We'd be better off with a slim majority republican house and senate so they can't override vetoes forcing them to negotiate with the president and dems there by making the government work as intended via checks and balances
And that produces a different result from the Republicans only having a majority in the House how? Obama still won't sign a budget that includes the repeal of the ACA, and the Republicans still won't send a budget without it.
The president's legacy is now ruined: few will remember the Speaker's name, the majority whip or any other representative or senator. History will only show that the government was shut down during this presidency.
It's unlikely history will show anything. After all, it's not the first time the government shut down.
How the hell do they have the resources to fight the "war on drugs" when they can't even keep the national parks open?!?!
The FBI is an essential service. It continues to run during the shutdown.
Fun fact: Although the FBI is still running, FBI agents are not currently getting paid. It is almost certain they will get their backpay when the government reopens, but that is something Congress gets to vote on.
if you would send a letter to someone saying they will die, then that it is most obviously a threat
Yeah, damn oncologists.
Think like this: If "three fingers Joe" of the mob posted the same video, I think it would be pretty clear to see that it is a threat.
Quite possibly, I haven't seen the video. But if "three fingers Joe" says that his Manhattan isn't dry enough, and he remembers the time "Sleeps With the Fishes Freddy" made a non-dry Manhattan I would interpert that as a threat too. If any 15-year-old kid said that I would think it was just him being stupid and thinking he was funny (exceptions for the sons of Mafia dons I suppose).
(IANAL) But I thought an illegal threat requires proximate means, plus the illegality of the act being threatened, plus in some cases a sense of immediacy (real or implied), plus a reasonable inference that the act will be performed.
Russian authorities directed all of the country's airports to immediately begin inspecting all visitors before allowing them to enter the airports.[17] However, this practice was ruled illegal by an appellate court in June 2011.[18]
I assume the malls are privately owned. Private companies doing security theater is very different from the government.
no massively expensive security measures have been instituted in response
That's because the massively expensive security measures that the government ordered implemented were overturned by the Russian courts as depriving people of rights.
In America, you violate the rights of citizens in the name of security; In (former) Soviet Russia, the independent judiciary acts as a check and balance on the totalitarian executive branch.
For some reason, it's less funny then most of Yakov's jokes.
I voted for Gary Johnson. You could have too. Maybe next time you won't throw your vote away on a Demopublican like Obama.
So I get to choose between economic policies I believe in but civil liberties policies I hate, economic policies I hate and civil liberties policies I hate, or voting for an unwinnable candidate with economic policies I hate, but who won't grope me!
DARPA is one of the coolest federal agencies. They take risks to try game-changing reimaginings that leap forward in the state-of-the-art. When they work. Which they often don't. But often even the failures are cool.
Thank goodness the Nuremberg trials have shown that this is the right attitude for a soldier. Never question superiors, never act in a way contrary to their orders no matter how many rights you violate. Bradley Manning has learned...
US and (I believe) international law is actually pretty clear. Officers have the right and duty to question their orders, and to refuse illegal orders. Enlisted men, such as Bradley, are supposed to follow an illegal order issued by someone in a position to legally give an order. They're not allowed to make the distinction between types of orders (legal, illegal, dumb strategically).
There's a nonsensical conflation, wrapped up in your other conflation.
On honesty: I care about what laws are passed. I do not care what justifications are given to a large number of idiots so it is popular. I only care if the justifications are used to support something I support.
On this being dishonest: There doesn't seem to be anything about charging people for an externality that necessitates spending that money on removing the pain. The point is to capture the lost value of something, not to undo the damage.
Pretty clearly, the GP is an immigrant/migrant worker. And without a job will be deported. So,a t that point, is being 6 months behind in pay worth being exiled? What if there's another job that pays the rent/etc. that he moonlights as (e.g. cab driver) but is not worthy of getting a visa?
The House of Representatives, specifically it's gerrymandering, is probably the worst part of the federal government. See, those districts typically elect idiots. And it doesn't matter what letter they have after their name. The party leadership will want a dyed-in-the-wool X, and idiots are less likely to change their mind.
