Well, since the entrance exam would likely be geared toward people graduating high school, wouldn't the entrance questions have to be at that level of educational experience?
Because in reality he could have gotten to 99% but never to 100%. There was always the chance that a student genuinely aced the exam on his own accord but would get accused of cheating and expelled anyway. That would be disaster for the prof and the school if the kid turned around and sued them. So instead he opted for a typical prisoner's dilemma to weed out the cheaters. And notice the carrot for that, take an ethics course and all is forgiven. Not, you will fail this class but be thankful you're not expelled.
Here's the thing. YOUR debt collectors don't have the right or the privilege to harass ME over your debts, just because we're linked as "friends" on facebook or whatever social network, even if they don't tell me the reason why they are pestering me to deliver messages to you. If someone decides that they do, you're no longer my "friend", AND I'll likely stop using Facebook / social network I am tired of getting other people's spam on.
What about the annoyance factor? "Hey why are these strangers contacting me and asking me to send you messages to contact them?! Do I look like your personal secretary??"
Well, since they wanted the ability to build any previous version of PostGreSQL from the version history, for them I'd say it was quite valuable. I would suspect this is the main driving issue for whether or not to preserve commit history when porting to a new VCS; for some developers they may almost never go back and rebuild old versions from scratch. For OSS developers though I can see that they would need to preserve "full disclosure" and if possible make every commit history available for others, if not the devs themselves, to analyze.
That's why you get an unlocked phone and buy an international SIM chip that you swap in overseas. $20K/year is ridiculous, and probably an exaggeration or lie on his part to try to make himself look like a desirable customer.
Someone else above said the Kindle edition of 1984 was 99 cents. I'm sure the publisher is well aware of the benefits of having a kindle edition, but got greedy and demanded it be sold at a significantly higher price (or they get a much larger percentage of the gross). When Amazon balked, they took their marbles and went home.
Hmm, are you making a joke about Hoover, or am I not the only one who thought the title said "Instant sex charge", with the article going to be about the FBI's kiddie porn honeypot sites, where even an accidental click on one could get you brought up on child porn charges?
That's surprisingly a pretty common sting. I've heard it used to nab deadbeat dads by getting them to all come to a stadium to "collect the prize they won".
It's difficult to follow, and I haven't read all the legal proceedings, but here is what I have gathered:
* Think Computer coined the term "The Facebook" to describe an in-house portal system at Harvard University which they built, back in 2003.
* At some point Mark Zuckerberg registered "thefacebook.com" and started making a competing student portal. He later renamed this to facebook.com (thefacebook.com still redirects to facebook.com to this day)
* Think Computers was content to let sleeping dogs lie for the most part, but decided that they wanted to publish a book about their portal system and the title of the book contained the words "the facebook".
* Facebook.com sued Think Computers for trademark infringement and got advertisement for the book blocked.
* Think Computers countersued facebook.com, claiming fraud in their trademark, because Mark Zuckerberg was classmates with Think Computers CEO at the time and knew that he had previously coined "the facebook" for his portal system.
* Facebook tried to get the fraud count removed, presumably because if they are found guilty, penalties may extend beyond the loss of the trademark "Facebook".
* The court just ruled that the fraud count will not be removed for the upcoming trial.
No doubt this is in response to the "I am Rich" app, which technically could not be rejected on fraudulent grounds since the description stated it did absolutely nothing.
Yes, I know Apple pulled it anyway, but they potentially set themselves up for a lawsuit by some other scumbag down the road if they don't find a way to cover themselves for pulling down apps that are technically legal, but are solely designed to "fool the gullible".
I heard from a non-Mormon who went to BYU and said the intolerance there was so awful, that students would walk up to you and ask, "Are you a Mormon?" and if you said no, they would just walk away like you didn't even exist.
Blockbuster has enough clout to force movie companies to "water down" their product so they don't have to sell "unrated / NC-17" editions of movies, why can't they negotiate a much better public screening rate? Also, if it is so un-economical, why do the electronics stores that sell home theaters do exactly this?
I'm surprised this hasn't been a problem before for Verizon. Many Japanese surnames, when romanized, have the string 'shit' in it. In fact, ICANN had to change their rules for domain name registration to allow for this after many people couldn't register romanized Japanese words
My sister is an online used bookseller, and she has both an ABEbooks and an Amazon Z-shop account. She says she prefers to list with ABE because they charge a lower commission. I wonder if that will change now.