And note "buildings, land, lab equipment, computers and other items" are included in assessments. I'm guessing Apple (and Genentech) are arguing the values of the latter items have depreciated per some accounting rule, rather than using the real-world resale value.
It's due to the risk of chargebacks from people that buy something that subsequently loses value. You often can't buy stocks using a credit card for the same reason.
A small minority remember everything and kept trying to "wake up" and "scream for them to stop".
You may be thinking of cases where people are paralyzed but still conscious - for surgery you may be given separate drugs render you unconscious and immobilize you, and if they get the mix wrong you get the above nightmare.
Context and emotional content matter. The statement "Your restaurant has no fire insurance" is a statement of fact, by itself not a threat. However, if this statement was made in response to your statement "We'll be using a different meat supplier," a reasonable person might interpret it as a threat.
The US indicted 6 VW execs for breaking US law. Schmidt had the misfortune of being in the US when the indictments came down. Presumably the other 5 are avoiding getting anywhere near US soil.
""outer space is not subject to national appropriation by..." (list methods)
NATIONAL.
The treaty prohibits NATIONAL appropriation.
There's nothing there that says Exxon or Apple or Google can't land on it and say it's theirs.
Nothing, except for Article VI:
Article VI States Parties to the Treaty shall bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, whether such activities are carried on by governmental agencies or by non-governmental entities, and for assuring that national activities are carried out in conformity with the provisions set forth in the present Treaty. The activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty. When activities are carried on in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, by an international organization, responsibility for compliance with this Treaty shall be borne both by the international organization and by the States Parties to the Treaty participating in such organization.
I'm curious where the BBC got that Prof. Sharkey called for a ban. He doesn't call for a ban in the report, and the only mention of a ban is a quote from a another report where someone calls it shortsighted.
Summary and Conclusion Question 7: Would sex robots help to reduce sex crimes? This is a question that suffers major disagreement. On one side, there is a small number who believe that expressing disordered or criminal sexual desires with a sex robot would satiate them to the point where they would not have the desire to harm fellow humans. On the other side, there are scholars and therapists who believe that this would be an indulgence that could encourage and reinforce illicit sexual practices. This may work for a few but it is a very dangerous path to tread and research could be very difficult. It may be that allowing people to live out their darkest fantasies with sex robots could have a pernicious effect on society and societal norms and create more danger for the vulnerable. Currently there is a lack of clarity about the law on the distribution of sex robots that are representations of children.
If it has a Venus-like atmosphere, which seems likely that close to its star, the thick atmosphere might do a good job of diffusing, trapping, and spreading the heat around the planet. IIRC, despite it's nearly year-long day, Venus has a fairly uniform temperature all over the globe.
i thought there was a much, much older 'bill' that already covered this?
You do have that phrase "against unreasonable searches and seizures" in there - and the court has affirmed that there is a much lower bar for what's considered reasonable at a border crossing.
The testing software takes over the computer ("securely" according to the instructional video, FWIW) and doesn't let you switch out to other programs while you are in the test environment. It looks like the TouchBar bypasses that restriction.
The proposal also says that robots should always be identifiable as mechanical creations. That will help prevent humans from developing emotional attachments.
Have the proposal writers met people? Our ability to develop emotional attachments to things that aren't even animate is remarkable.
a) The law passes and the courts don't strike it down - a Miracle! b) The law passes and the courts strike it down - activist judges blocking the will of the People! c) The law fails to pass - the opposition supports Pedophiles!
- China owns the majority of U.S. debt, hence the U.S. economy.
No, the majority (two-thirds) of US debt is owned by the US. And of the third that is foreign-owned, China is only the largest owner (followed closely by Japan), not majority owner.
If the court can demonstrate that it is a device for which you know or have access to the password or key, they can compel you to reveal it. The thinking is that they've already proven you have access to the contents, and that your giving over the password/key does not further incriminate you.
If they haven't established that you can access the device, then your handing over the password/key is what establishes that fact and counts as incriminating yourself.
Probably because the Note 7 recall erased their profits and put them in a loss for the quarter. Including the loss is what pushed the mathematically correct but misleading headline that Apple earned over 100% of the profits we saw earlier.
"it is possible that the Second Circuit Court created an incentive for other jurisdictions to require data to be held within their national boundaries"
No, the PATRIOT act and related laws regarding the (lack of) privacy for data held in the US did that ages ago.
I wonder is this was originally developed for sleep tracking (monitoring the length and quality of your sleep), and they've just hit upon a more exciting marketing strategy.
It looks like they settled before class-action status was granted. Or even asked for? If class-action status was granted, this would be dragging out for another year or more as they looked for people to join the action, put it before a judge, and negotiate a settlement.
And the real harm was the chilling effect on using the song. Harder to measure that in monetary terms.
Slashdot Mirror
And note "buildings, land, lab equipment, computers and other items" are included in assessments. I'm guessing Apple (and Genentech) are arguing the values of the latter items have depreciated per some accounting rule, rather than using the real-world resale value.
What in god's name other kind of format would anyone want for reading a serious scientific paper???
Screen caps of a series of tweets posted to Facebook.
It's due to the risk of chargebacks from people that buy something that subsequently loses value. You often can't buy stocks using a credit card for the same reason.
A small minority remember everything and kept trying to "wake up" and "scream for them to stop".
