|
|
Post by ToNoAvail on Jun 1, 2017 21:22:49 GMT -5
We would ALL miss jackel. Except OC, I think he GENUINELY hates him.
Jackal is a staple of the forum.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Jun 1, 2017 22:07:25 GMT -5
So, the Supreme Court finally did something amazing for the people and a giant fuck you to the politicians and their puppeteers.
Their ruling on Impression v. Lexmark denies companies post-sale patent restrictions (which has been a way a lot of major corporations have kept competitors out of the market). Not only does this finally end the Monsanto seed debate, but finally allows us to tinker and improve technology without being beholden to the base's patent holder.
|
|
|
|
Post by boboplata on Jun 1, 2017 22:31:30 GMT -5
I'm on Lexmark's side on this one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Jun 1, 2017 22:43:26 GMT -5
I'm on Lexmark's side on this one. Sorry, but if I buy something, I like to know that I own it. I don't like the idea of everything I pay for I'm just in fact renting and can have taken from me at any time. That we can't improve on technology in order to compete, etc... |
|
|
|
Post by boboplata on Jun 1, 2017 22:52:25 GMT -5
I'm on Lexmark's side on this one. Sorry, but if I buy something, I like to know that I own it. I don't like the idea of everything I pay for I'm just in fact renting and can have taken from me at any time. That we can't improve on technology in order to compete, etc... Impression just changes chips. They're not putting RnD or developing/improving anything & just cutting corners. |
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Jun 1, 2017 23:29:10 GMT -5
Sorry, but if I buy something, I like to know that I own it. I don't like the idea of everything I pay for I'm just in fact renting and can have taken from me at any time. That we can't improve on technology in order to compete, etc... Impression just changes chips. They're not putting RnD or developing/improving anything & just cutting corners. I don't care, they bought the shit, they can do what they want with it. Once it becomes their property, they can do what the fuck they want with it. |
|
|
|
Post by boboplata on Jun 1, 2017 23:50:57 GMT -5
Impression just changes chips. They're not putting RnD or developing/improving anything & just cutting corners. I don't care, they bought the shit, they can do what they want with it. Once it becomes their property, they can do what the fuck they want with it. That's a very ham-fisted approach. |
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Jun 2, 2017 1:07:39 GMT -5
I don't care, they bought the shit, they can do what they want with it. Once it becomes their property, they can do what the fuck they want with it. That's a very ham-fisted approach. Well yeah. If I buy a ham sandwich, I don't want them to turn around an claim patent infringement for digesting it. |
|
|
|
Post by boboplata on Jun 2, 2017 1:14:07 GMT -5
That's a very ham-fisted approach. Well yeah. If I buy a ham sandwich, I don't want them to turn around an claim patent infringement for digesting it. Reaching. Impression isn't selling shit. They're using technology developed by Lexmark to directly compete with them at almost no cost for RnD. |
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Jun 2, 2017 1:18:56 GMT -5
Well yeah. If I buy a ham sandwich, I don't want them to turn around an claim patent infringement for digesting it. Reaching. Impression isn't selling shit. They're using technology developed by Lexmark to directly compete with them at almost no cost for RnD. They are buying used up and fixing and then re-selling used up Lexmark products. It damn near the equivalent of a used-car lot (which is similar to an argument made by the justices) |
|
|
|
Post by PatSox on Jun 2, 2017 6:20:28 GMT -5
So the president just pulled the US out of the Paris Accord. It's the biggest news story fucking...EVERYWHERE.
Here? Two pages about Lexmark and patent pending laws.....and Jackel wondering why we like baph, but not him, or something like that
Ahhh....this place is starting to look more like the OD I remember. Feels good man
|
|
|
|
Post by MMAJim on Jun 2, 2017 8:29:48 GMT -5
You're tip-toeing on the line PatSox. Portions of that post should be in the "Trump Presidency" thread.
