Reheard the police statement. First they couldn't locate him due to no fixed address. Then when they located him, he left the country the next day. He recently returned and was detained by border personal in Vancouver, then they went through his computer and charged him. Lots of talk about how rare and weird a charge like this is with the general feeling it is due to the murder being so high profile.
You should note that Canada has less free speech than in America (we have 'hate crime laws'),
From the Charter of Rights and Freedoms: 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: (a) freedom of conscience and religion; (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and (d) freedom of association.
We have the exact same free speech rights as the US.
Section 1 places some limits on our rights, 1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
Note that in practice America does the same with their Bill of Rights, which is why child porn is illegal down there.
The radio (CBC) was just interviewing someone about that. Seems that the Marek had no fixed address and it took quite a while for the cops to catch up to him.
The Fathers of Confederation looked at the failure of the American Constitution in the 1860's, with millions of Americans dead, and decided to do something different. The Writers of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms didn't want child porn to be legal and put some limitations on our rights. Now we come closer to following our constitution then America where the government is so used to working around their Constitution that they've formed a habit of ignoring it.
Banishment was often an option for dealing with anti-social nut-jobs. Imbeciles and other people that were plain old different often were accepted and even considered holy.
4th amendment amends the constitution and trumps article II. Unluckily courts have overridden most of the constitution turning it into a piece of paper so why even refer to it? Basically government can do what it wants as long as they can find a sympathetic court. Want to break the first amendment, declare that speech actually means some types of speech. Want to house soldiers in houses? Declare they meant toy soldiers in the third. And on and on. The American constitution is broken as it is selectively enforced and people like you cheer the selective enforcement on, at least until you find yourself prosecuted for talking.
Don't be daft. How often do kitchen knives, garden tools or power tools kill random strangers? Just about every day it seems I hear about someone getting killed by a vehicle, often people not in the vehicle that was improperly operated.
It won't ever be 300 million vs 1.5 million. It'll be 100 million vs 100 million with the other 100 million being undecided. Perhaps a 100 million conservatives against a 100 million liberals or perhaps some other labels with the divider being something stupid like gay marriage. The troops will be indoctrinated and mostly side with the government, whichever side it is.
The amendments supersede Article II section 2. In other words the President is not constitutionally allowed to break amendments 1 and 4, even to use his chief of staff powers. Same thing with prosecuting Snowdon, amendment #1 says that congress can not pass a law denying his freedom of speech and the 14th amendment extends it to all parts of government Need powers to protect national security? Pass an amendment allowing laws abridging freedom of speech rather them just hand waving away fundamental parts of the Constitution. As long as the government is allowed to break some basic freedoms, there is nothing to stop them breaking more.
You run configure (various options such as --enable-gpl for FFmpeg) && make for each platform. For benchmarking I guess you could do make check for Cairo but that is not a very good test as make check needs exactly the right versions of ghostscrpt, various fonts and I don't know what else. For FFmpeg you could run make fate after downloading the samples and time it. This would be a fairly good C benchmark for various CPU's because as you stated there are code paths for a hell of a lot of CPU's. The OS and libc are still going to affect the results. Examples of results of this, without timings, are at fate.ffmpeg.org (also similar at fate.libav.org)
Having 2 crew members would have increased the chances the appropriate number of hand brakes were set. Often it is good to have people double checking their work. Seems that there aren't many regulations on the number of handbrakes that need to be set as well.
I'd assume they do. Whether they had them in '79 and how many I don't know. I grew up by the CPR mainline and played along a 5 mile section in the early '70's and don't remember any sensors. Wouldn't be surprised if the reaction to the Mississauga accident caused usage of detectors. They'll be a lot of changes to regulations all over N. America in reaction to the Quebec accident as well.