You may be thinking of cases where people are paralyzed but still conscious - for surgery you may be given separate drugs render you unconscious and immobilize you, and if they get the mix wrong you get the above nightmare.
Stating facts is not a threat.
Context and emotional content matter. The statement "Your restaurant has no fire insurance" is a statement of fact, by itself not a threat. However, if this statement was made in response to your statement "We'll be using a different meat supplier," a reasonable person might interpret it as a threat.
As I read it:
54% of people buy or rent.
33% of people buy or rent in addition to streaming.
Implying 21% buy or rent but do not stream.
It's a PayPal-branded MasterCard issued by Synchrony Bank. But yeah, nothing particularly special or different.
The US indicted 6 VW execs for breaking US law. Schmidt had the misfortune of being in the US when the indictments came down. Presumably the other 5 are avoiding getting anywhere near US soil.
""outer space is not subject to national appropriation by..." (list methods)
NATIONAL.
The treaty prohibits NATIONAL appropriation.
There's nothing there that says Exxon or Apple or Google can't land on it and say it's theirs.
Nothing, except for Article VI:
Article VI
States Parties to the Treaty shall bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, whether such activities are carried on by governmental agencies or by non-governmental entities, and for assuring that national activities are carried out in conformity with the provisions set forth in the present Treaty. The activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty. When activities are carried on in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, by an international organization, responsibility for compliance with this Treaty shall be borne both by the international organization and by the States Parties to the Treaty participating in such organization.
I'm curious where the BBC got that Prof. Sharkey called for a ban. He doesn't call for a ban in the report, and the only mention of a ban is a quote from a another report where someone calls it shortsighted.
http://responsiblerobotics.org...
Summary and Conclusion
Question 7:
Would sex robots help to reduce sex crimes?
This is a question that suffers major disagreement. On one side, there is a small number who believe that expressing disordered or criminal sexual desires with a sex robot would satiate them to the point where they would not have the desire to harm fellow humans. On the other side, there are scholars and therapists who believe that this would be an indulgence that could encourage and reinforce illicit sexual practices. This may work for a few but it is a very dangerous path to tread and research could be very difficult. It may be that allowing people to live out their darkest fantasies with sex robots could have a pernicious effect on society and societal norms and create more danger for the vulnerable. Currently there is a lack of clarity about the law on the distribution of sex robots that are representations of children.
If it has a Venus-like atmosphere, which seems likely that close to its star, the thick atmosphere might do a good job of diffusing, trapping, and spreading the heat around the planet. IIRC, despite it's nearly year-long day, Venus has a fairly uniform temperature all over the globe.
i thought there was a much, much older 'bill' that already covered this?
You do have that phrase "against unreasonable searches and seizures" in there - and the court has affirmed that there is a much lower bar for what's considered reasonable at a border crossing.
The testing software takes over the computer ("securely" according to the instructional video, FWIW) and doesn't let you switch out to other programs while you are in the test environment. It looks like the TouchBar bypasses that restriction.
The proposal also says that robots should always be identifiable as mechanical creations. That will help prevent humans from developing emotional attachments.
Have the proposal writers met people? Our ability to develop emotional attachments to things that aren't even animate is remarkable.
But they know how pandering to the base works.
a) The law passes and the courts don't strike it down - a Miracle!
b) The law passes and the courts strike it down - activist judges blocking the will of the People!
c) The law fails to pass - the opposition supports Pedophiles!
- China owns the majority of U.S. debt, hence the U.S. economy.
No, the majority (two-thirds) of US debt is owned by the US. And of the third that is foreign-owned, China is only the largest owner (followed closely by Japan), not majority owner.
If the court can demonstrate that it is a device for which you know or have access to the password or key, they can compel you to reveal it. The thinking is that they've already proven you have access to the contents, and that your giving over the password/key does not further incriminate you.
If they haven't established that you can access the device, then your handing over the password/key is what establishes that fact and counts as incriminating yourself.
Probably because the Note 7 recall erased their profits and put them in a loss for the quarter. Including the loss is what pushed the mathematically correct but misleading headline that Apple earned over 100% of the profits we saw earlier.
"it is possible that the Second Circuit Court created an incentive for other jurisdictions to require data to be held within their national boundaries"
No, the PATRIOT act and related laws regarding the (lack of) privacy for data held in the US did that ages ago.
Giving the law access to the drive is evidence that you have that access.
I wonder is this was originally developed for sleep tracking (monitoring the length and quality of your sleep), and they've just hit upon a more exciting marketing strategy.
Are they the same 75% of people who feel they have above average driving skills?
All the measurements are in micrograms/min, if you look at the article.
I'm guessing the submitter pasted-in the text from the article without realizing the symbols would be dropped by ./ - preview is your friend.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/11/politics/us-foreign-aid-report/
The top five recipients of foreign military financing in 2014:
1. Israel: $3.1 billion
2. Egypt: $1.3 billion
3. Iraq: $300 million
3. Jordan: $300 million
5. Pakistan: $280 million
It looks like they settled before class-action status was granted. Or even asked for? If class-action status was granted, this would be dragging out for another year or more as they looked for people to join the action, put it before a judge, and negotiate a settlement.
And the real harm was the chilling effect on using the song. Harder to measure that in monetary terms.