I think we have other problems, like putting 50-year-olds on the Supreme Court who then remain entrenched for decades; a Senate that uses the filibuster not to block legislation, but to block appointments; and a sizable portion of the country that only votes for President because of who he will put on the Supreme Court, and in that capacity cares only about a few issues.
I mean the executive branch has been pretty bad this entire millennium, but it's probably the sanest overall (when looking at the output of the legislative branch - there are clearly better individuals within it).
Is there any evidence to back that up? I'm not terribly familar with revolutions, but none in my experience seemed sparked by necessities being short. One major cause can be very public wealth inequality, but not universal suffering.
You expect the rest of the world to know conversion ratios for your archaic system.... Politeness would be recognizing that you chose not to use the standard system everyone else does but still accommodating them with a quick google conversion.
Maybe politeness would be you taking the time to learn both systems? I mean, you can get a sense of size without needing to convert it to metric if you have a few common things in feet to compare to . Minimum soccer field (for international play) is 330 feet. So when you see 1000 ft think "3 soccer fields."
But since you got all snide about your units of measure: I'm sorry if I like units on a scale I give a shit about (inches/feet or even cm as a base unit; Farenhieght encompasses temps that normal people see often and are comfortable with in the 0-100 range). I don't worship at the cult of "how heavy water is at my home in France (on average)" has some kind of universal significance, nor do I think sea-level near France is a great measure of "Standard Pressure". But the way you guys fellate water and base 10 is amazing. Even giving you that some location in France is super awesome, and water is the best thing you can base something on, you have such stupid inconsistencies with conversions (cm^3 = mL = 1 gram of 25 Celsius water).
TL;DR Metric was invented because no one read Emerson - and therefore has hobgoblins of the foolish mind.
I'm a software programmer so I can honestly say if a company takes more than 7 days to issue a fix, they aren't good.
I doubt there is any company in the world you consider very good. Care to give me a couple. Bonus points if you do the lookups of "longest open critical issue" instead of making me prove they were over 7 days.
A 30 minute delay for "there's cake in the breakroom" and 7+ day delay on "someone's hacking our website" means someone epically screwed up the importance of that e-mail getting relayed to the correct people.
You think it's e-mail relaying? Someone's on vacation? Or working with 3 other people on the feature promised to a customer right away. Or a hundred other reasons why they cannot drop everything.
If the programmers can't read their own damn code that they wrote and figure out why the vulnerability happened, they should be fired... they don't know what the command they're doing ACTUALLY do and that was the cause of the problem.
Wow? So, the bug in the library everyone uses, or a flaw in the compiler, never happened to you? How long have you been programming? It can take a while to realize that the documentation got some subtle feature of the library you're using incorrect. And there's always that issue with documentation, once the libraries get big enough.
Then if it takes more than 7 days to "publish" or "push" a new version of their software live, then the whole project was designed like it's 15 years ago. These days, you need urgent patches faster than that.
It does depend on the software. You seem to think all software is written for the web, and runs on the servers. That's an easier solution (not trivial of course, and you have scale issues). But what if you have a Linux/OS X/Windows XP/Windows Vista/Windows 8 product? On tons of different hardware?
Let the programmers who wrote the code do the testing so there's zero delay and then don't require some know-nothing 60-year old head of the department review all code before it goes live.
Skip QA? Programmers who wrote the code test it? That might work if it's "this function has a buffer overwrite", and the fix is transparent to everyone, but what if the problem arose because the menus were confusing, and people were accidentally reformatting their drive? Are the programmers who thought it was fine in the first place really the best judge of the fix?
Also, have you written an emergency patch? I have, 2 hours before the software went to QA for the final time (the ship deadline was on us, and QA decided new build/old build.) Hell yes, I talked through every line of code with another person.
it is in my interests to have my articles as easily accessible as possible
You can already just send your article out for free on the internet. You don't because, although you may not see a dime from the paywall, the journals offer credibility/exposure - and they know you have to publish to make tenure.
Some publishers allow open access only when required by law and this would give me leverage.
