This isn't a troll, in light of the post it answers. Or is it forbidden to criticize US policy towards the UN?
Re:Sorry, but I have to consider the source
on
UN Attacks Free Speech
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Unlike western systems where the laws are held in a single repository.
Ahahahhaha. Right. Single repository. Well, first of all, Most nations use civil codes for their law, and I guess that makes things easier for them, but all Commonwealth nations, and the United States, use the common law system, which is built on, you guessed it, precedent. As for them being all in one place, no. Basically what happens is that each trial results in a decision, which may or may not be written. If the decision is written, then it gets passed along to the reporters, who decide whether it's important enough to be reported. If it gets reported, it's precedent. Note that each country might have several different reporters, any one of which might report the case. For a long time in England, the cases were reported in the newspapers, and those papers were for a long time the main place records were kept.
Of course, a case that's reported may end up being overturned by a higher court later, and on up to the Supreme Court of that jurisdiction, creating three separate cases. Only one will generally end up being precedent (the top one) but sometimes the high court will refer to something the trial court said, so we have to keep all the decisions around.
To complicate things further, different jurisdictions follow their own precedents, so that you could have, in theory at least, a different interpretation of a law for each State and one for the United States, and they would all be precedent, depending on where the disputed harm occurred, and which constitution or statute, state or federal, is being invoked. Now this would be exceedingly rare and unlikely, to have 50+ different precedents on the same matter, as usually the best decisions will sooner or later be adopted by most or all of the states, but it's possible. (I don't know if this situation has ever happened, I'm studying law in Canada)
In the Commonwealth, it can get even more tricky, because even though a case in your own jurisdiction is precedent, cases from other jurisdictions can be persuasive. So in Ontario, Canada, a House of Lords decision from England might have more weight than a lower court decision from Saskatchewan. And in Canada, for a long time, the House of Lords in England was the supreme court, so older English decisions are binding. The oldest English decision I've read in school so far was in Property law, and the decision was from 1210 I believe. It's still good law.
And finally, the trend in most countries, whether they use the common or the civil law, is that they are slowly evolving into hybrids of both. Common laws can always be superceded by statute, and in civil law countries, more and more they are starting to track the decisions made by judges in interpreting the civil codes.
Mods, this is not offtopic, anyone who read through the article as posted above would have seen the price comparisons with similar HP and Dell drives. Apple is not alone in this price gouging, if gouging it is.
Well, I can't answer that question, but I can tell you about a case we studied in class, called Nanabush v. the Deer Nation. Basically, the Deer Nation was refusing to offer itself to feed humans because Nanabush had tricked one of the deer into dying, then performed other indignities on the corpse (letting other creatures eat the meat so Nanabush could escape death, wearing the deer's skull, etc). The Deer Nation were basically withholding their services because Nanabush had breached the contract between humans and Deer.
Putting the old story into the form of case law illustrated for us how seriously the aboriginal people took their relationships with other creatures. Saying that it was a matter of religion isn't really accurate, but it is fair to say that respect for the animals hunted for food was an integral part of the culture.
Thanks for this, it's good to hear and learn more about what's really going on in Afghanistan, now and in the past. I'd heard a lot of this through our own media here, but it's better to have confirmation that's closer to the source.
Also, I'm not from the US, I'm from Canada, so I can't take offence to your statement about the US religious and educational problems.
So, speaking as a Canadian, whose country also has troops in Afghanistan, my question is (and it's a serious question, I'd really like to know):
What do you think the solution is? Do you think increasing the West's military power there is going to do the job? Or should we be putting money and people into infrastructure development instead of soldiery? Or do we all just get out and let the Afghans work it out on their own? I'm really curious, and I hope you can tell me your thoughts.
Well, strictly speaking, no the CIA should not be investigating the electronic vote-rigging in the USA. The FBI would be a more appropriate agency for that, I suspect.
I don't think they want us there anymore, the news from Afghanistan isn't so good these days, and the soldiers on the ground are reporting more and more resistance among the civilians.
They were happy to receive us there (I'll concede that, though I don't think it's that simple) but they're not thrilled with taking "collateral damage" and are starting to resist our "liberation" more and more.
Also, several Nato commanders in the region (and our own Prime Minister, who's a conservative and a hawk) have basically said that we can't win in Afghanistan through combat, and need to start thinking seriously about changing the mission or getting out, or both.
I'm surprised at you McGrew, I thought you'd have more sense than that. How would nuking a bunch of innocent people (along with the malefactors) do any good at all? And also, do you have any idea what kind of mess would be created by dropping a nuke on the capitol? I would bet that it'd result in a full-scale, multi-nation nuclear war. All to avenge 3000 people. That would be monstrous.
You seem to be under the impression that military intervention in Afghanistan is actually "useful". I agree with some of the aims of the Afghan war -- toppling a theocratic dictatorship, liberating women from oppression, maybe even hunting down those responsible for 9/11 (maybe) -- but the fact is, we're not accomplishing those goals there. The Afghan people have been kicking the ass of world powers for decades now, and if they don't want you there, you can't succeed there. Maybe the Germans recognise this.
