YouTube hosts content posted by third parties which it makes available to others without prior review. It is exactly the kind of situation the DMCA's safe harbor provisions are meant to address.
Fuck you Viacom for expecting to reap the benefits of copyright law while rejecting those aspects of it you dislike.
The cold war arms race averaged around 25.000 tons of TNT, though there were some weapons made that did 50k and some with a theoretical limit at 100k tons.
Wrong prefix. Some were made to 50Mt with a theoretical of 100Mt (Tsar Bomba).
And I wouldn't want to be in the same ocean as a nuke burst. Hydraulic forces can hurt, especially at any distance where the explosion would be visible through the water.
...eeewwwwwww! Satan's enema?
...is like selling a car based on the doors...
And let the terrible analogies flow.
Come on, at least he made it a car analogy
You do realize you can do
Sure it can! See nuclear summer.
That's called a bonus. Kinda of like Christmas in July. Well, except for the radiation poisoning.
Detonating nukes Idle. Why do I sound worried?
This is a weird world we're living in. Microsoft is offering patent protection to an open source product to counter lawsuits by Apple, thereby increasing the viability of the open source platform to spite Apple's own platform, even though Microsoft also has a competing platform.
Well, I guess I still hate Apple, so.. go Microsoft!
Rule #1 - Any positive comments about Apple will get you modded troll it seems. Slashdot has turned from rational thinking and actual intelligent discourse in regards to Apple to simply "they are anti-geek or anti-hacker and therefore evil".
Slashdot is "news for nerds". Many things that Apple does goes straight against things nerds want to do. So I find it entirely unsurprising that are considered evil by many people.
And for me at least it is indeed that simple: They are anti-geek or anti-hacker and therefore unworthy of my support. Supporting them would be going squarely against my interests.
It doesn't matter what the context or the content of the post is. Any 'fuck apple' will get an immediate 5 Insightful. Look to the top of this entire thread for a prime example.
Apple gives plenty to the community:
That is irrelevant. Doing good doesn't erase your evil deeds. The court might be a bit more lenient if you're generally upstanding character and did nothing too heinous, but I've never heard of anybody get declared innocent due to a good deed cancelling out some wrongdoing. Al Capone ran soup kitchens, but that didn't help, which is precisely the way things should work.
I have no problem with recognizing that they did some good work there, but don't see why that suddenly absolve them of anything.
They are a far more responsible corporation than some,
What any other company does or doesn't do doesn't enter into it. My neighbour stealing a lot doesn't justify me stealing a bit.
[...] but they ARE a company, and given who they are competing with, they have to protect their profits. Apparently they are supposed to simply allow anyone to use their patents and copyrights, and defending those patents will immediately make you even more evil, even if it's justified (something that has yet to be determined by the courts, but has already been decided here).
I do think patents should be greatly reduced, and software ones shouldn't exist at all. That said, there are plenty companies that manage to exist perfectly fine while being a lot less heavy handed, so improvement must be possible.
They are also not allowed to control their product sales, terms of service, or anything else that is accepted in thousands of other products around the world, all because they have 'insulted' the geek crowd.
It's not specifically about Apple. Personally I believe that there should be as much freedom as possible for the individual, but that companies should be much more limited in what they can do. Again, that somebody else does it isn't an excuse. Right of first sale should be absolute, for all companies, not just Apple. I have just as much of a problem with game companies wanting to end second hand sales, but their fanboys seem to be less numerous, so pointing out I don't agree with it seems to be a lot less controversial.
Loan-department manager: "There isn't any fine print. At these interest rates, we don't need it."