All this means is they'll stop accepting your work if it requires compliance with this new law. More likely, you'll merely be legally forbidden to submit to those journals. They'll never know whether it was because of the California law or just dull results.
Lastly, even if it cuts out half the research, most for-profit journals would rather do that than all the revenue.
V-22:First flew in 1989, entered service 2007, was unreliable for several years after that. It took us over 20 years to fully develop it
You seem to think that the plans are somehow the first drafts created in 1989, as opposed to the versions created in 2007. If that's the case, not only did they get the plans for a warplane, but also the end result of an 18-year R&D project. The worst-case isn't that they can build the V-22. It's that the plans illustrate some principle/solution they haven't discovered that's preventing them from building their latest-and-greatest weapons system. And what they started in 2008 skips the 18-years of R&D and jumps straight into production.
. I'm not worried about the Chinese gaining access to equipment that has been in use for decades: once something is out in the open and being used in combat/training operations, their capabilities are easily discerned and easy to copy.
It's not like the military doesn't take great pains to ensure that they don't use systems to the absolute limit, so that it's hard to observe their characteristics. And it certainly isn't like knowing what the practical limits are doesn't give you a blueprint for reproducing it. Look, a lot of things are easy to describe and hard to do. For instance, a hyper-sonic jet (Mach 5+). Is the hard part the specification: must go Mach 5+? No, it's actually building the damn thing, and dealing with all the little issues.
I am 26 years old
Let me offer an analogy from something you have experienced: Iron Man (the first movie). Observing the specs is what Obadiah does. It works pretty well. But if he had the blueprints, he would have seen the change commented "icing solution", and would have known a) that he had to fix that, and b) one solution
It depends on how much you consider "knowledge". I can read pretty much any OO language well enough to understand any recent graduate's code for hiring purposes. I also understand enough to be dangerous in all of them; that is enough to open the IDE, change behavior to suit a requirement, and make sure it works. What I don't know in most of them is when I'm re-inventing the wheel, when I'm doing something a backwards-ass way, etc.
Mostly true. It does change the calculus some. The risk of future events like this/mitigating those risk increase the cost of issuing the cards. Therefore, they may be willing to increase prices (slightly) and issue fewer cards (slightly) to re-maximize profits.
But yeah, this particular event is a one-time cost, so not going to change their pricing structure/desire for profit.
Although there's 3 other veins where the effect may be felt.
An "anti-fraud" surcharge may be added to cards, because non-sticker costs have a different impact on consumer behaviors than an identical transparent charge.
There may be the ability to transfer liability to the consumer (increasing their total costs), with or without the option of purchasing insurance. Or even claim that they provide insurance for something the consumer is not liable for.
This may serve as a trigger that allows all banks to raise their rates at the same time without violating anti-collusion laws.
Fox News/Rush would pick it up in a second. Not that they like atheists by any means, but conservative radio/Fox News will pick up any example to hammer the USPS.
BU, the similarly named public univerisity is and always has been secular.
In a secular government: should taxpayers be forced to fund a religious institution?
That's kind of an open question, to the degree to which a religious institution does a secular function. I'm honestly not sure where I come down on that.
Slashdot Mirror
And that produces a different result from the Republicans only having a majority in the House how? Obama still won't sign a budget that includes the repeal of the ACA, and the Republicans still won't send a budget without it.
It's unlikely history will show anything. After all, it's not the first time the government shut down.
The FBI is an essential service. It continues to run during the shutdown.
Fun fact: Although the FBI is still running, FBI agents are not currently getting paid. It is almost certain they will get their backpay when the government reopens, but that is something Congress gets to vote on.
Yeah, damn oncologists.
Quite possibly, I haven't seen the video. But if "three fingers Joe" says that his Manhattan isn't dry enough, and he remembers the time "Sleeps With the Fishes Freddy" made a non-dry Manhattan I would interpert that as a threat too. If any 15-year-old kid said that I would think it was just him being stupid and thinking he was funny (exceptions for the sons of Mafia dons I suppose).