Hey now, don't paint us all with the same brush. We're not all dicks you know. And FYI to others, as far as I know, GP's links do not reveal a sufficiently similar feature in OS X, and I certainly haven't found one on my mac.
If you install unlicensed software for the company, YOU may still be personally liable for the resulting copyright infringement (this is law, and I'm a geek not a lawyer, so YMMV); there's every chance that corporate directives to do it won't shield you (or may mysteriously become nonexistent when the manure impacts the wind turbine), leaving you hung out to dry.
Possible, but not very likely (unless criminal charges are involved). One of the main legal functions of a corporation is to shield it's employees and owners from legal liability. It's not in the best interest of the bosses to hang you out to dry, because the same laws protect them from personal liability to third parties (liability to shareholders is another matter). Far better to let your liability insurance (if you have some) cover it. If your employee was just going about her business, and especially if she was following company policy (written or not), then she's probably covered.
There are circumstances in which a corporation can deny coverage to an employee, but they rarely come up. I'm not a lawyer of course, but I was a law clerk for a firm who represented companies in negligence suits, and I never saw a company even try to deny an employee coverage, let alone succeed.
The OP (or anyone else) should NOT take what I'm saying as reflecting the state of the law. My advice is to go see a lawyer, either your own or a lawyer for the company in question (if the company has one). Laws and how they're interpreted vary by jurisdiction, and if the Poster's jurisdiction has criminal laws against copyright infringement, all bets are off.
Indeed. When I took comp sci 15 or so years ago, we did Pascal, Modula 3, Scheme, and an emulated assembler, all by my second year, after which I gracelessly washed out (combinatorics was my ultimate downfall). By second year I'd learned enough about several different language groups that I was able to help the science majors with their FORTRAN homework, without ever having studied the language. If you've graduated a decent Comp Sci program, you should have learned how to pick up the basics of any language, fairly quickly.
Are you sure this is a problem? I'm not a physicist, but I thought that a) "spooky action at a distance" has been demonstrated in a lab and b) there's no way to use it to transmit information at superluminal speeds. Maybe someone with a real physics edumacation could enlighten me?
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't a troll, in light of the post it answers. Or is it forbidden to criticize US policy towards the UN?
Unlike western systems where the laws are held in a single repository.
Ahahahhaha. Right. Single repository. Well, first of all, Most nations use civil codes for their law, and I guess that makes things easier for them, but all Commonwealth nations, and the United States, use the common law system, which is built on, you guessed it, precedent. As for them being all in one place, no. Basically what happens is that each trial results in a decision, which may or may not be written. If the decision is written, then it gets passed along to the reporters, who decide whether it's important enough to be reported. If it gets reported, it's precedent. Note that each country might have several different reporters, any one of which might report the case. For a long time in England, the cases were reported in the newspapers, and those papers were for a long time the main place records were kept.
Of course, a case that's reported may end up being overturned by a higher court later, and on up to the Supreme Court of that jurisdiction, creating three separate cases. Only one will generally end up being precedent (the top one) but sometimes the high court will refer to something the trial court said, so we have to keep all the decisions around.
To complicate things further, different jurisdictions follow their own precedents, so that you could have, in theory at least, a different interpretation of a law for each State and one for the United States, and they would all be precedent, depending on where the disputed harm occurred, and which constitution or statute, state or federal, is being invoked. Now this would be exceedingly rare and unlikely, to have 50+ different precedents on the same matter, as usually the best decisions will sooner or later be adopted by most or all of the states, but it's possible. (I don't know if this situation has ever happened, I'm studying law in Canada)
In the Commonwealth, it can get even more tricky, because even though a case in your own jurisdiction is precedent, cases from other jurisdictions can be persuasive. So in Ontario, Canada, a House of Lords decision from England might have more weight than a lower court decision from Saskatchewan. And in Canada, for a long time, the House of Lords in England was the supreme court, so older English decisions are binding. The oldest English decision I've read in school so far was in Property law, and the decision was from 1210 I believe. It's still good law.
And finally, the trend in most countries, whether they use the common or the civil law, is that they are slowly evolving into hybrids of both. Common laws can always be superceded by statute, and in civil law countries, more and more they are starting to track the decisions made by judges in interpreting the civil codes.
You really are a tiresome pedant. Let it go already.
Mods, this is not offtopic, anyone who read through the article as posted above would have seen the price comparisons with similar HP and Dell drives. Apple is not alone in this price gouging, if gouging it is.
Well, I can't answer that question, but I can tell you about a case we studied in class, called Nanabush v. the Deer Nation. Basically, the Deer Nation was refusing to offer itself to feed humans because Nanabush had tricked one of the deer into dying, then performed other indignities on the corpse (letting other creatures eat the meat so Nanabush could escape death, wearing the deer's skull, etc). The Deer Nation were basically withholding their services because Nanabush had breached the contract between humans and Deer.
Putting the old story into the form of case law illustrated for us how seriously the aboriginal people took their relationships with other creatures. Saying that it was a matter of religion isn't really accurate, but it is fair to say that respect for the animals hunted for food was an integral part of the culture.
