Like for instance, having certain types of sex with young people below the age of consent could easily be non-dangerous for the young person you mean? Barriers like it exist since when an activity is deemed inherently risky to someone other than yourself it should be blocked since statistically that is more advantageous.
Stocks aren't worth anything. Seriously, try to live your life be trying to give stock to people instead of money.
Stocks are a representation of invested money, they are only worth something the minute you're selling them.
Thus, the only relevant point is taxing the sale that has been done.
And, still, even then, it's quite a strange market, since, when you sell the stock, they determine what you bought it for against what you sold it for and, here comes the kicker, without accounting for inflation.
So, for an example. If I had bought stocks worth 1 million SEK (yup Swede, so using our numbers and values) in 1980, and sold them in 2010, and, just for the heck of it we'll say they went up a total of 200%, making them worth 3 million SEK in 2010. This would mean I would have to tax for 2 million SEK, thus making me pay 600000 SEK, leaving me with a total of 2.4 million SEK. How much is that if you account for inflation? Well, according to KPI (the official estimate for how much a single SEK has gone up), the prices have about tripled since, hence, I've actually lost 600k on the while affair in todays measurements.
And what you are saying is that I should've lost more?
Also, there's another issue. On year, a company has a really, really good year and the stock prices soar to 200%. Amazing year. Taxing stocks would then mean that I would have to pay for this increase. Next year, the company takes a dive right into the dumpster, down to 1% of their total worth. Sucks to be me, now I've lost the money I invested AND lost the money on taxes.
Such a system would mean that investing money in the public market would be bordering on insane for everyone but short-term dealers.
The main problem is that none of the models can account for the extreme level of warming that is occuring. At least around the north pole.
I'm not saying that this even means that the models are correct, however, it means that something definitely needs to be done or we will be fucked by razorsharp dicks.
So how come one of the least capable species when it comes to fighting capability naturally based on the weight and food requirements on this entire planet won?
It's because we used our adaptable brain to subvert our surroundings wherever we ended up.
Nope. The extreme situations which arise between humans exist as a luxury that we can afford since we have no natural enemies.
In a situation where you are fighting for your survival (aka, every living being not under the care of human society) the most extreme behaviour is not afforded and will simply not exist.
Stability and survival are the necessary traits for survival, humans in relatively small groups excel at that.
To paraphrase: I don't mind when my friend has an imaginary friend. When the imaginary friend starts to dictate the rules however, it has gone too far.
1: They don't, at least not in Sweden, they go from 80 SEK to 150 SEK or so. 2: People know what it costs to go to the cinema if everything costs the same, entertainment is more fun if you don't have to think about the money you are spending. Or to put in another way, if you are going to see a movie, having to decide whether to spend more to see a certain movie detracts from the experience. 3: Smaller movies are less interesting, the incitament of noticably lower prices is not certain to recoup benefits, instead, they might even have to charge more to make as much money on them.
In Sweden, being a woman is a great benefit in tech sector. Over here, it's really important for some reason to fill up quotas of different types or you are considered to be stale and unmodern.
Let me tell you, none of the girls in my sysadmin class had any trouble finding internships...
Because you can not control your bandwidth in any meaningful way. Also, there are so many sources of bandwidth hogs on the internet that it's silly. Also, in general, the rates are ludicrous and can be reached what should be considered normal behaviour. Also, they refuse to let people get different rates at different hours. Also, monitoring bandwidth usage is highly resource intensive and hard, making it cost more and not really making it worth it. Another aspect is that as soon as the meter starts, actually using the internet means losing money, meaning, you use it in a less obiquitous way.
Doing most types of drugs has some type of adverse effect, that is the main reason they are banned.
Some people like to pretend that there are adverse effects to watching porn, but there are no relevant studies on the subject.
Hell, even marijuana and other non-potent drugs have several adverse effects (alcohol is noticeably much so, it's only legal since the alternative is smuggling).
SMTP without authorization is the fundament for spam. SMTP has several known attack vectors. SMTP is by default unencrypted every part of the way, even when sending passwords. SMTP lacks any standardized (heck, any non-client measure) to encrypt data along the way.
This is a personality type which happens to have trouble with a lot of things normal people take for granted while being strong in other aspects which may or may not be helpful.
Slashdot Mirror
Like for instance, having certain types of sex with young people below the age of consent could easily be non-dangerous for the young person you mean?
Barriers like it exist since when an activity is deemed inherently risky to someone other than yourself it should be blocked since statistically that is more advantageous.
http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/a/arda.html
Stocks aren't worth anything.
Seriously, try to live your life be trying to give stock to people instead of money.
Stocks are a representation of invested money, they are only worth something the minute you're selling them.
Thus, the only relevant point is taxing the sale that has been done.
