I agree in general, but the question must be asked, at what point does it go from genuine dissent into outright fraud for gain? I wouldn't say it's necessarily time to invoke RICO, but perhaps it's time to ask how far is too far.
Keep in mind, they are not talking about organizations simply saying things like "we are not satisfied that the data supports the conclusion" or "we believe there are flaws in your raw data". They are talking about very deliberately setting out to produce fraudulent data and calculations to confound the issue (good old fraud).
I have to agree. I have to wonder what right any of the 'adults' involved have to tell any child "grow up" when clearly they never did. Are these people really allowed to be in charge of something?
They clearly have such a mechanism since you can't just bleed the bank dry if you get the account number of a deceased customer with no living relatives for them to tap. They just opt to be accomplices to a crime for their cut and take advantage of being too big to prosecute. That's why they are deathly afraid of anything that might change their status. They've forgotten how to make an honest living.
That's one of the dirty secrets. When the fabulously wealthy say they are financing something what they mean is they are spending other people's money and taking the credit.
I am suggesting that until something perturbs the neural net from it's default state, there is no sentience there. It needs to have been awake to some degree for at least an instant at some time to be anything more than a blob of neural net.
I suspect coordinated and consistent input would be required to get from sentience to intelligence. In order to reason, there must be something to reason about.
We do know that significant sensory input is a requirement to be conscious. Even the really incomplete deprivation in a sensory deprivation tank results in a dream like state in short order.
Having no neural connection to sensory organs would be a much more complete deprivation.
No, they were told they were buying a car with a specific mileage and performance. They had the right to presume that those figures could be had while the car complied with federal law.
If either of those is degraded in order to comply with the law, they were defrauded and have a right to compensation.
Personally, I find the trade of prescription drugs on the dark web more interesting. People buying inhalers over the dark web for $30 because they can't afford the $300 demanded at the pharmacy for the same thing.
That article also touches on how drugs get so expensive. We hear all about how many very expensive studies come to nothing and how the one success has to pay for all those failures. But in the case of Centocor, they had the golden opportunity to avoid the big costs by admitting early on that it wasn't all it should be. But they had "go fever" by then and so wasted boatloads of money trying to ram it through approval anyway. Perhaps if they would stop looking at their early studies as obstacles to be overcome and see them as valuable information to be considered instead, they wouldn't have to make up for so many losses when they have a success.
Seriously. Have you not seen the studies suggesting that a degree now barely pays for itself? Were you unaware of the growing trend towards calling the police for what used to be considered a simple school disciplinary incident? Surely you know that a criminal record limits opportunities!
There's plenty of blame to go around. Pharma doesn't get off the hook since they fabricated a study that claims one of their big sellers is safe when it is nothing of the sort.
Schools are the prime pushers of these drugs. Many parents oppose it but bend to pressure from the school. Nobody seems willing to even consider that all the no child left behind, time on task, zero tolerance crap is perhaps the problem. Surprise surprise, close off all ways to blow off steam and pressure builds to the breaking point. Or perhaps it's the way the social contract is being stepwise rewritten to read "all your base are belong to us". Study hard, get good grades, get a degree and find yourself unemployed and in perma-debt anyway.
Be honest. If you were in their shoes, just starting out, watching the news every night as recommended, not yet fully programmed to swallow the lies, might you be a bit depressed about it? Perhaps feel an urge to act out from time to time?
And that's the real crux of it. If we un-rigged the game so that small to medium businesses could get the fed to make some money appear out of thin air for them rather than having to pay rent to the financial sector, things would work a lot better.
No. This is the United States. We are SUPPOSED to presume innocence. Since he never at any time claimed it was a bomb, we cannot charge him with creating a hoax bomb, even if we suspect he might have claimed it was a bomb later. Precrime isn't a thing here.
Surely they have a civics class? Perhaps they should read the textbook themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree in general, but the question must be asked, at what point does it go from genuine dissent into outright fraud for gain? I wouldn't say it's necessarily time to invoke RICO, but perhaps it's time to ask how far is too far.
Keep in mind, they are not talking about organizations simply saying things like "we are not satisfied that the data supports the conclusion" or "we believe there are flaws in your raw data". They are talking about very deliberately setting out to produce fraudulent data and calculations to confound the issue (good old fraud).