Add to that Dukakis, Henry Rollins (with Ralph Nader)
I'd settle for a similar photo of Marina Sirtis, myself.
Thanks for this, it's good to hear and learn more about what's really going on in Afghanistan, now and in the past. I'd heard a lot of this through our own media here, but it's better to have confirmation that's closer to the source.
Also, I'm not from the US, I'm from Canada, so I can't take offence to your statement about the US religious and educational problems.
So, speaking as a Canadian, whose country also has troops in Afghanistan, my question is (and it's a serious question, I'd really like to know):
What do you think the solution is? Do you think increasing the West's military power there is going to do the job? Or should we be putting money and people into infrastructure development instead of soldiery? Or do we all just get out and let the Afghans work it out on their own? I'm really curious, and I hope you can tell me your thoughts.
I still think Democracy is a great idea, and maybe the US will be a democracy (or at least a Republic) someday~
Well, strictly speaking, no the CIA should not be investigating the electronic vote-rigging in the USA. The FBI would be a more appropriate agency for that, I suspect.
On a somewhat related point, has anyone else noticed that the CowboyNeal option has disappeared from the recent Polls?
I don't think they want us there anymore, the news from Afghanistan isn't so good these days, and the soldiers on the ground are reporting more and more resistance among the civilians.
They were happy to receive us there (I'll concede that, though I don't think it's that simple) but they're not thrilled with taking "collateral damage" and are starting to resist our "liberation" more and more.
Also, several Nato commanders in the region (and our own Prime Minister, who's a conservative and a hawk) have basically said that we can't win in Afghanistan through combat, and need to start thinking seriously about changing the mission or getting out, or both.
I'm surprised at you McGrew, I thought you'd have more sense than that. How would nuking a bunch of innocent people (along with the malefactors) do any good at all? And also, do you have any idea what kind of mess would be created by dropping a nuke on the capitol? I would bet that it'd result in a full-scale, multi-nation nuclear war. All to avenge 3000 people. That would be monstrous.
You seem to be under the impression that military intervention in Afghanistan is actually "useful". I agree with some of the aims of the Afghan war -- toppling a theocratic dictatorship, liberating women from oppression, maybe even hunting down those responsible for 9/11 (maybe) -- but the fact is, we're not accomplishing those goals there. The Afghan people have been kicking the ass of world powers for decades now, and if they don't want you there, you can't succeed there. Maybe the Germans recognise this.
There is no sound reason for teachers or school administrators to be performing strip searches, for any reason. At all.
Hey now, don't paint us all with the same brush. We're not all dicks you know. And FYI to others, as far as I know, GP's links do not reveal a sufficiently similar feature in OS X, and I certainly haven't found one on my mac.
You forgot:
5. When you get back from the unemployment office, rat out your former employer to the BSA and watch the company go down in flames.
and probably
6. Find a new career after you're blackballed by your industry.
If you install unlicensed software for the company, YOU may still be personally liable for the resulting copyright infringement (this is law, and I'm a geek not a lawyer, so YMMV); there's every chance that corporate directives to do it won't shield you (or may mysteriously become nonexistent when the manure impacts the wind turbine), leaving you hung out to dry.
Possible, but not very likely (unless criminal charges are involved). One of the main legal functions of a corporation is to shield it's employees and owners from legal liability. It's not in the best interest of the bosses to hang you out to dry, because the same laws protect them from personal liability to third parties (liability to shareholders is another matter). Far better to let your liability insurance (if you have some) cover it. If your employee was just going about her business, and especially if she was following company policy (written or not), then she's probably covered.
There are circumstances in which a corporation can deny coverage to an employee, but they rarely come up. I'm not a lawyer of course, but I was a law clerk for a firm who represented companies in negligence suits, and I never saw a company even try to deny an employee coverage, let alone succeed.
The OP (or anyone else) should NOT take what I'm saying as reflecting the state of the law. My advice is to go see a lawyer, either your own or a lawyer for the company in question (if the company has one). Laws and how they're interpreted vary by jurisdiction, and if the Poster's jurisdiction has criminal laws against copyright infringement, all bets are off.
This deserves mod points, people.
Of course, you can't run Linux on a toaster until you remove the Thetans.
Indeed. When I took comp sci 15 or so years ago, we did Pascal, Modula 3, Scheme, and an emulated assembler, all by my second year, after which I gracelessly washed out (combinatorics was my ultimate downfall). By second year I'd learned enough about several different language groups that I was able to help the science majors with their FORTRAN homework, without ever having studied the language. If you've graduated a decent Comp Sci program, you should have learned how to pick up the basics of any language, fairly quickly.
Except he's not laughing.
Religious services for gay and lesbian couples are performed in Ontario, in some chuches. They're married.
that's what I thought. Thanks.
Are you sure this is a problem? I'm not a physicist, but I thought that a) "spooky action at a distance" has been demonstrated in a lab and b) there's no way to use it to transmit information at superluminal speeds. Maybe someone with a real physics edumacation could enlighten me?