(IANAL) But I thought an illegal threat requires proximate means, plus the illegality of the act being threatened, plus in some cases a sense of immediacy (real or implied), plus a reasonable inference that the act will be performed.
Check wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domodedovo_International_Airport_bombing
I assume the malls are privately owned. Private companies doing security theater is very different from the government.
That's because the massively expensive security measures that the government ordered implemented were overturned by the Russian courts as depriving people of rights.
In America, you violate the rights of citizens in the name of security; In (former) Soviet Russia, the independent judiciary acts as a check and balance on the totalitarian executive branch.
For some reason, it's less funny then most of Yakov's jokes.
Typewriter Repair Man: With cash or check. I don't own a credit card machine, and I don't want one to own me.
Keep in mind automotive gas (and diesel) is more expensive then the dyed generator only stuff.
Actually, I don't believe in the economic policies of any of the three, come to think about it. I temporarily confused what they said with the truth.
So I get to choose between economic policies I believe in but civil liberties policies I hate, economic policies I hate and civil liberties policies I hate, or voting for an unwinnable candidate with economic policies I hate, but who won't grope me!
Giant Douche, Turd Sandwich, meet Useless Jackass.
And how do you think we'll get there?
DARPA is one of the coolest federal agencies. They take risks to try game-changing reimaginings that leap forward in the state-of-the-art. When they work. Which they often don't. But often even the failures are cool.
US and (I believe) international law is actually pretty clear. Officers have the right and duty to question their orders, and to refuse illegal orders. Enlisted men, such as Bradley, are supposed to follow an illegal order issued by someone in a position to legally give an order. They're not allowed to make the distinction between types of orders (legal, illegal, dumb strategically).
There's a nonsensical conflation, wrapped up in your other conflation.
On honesty: I care about what laws are passed. I do not care what justifications are given to a large number of idiots so it is popular. I only care if the justifications are used to support something I support.
On this being dishonest: There doesn't seem to be anything about charging people for an externality that necessitates spending that money on removing the pain. The point is to capture the lost value of something, not to undo the damage.
Pretty clearly, the GP is an immigrant/migrant worker. And without a job will be deported. So,a t that point, is being 6 months behind in pay worth being exiled? What if there's another job that pays the rent/etc. that he moonlights as (e.g. cab driver) but is not worthy of getting a visa?
The House of Representatives, specifically it's gerrymandering, is probably the worst part of the federal government. See, those districts typically elect idiots. And it doesn't matter what letter they have after their name. The party leadership will want a dyed-in-the-wool X, and idiots are less likely to change their mind.
I think we have other problems, like putting 50-year-olds on the Supreme Court who then remain entrenched for decades; a Senate that uses the filibuster not to block legislation, but to block appointments; and a sizable portion of the country that only votes for President because of who he will put on the Supreme Court, and in that capacity cares only about a few issues.
I mean the executive branch has been pretty bad this entire millennium, but it's probably the sanest overall (when looking at the output of the legislative branch - there are clearly better individuals within it).
Is there any evidence to back that up? I'm not terribly familar with revolutions, but none in my experience seemed sparked by necessities being short. One major cause can be very public wealth inequality, but not universal suffering.
Maybe politeness would be you taking the time to learn both systems? I mean, you can get a sense of size without needing to convert it to metric if you have a few common things in feet to compare to . Minimum soccer field (for international play) is 330 feet. So when you see 1000 ft think "3 soccer fields."
But since you got all snide about your units of measure: I'm sorry if I like units on a scale I give a shit about (inches/feet or even cm as a base unit; Farenhieght encompasses temps that normal people see often and are comfortable with in the 0-100 range). I don't worship at the cult of "how heavy water is at my home in France (on average)" has some kind of universal significance, nor do I think sea-level near France is a great measure of "Standard Pressure". But the way you guys fellate water and base 10 is amazing. Even giving you that some location in France is super awesome, and water is the best thing you can base something on, you have such stupid inconsistencies with conversions (cm^3 = mL = 1 gram of 25 Celsius water).
TL;DR Metric was invented because no one read Emerson - and therefore has hobgoblins of the foolish mind.
