I don't understand why heads of state don't assume they're being spied on. I assume all my countries allies are listening to POTUS's unencrypted phone, and all of congressmen's. It doesn't bother me. In fact, it's considered a backchannel - things are said assuming they are overheard. So things like "If Japan pushes for X in the negotiations, we'll have to walk away" can be said, knowing Japan is evesdropping
It seems foolish to assume that valuable, low-security things aren't going to be hacked.
When you play baccarat, you are playing against other customers, never the Casino's money.
In some form of baccarat, the players take turns being the bank (or house). In the baccarat you play at the casinos, the casino is the house. Phil Ivy and the casino's dealer were the only two people pushing money across the table.
I wonder if this judge also believes that casinos have a "mutual obligation" to problem gamblers to make sure that they're not gambling money intended for other purposes?
To some degree they do - they have a blacklist you can add yourself to, and then they are not allowed to let you gamble.
You have to pay attention to the surrounding documentation. Certainly, Gerald Ford made numerous statements (backed by his legal team) that accepting a pardon necessarily involved admitting guilt.
If the PC becomes a professional only device, the price will rise out of the cost of the average consumer. Look at the non-adware, update-controllable versions of Windows 10. It's only a matter of time... hopefully decades out.
You say that like it's supposed to mean something. Congress votes for illegal and amoral actions all the time.
The various posts in this thread focused on legality - starting with the post you responded to that I responded to that you then responded to to this post that I am currently writing. So, of course legality means something.
You may disagree with spying on foreign nationals, but that definitely was legal and approved by congress... even the spying on allies. Nor was it secret that the NSA's mission included that in their scope (although obviously the methods, extent and specific people being spied on were secret.)
He also revealed a lot of information on purely legal foreign operations. You cannot just infodump everything into the wild and disavow any negative consequences from what you overrevealed. Nor can you judge someone exclusively by the best result of their actions.
On Jan 22nd, Snowden will most certainly be on a plane back to the US. And Trump will take credit for accomplishing something Obama failed at for years, then throw him in jail. That's the part of the new US-Russian partnership.
Okay, maybe not the 22nd, maybe whenever Trump needs to win a news cycle and has nothing else.
No, we're talking about the standards that applied to Snowden. It would be more if the Police department hired a contract security officer, and if he had a personal obligation to "protect and serve".
NYC was better off off after Giuliani because all of America improved during that time. Compared to the rest of America, NYC actually lost ground.
Part of that was due to wasteful, counterproductive and possibly unconstitutional policing policies (broken window policing, stop and frisk). Part of that was due to setting up charter schools that actually underperformed the public schools. Part of that was due to botching the ability to respond to 9/11 by failing to properly prepare (e.g. putting the emergency command and control building in the WTC against all advice). And part of that was giving jobs to corrupt associates as opposed to qualified bureaucrats.
I think they're suggesting that if HR fires people who are "presick", they'll get a (possibly under the table) discount on health insurance, or other similar issues.
This is strong evidence that capitalism does work, eventually.
It depends a lot on what you mean by "works". That things eventually get better? Sure, but things also economically got better under feudalism. Hell, quality of life, materially, even improved in Soviet Russia over time. That's a very low bar.
On the other hand, if you compare this to the epipen in countries that do not let capitalism run free reign over health care, this "supercheap" solution is still more expensive than in these countries. In Canda, for exmaple, it's like 30% cheaper.
Yes, capitalism slowly works, to some degree. On the other hand, in Canada which uses socialism to control prices for medicine, an epipen two pack is still under $100, and thus cheaper than this "super-cheap" option from CVS
(BTW, this option still isn't considered a generic variant of the epipen; it requires a different prescription. That said, this drug fills the same niche.)
The tax theory was advocated as a way to ameliorate the natural consequences of land monopolies. Specifically targeted for that. Showing those consequences is the entire point of the game. Convincing people that land monopolies are bad was the main motivator.
I probably could not get anyone to play Candyland with me either. But Candyland doesn't even rise to the standard of "game".
Have you really never played a good game? I'd recommend starting with Ticket to Ride or Settlers of Catan (knowing nothing about you). But there are a lot of other options.
The assertion is true, and the link supports it. In "Early History":
American anti-monopolist Elizabeth (Lizzie) J. Magie Phillips, created a game through which she hoped to be able to explain the single tax theory of Henry George
Slashdot Mirror
I don't understand why heads of state don't assume they're being spied on. I assume all my countries allies are listening to POTUS's unencrypted phone, and all of congressmen's. It doesn't bother me. In fact, it's considered a backchannel - things are said assuming they are overheard. So things like "If Japan pushes for X in the negotiations, we'll have to walk away" can be said, knowing Japan is evesdropping
It seems foolish to assume that valuable, low-security things aren't going to be hacked.