Not-Trump related, but I was surprised to learn that all industry in the USA has a giant lever that they now go switch to "massive pollution" to destroy the planet.
|
|
|
|
Post by PatSox on Jun 2, 2017 8:50:15 GMT -5
You're tip-toeing on the line PatSox. Portions of that post should be in the "Trump Presidency" thread. Not-Trump related, but I was surprised to learn that all industry in the USA has a giant lever that they now go switch to "massive pollution" to destroy the planet.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2017 9:04:08 GMT -5
Lol.
It's just after the Ludicrous Speed setting. Our emissions are going plaid. And we're very excited.
This whole Paris thing is a good way to show who's been paying attention and who hasn't been. Everyone up in arms over the agreement have looked at me with confusion when I asked them if they are familiar with Solyndra.
Because this Paris agreement was basically going to allow American taxpayers the tremendous opportunity to fund other Solyndra's all over the globe. We would give our money to foreign governments. They would then give our money to the company of their choosing in the renewable energy sector. That is exactly what the United States tried to do with solyndra. 535 million dollars later, to the surprise of no one who has watched our government attempt to conduct private sector business, solyndra is bankrupt.
I'm just so bummed out that we don't get a chance to do that in every other country in the world.
|
|
|
|
Post by ocmmafan on Jun 2, 2017 9:27:38 GMT -5
Lol. It's just after the Ludicrous Speed setting. Our emissions are going plaid. And we're very excited. This whole Paris thing is a good way to show who's been paying attention and who hasn't been. Everyone up in arms over the agreement have looked at me with confusion when I asked them if they are familiar with Solyndra. Because this Paris agreement was basically going to allow American taxpayers the tremendous opportunity to fund other Solyndra's all over the globe. We would give our money to foreign governments. They would then give our money to the company of their choosing in the renewable energy sector. That is exactly what the United States tried to do with solyndra. 535 million dollars later, to the surprise of no one who has watched our government attempt to conduct private sector business, solyndra is bankrupt. I'm just so bummed out that we don't get a chance to do that in every other country in the world. excellent point. It's a global Solyndra scam where the US will foot the bill. Meanwhile, China doesn't have to reduce and can even partake in some of the funds the US will be fronting. Imagine that - we foot the bill for fucking China to build energy while competing with them? Total fucking globalist scam that will help some large players in the energy field but NOT help the US worker nor actually reduce carbon emissions. Takes all of 5 minutes reading about this shit to figure it out. |
|
|
|
Post by ocmmafan on Jun 2, 2017 9:28:17 GMT -5
We would ALL miss jackel. Except OC, I think he GENUINELY hates him. Jackal is a staple of the forum. I have him on ignore so the forum is a much better place. |
|
|
|
Post by PatSox on Jun 2, 2017 9:40:50 GMT -5
So far I've seen General Electric, Microsoft, Apple, Exxon, Chevron, Disney, The Weather Channel, Google, Tesla come out definitively against this decision
What's behind this? Are they misinformed? Are they just pandering to liberals? Could they have legit concerns?
Do any of us know enough about this to really say? Is this another one of those things were what you think/say about it depends on what side of the isle you were on before hand? Based on my quick glance at CNN and Fox News....sure seems like it
|
|
|
|
Post by ocmmafan on Jun 2, 2017 9:51:52 GMT -5
So far I've seen General Electric, Microsoft, Apple, Exxon, Chevron, Disney, The Weather Channel, Google, Tesla come out definitively against this decision What's behind this? Are they misinformed? Are they just pandering to liberals? Could they have legit concerns? Do any of us know enough about this to really say? Is this another one of those things were what you think/say about it depends on what side of the isle you were on before hand? Based on my quick glance at CNN and Fox News....sure seems like it Take politics out of it. As a US citizen and tax payer in this country, do you care first about the citizens here or some bare foot kid in India? Would you rather have a US engineer working domestically or is it better for us to fund energy plants for engineers in the 3rd world? Ask yourself if you want a President determining where we shift billions of US tax dollars without allowing representative to vote on it. Forget what the NY Times or Fox News says about it and