Well if the government was left wing, then rather then bailing them out, they would nationalize them, and as long as they weren't too left wing, they would split the companies into smaller units and resell them and fuck the management and the stock holders. Unluckily we have right wing governments that worship free enterprise to the point where business can do no wrong and rather then punish businesses that screw up, they reward them with bail outs and the management gets bonuses instead of losing everything including their freedom for the worst offenders,
I was referring to the regulations about the number of crew required on a train, specifically the short lines. For short lines the number is now one engineer, no conductor, no brakeman. Having two people in the cab allows them to double check their work, not perfect as a recent plane crash shows but it is more likely that the correct number of hand brakes will be set if two people are double checking their work. Another recent example was the train bridge collapse outside of Calgary due to the CPR inspectors OKing an old bridge when the water was to high to even consider sending divers in to check the footings. In that case disaster was averted through luck as anything. The large railways have been pretty good about the self regulation but since the CPR has gotten new management who's priority is higher profits things are going down hill. The experienced workers are being heavily encouraged to retire or being let go and the newer, cheaper workers just don't have the experience and have management breathing down their necks demanding more production. A potential for another large accident due to de-regulation and management that is more interested in bringing up the profits this quarter. The Mississauga accident seems to have little to do with regulations, just a hot bearing that got too hot.
I thought it was a wide load but wasn't paying that much attention. Anyways if Washington has been doing the same as BC, those regulations about oversized loads have been getting weaker and weaker for a long time. Seems the current policies are to deregulate until an accident happens then re-regulate. See a certain railroad accident in Quebec that seems to have been at partially caused by removing regulations on number of crew running the train. Also a recent train bridge collapse outside of Calgary where the railroad was in charge of deciding its bridge was safe during a major flooding event. Companies push until there is a failure and talk the government into doing the same thing and as wages have dropped people have become more resistant to taxes so accept the government and businesses cheeping out.
A town in Quebec was just last week blown up due to deregulation allowing the railroad to self-regulate. While it's true the railroad will go out of business so will most of the businesses in that town not to mention the 50+ people killed. The businesses depending on the railroad may also go out of business as well. For some reason people want to have the railroads regulated now.
My countries Bill of Rights explicitly gives most of the rights to legal persons, a few to natural persons and the only ones limited to citizens are voting, holding office in the legislatures and mobility rights (moving around the country or entering and leaving (permanent residents also get most of the mobility rights as well with exceptions involving social programs)). Further our courts have interpreted our right to not be unreasonably searched to actually be a right to privacy and extend to corporations. Of course our leaders flaunt the rules until the courts set them straight which can take a while and the laws generally only apply in the country. Our rights are also limited by the first section,
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
which is why laws against child porn or having laws allowing military secrets are constitutional here unlike the States where the Bill of Rights is constantly broken with the agreement of the courts. eg the First Amendment is pretty simple and doesn't allow any limits on speech or gathering of people yet you have laws against allowing Snowden to talk and laws about free speech zones.
What good would more amendments do? Some are pretty clear and yet the courts have no problem neutering them and all up and down this page I see people who interpret People as American Citizen when the constitution is pretty clear with only some political parts depending on citizenship.
Genocide was official American policy up until about a century and a half ago. Maybe peaked during the presidency of Andrew Jackson with massive (for the time) forceful use of death camps.
The problem is that the American Constitution is totally broken and every president (and congress and courts) has to do unconstitutional things. One example is the First Amendment's free speech clause which disallows national secrets, child porn and all kinds of other illegal speech. Combined with the 14th Amendment a country can not operate as all countries need things like military secrets so right from the get go the Constitution has to be disobeyed and you're left with the courts interpreting things like what speech can be deemed illegal when the first amendment is clear, no laws infringing on speech. The American system is this balancing act, what is actually unconstitutional? With tons of laws, some going back to the beginning, that actually break the constitution. The American people happily accept unconstitutional things like national security secrets, unconstitutional military wings such as the Air Force (how hard would it have been to amend the constitution to allow an air force?). With the American people worshiping the constitution and breaking it how can you expect the President to obey it. Can you imagine the outrage if Obama said that it is unconstitutional to have national secrets? Refused to prosecute child porn? Disbanded the Air Force? A constitution that can't be obeyed is broken and to expect only some parts to be enforced is also broken.
If the government can demonize the protesters the army will fire on them. In previous days just labeling the protesters as commies would have been enough. Now perhaps labeling them terrorists, especially if some acts of terrorism happen, whether committed by the protesters or agents provacator. The army is a captive audience for the propagandist.
Slashdot Mirror
Reheard the police statement. First they couldn't locate him due to no fixed address. Then when they located him, he left the country the next day. He recently returned and was detained by border personal in Vancouver, then they went through his computer and charged him.
