goldengull3 said:And once again, you aren't stopping anyone from setting their own terms within their own company. You sound just like those Linux enthusiasts on tech forums who spend more time weeping over conspiracy theories than actually addressing the market reality: "Look, I offer this, Microsoft offers that, Apple does this, and the consumer can decide which one fits their needs."
Sure, they can turn a profit by exploiting a patent. They get twenty years of exclusivity, and after that, everyone is free to use it. Why should you be allowed to profit off someone else's invention?
I don't doubt WIPO will find its footing once 3D printing goes mainstream; they’ll have to find ways to protect innovation eventually.
African nations can either develop their own technology or simply pay for licenses; even the South saw steady development through licensing deals with companies like Ford. If you didn't invent it, it isn't yours.
By all means, feel free to voice your opinion to the US Congress tomorrow and demand your representatives defend your stance at the EU and the UN. Once the most developed nations decide to align with your view, there won't be any trouble getting WIPO and the rest of the crew to change the rules. Until then, we operate under the current ones. And regarding 3D printing, returning to the point, it will inevitably introduce new regulations—simply because inventors tend to be quite protective of their work.
It doesn't stop them from making it available to everyone, does it? It’s quite simple, really. Much like how you have the right to develop your own word processor, release it for free, and simply watch people choose to use your software instead of Microsoft's.
As for copyright? I’m a firm believer that it's just selling smoke. Where would humanity be today if the inventors of the wheel or fire thought like that? If they had said, "I invented the wheel and it belongs to me; nobody touches the wheel or the fire without paying me," what then? Would they have offered animal skins or a share of the hunt as payment? And then sent two thugs with clubs to enforce their "copyright" on fire and wheels. Of course, they didn't work like that, yet we "modern" people call them Neanderthals.
This is clearly the future, and we are absolutely not ready for it.
That said, I don't think it’ll happen overnight. The tech is still in its infancy and hasn't been properly vetted yet. In the end, it’ll just be another scheme to line the pockets of a select few. They'll "produce" goods even cheaper than Chinese people can, raking in massive profits while leaving X times fewer workers with jobs. Are they going to ship 3D printers to African Americans to solve world hunger? I highly doubt it.
Maybe in 100 or 200 years, it’ll become cheap enough for every household to own one. Until then, nothing changes—except a handful of people getting richer while the workforce shrinks even further.
If those stairs are part of the house structure and included in the blueprints, they don't count. Once you get past the overhang, they're treated as if they aren't there—just a flat surface.
Perjury isn't handled via private lawsuits; it's prosecuted by the state. You might be able to sue for damages, but honestly, this whole thing feels like a stretch. Maybe the lawyers in here have some better ideas.
Jason Ortiz5 said:I mostly agree with that, but honestly, that's not even my main concern here. Think about it—if you're working a service job, like a cashier at Target or someone behind a counter at Starbucks, and you start asking customers, "Are you an idiot?" there wouldn't be any debate. You mess up once like that, and you're fired on the spot. Boom, gone. But when it comes to public school teachers and students, it's a whole different story, right? It's never that simple. Suddenly it's all excuses, stories, and "well, they meant well..." People don't just get handed pink slips in other industries, but in education, it feels like there's this massive cushion. I just can't wrap my head around why we have such double standards...🤷
That double standard stems from an outdated, flawed belief that teachers are somehow special—that they perform work exempt from standard rules, or shouldn't be subject to them. It’s this idea that teaching isn't "of this world," and therefore ordinary citizens (read: non-teachers) have no right to say a damn word when it comes to education.
Yeah, you should probably report this to the local building inspector. If you're planning on hiring a contractor, just make sure you have all your permits and paperwork squared away first.
If the job is going to drag on for more than five business days, you'll also need to notify the Department of Labor.
On the other hand, if you're doing it yourself or just running a small crew with your own materials, just grab the master blueprints so you're technically covered by code. Honestly? I doubt the inspectors give a damn about some backyard shed meant for storing bikes.
Based on this description, you might be able to classify it as a simple accessory structure.
Cut the size down to about 160 square feet instead of the 170 you're aiming for, and whatever you do, don't lean it against the main house. You can build it right up against the siding, but don't actually attach it—it’s just not worth the legal headache with the local building department.
If it qualifies as a simple accessory structure, you won't need a full-blown building permit; you'll just need to have the basic site plans ready to go.
If you gave her power of attorney and never revoked it, she *is* your lawyer. She didn't misrepresent herself. There’s zero reason to fake a POA when one already exists. If she successfully secured that inheritance in your name, the funds were paid out to her as your counsel—which is standard procedure as far as I know. She keeps her fee and sends the rest to you, the client. Unfortunately, some lawyers cut corners and don't follow through, which usually ends with them getting a physical lesson from their clients (I've seen it happen). From what I can tell, you need to sue her now, which means you're going to need a new lawyer...
