Or Rodney's tablets in Star Gate Atlantis, or the PADD in Star Trek TNG, or the ACTUAL TABLET COMPUTERS that have been produced for the last 10 years that have been getting smaller and thinner, and shockingly rectangular... some of them are even black! my god!
Everyone's favorite primate-shaped president! I like that how I'm POSITIVE that Rihanna would 'Klout' as more influential than Bill Gates, but I'm sure even Rihanna wouldnt try to describe herself as 'more influential'.
I hope that all this effort trying to charge a website didnt detract from efforts to charge the pedophiliac pimps that actually harmed her and society, but that would be naive to think that...
That's almost a suggestion to tax revenue instead of profit... which would fail companies faster than any internet bill.
Comparing corporate and personal taxes is irrelevant unless you start counting every penny your employer spends on your benefits, office space, work equipment etc to your gross. You would probably be paying around 5% too when real expenses are included.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't every major corporation have 'companies' in every country they do business in? So wouldn't that restriction be a paper shield at best?
Seriously, look at this clown, and look at the brilliant mind that is Mark Zuckerberg, and ask yourself who actually created Facebook, regardless of who spoke the words together first...
Wow. Just wow. Just read the comments, and like... the ignorance made me feel dirty. Im actually about to take a shower because people like that have enough economic influence to at least afford posting that drivel on the internet....
The 3D printing one will be good, we have a 3D Printer at my work, and it TERRIFIES management, because there is no legal framework around actually duplicating an object with your own materials. Should be legal, no one loses, but it sure wont be...
This is actually a really good point, and fairly settled in case law I think. Im a Conservative, but this seems both stupid from a publicity perspective (could easily be dealt with using a statement about the economic benefit of controlled asbestos exports or something), its also probably not worth pursuing as I can see our current Supreme Court easily siding with her, and so would everyone else in our judicial system.
Can you please write about this in relation to the doofus who said that the internet has destroyed good conversation and ideas. Case in point, 2 authors with opposing viewpoints have each written pieces supporting their opinion, and then the readers of each have branched out into both communities to engage in intelligent debate.
And as a side note, look at the incredible investment Google has made in Android, knowing that its going to pay out in the WAY long run if it becomes the Windows of the smartphone, but WOW. You dont usually see public companies operate with that incredible foresight. Thats like 125% of their entire net profit of 2011, which for a 10 year old company is crazy. More than 20% of every penny they've made as a company to defend a product that they give away for free. And NO ONE is saying its stupid, finally.
I'm pretty sure it went down (much simplified) like this:
Google went to Motorola (who, with mid 90s acquisitions own a good chunk of the 2g patent thicket) and said "listen, you need to step up and attack Apple to help out Samsung and HTC with these suits" and Motorola responded "Are you crazy? Those are our primary competitors. We are looking golden here". And Google, honestly not understanding how Motorola doesn't see the importance of defending the ecosystem in the early days, offered to buy the patents. Motorola would have, of course, refused, as they need those to defend themselves from Apple. Then Google offered to buy the entire mobile business unit, which shocked the Moto execs. So they did it.
And now we will see Google prime up and blast Apple away. Although Apple may have pioneered the current smartphone environment, they sure as hell didn't invent the cell phone, and ultimately, that's what they are selling.
"And it would be foolish to let certain companies write laws to prop up their business models -- even if those companies happen to be in the technology business."
This is the height of intellectual dishonesty from someone with your background. You know full well that the only industry's trying to use the law to regulate communications online are the media companies and law enforcement. Yet you falsely claim that Google is trying to get laws rewritten to suit their needs. The truth is, google is trying to get laws UNwritten, because the original authors were media industry shills. Theres a huge difference, and not mentioning that in conjunction with this statement is misdirection approaching an outright lie.
On the post: Samsung Cites 2001: A Space Odyssey As Prior Art For Tablet Design
Re:
On the post: Wait, America-Hating Foreigners Will Be Influenced By How Many Twitter Followers A US Diplomat Has?
Re:
On the post: Can A Computer Pick Out Fake Online Reviews When Humans Can't?
On the post: Would You Volunteer For An Organization That Makes You Sign Away Your Right To Ever Say Anything Negative About It?
Re:
On the post: As Expected, Backpage Is Not Liable For Prostitution Ads
On the post: CBO Says PROTECT IP Will Cost Taxpayers Over $10 Million Per Year To Censor The Internet
Re: Re: Re:
Comparing corporate and personal taxes is irrelevant unless you start counting every penny your employer spends on your benefits, office space, work equipment etc to your gross. You would probably be paying around 5% too when real expenses are included.
On the post: CBO Says PROTECT IP Will Cost Taxpayers Over $10 Million Per Year To Censor The Internet
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: CBO Says PROTECT IP Will Cost Taxpayers Over $10 Million Per Year To Censor The Internet
Re: Re:
On the post: Once Again, Basic Detective Work Tracks Down Criminal Activity Done On Open WiFi
On the post: CBO Says PROTECT IP Will Cost Taxpayers Over $10 Million Per Year To Censor The Internet
Re:
On the post: Paul Ceglia To Facebook: I Didn't Forge A Contract, You Did!
Seriously?
On the post: Paul Ceglia To Facebook: I Didn't Forge A Contract, You Did!
Re: He's reaching
On the post: Original Contract Used By Paul Ceglia To Claim Facebook Ownership... Doesn't Mention Facebook
Re: Who doctored what
On the post: It's SXSW Voting Time
On the post: Canadian Political Party Threatens Widow For Using Its Logo In Ad Criticizing Canadian Government
Re: It's Exempt
On the post: Cooley Law School Sued Over Its Supposedly 'Misleading Employment Stats'
On the post: The Latest Entrant Into The Economically Clueless, Luddite 'Internet Is Evil' Book Category
Re: Re: One thing I object to
I think without meaning to, you 'mythbusted' him.
On the post: Google Spends $12.5 Billion To Buy Motorola Mobility... And Its Patents
Re:
On the post: Google Spends $12.5 Billion To Buy Motorola Mobility... And Its Patents
Google went to Motorola (who, with mid 90s acquisitions own a good chunk of the 2g patent thicket) and said "listen, you need to step up and attack Apple to help out Samsung and HTC with these suits" and Motorola responded "Are you crazy? Those are our primary competitors. We are looking golden here". And Google, honestly not understanding how Motorola doesn't see the importance of defending the ecosystem in the early days, offered to buy the patents. Motorola would have, of course, refused, as they need those to defend themselves from Apple. Then Google offered to buy the entire mobile business unit, which shocked the Moto execs. So they did it.
And now we will see Google prime up and blast Apple away. Although Apple may have pioneered the current smartphone environment, they sure as hell didn't invent the cell phone, and ultimately, that's what they are selling.
On the post: The Latest Entrant Into The Economically Clueless, Luddite 'Internet Is Evil' Book Category
Re: One thing I object to
This is the height of intellectual dishonesty from someone with your background. You know full well that the only industry's trying to use the law to regulate communications online are the media companies and law enforcement. Yet you falsely claim that Google is trying to get laws rewritten to suit their needs. The truth is, google is trying to get laws UNwritten, because the original authors were media industry shills. Theres a huge difference, and not mentioning that in conjunction with this statement is misdirection approaching an outright lie.
Next >>