Don't know where you are, but in my neck of the southeast, it's certainly not unusual to push past 35C for a week to 10 days running. It's only marginally cooler inside my house, because I don't turn on the air conditioning unless my kids come home to visit. Nothing wrong with the separating butter blobs here!
Maybe you need to try a different brand…. or just consume it faster! ;-)
When you care enough to leave your butter on the counter, it will be long gone before it has a chance to spoil. In high summer, it may melt into a formless blob that's easier to scoop up with a spoon, but there's nothing wrong with it. Why even bother with a butter dish cover, when it just gets in the way?
I'm not sure most people realize how much time it actually takes for butter to go bad. They'd also be surprised to learn that the extra flavor associated with "Country Butter" comes from allowing it to go slightly rancid in the churn.
That would certainly seem to create an expectation of privacy -- if everything else in almost every TOS you'd actually care about weren't specifically focused on getting you to relinquish ownership of any and everything else you might conceivably expect to retain.
"I'd argue that my phone records are a hell of a lot more revealing and private than my bank records."
Is that point even arguable any more? There's enough research in circulation now to make that proposition look more like an established fact. Is there a judicial equivalent to Ivory Tower oblivion?
".....which would allow broadcasters to claim rights as middlemen, over things they have no claim to, including public domain works, just for broadcasting them."
This strikes me as somewhat misleading? If ABC broadcasts Jane Eyre, they're not claiming sole rights to Jane Eyre. As the dissenters point out, content is adequately protected already. Broadcasters are saying you can't record ("fix") that particular program or performance and use it for your own purposes, without express permission. And that's where the most serious dangers lie.
Permission presumably includes not only commanding fees for use, but controlling how/when/where you show or mount such video. What's really pernicious is that the Treaty would assign legal liabilities to anyone who "facilitates" such recordings and/or distribution. This would essentially give broadcasters de facto control over the technology of any device which could conceivably be used to record a broadcast -- or play it. We're ultimately talking about both hardware and software. Your fast forward button suddenly won't work when you try to skip the advertising; YouTube will be tamed; your cell phone will be disabled, if you try to record a live concert being filmed for commercial use.
It's safe to say that broadcasters won't be the only ones who would be exceedingly interested in such controls! Broadcasters are after your money, but it's Big Brothers of every ilk who are standing atop the slippery slope of the precedent this Treaty would establish.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by JM Hanes.
"[T]he fact that Clinton's own staff went through them and got rid of a bunch first will keep conspiracy theorists in business for ages."
Not to mention the Hillary apologists.
Re: Re: Exactly!
Don't know where you are, but in my neck of the southeast, it's certainly not unusual to push past 35C for a week to 10 days running. It's only marginally cooler inside my house, because I don't turn on the air conditioning unless my kids come home to visit. Nothing wrong with the separating butter blobs here!
Maybe you need to try a different brand…. or just consume it faster! ;-)
Exactly!
When you care enough to leave your butter on the counter, it will be long gone before it has a chance to spoil. In high summer, it may melt into a formless blob that's easier to scoop up with a spoon, but there's nothing wrong with it. Why even bother with a butter dish cover, when it just gets in the way?
I'm not sure most people realize how much time it actually takes for butter to go bad. They'd also be surprised to learn that the extra flavor associated with "Country Butter" comes from allowing it to go slightly rancid in the churn.
Re: Re: can a 3rd party give a privacy guarantee creating a reasonable expectation?
That would certainly seem to create an expectation of privacy -- if everything else in almost every TOS you'd actually care about weren't specifically focused on getting you to relinquish ownership of any and everything else you might conceivably expect to retain.
Revelations
"I'd argue that my phone records are a hell of a lot more revealing and private than my bank records."
Is that point even arguable any more? There's enough research in circulation now to make that proposition look more like an established fact. Is there a judicial equivalent to Ivory Tower oblivion?
".....which would allow broadcasters to claim rights as middlemen, over things they have no claim to, including public domain works, just for broadcasting them."
This strikes me as somewhat misleading? If ABC broadcasts Jane Eyre, they're not claiming sole rights to Jane Eyre. As the dissenters point out, content is adequately protected already. Broadcasters are saying you can't record ("fix") that particular program or performance and use it for your own purposes, without express permission. And that's where the most serious dangers lie.
Permission presumably includes not only commanding fees for use, but controlling how/when/where you show or mount such video. What's really pernicious is that the Treaty would assign legal liabilities to anyone who "facilitates" such recordings and/or distribution. This would essentially give broadcasters de facto control over the technology of any device which could conceivably be used to record a broadcast -- or play it. We're ultimately talking about both hardware and software. Your fast forward button suddenly won't work when you try to skip the advertising; YouTube will be tamed; your cell phone will be disabled, if you try to record a live concert being filmed for commercial use.
It's safe to say that broadcasters won't be the only ones who would be exceedingly interested in such controls! Broadcasters are after your money, but it's Big Brothers of every ilk who are standing atop the slippery slope of the precedent this Treaty would establish.