from whom I can't get that face-to-face feel, and who doesn't offer any kind of certification for thier items... yeah, i'm going to be just a bit hesitant about that.
As far as ebay's responsibility... I think we're mostly on the right track here. They're not really an auction house... and even if they were, it's not the auction house's responsibility to guarantee the authenticy of the items that are sold through them. They usually do authenticate items, but it's a service they do for PR purposes and for reputation.
Let's face it, ebay isn't supposed to be the place to procure original runs of fine art or first prints of rare books... it's more of a seller's tool than a buyer's. I'v always been of the impression that ebay is the place to go sell things; not a place to go find those rare things to buy.
You're kidding, right? Yet another way for walmart to screw up music? Great. Considering how they release edited version of "inappropriate" cd's without lableing them as modified... I can't wait to see how south this one goes.
I'll make the popcorn, someone else get the soda. Gonna be a good show.
Maybe if the animated emoticons are patented, those adverts on the sides of webpages and the bottom of some web emails would have to be removed. Geez... if I have to look at that collection of laughing and crying little yellow bastards one more time......
On the post: Blame The Mobile Phone? Or The Cocaine, Pot And Speed?
Re: No Subject Given
Agreed...on all points actually. I love Mythbusters.
But the point of the article was that the drugs in the guys systems were downplayed, or barley even mentioned.
Operating while under the influence = dangerous. Operating on the phone = more dangerous. Simple math shows: operating under the influence + on the phone = even more dangerous.
But lets make sure we don't blame this one all on the phone, since it was just one variable in the equasion.
On the post: Why Don't We Just Turn Our Children Into Robots?
Re: hmmm parenting...
Nah, no one ever uses it. It'd be the only patent that's not being infringed.
And Jake... seriously man. Time to switch to decaf.
And while I hate busting on people's speech/typing, I can't let the hypocrisy go. "…have they ever encouraged the choice of making sure you can communicate in English?????” You do know that one question mark will do, right? Just checking.
On the post: What's The Story With Your Area Code?
Missing the original point
Anyway, while the answer to "how many numbers can there be" is a pretty big figure, it's still only a fraction of phone users in the nation. Therefore, we need a way to repeat some of those numbers while not duplicating them. In other words, we need more numbers. Find that math figure and add area codes into the mix. See how big that gets.
Area codes will always be here, unless we just stop calling the AC's and all go around w/ a 10-digit number.
On the post: Can't Wait For The MySpace Generation To Run For Office
Re: Just wait till they start campaigning on myspa
On the post: Don't Buy That Book. The Bloggers Hate It
Re: Just a thought
Everyone alread has the bread (phone). We- the two companies doing the service here- are supplying the stuff to put on that bread. I'm Jiffy Peanut Butter, you're Smucker's Jelly. Neither one of us makes the bread.
See? My analogy still works!
And no, I'm not going to expand this to figure out who's the knife with which the PB&J are spread on the bread. I'm not stoned enough for that level of thinking. ;)
On the post: Bloomberg's Double Standard On Mixing Games With Work
wait wait wait...
Aw crap... dripped sarcasm all over my keyboard. Damn.
On the post: Don't Buy That Book. The Bloggers Hate It
Just a thought
This company that's doing the scanning is obviously going to be handling the process for reading the pic of the barcode, then looking that item up in a database. Why not partner with someone like Consumer Reports to put the info into that database?
If I'm specialized in peanut butter, and you're specialized in jelly... hell, we could make some great sammiches together.
On the post: Dating The Friendly Skies
Re: California Air Hump
On the post: Ask A Yakking Theater Patron To Be Quiet, Get Charged With Assault
Re: figures...
If nothing else, we can thank the chatty lady for yet another dead fish with which we can smack the movie industry upside the head. Not that they'll listen...
On the post: Should MySpace Be Blamed For Sexual Assault?
Re: Excesses of the
Is it the manuf.'s fault that I use a dishwasher instead of washing by hand and verifying that things are clean?
Or conversely, if the coffee pot was extremely well washed, causing the water to superheat and explode violently? If it was a design flaw that lead to the explosion, absolutly. But if it were a freak accident that could have happened to any glassware... protection from that would fall outside of the "reasonable and prudent" dutys of the manuf. They can't forsee everything.
Or do manufacturers have a responsibility to build more accessible products?
Again, no they don't. If Can Company A makes something that my grandmother can't open, it's time to buy from Company B. But it's not their responsibility to provide for my convenience. You're making it sound like starvation would be the result of a difficult jar. There's other food out there. Not to sound like a smartass, but bread is pretty easy to open.
With the HP thing, yes. You're hitting on something that could be a manuf.'s resposibility. Except for one small detail. A pool is a luxury item. It's my risk to have one. There's noone telling me to get one and it's not required for my livelyhood.
For the household cleaners, yes, that's the manuf's responsibility to make sure the consumer understands that the intended use of the product could be dangerous if not used with certain precautions that would be unknown to a reasonable and prudent person.
