However, I'm tempted to give you a bonus point for "Big Search". That's a hilarious comparison to Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Tobacco... I'm sure the list could go on.
"""My prediction is that this will change nothing in the Android supply chain. My second prediction is that thousands of flame-bait articles will be written, when Samsung releases new Windows phones, ignoring the fact that Samsung has had every intention of doing, well before the news of the buyout was published."""
I agree with you, but you forgot to add "and no one will buy the Windows phones because they were dead in the water about a year ago anyway." As noted by another poster, does anyone know anyone else that has a Windows phone? In a fairly sizable group of friends, family, and coworkers I don't know a single person bragging about their Windows phone. And before any pedants point it out, yes, I *do* think I would know, we all like to show off our little toys, don't we?
"""Incorrect. You just doubled the supply. Supply and demand says that you just lowered the market price of the original."""
Holy smokes, do you really believe that??? I mean, really? You think that somehow the "market" just "knows" that a copy of something has been created and automatically prorates all other copies accordingly? Are you actually that blindingly dense?
"""Welcome to reality."""
Dude, I love an ironical statement as much as the next guy, but this is just too much, you're killing me. I'm shocked you can even communicate with us at your far level of remove from reality.
"""most creators of multimedia are not live performers, basically their motivation to create is the end product, the "recording of the creation" - making their passion and efforts worthless will NEVER fly and we will fight to make sure of that, besides there are LAWS against that called copyrights - until the law changes we have every right to fight for our rights - The Iceman didn't have laws to protect his rights or it would have been a smoother transition instead of extinction - WE WILL NOT GO OUT LIKE THAT!"""
All I hear is:
Bark! Bark bark! Bark bark bark! Bark!
I understand precisely what herd immunity is, and that it's not an individual concern (dur, herd?) EXCEPT insomuch as it's all of our concern to keep the "herd" strong. When individuals decide not to vaccinate, then they endanger the herd. I'm pretty sure that's what the OP meant, although I don't want to put words into his mouth.
"""Last, but certainly not least, Mike's line about non-vaccinating parents causing actual public health issues is total bullshit. (Sorry, Mike. For once, you're wrong.)"""
You seem to be referencing this line:
Given the serious health problems created by parents now refusing to vaccinate their children due to clueless anti-scientific fear-mongering, you would think that a government Department of Health would be thrilled that one of its employees was defending vaccinations and talking back to someone who was arguing against vaccines.
A slight future-tense modification makes it not "bullshit" and quite valid:
Given the serious health problems that would be created by increasing numbers of parents refusing to vaccinate their children due to clueless anti-scientific fear-mongering, you would think that a government Department of Health would be thrilled that one of its employees was defending vaccinations and talking back to someone who was arguing against vaccines.
Jeez dude, it's called herd immunity. You either know this and are actively trolling, or you've been living under a rock (and probably missed getting your vaccinations).
Royalties. If all of the music was "work for hire", why do they pay the artists royalties? I mean, they do their very desperate best to NOT pay them, but occasionally a few dollars do make it to the bigger artists.
"""I'm actually ok with this, after I followed the link and read the story."""
Then you are part of the problem. Nobody should be ok with this. There are effective ways to protect strategic assets. Harassing people for taking pictures of them is not effective, and frankly only serves to draw more attention to an asset's perceived value.
"""They ask a question, and off you go."""
So, taking the example a little further: You would have no problem with a strip search before boarding a plane flight; after all, it's just a quick lookie-loo, and then off you go.
I really did try to come up with a profound, useful comment, but the only thing that keeps running through my mind is:
HOLY SHIT, WTF, HOLY SHIT, WTF... well, you get the idea. Police are now tasked with deciding what may or may not be considered art? Correct me if I'm wrong, but does that not count as thought control? "Excuse me citizen, but you cannot take a picture of that ashtray, it has no esthetic value. Move along."
The story seems kind of silly at first, but after a couple moments reflection, this is the scariest thing I've read in many moons.
Yeah, totally agree. And just by a HUGE coincidence, if you check the first comment on the link, a fellow named Scot basically says the same thing: financial death penalty.
"""Quite a bit of money to spend on "bogus" patents."""
No, not really, when the "bogus" laws allow for the filing of countless "bogus" lawsuits for supposed infringement of those "bogus" patents. It's much cheaper and easier to buy them and not have to worry about being threatened with them.
"""And where on earth do you get the idea that you lose privacy rights if you trespass? The penalty for trespass is not waiver of your tort rights."""
Perhaps not a "waiver" per se, but there is a principle called "clean hands". It basically means that if you're riding dirty, don't come to court expecting them to help you out. If you're pot deal goes south, you can't sue about it in court. If you're trespassing, perhaps you can't sue about damage to your privacy rights?
On the post: Don Henley Hatred Of YouTube Clouding His Vision On PROTECT IP
Re: Wow!
However, I'm tempted to give you a bonus point for "Big Search". That's a hilarious comparison to Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Tobacco... I'm sure the list could go on.
On the post: Could Google's Motorola Buy To Fend Off Microsoft... Actually Drive More Business To Microsoft?