I have to agree. I have to wonder what right any of the 'adults' involved have to tell any child "grow up" when clearly they never did. Are these people really allowed to be in charge of something?
They clearly have such a mechanism since you can't just bleed the bank dry if you get the account number of a deceased customer with no living relatives for them to tap. They just opt to be accomplices to a crime for their cut and take advantage of being too big to prosecute. That's why they are deathly afraid of anything that might change their status. They've forgotten how to make an honest living.
That's one of the dirty secrets. When the fabulously wealthy say they are financing something what they mean is they are spending other people's money and taking the credit.
I am suggesting that until something perturbs the neural net from it's default state, there is no sentience there. It needs to have been awake to some degree for at least an instant at some time to be anything more than a blob of neural net.
I suspect coordinated and consistent input would be required to get from sentience to intelligence. In order to reason, there must be something to reason about.
We do know that significant sensory input is a requirement to be conscious. Even the really incomplete deprivation in a sensory deprivation tank results in a dream like state in short order.
Having no neural connection to sensory organs would be a much more complete deprivation.
I once saw a home built trailer where the tailgate was slide to unlock. That was in the '70s and on a mobile device.
No, they were told they were buying a car with a specific mileage and performance. They had the right to presume that those figures could be had while the car complied with federal law.
If either of those is degraded in order to comply with the law, they were defrauded and have a right to compensation.
They will only if they are mandated to do so (if then).
Personally, I find the trade of prescription drugs on the dark web more interesting. People buying inhalers over the dark web for $30 because they can't afford the $300 demanded at the pharmacy for the same thing.
They should be, but since they only defraud the consumer, no action will be taken.
Actually, it is. It is fraud.
I would have hoped they would have to compensate any owner unsatisfied with the degraded performance after the update.
They do the same thing for newer cars in the U.S. as well, at least in some states.
That article also touches on how drugs get so expensive. We hear all about how many very expensive studies come to nothing and how the one success has to pay for all those failures. But in the case of Centocor, they had the golden opportunity to avoid the big costs by admitting early on that it wasn't all it should be. But they had "go fever" by then and so wasted boatloads of money trying to ram it through approval anyway. Perhaps if they would stop looking at their early studies as obstacles to be overcome and see them as valuable information to be considered instead, they wouldn't have to make up for so many losses when they have a success.
Seriously. Have you not seen the studies suggesting that a degree now barely pays for itself? Were you unaware of the growing trend towards calling the police for what used to be considered a simple school disciplinary incident? Surely you know that a criminal record limits opportunities!
There's plenty of blame to go around. Pharma doesn't get off the hook since they fabricated a study that claims one of their big sellers is safe when it is nothing of the sort.
Schools are the prime pushers of these drugs. Many parents oppose it but bend to pressure from the school. Nobody seems willing to even consider that all the no child left behind, time on task, zero tolerance crap is perhaps the problem. Surprise surprise, close off all ways to blow off steam and pressure builds to the breaking point. Or perhaps it's the way the social contract is being stepwise rewritten to read "all your base are belong to us". Study hard, get good grades, get a degree and find yourself unemployed and in perma-debt anyway.
Be honest. If you were in their shoes, just starting out, watching the news every night as recommended, not yet fully programmed to swallow the lies, might you be a bit depressed about it? Perhaps feel an urge to act out from time to time?
Excellent!
Since you don't want to do any math either this morning, call it double for the rich, zero for the rest.
First set a threshold such that poor and middle class don't typically owe any. Raise the rate on the wealthy to balance it.
And that's the real crux of it. If we un-rigged the game so that small to medium businesses could get the fed to make some money appear out of thin air for them rather than having to pay rent to the financial sector, things would work a lot better.
Add in property tax and recompute.
They can't use systemd in a car. Since there's a spare tire, you'd have to manually re-mount the wheels every time you started it.
If this school is typical, perhaps there's a reason the students fixate on their phones rather than the class.
No. This is the United States. We are SUPPOSED to presume innocence. Since he never at any time claimed it was a bomb, we cannot charge him with creating a hoax bomb, even if we suspect he might have claimed it was a bomb later. Precrime isn't a thing here.
Surely they have a civics class? Perhaps they should read the textbook themselves.