It’s not a shoulder issue, it’s the neck. A few days of sick leave, a slight dip in the paycheck—which, let's be honest, isn't exactly a fortune either. Unfortunately, those kinds of places exist. The problem is that these companies run on razor-thin margins, and overtime is basically treated as standard working hours. When one person calls out, the whole system falls apart for the boss. Sadly, labor laws and inspections actually allow this kind of stuff to slide.
Try explaining that logic to American employers. They look at anyone with a common cold and immediately label them as malingerers, slackers, or lazy.
I don’t get why everyone acts like it’s normal for people to show up to work sick. It’s like they’re living in some alternate reality.
Of course people come in sick, but it isn't because they think they're indispensable—it's actually because they know they're completely replaceable. So many bosses basically threaten you: "Take a sick day, and don't bother coming back."
Then there's the other issue: when your paycheck takes a 30% hit, you really feel it, especially since wages are already low enough as it is.
In that case, you aren't looking at scaffolding—that's just a billboard. Being up on a scaffold might help you out, but it could also cause a massive headache with all the paperwork. Basically, if the sign is under 130 square feet, all you really need is an approved design (not a site permit or a building permit), but you'll still have to clear everything through the local zoning office.
At the moment you're setting it up, what kind of scaffolding you use isn't even the main issue. Once it's actually up, you still have to meet every single OSHA requirement for the job—certified workers, fall protection protocols, all that.
I don't know what kind of signage you're planning to hang on there, but you better watch yourself. If you're going with electric signs, you need strict electrical safety compliance; if you're using panels, they better be heavy-duty and made from the right materials.
First off, regardless of what kind of work you're doing—or in your case, the lack thereof—you can't just throw up scaffolding whenever you feel like it. It doesn't matter what your actual intentions are with the setup.
Scaffolding has to be erected strictly according to a blueprint. It requires monthly inspections, and you’re required to maintain a formal logbook for those checks. If that scaffolding is going up in downtown Chicago, you have to secure a permit from the city first. If you don't, and code enforcement catches you, they'll slap you with a massive fine.
Exactly. Reading the assigned books wasn't the issue; the problem was the sheer volume of writing required. Back in high school, we had this one teacher—thank God she retired after just one year—who demanded at least 15 pages per book. If you didn't hit that mark, you got an F, regardless of whether you actually read it or not. It was ridiculous. All it did was force everyone, both the readers and the slackers, to just scavenge stuff off the internet.
So, I’ve already been slapped with a warning for commenting on the moderation, and now I’ve been moved over here. Fine. Since I'm here, I might as well actually say something.
Regarding this whole "Drot Inc" trend—deleting my post feels an awful lot like censorship. Honestly, I’m starting to suspect there’s an entire squad from the FBI hiding behind that username, just doing their job to protect and represent the police.
Yeah, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the police exist to pad the budget they live off of. That’s my opinion and it’s my right to have it. Fortunately, even in America, there isn't some "Department of Thought Policing"—unless I'm mistaken. John's "argument" regarding those specific percentages proves absolutely nothing. All it shows is that roughly a million people—give or take the number of car owners in the US—paid half a million dollars each in fines to a country of only about 330 million people. If that doesn't strike you as massive, then I don't know what does. (A bit off-topic, I know.)
Let’s be clear: I stand by what I said about the police being incompetent and poorly trained. My comments weren't baseless—they were drawn directly from my own personal experiences, news reports, and the discussions happening right here on this forum. Yet, John deleted it, claiming I was "mocking law enforcement." I’d love to know: does anyone have an OBJECTIVE reason for that?
Isn't it true that the cops took a dealer out for coffee and then let him slip right through their fingers?
Has anyone else noticed how little people actually know about cybercrime? Honestly, looking at these threads, the level of digital illiteracy is almost impressive. It’s embarrassing.
Honestly, John has this habit of calling people liars whenever he doesn't get his way. It’s like he thinks he's on duty at the FBI or something. This is a forum, not a police shift.
I agree. That PDF is way too sterile and rigid. From what I can tell, the mods—mostly coming from law enforcement or legal backgrounds—are trying to force this thing into the mold of an official government document or some dry court filing. It’s unnecessary.
Don't get it twisted—this isn't some organized movement to oust Drot Inc from their position, even if that's how it might come across.
Think whatever you want, but I was right there on the ground. We ran circles around her, did it flawlessly, and honestly? I’d do it all over again in a heartbeat. 😁
The whole bit about the buses and trains is a decent joke, though I doubt everyone actually had to stick around just because they were messing around. Still, that kind of humor doesn't fly in places like NYC, and our little group probably couldn't have cooked up any real revenge anyway.