Not since XP.
Also first party.
You seem to confuse "easy to set" and "power users have the ability to heavily customize windows without resorting to 3rd part code.
Or, you could just not blindly install every upgrade offered to you.
I doubt there is any company in the world you consider very good. Care to give me a couple. Bonus points if you do the lookups of "longest open critical issue" instead of making me prove they were over 7 days.
You think it's e-mail relaying? Someone's on vacation? Or working with 3 other people on the feature promised to a customer right away. Or a hundred other reasons why they cannot drop everything.
Wow? So, the bug in the library everyone uses, or a flaw in the compiler, never happened to you? How long have you been programming? It can take a while to realize that the documentation got some subtle feature of the library you're using incorrect. And there's always that issue with documentation, once the libraries get big enough.
It does depend on the software. You seem to think all software is written for the web, and runs on the servers. That's an easier solution (not trivial of course, and you have scale issues). But what if you have a Linux/OS X/Windows XP/Windows Vista/Windows 8 product? On tons of different hardware?
Skip QA? Programmers who wrote the code test it? That might work if it's "this function has a buffer overwrite", and the fix is transparent to everyone, but what if the problem arose because the menus were confusing, and people were accidentally reformatting their drive? Are the programmers who thought it was fine in the first place really the best judge of the fix?
Also, have you written an emergency patch? I have, 2 hours before the software went to QA for the final time (the ship deadline was on us, and QA decided new build/old build.) Hell yes, I talked through every line of code with another person.
You can already just send your article out for free on the internet. You don't because, although you may not see a dime from the paywall, the journals offer credibility/exposure - and they know you have to publish to make tenure.
All this means is they'll stop accepting your work if it requires compliance with this new law. More likely, you'll merely be legally forbidden to submit to those journals. They'll never know whether it was because of the California law or just dull results.
Lastly, even if it cuts out half the research, most for-profit journals would rather do that than all the revenue.
You seem to think that the plans are somehow the first drafts created in 1989, as opposed to the versions created in 2007. If that's the case, not only did they get the plans for a warplane, but also the end result of an 18-year R&D project. The worst-case isn't that they can build the V-22. It's that the plans illustrate some principle/solution they haven't discovered that's preventing them from building their latest-and-greatest weapons system. And what they started in 2008 skips the 18-years of R&D and jumps straight into production.
It's not like the military doesn't take great pains to ensure that they don't use systems to the absolute limit, so that it's hard to observe their characteristics. And it certainly isn't like knowing what the practical limits are doesn't give you a blueprint for reproducing it. Look, a lot of things are easy to describe and hard to do. For instance, a hyper-sonic jet (Mach 5+). Is the hard part the specification: must go Mach 5+? No, it's actually building the damn thing, and dealing with all the little issues.
Let me offer an analogy from something you have experienced: Iron Man (the first movie). Observing the specs is what Obadiah does. It works pretty well. But if he had the blueprints, he would have seen the change commented "icing solution", and would have known a) that he had to fix that, and b) one solution
It depends on how much you consider "knowledge". I can read pretty much any OO language well enough to understand any recent graduate's code for hiring purposes. I also understand enough to be dangerous in all of them; that is enough to open the IDE, change behavior to suit a requirement, and make sure it works. What I don't know in most of them is when I'm re-inventing the wheel, when I'm doing something a backwards-ass way, etc.
Mostly true. It does change the calculus some. The risk of future events like this/mitigating those risk increase the cost of issuing the cards. Therefore, they may be willing to increase prices (slightly) and issue fewer cards (slightly) to re-maximize profits.
But yeah, this particular event is a one-time cost, so not going to change their pricing structure/desire for profit.
Although there's 3 other veins where the effect may be felt.
Fox News/Rush would pick it up in a second. Not that they like atheists by any means, but conservative radio/Fox News will pick up any example to hammer the USPS.
Since it's founding.
BU, the similarly named public univerisity is and always has been secular.
That's kind of an open question, to the degree to which a religious institution does a secular function. I'm honestly not sure where I come down on that.