For the doctors; that's a negligence issue and they are responsible for intentional misdeeds, or intentional laziness.
Alas, this will be last post on this for the day. I have enjoyed the debate immensly, but it's friday night. Party time. If you want to contiune this outside of the list, send to my name (with no spaces) at yahoo-dot-come.
On the post: Should MySpace Be Blamed For Sexual Assault?
Re: Excesses of the
And the point isn't to have you home to monitor your kids 24/7. The point is to instill (preferrably from a young age) a sense of right and wrong so that these kids can make informed and responsible decisions on thier own.
Will they screw up? You betcha. I did some really stupid things as a kid even though my parents were very good with the whole right/wrong thing. I slashed up a storage room door in my apartment building with a friend just to see who's knife was sharper. We tore that thing all kinds of up. Stupid thing? Yup. Did I know better? Yeah. Did I feel bad afterwards? Damn right, especially after my mom drove home the "we taught you better than that" lesson.
The important things, tho, like "don't talk to strangers who want to touch you in bad places"... yeah. That's a no-brainer. "Don't steal that box of candy from the store?" OK, sure, they may have to learn that one the hard way. But as a parent, are you going to hold the store responsible for putting th candy out there to be stolen? No. It's your responsibility to teach them, not the store's responsibility to enforce morality on your child.
And I know the argument has/is going to be made about "what if my kids to avoid strangers, but are molested because some predator found them". First and fore-most, you'd have my sympathy. Second, it's the fault of the molester. Not the fault of the owner/facilitator of the forum through which the predator found your child. The predator's parents should have done a better job raising the bastard. The bastard knows right from wrong in situations like this and chooses to do what they do.
On the post: Should MySpace Be Blamed For Sexual Assault?
Re: Excesses of the
What if a rat bites the alarm clock power cord, starts an electrical fire, and you die? Whose responsibility is it then?
No one's responsibility. Perhaps mine for not maintaining a pest control program for my house? That far into a hypothetical requires a bit more info to quantify the situation. It’s not the alarm clock manufacturer’s fault that the rat got into my house. As far as the cord catching fire when bit… there’s risk involved with anything that uses electricity.
If a poorly washed coffee pot develops a steam bubble that spontaneously explodes, sending glass fragments that damage your eye, is it your fault or the maker's fault?
That one would be my fault... "poorly washed".
Upkeep of items that I purchase is my responsibility. That's why insurance excludes losses for damage caused by lack of maintenance/upkeep.
The condiments illustration was more along the lines of 'biting into a burger and squirting mustard on myself'. Sorry that I wasn't more clear on that. That one was my bad.
...does not the manufacturer bear a reasonability to make more accessible products?
No. Such a responsibility does not reside anywhere. The only requirement on a manufacturer's part is to make a safe product. Such that the item is used "as intended by a reasonable and prudent person". In the ‘rat biting the power cord’ analogy above, a “reasonable & prudent person” would keep his/her house clean of vermin and would make sure they could not create a fire hazard. "Reasonable" and "prudent" are the bywords here. Sure, they're fuzzy as hell, but those are the terms used in legal enforcement of negligence.
As consumers, it is our responsibility to educate ourselves on what we are consuming. In your example about hypersensitivity pneumonitis, it is our responsibility to make a "reasonable effort" (there's that word again) to educate ourselves on what we're getting into. True, H.P. (sorry, long word) seems to be a rare thing (I’ve never heard of it), but it's not a pool manufacturer's responsibility to make sure we're aware of a possible risk like that.
Unfortunately, by allowing lawsuits like this to stand, we force that responsibility on manufacturers. Hence the Ergonomic Warnings on keyboards, monitors, and desks that we see now a days. It shouldn't be a keyboard manufacturer's responsibility to warn us about the risks involved in using their product... I could drop a keyboard on my foot (hey, it’s a risk), but it’s my fault if I do so. But fear of a lawsuit against them has caused them to accept the responsibility anyway.
Perhaps it would be best if we step back and boil it down here. What we’re talking about here is ‘who’s responsible’. Ok. That would be the party that would be guilty of negligence. Negligence is simple to illustrate, but difficult to prove. Here are the requirements for it:
1)There must be a “reasonable and prudent” duty to act or perform (or not act or perform, depending on the situation)
2)There must be a breach of that duty (proof that the party failed to act when it should, or vise versa)
3)There must be actual damage caused (easy to show, but usually hard to quantify)
4)There must be an unbroken chain of events linking the original failure-to-act to the damage caused. (usually referred to as “proximate cause”)
In any one of your illustrations, apply the situation to these 4 criteria and see if it fits. If it does, then the party would be considered responsible.
On the post: Should MySpace Be Blamed For Sexual Assault?
Re: It's called PARENTING
You're right and wrong... A child is a gift... no argument there. But it is also a responsibility. Bringing a child into this world gives you the responsibility to make sure that the child is a self-sufficient and responsible member of society.
When this discussion talks about whose responsibility it is, we're talking about whose responsibility it is to monitor your children. Yours or service-providers.