ask yourself these questions. GE, Microsoft, Apple, Exxon, Chevron, Google, Tesla all have a stake in making more money. The US funding globalist energy platforms helps all of them because they will reap benefits from it. Also, given the narrative is forming that this is about "global warming" and not money, of course they are going to be on the side of "what helps the entire earth". It's BS. Nothing is stopping all of the companies listed from themselves donating to this global fund and themselves initiating clean energy in every other country, or the US. But they won't do it if they don't have the backing of our tax money. Do I want to end global hunger? Yes, in theory I do. I don't want kids dying because they don't have clean water or food. But, do I want to donate 10% of my income to it? No, I don't. This entire Paris accord issue is playing being discussed morally and not fiscally, and the fiscal impact is the more important one to US. Because we will be the ones funding this shit to benefit others over ourselves. |
|
|
|
Post by MMAJim on Jun 2, 2017 9:59:53 GMT -5
So far I've seen General Electric, Microsoft, Apple, Exxon, Chevron, Disney, The Weather Channel, Google, Tesla come out definitively against this decision What's behind this? Are they misinformed? Are they just pandering to liberals? Could they have legit concerns? Do any of us know enough about this to really say? Is this another one of those things were what you think/say about it depends on what side of the isle you were on before hand? Based on my quick glance at CNN and Fox News....sure seems like it This is a very key point that I like to point out. (edit: back to the key point - most people don't know enough about the Paris deal or anything else they carry on about, I try to base everything around the fact that I know very little and go from there) I honestly don't know much about the Paris Climate deal. My only reaction to this event is to react to the overreaction. For example, I am trying to set a meeting with Rep Betty McCollum or an appropriate staffer in her office. This is from her website yesterday, literally while Trump is speaking this is already up - "MCCOLLUM: PARIS AGREEMENT WITHDRAWAL CONDEMNS FUTURE GENERATIONS TO HELL OF OVERHEATED PLANET" We're all going to hell! Directly to hell. Her website is basically "Look at me, I hate Trump." mccollum.house.gov/I personally wouldn't have 'made promises' to get out of the Paris deal. I personally think he should have "Made the Paris Climate Deal Great Again" instead of fully pulling out. He should have held leaving and blowing it up over the group, blast light at ridiculous double standard, etc. Those are generalities, I'm not an expert. I have also noticed that a lot of people have included in their derision some version of 'the world is going green, we're going to miss out on green energy, blah blah.' If the world is already going clean, then why should USA have to pay a stiffer economic price to just go where we're all going anyway. Not to mention, money is money, and there is money to be made in green and greener energy, therefore, progress will be made with or without the big bad, psuedo-binding agreement. |
|
|
|
Post by ocmmafan on Jun 2, 2017 10:30:28 GMT -5
So far I've seen General Electric, Microsoft, Apple, Exxon, Chevron, Disney, The Weather Channel, Google, Tesla come out definitively against this decision What's behind this? Are they misinformed? Are they just pandering to liberals? Could they have legit concerns? Do any of us know enough about this to really say? Is this another one of those things were what you think/say about it depends on what side of the isle you were on before hand? Based on my quick glance at CNN and Fox News....sure seems like it This is a very key point that I like to point out. (edit: back to the key point - most people don't know enough about the Paris deal or anything else they carry on about, I try to base everything around the fact that I know very little and go from there) I honestly don't know much about the Paris Climate deal. My only reaction to this event is to react to the overreaction. For example, I am trying to set a meeting with Rep Betty McCollum or an appropriate staffer in her office. This is from her website yesterday, literally while Trump is speaking this is already up - "MCCOLLUM: PARIS AGREEMENT WITHDRAWAL CONDEMNS FUTURE GENERATIONS TO HELL OF OVERHEATED PLANET" We're all going to hell! Directly to hell. Her website is basically "Look at me, I hate Trump." mccollum.house.gov/I personally wouldn't have 'made promises' to get out of the Paris deal. I personally think he should have "Made the Paris Climate Deal Great Again" instead of fully pulling out. He should have held leaving and blowing it up over