Lots of talk about how rare and weird a charge like this is with the general feeling it is due to the murder being so high profile.
I may well have missed a bit of the interview.
You should note that Canada has less free speech than in America (we have 'hate crime laws'),
From the Charter of Rights and Freedoms:
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.
We have the exact same free speech rights as the US.
Section 1 places some limits on our rights,
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
Note that in practice America does the same with their Bill of Rights, which is why child porn is illegal down there.
The radio (CBC) was just interviewing someone about that. Seems that the Marek had no fixed address and it took quite a while for the cops to catch up to him.
The Fathers of Confederation looked at the failure of the American Constitution in the 1860's, with millions of Americans dead, and decided to do something different. The Writers of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms didn't want child porn to be legal and put some limitations on our rights.
Now we come closer to following our constitution then America where the government is so used to working around their Constitution that they've formed a habit of ignoring it.
Put a sign up, "No Papers Delivered Here". Works for some people I know with the community papers full of flyers in the Fraser Valley.
Banishment was often an option for dealing with anti-social nut-jobs. Imbeciles and other people that were plain old different often were accepted and even considered holy.
4th amendment amends the constitution and trumps article II. Unluckily courts have overridden most of the constitution turning it into a piece of paper so why even refer to it? Basically government can do what it wants as long as they can find a sympathetic court. Want to break the first amendment, declare that speech actually means some types of speech. Want to house soldiers in houses? Declare they meant toy soldiers in the third. And on and on. The American constitution is broken as it is selectively enforced and people like you cheer the selective enforcement on, at least until you find yourself prosecuted for talking.
Don't be daft. How often do kitchen knives, garden tools or power tools kill random strangers? Just about every day it seems I hear about someone getting killed by a vehicle, often people not in the vehicle that was improperly operated.
It won't ever be 300 million vs 1.5 million. It'll be 100 million vs 100 million with the other 100 million being undecided. Perhaps a 100 million conservatives against a 100 million liberals or perhaps some other labels with the divider being something stupid like gay marriage. The troops will be indoctrinated and mostly side with the government, whichever side it is.
The amendments supersede Article II section 2. In other words the President is not constitutionally allowed to break amendments 1 and 4, even to use his chief of staff powers. Same thing with prosecuting Snowdon, amendment #1 says that congress can not pass a law denying his freedom of speech and the 14th amendment extends it to all parts of government
Need powers to protect national security? Pass an amendment allowing laws abridging freedom of speech rather them just hand waving away fundamental parts of the Constitution. As long as the government is allowed to break some basic freedoms, there is nothing to stop them breaking more.
You run configure (various options such as --enable-gpl for FFmpeg) && make for each platform. For benchmarking I guess you could do make check for Cairo but that is not a very good test as make check needs exactly the right versions of ghostscrpt, various fonts and I don't know what else. For FFmpeg you could run make fate after downloading the samples and time it. This would be a fairly good C benchmark for various CPU's because as you stated there are code paths for a hell of a lot of CPU's. The OS and libc are still going to affect the results. Examples of results of this, without timings, are at fate.ffmpeg.org (also similar at fate.libav.org)
Having 2 crew members would have increased the chances the appropriate number of hand brakes were set. Often it is good to have people double checking their work.
Seems that there aren't many regulations on the number of handbrakes that need to be set as well.
I'd assume they do. Whether they had them in '79 and how many I don't know. I grew up by the CPR mainline and played along a 5 mile section in the early '70's and don't remember any sensors. Wouldn't be surprised if the reaction to the Mississauga accident caused usage of detectors.
They'll be a lot of changes to regulations all over N. America in reaction to the Quebec accident as well.
Well if the government was left wing, then rather then bailing them out, they would nationalize them, and as long as they weren't too left wing, they would split the companies into smaller units and resell them and fuck the management and the stock holders.
Unluckily we have right wing governments that worship free enterprise to the point where business can do no wrong and rather then punish businesses that screw up, they reward them with bail outs and the management gets bonuses instead of losing everything including their freedom for the worst offenders,
I was referring to the regulations about the number of crew required on a train, specifically the short lines. For short lines the number is now one engineer, no conductor, no brakeman. Having two people in the cab allows them to double check their work, not perfect as a recent plane crash shows but it is more likely that the correct number of hand brakes will be set if two people are double checking their work.