On the post: Should MySpace Be Blamed For Sexual Assault?
Re: Excesses of the
Dorpus... you seem to be implying that it should be everyone else's responsibility for what I do.
-When I wake up in the morning late for work, it's the alarmclock maker's fault that the alarm wasn't loud enough.
-When I burn myself on the coffee pot rushing out the door, it's Mr. Coffee's fault for having a hotplate.
-When I'm in too much of a rush backing out of my driveway and nick a neighbor's mailbox, it's the mailbox maker's fault for not making them more damage resistant or the car's manufacturer's fault for not making a warning system
-When I run over some girl's little doggy on my way out of the neighborhood, it's the municipality's fault for not enforcing a stricter leash-law
-When I spill condiments on my clothes from my drive-thru food, it’s the food establishment’s fault for not providing better food packaging that I can use as a plate in the car
Or, maybe... just maybe its:
-My fault for staying up too late the night before or not having the alarm clock closer to my bed
-My fault for not watching what I was doing while putting the coffee pot back on the burner
-My fault for not watching where I was backing
-My fault for not paying attention to the road
-My fault for eating food in a car on the road
It’s sure as hell not the government’s fault for any of this. And shifting the blame back to where it’s supposed to be (me); that’s not going to dissolve the government or civilization and it’s not going to plunge us into anarchy.
I know the examples I put above are nowhere near the severity and level of child molestation. But I molest a child, whose fault is it? It’s mine. That’s all.
I don’t know where we got this idea that everyone in our lives has to monitor what we do and serve as a conscience for us. Aren’t we supposed to be capable of, and responsible for, our own moral decisions? Doesn’t it strike anyone as worrisome that we seem to be giving other people control over what we shouldbe considering as right and wrong?
Maybe if the government wasn’t so damned busy answering the misplaced and unnecessary call of the irresponsible and the self-proclaimed blameless… maybe they could move on to fixing other problems that are their responsibility.
The government is what we make it and what we allow it to become. Holy sh** have we screwed something up somewhere.
On the post: New Bill Designed To Extend Trademark Law To Ridiculous Extremes
Re: Differing justifications
In the case of the 49'ers shirts... Not being able to print up shirts using the "official" 49'ers logo is not a matter of trademark. That's a copyright. That logo is actual "property".
I can go around and write 49 anywhere I want to. Hell, I can write 49ers if I want to. I just can’t use that actual logo and make money off of it – and so long as I don’t try to associate myself with the actual 49’ers franchise.
Race fans can put "3" or "42" or whatever on their cars without having to purchase "official stickers". All of that is no problem.
We have two things here:
1)Trademark, which is supposed to keep me from using someone else's name or phrase (or what have you) in such a way as to identify myself as that name...
2)Copyright, which is supposed to keep me from profiting off of your "intellectual property" (logo, et al) without your permission (and usually without giving you a cut).
On the post: iPod Owner Sues Apple For Potential Hearing Loss
Simple Solution
If you can't figure out that you shouldn't stop a chainsaw blade "with your hands or genitals" (no, I’m not making this up), they you don't deserve to live. You have zero potential to enhance the species with your presence here, so buh bye.
If you can't figure out that you shouldn’t blow-dry your hair while sitting in the tub... you deserve to get lit up like a xmas tree.
Why do we cater to the lowest common denominator? Where did we get this "everyone should be treated equally" crap? We were founded under the idea that everyone has equal opportunity. If you choose to asshat out and screw up your potential and opportunity through stupidity, it's not society's responsibility to cater to you.
Yes, everyone screws up. Yes, it's nice when your fellow man (or woman) helps you back up and helps you dust off. But it should not be legally fu**ing required for everyone to protect you from yourself. It's evolution baby. Let's stop making the gene pool more hospitable to algae.
On the post: On eBay, It Isn't Always What It Says It Is
Shouldn't some of it rest on the buyer?
Sure, my ebay status is in the low 30's, which means I haven't doen a whole lot of transactions. But I do have the common sense that buying something from someone I've never met, from whom I can't get that face-to-face feel, and who doesn't offer any kind of certification for thier items... yeah, i'm going to be just a bit hesitant about that.
As far as ebay's responsibility... I think we're mostly on the right track here. They're not really an auction house... and even if they were, it's not the auction house's responsibility to guarantee the authenticy of the items that are sold through them. They usually do authenticate items, but it's a service they do for PR purposes and for reputation.
Let's face it, ebay isn't supposed to be the place to procure original runs of fine art or first prints of rare books... it's more of a seller's tool than a buyer's. I'v always been of the impression that ebay is the place to go sell things; not a place to go find those rare things to buy.
Ebay: where "Caveat Emptor" is alive and well.
On the post: Canadian Record Label To Pay For Teen's Lawsuit Against The RIAA
Booyah!
On the post: Does Online Video Make Retailers Cooler Somehow?
No Subject Given
I'll make the popcorn, someone else get the soda. Gonna be a good show.
On the post: Emoticons? Patented! :(
No More Ad-Bars!
Next >>