the group, blast light at ridiculous double standard, etc. Those are generalities, I'm not an expert. I have also noticed that a lot of people have included in their derision some version of 'the world is going green, we're going to miss out on green energy, blah blah.' If the world is already going clean, then why should USA have to pay a stiffer economic price to just go where we're all going anyway. Not to mention, money is money, and there is money to be made in green and greener energy, therefore, progress will be made with or without the big bad, psuedo-binding agreement. He could have certainly went the middle route and tried to renegotiate from within. He stays in with the caveat this needs to be redone, but then he would be attacked anyway and it would lengthen the argument. But your generality is definitely a strategy he could have went with. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2017 11:41:57 GMT -5
So far I've seen General Electric, Microsoft, Apple, Exxon, Chevron, Disney, The Weather Channel, Google, Tesla come out definitively against this decision What's behind this? Are they misinformed? Are they just pandering to liberals? Could they have legit concerns? Do any of us know enough about this to really say? Is this another one of those things were what you think/say about it depends on what side of the isle you were on before hand? Based on my quick glance at CNN and Fox News....sure seems like it I don't know about all the other companies. But I can speak on Tesla. Tesla is going through a transition phase that is going to most likely result in the deletion of their Automotive business. They are going to be getting into the business of batteries and solar panels. I believe that Elon was sidling up to Trump with the hopes that he would be able to snag some government funding to go towards his gigafactory in Nevada. It makes sense given the concessions he's asked top shareholders to make with regards to their dividends. He doesn't want his own company to have to pay for all of the development. So I think he saw our withdrawal from the Paris Accord as a pretty clear sign that he's not going to be getting any money from the United States government. Elon has a long track record of getting the government to finance his bigger projects either via tax breaks or refund. I think that OC is correct when he says that this is really about money. Elon left not because he thinks that this is dangerous for the planet. I think he left because he knew that he wasn't going to gain much from continuing to be involved. To me it kind of seems like General Electric and all the other big companies that are against our withdrawal are the equivalent of welfare recipients taking to the streets and protesting that they can no longer use their food stamps to buy luxury items. Somehow these companies have gotten the mentality that they are entitled to our tax dollars for their R&D. R&D that then winds up being implemented in other countries. So we pay for all the heavy lifting, and they benefit from the industry that that heavy lifting creates? Fuck that. |
|
|
|
Post by ocmmafan on Jun 2, 2017 12:09:41 GMT -5
Kathy Griffen holds a press conference and for 25 minutes bashes the POTUS, his family and claims she is a victim?? Are you fucking kidding me? Maybe she is desperate to get her 15 minutes but this is only going to make people hate her even more. But, it is the true epitome of the left today where no one is responsible for their actions. She fucked up and went over the line thus losing herself a job, advertisers and was convicted in the court of public opinion. The same shit that happens to people that fuck up all the time. She held up a bloodied head of the POTUS - she did that. No one else did it but she is somehow now the victim? I don't get it. I really don't understand how the liberal brain works but I am starting to understand the Floyd and Toehold argument about mental illness. Some people are just so fucking mentally deranged, or incapable, that it must be mental illness.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jun 2, 2017 12:44:08 GMT -5
Why would anyone knowingly agree to a bad deal?
That's just fucking stupid, you wouldn't.
The Paris climate accord was written to specifically fuck the US over financially,
all while other countries directly benefit from our losses.
Why should foreign countries decide what we do on our land?
The Paris climate accord has a special global committee that is capable of over riding our countries constitution.
That is the definition of one world government.
Why do so many Americans want to give away what their families for generations worked so hard for?
Why do so many Americans want to give away other American's freedom and financial earnings?
