Oh, you just have to pay a hefty fee to the whitelist maintainers. Nothing pricey of course, just a bit more than you'd pay to publish whatever you want to get out without the internet.
Unrelatedly, it figures that the one time I decide my post is sarcastic enough to not warrant the inclusion of a "" tag, someone takes it for real.
> [the law] makes the touching or viewing with a technological device of a person's breasts or genitals by a government security agent without probable cause a sexual assault.
So apparently if you work for the government, viewing porn is illegal now?
I'm actually against this practice though, and here's why:
Here, even if Network has not clearly identified itself in the text of its ads, Google and Bing have partitioned their search results pages so that the advertisements appear in separately labeled sections for "sponsored" links.
Sadly, the "sponsored" links are at the very top of the results page and in blight yellow, saying "this is your result! click me!" to uninformed users.
And the worst part is that most ad buyers don't bother to identify themselves, meaning companies have to take out ads themselves to make sure they're the top standing in Google.
I'm pretty sure every state has some kind of sales tax on whatever you buy anyways. For this example, I'm going by Alabama tax rates of 8% of everything.
A $.99 item plus an 8% sales tax would be $1.07, a $1.00 item plus the same tax would be $1.08.
It's A) not much of a difference once tax is counted in, and B) prices wouldn't even be coming to even dollar ammounts anyways.
I don't know how you Canadians and Brits get around with dollar coins.
I automatically assume any coinage I receive is disposable, simply because it tends to fall out of my pockets when I sit down, and almost never carry it when I can carry bills instead.
While that may be true, if the layout and other work done on the data such as formatting is all stripped away, one again has "exclusively public facts, with no manipulation".
I seriously hope we don't get an HTTPS mandate law.
Of course it would seem good at first, for the protection of the public; but one of the clauses will likely happen to be that self-signed certificates are nixed.
And I ask how many web sites out there now don't use HTTPS or use insecure HTTPS because they can't afford a cert. :/
Remember... he didn't just fraud his customers, he did so with- (insert dramatic theremin noises) a computer!
Remember, Cyberspace is a dangerous new frontier where the normal laws of the United States and other countries do not apply. That's why we need special laws specifically detailing to crimes involving computers, vs crimes carried out without.
Ideally, the laws would match up against our existing laws to the point where they're superfluous, but hey, we're sure taking down a major bank is exactly the same as lying about your age on Facebook, so who cares.
(And I've got my tongue in my mouth here, people. That's a real difference between online and IRL, where if you don't state your sarcasm, people will mistake you for being sincere. Cf. Poe's Law)
On the post: Enclosing The Ocean Commons
So...
On the post: Rep. Lofgren Again Explains How And Why Domain Seizures Violate The Law
Re:
This is actually a very interesting point. I'd love to see the rulings from the 1910s on internet piracy.
On the post: Twitter Decides To Kill Its Ecosystem: How Not To Run A Modern Company
Twitter stopped being developer friendly the second they discontinued the easy-to-use REST API for an incomplete untested version of oAuth.
On the post: The Changing Way That Math Is Taught To Children
Feels kinda strange
If it makes me feel any better, I did use a similar method for addition:
36 + 24 = 30 + 6 + 20 + 4 = 30 + 20 + 10 = 30 + 30 = 2*30 = 2*3*10 = 6*10 = 60
The thing from 30+30 to 60 is mainly how I saw adding those up.
On the post: Google Found Guilty Of Copyright Infringement In France For Not Magically Blocking Infringing Movie
Re: Re:
Unrelatedly, it figures that the one time I decide my post is sarcastic enough to not warrant the inclusion of a "" tag, someone takes it for real.
On the post: Another Attempt To Make TSA Searches Open To Sex Offender Charges
> [the law] makes the touching or viewing with a technological device of a person's breasts or genitals by a government security agent without probable cause a sexual assault.
So apparently if you work for the government, viewing porn is illegal now?
On the post: Google Found Guilty Of Copyright Infringement In France For Not Magically Blocking Infringing Movie
A trusted party *ahem*MPAA*/ahem* gives Google a list of "non-infringing" sites, and Google only indexes them.
That way, Google's not at liability for infringement, and no infringement occurs. Everyone wins!
Except users, of course, but who cares about them.
On the post: GAO Suggests It's Time To Ditch Dollar Bills For Coins
Re: Re:
On the post: Finally: Clear Ruling That Realizes That Just Buying Ads On Trademarked Keywords Is Not Infringing
Sadly, the "sponsored" links are at the very top of the results page and in blight yellow, saying "this is your result! click me!" to uninformed users.
And the worst part is that most ad buyers don't bother to identify themselves, meaning companies have to take out ads themselves to make sure they're the top standing in Google.
On the post: GAO Suggests It's Time To Ditch Dollar Bills For Coins
A $.99 item plus an 8% sales tax would be $1.07, a $1.00 item plus the same tax would be $1.08.
It's A) not much of a difference once tax is counted in, and B) prices wouldn't even be coming to even dollar ammounts anyways.
On the post: GAO Suggests It's Time To Ditch Dollar Bills For Coins
I automatically assume any coinage I receive is disposable, simply because it tends to fall out of my pockets when I sit down, and almost never carry it when I can carry bills instead.
On the post: GAO Suggests It's Time To Ditch Dollar Bills For Coins
Re: Re:
On the post: Copyright Pre-Settlement Virus A Lucrative Scam
Shouldn't /this/ kind of thing be against Visa and MasterCards's policies?
On the post: It May Take Up To 10,000 Years Before We Finally Get Rid Of 'Up To' Language In Broadband Marketing
On the post: Senator Schumer Fails To Properly Use HTTPS On His Own Site, After Pushing Other Sites To Use It [Updated]
Re: Re: On the other hand
On the post: The Privatization Of Public Data Sets A Bad Precedent
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Senator Schumer Says Websites Should Default To HTTPS
Of course it would seem good at first, for the protection of the public; but one of the clauses will likely happen to be that self-signed certificates are nixed.
And I ask how many web sites out there now don't use HTTPS or use insecure HTTPS because they can't afford a cert. :/
On the post: Programmer Faces 15 Years In Jail For Planting Virus That Automatically Broke Whac-A-Mole Games
Remember, Cyberspace is a dangerous new frontier where the normal laws of the United States and other countries do not apply. That's why we need special laws specifically detailing to crimes involving computers, vs crimes carried out without.
Ideally, the laws would match up against our existing laws to the point where they're superfluous, but hey, we're sure taking down a major bank is exactly the same as lying about your age on Facebook, so who cares.
(And I've got my tongue in my mouth here, people. That's a real difference between online and IRL, where if you don't state your sarcasm, people will mistake you for being sincere. Cf. Poe's Law)
On the post: Once Again, As The MPAA Whines About 'Piracy,' It Had Record Results At The Box Office
Re:
On the post: The Privatization Of Public Data Sets A Bad Precedent
Re:
Next >>