Re: Calling shenanigans on this idea
I agree with you, but you forgot to add "and no one will buy the Windows phones because they were dead in the water about a year ago anyway." As noted by another poster, does anyone know anyone else that has a Windows phone? In a fairly sizable group of friends, family, and coworkers I don't know a single person bragging about their Windows phone. And before any pedants point it out, yes, I *do* think I would know, we all like to show off our little toys, don't we?
On the post: Could Google's Motorola Buy To Fend Off Microsoft... Actually Drive More Business To Microsoft?
Re: You put too much emphasis here on patents.
Whatever gave you that idea?
On the post: Why Are We Letting An Obsolete Gatekeeper Drive The Debate On Anything?
Re: Re: Re:
Holy smokes, do you really believe that??? I mean, really? You think that somehow the "market" just "knows" that a copy of something has been created and automatically prorates all other copies accordingly? Are you actually that blindingly dense?
"""Welcome to reality."""
Dude, I love an ironical statement as much as the next guy, but this is just too much, you're killing me. I'm shocked you can even communicate with us at your far level of remove from reality.
On the post: Why Are We Letting An Obsolete Gatekeeper Drive The Debate On Anything?
Re:
All I hear is:
Bark! Bark bark! Bark bark bark! Bark!
On the post: Public Health Official Forced To Shut Up On Twitter, Blog For Daring To Speak Honestly
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Public Health Official Forced To Shut Up On Twitter, Blog For Daring To Speak Honestly
Re: Re: Re: actuallly..
You seem to be referencing this line:
Given the serious health problems created by parents now refusing to vaccinate their children due to clueless anti-scientific fear-mongering, you would think that a government Department of Health would be thrilled that one of its employees was defending vaccinations and talking back to someone who was arguing against vaccines.
A slight future-tense modification makes it not "bullshit" and quite valid:
Given the serious health problems that would be created by increasing numbers of parents refusing to vaccinate their children due to clueless anti-scientific fear-mongering, you would think that a government Department of Health would be thrilled that one of its employees was defending vaccinations and talking back to someone who was arguing against vaccines.
On the post: Public Health Official Forced To Shut Up On Twitter, Blog For Daring To Speak Honestly
Re: Re:
On the post: Dear Musicians: The RIAA Is About To Totally Screw You Over (Again!)
One word
On the post: Police Say They Can Detain Photographers If Their Photographs Have 'No Apparent Esthetic Value'
Re:
Then you are part of the problem. Nobody should be ok with this. There are effective ways to protect strategic assets. Harassing people for taking pictures of them is not effective, and frankly only serves to draw more attention to an asset's perceived value.
"""They ask a question, and off you go."""
So, taking the example a little further: You would have no problem with a strip search before boarding a plane flight; after all, it's just a quick lookie-loo, and then off you go.
On the post: Police Say They Can Detain Photographers If Their Photographs Have 'No Apparent Esthetic Value'
I tried
HOLY SHIT, WTF, HOLY SHIT, WTF... well, you get the idea. Police are now tasked with deciding what may or may not be considered art? Correct me if I'm wrong, but does that not count as thought control? "Excuse me citizen, but you cannot take a picture of that ashtray, it has no esthetic value. Move along."
The story seems kind of silly at first, but after a couple moments reflection, this is the scariest thing I've read in many moons.
On the post: Police Say They Can Detain Photographers If Their Photographs Have 'No Apparent Esthetic Value'
Re:
When can I expect my "I trolled with out_of_the_blue!" t-shirt?
On the post: If Even The Death Penalty Won't Stop Infringement... Perhaps A Different Approach Is Needed
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Court Says Sending Too Many Emails To Someone Is Computer Hacking
Re: Is an software update hacking?
On the post: Court Says Sending Too Many Emails To Someone Is Computer Hacking
Re: Re: Re: Threats and Vulgar language
Or tech support for his Viagra.
On the post: Court Says Sending Too Many Emails To Someone Is Computer Hacking
Re: Re: What an outrage
Also... hahaha, remember film?
On the post: If Even The Death Penalty Won't Stop Infringement... Perhaps A Different Approach Is Needed
Re: Re: Re:
You're right. Nobody would suggest such unreasonable punishments like the death penalty or a 1.92 million dollar award for infringement.
Oh wait...
On the post: Google Being More Aggressive About Bad Patents; But Should It Go Even Further?
Re:
No, not really, when the "bogus" laws allow for the filing of countless "bogus" lawsuits for supposed infringement of those "bogus" patents. It's much cheaper and easier to buy them and not have to worry about being threatened with them.
p.s. All software patents are bullshit, period.
On the post: Student Sues Former Principal For Privacy Rights Violation In Showing Surveillance Video Of Her Having Sex
Re:
Oh noes, we're going to lose an anonymous coward's invaluable input?
In the immortal words of Mötley Crue: Don't go away mad...
On the post: Student Sues Former Principal For Privacy Rights Violation In Showing Surveillance Video Of Her Having Sex
Re: Re: Privacy rights in a public spot?
Perhaps not a "waiver" per se, but there is a principle called "clean hands". It basically means that if you're riding dirty, don't come to court expecting them to help you out. If you're pot deal goes south, you can't sue about it in court. If you're trespassing, perhaps you can't sue about damage to your privacy rights?
Next >>