Another recent example was the train bridge collapse outside of Calgary due to the CPR inspectors OKing an old bridge when the water was to high to even consider sending divers in to check the footings. In that case disaster was averted through luck as anything.
The large railways have been pretty good about the self regulation but since the CPR has gotten new management who's priority is higher profits things are going down hill. The experienced workers are being heavily encouraged to retire or being let go and the newer, cheaper workers just don't have the experience and have management breathing down their necks demanding more production. A potential for another large accident due to de-regulation and management that is more interested in bringing up the profits this quarter.
The Mississauga accident seems to have little to do with regulations, just a hot bearing that got too hot.
I thought it was a wide load but wasn't paying that much attention. Anyways if Washington has been doing the same as BC, those regulations about oversized loads have been getting weaker and weaker for a long time. Seems the current policies are to deregulate until an accident happens then re-regulate. See a certain railroad accident in Quebec that seems to have been at partially caused by removing regulations on number of crew running the train. Also a recent train bridge collapse outside of Calgary where the railroad was in charge of deciding its bridge was safe during a major flooding event.
Companies push until there is a failure and talk the government into doing the same thing and as wages have dropped people have become more resistant to taxes so accept the government and businesses cheeping out.
A town in Quebec was just last week blown up due to deregulation allowing the railroad to self-regulate. While it's true the railroad will go out of business so will most of the businesses in that town not to mention the 50+ people killed. The businesses depending on the railroad may also go out of business as well.
For some reason people want to have the railroads regulated now.
Yea, I should have read TFA, seems it's a very hot Jupitor type
My countries Bill of Rights explicitly gives most of the rights to legal persons, a few to natural persons and the only ones limited to citizens are voting, holding office in the legislatures and mobility rights (moving around the country or entering and leaving (permanent residents also get most of the mobility rights as well with exceptions involving social programs)). Further our courts have interpreted our right to not be unreasonably searched to actually be a right to privacy and extend to corporations.
Of course our leaders flaunt the rules until the courts set them straight which can take a while and the laws generally only apply in the country.
Our rights are also limited by the first section,
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
which is why laws against child porn or having laws allowing military secrets are constitutional here unlike the States where the Bill of Rights is constantly broken with the agreement of the courts. eg the First Amendment is pretty simple and doesn't allow any limits on speech or gathering of people yet you have laws against allowing Snowden to talk and laws about free speech zones.
What good would more amendments do? Some are pretty clear and yet the courts have no problem neutering them and all up and down this page I see people who interpret People as American Citizen when the constitution is pretty clear with only some political parts depending on citizenship.
Genocide was official American policy up until about a century and a half ago. Maybe peaked during the presidency of Andrew Jackson with massive (for the time) forceful use of death camps.
Probably methane absorbing red light much like Neptune which looks very blue
The problem is that the American Constitution is totally broken and every president (and congress and courts) has to do unconstitutional things. One example is the First Amendment's free speech clause which disallows national secrets, child porn and all kinds of other illegal speech. Combined with the 14th Amendment a country can not operate as all countries need things like military secrets so right from the get go the Constitution has to be disobeyed and you're left with the courts interpreting things like what speech can be deemed illegal when the first amendment is clear, no laws infringing on speech.
The American system is this balancing act, what is actually unconstitutional? With tons of laws, some going back to the beginning, that actually break the constitution. The American people happily accept unconstitutional things like national security secrets, unconstitutional military wings such as the Air Force (how hard would it have been to amend the constitution to allow an air force?). With the American people worshiping the constitution and breaking it how can you expect the President to obey it. Can you imagine the outrage if Obama said that it is unconstitutional to have national secrets? Refused to prosecute child porn? Disbanded the Air Force?
A constitution that can't be obeyed is broken and to expect only some parts to be enforced is also broken.
If the government can demonize the protesters the army will fire on them. In previous days just labeling the protesters as commies would have been enough. Now perhaps labeling them terrorists, especially if some acts of terrorism happen, whether committed by the protesters or agents provacator. The army is a captive audience for the propagandist.