And, still, even then, it's quite a strange market, since, when you sell the stock, they determine what you bought it for against what you sold it for and, here comes the kicker, without accounting for inflation.
So, for an example.
If I had bought stocks worth 1 million SEK (yup Swede, so using our numbers and values) in 1980, and sold them in 2010, and, just for the heck of it we'll say they went up a total of 200%, making them worth 3 million SEK in 2010.
This would mean I would have to tax for 2 million SEK, thus making me pay 600000 SEK, leaving me with a total of 2.4 million SEK.
How much is that if you account for inflation?
Well, according to KPI (the official estimate for how much a single SEK has gone up), the prices have about tripled since, hence, I've actually lost 600k on the while affair in todays measurements.
And what you are saying is that I should've lost more?
Also, there's another issue.
On year, a company has a really, really good year and the stock prices soar to 200%.
Amazing year.
Taxing stocks would then mean that I would have to pay for this increase.
Next year, the company takes a dive right into the dumpster, down to 1% of their total worth.
Sucks to be me, now I've lost the money I invested AND lost the money on taxes.
Such a system would mean that investing money in the public market would be bordering on insane for everyone but short-term dealers.
The main problem is that none of the models can account for the extreme level of warming that is occuring.
At least around the north pole.
I'm not saying that this even means that the models are correct, however, it means that something definitely needs to be done or we will be fucked by razorsharp dicks.
So how come one of the least capable species when it comes to fighting capability naturally based on the weight and food requirements on this entire planet won?
It's because we used our adaptable brain to subvert our surroundings wherever we ended up.
Nope.
The extreme situations which arise between humans exist as a luxury that we can afford since we have no natural enemies.
In a situation where you are fighting for your survival (aka, every living being not under the care of human society) the most extreme behaviour is not afforded and will simply not exist.
Stability and survival are the necessary traits for survival, humans in relatively small groups excel at that.
To paraphrase:
I don't mind when my friend has an imaginary friend.
When the imaginary friend starts to dictate the rules however, it has gone too far.
1: They don't, at least not in Sweden, they go from 80 SEK to 150 SEK or so.
2: People know what it costs to go to the cinema if everything costs the same, entertainment is more fun if you don't have to think about the money you are spending.
Or to put in another way, if you are going to see a movie, having to decide whether to spend more to see a certain movie detracts from the experience.
3: Smaller movies are less interesting, the incitament of noticably lower prices is not certain to recoup benefits, instead, they might even have to charge more to make as much money on them.
Lenovo A1.
It's based on a book called darkly dreaming Dexter.
Also, hero is a definite overstatement, even if the later seasons go more in that direction.
There have been other works which portray a serial killer as the protagonist, most notably american psycho.
You could just say that you would like to run GNU on it.
Nope.
Sudo is enabled.
root isn't.
Sudo su gives you root though.
In Sweden, being a woman is a great benefit in tech sector.
Over here, it's really important for some reason to fill up quotas of different types or you are considered to be stale and unmodern.
Let me tell you, none of the girls in my sysadmin class had any trouble finding internships...
Because you can not control your bandwidth in any meaningful way.
Also, there are so many sources of bandwidth hogs on the internet that it's silly.
Also, in general, the rates are ludicrous and can be reached what should be considered normal behaviour.
Also, they refuse to let people get different rates at different hours.
Also, monitoring bandwidth usage is highly resource intensive and hard, making it cost more and not really making it worth it.
Another aspect is that as soon as the meter starts, actually using the internet means losing money, meaning, you use it in a less obiquitous way.
Or they just raise prices to stop people from buying disks since they don't have enough.
Which are honest, dissenting opinions.
Compare it with drugs?
That's a load of crap.
Doing most types of drugs has some type of adverse effect, that is the main reason they are banned.
Some people like to pretend that there are adverse effects to watching porn, but there are no relevant studies on the subject.
Hell, even marijuana and other non-potent drugs have several adverse effects (alcohol is noticeably much so, it's only legal since the alternative is smuggling).
Sweden has got 9 million.
Norway and denmark a bit over 5 each.
So almost 20 million.
SMTP without authorization is the fundament for spam.
SMTP has several known attack vectors.
SMTP is by default unencrypted every part of the way, even when sending passwords.
SMTP lacks any standardized (heck, any non-client measure) to encrypt data along the way.
Yes, it's broken.
Aspergers have normal average level of intelligence but unevenly distributed.
That is actually the prime distuingishing factor from high-functioning autism.
Which is what psychologists say as well.
The interesting thing is that it's common to have both.
It's not a disease.
A disease can be cured.
This is a personality type which happens to have trouble with a lot of things normal people take for granted while being strong in other aspects which may or may not be helpful.
If they know exactly how these people think.
They can lock them out the next round.
So, is this actually going to ruin compatibility?
Just when office finally has started supporting ODF, it's time to make it even harder?