|
|
|
|
Post by PatSox on Jun 2, 2017 13:13:46 GMT -5
Why would anyone knowingly agree to a bad deal? That's just fucking stupid, you wouldn't. The Paris climate accord was written to specifically fuck the US over financially, all while other countries directly benefit from our losses. Why should foreign countries decide what we do on our land? The Paris climate accord has a special global committee that is capable of over riding our countries constitution. That is the definition of one world government. Why do so many Americans want to give away what their families for generations worked so hard for? Why do so many Americans want to give away other American's freedom and financial earnings? Should later generations really be looking to reap the benefits of previous ones? Shouldn't each generation have to make their own way and fully earn what they get? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2017 14:07:09 GMT -5
Kathy Griffen holds a press conference and for 25 minutes bashes the POTUS, his family and claims she is a victim?? Are you fucking kidding me? Maybe she is desperate to get her 15 minutes but this is only going to make people hate her even more. But, it is the true epitome of the left today where no one is responsible for their actions. She fucked up and went over the line thus losing herself a job, advertisers and was convicted in the court of public opinion. The same shit that happens to people that fuck up all the time. She held up a bloodied head of the POTUS - she did that. No one else did it but she is somehow now the victim? I don't get it. I really don't understand how the liberal brain works but I am starting to understand the Floyd and Toehold argument about mental illness. Some people are just so fucking mentally deranged, or incapable, that it must be mental illness. Legit LOL from me... |
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Jun 2, 2017 15:03:33 GMT -5
The reason big business, and even big oil want us to stay in the Paris Agreement is because it was corrupted. Tillerson (who wanted us to stay in), and his successor at Exxon (Woods) and Lance over at ConocoPhillips have all said the same thing. They want to stay in the Paris Agreement because it allows us (which they quickly corrected to "the US" but we know what they meant) to control the efforts to reduce carbon emissions.
Leaving the Paris Agreement with a goal to enter a new agreement (something Trump is adamant about) can very likely cut big business out of having a hand in manipulating energy standards to their favour. No more exemptions for their companies and not their smaller competitors, no cut-offs just above their operating standards, etc...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2017 15:14:57 GMT -5
I only own a superficial amount of knowledge of this but it seems I agree with Rand Paul on this. The treaty (if what he says is accurate) is crap. China would not have to cut any carbon emissions but we would have to cut by 20% and other countries would get money to cut their emissions. It is another way for the US to handle the financial burden while costing us jobs in our country. I for one am glad Trump doesn't want to play protector for the rest of the world. No more people hiding behind out military might. No more joining agreements where Americans get hosed. I don't agree with his protectionist policies overall but do support having other countries stop basically getting subsidized military power (on a different note than Paris treaty, just wanted to mention it).
|
|
|
|
Post by CaveBearOG on Jun 2, 2017 16:22:55 GMT -5
I know nothing of the Paris bullshit and I ain't missing shit. I like pollution, I want global warming, I want palm trees on the great lakes, I want the polar caps to melt so the entire east coast metro gets swallowed by 30 feet of water. Fuck you, fuck off.....lol.
P.s.. yes I'm sober.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2017 16:37:43 GMT -5
Bilderberg meeting today. Primary topic of discussion: how to deal with Trump.
This interests me. I know there's a lot of conspiracy theory around Bilderberg. And I'm sure a lot of it is blown out of proportion.
However.
It genuinely interests me that this is the first time since I've ever started following Bilderberg that a United States president has been the primary focus of the conversation. The reason I find it interesting it's because these people at Bilderberg are supposedly the people who run the whole fucking planet. So I find it intriguing that none of the previous presidents were considered a topic of concern. Almost like this is the first president we've had in my lifetime who wasn't bought and paid for before the election even started.
Hillary has actually attended multiple Bilderberg meetings. I wonder if she got invited this year? I bet you she didn't. LOL. Cunt.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Jun 2, 2017 16:40:49 GMT -5
I only own a superficial amount of knowledge of this but it seems I agree with Rand Paul on this. The treaty (if what he says is accurate) is crap. China would not have to cut any carbon emissions but we would have to cut by 20% and other countries would get money to cut their emissions. It is another way for the US to handle the financial burden while costing us jobs in our country. I for one am glad Trump doesn't want to play protector for the rest of the world. No more people hiding behind out military might. No more joining agreements where Americans get hosed. I don't agree with his protectionist policies overall but do support having other countries stop basically getting subsidized military power (on a different note than Paris treaty, just wanted to mention it). Fact. It's exactly like NATO. US does all the work, pays all the bills, China still gets to piss in the pool with impunity, and we funnel untold fucking billions to 3rd world tyrants like Chavez because they're totally not corrupt buddies are starting up a totally legit solar company, and not embezzling out billions. How fucking dumb are we? |
|