In some form of baccarat, the players take turns being the bank (or house). In the baccarat you play at the casinos, the casino is the house. Phil Ivy and the casino's dealer were the only two people pushing money across the table.
You have to pay attention to the surrounding documentation. Certainly, Gerald Ford made numerous statements (backed by his legal team) that accepting a pardon necessarily involved admitting guilt.
If the PC becomes a professional only device, the price will rise out of the cost of the average consumer. Look at the non-adware, update-controllable versions of Windows 10. It's only a matter of time... hopefully decades out.
The various posts in this thread focused on legality - starting with the post you responded to that I responded to that you then responded to to this post that I am currently writing. So, of course legality means something.
Why? Mass transportation has a lot of positive externalities.
Assuming that no one signed the petition twice. But such fraud never happens over the internet.
Nixon's pardon was conditioned on him admitting responsibility. By accepting it, he admitted guilt.
You may disagree with spying on foreign nationals, but that definitely was legal and approved by congress... even the spying on allies. Nor was it secret that the NSA's mission included that in their scope (although obviously the methods, extent and specific people being spied on were secret.)
He released them to reporters. If you offload responsibility to someone else, and they do a bad job, then you're still responsible.
He also revealed a lot of information on purely legal foreign operations. You cannot just infodump everything into the wild and disavow any negative consequences from what you overrevealed. Nor can you judge someone exclusively by the best result of their actions.
On Jan 22nd, Snowden will most certainly be on a plane back to the US. And Trump will take credit for accomplishing something Obama failed at for years, then throw him in jail. That's the part of the new US-Russian partnership.
Okay, maybe not the 22nd, maybe whenever Trump needs to win a news cycle and has nothing else.
He taught constitutional law. There is ample precedent (e.g. Ford/Nixon) for such a pardon. There is no way he was ignorant of that.
If you recall, he corrected Chief Justice Roberts when he misspoke when administering the presidential oath the first time.
No, we're talking about the standards that applied to Snowden. It would be more if the Police department hired a contract security officer, and if he had a personal obligation to "protect and serve".
You can most certainly decline a pardon.
NYC was better off off after Giuliani because all of America improved during that time. Compared to the rest of America, NYC actually lost ground.
Part of that was due to wasteful, counterproductive and possibly unconstitutional policing policies (broken window policing, stop and frisk). Part of that was due to setting up charter schools that actually underperformed the public schools. Part of that was due to botching the ability to respond to 9/11 by failing to properly prepare (e.g. putting the emergency command and control building in the WTC against all advice). And part of that was giving jobs to corrupt associates as opposed to qualified bureaucrats.
I think they're suggesting that if HR fires people who are "presick", they'll get a (possibly under the table) discount on health insurance, or other similar issues.
It depends whether she knew they were bullshit fake tests or she was really bad at sciencing*
*Not a word, but there needs to be a way to describe people who fail at experimental design/running experiments/after the fact statistics.
It depends a lot on what you mean by "works". That things eventually get better? Sure, but things also economically got better under feudalism. Hell, quality of life, materially, even improved in Soviet Russia over time. That's a very low bar.
On the other hand, if you compare this to the epipen in countries that do not let capitalism run free reign over health care, this "supercheap" solution is still more expensive than in these countries. In Canda, for exmaple, it's like 30% cheaper.
Yes, capitalism slowly works, to some degree. On the other hand, in Canada which uses socialism to control prices for medicine, an epipen two pack is still under $100, and thus cheaper than this "super-cheap" option from CVS
(BTW, this option still isn't considered a generic variant of the epipen; it requires a different prescription. That said, this drug fills the same niche.)
The tax theory was advocated as a way to ameliorate the natural consequences of land monopolies. Specifically targeted for that. Showing those consequences is the entire point of the game. Convincing people that land monopolies are bad was the main motivator.
I probably could not get anyone to play Candyland with me either. But Candyland doesn't even rise to the standard of "game".
Have you really never played a good game? I'd recommend starting with Ticket to Ride or Settlers of Catan (knowing nothing about you). But there are a lot of other options.
The assertion is true, and the link supports it. In "Early History":
That tax theory is a socialist theory.
You definitely upgrade to hotels. And then buy those 4 houses you just freed up for another monopoly you own on the same turn.