When I can buy a DVD for the price of a cinema ticket + parking + snacks
Cinema ticket is about $8. Parking is usually around $2-- this is in Chinatown, in Washington DC-- and assumes youre not a moron using $20 garage parking. Elsewhere (suburbs) its usually free, and many many many places do it for free with validation.
And are you seriously comparing the price of an outing with parking and food to the price of a dvd? Thats not even close to fair.
Movie theatres are expensive as others have said, and I generally prefer to get the DVD and avoid the price + hassle, but it really bugs the heck out of me when people try to twist things to prove something thats just not true. Theres no way you can buy a new in-theatre movie as a dvd for less than the price of the cinema ticket, and its dishonest for you to try to pretend otherwise by throwing in "snacks" and "parking".
. People who download movies usually cannot afford to go and see them,
Ba-loney.
Every single person I know who downloads movies has a full time job, a vehicle, a cellphone, pays insurance, goes out regularly, etc. And youre telling me they cant afford a movie?
Being against IP or the RIAA or the MPAA doesnt excuse spouting flat out lies. Unless you have a source to back up that rather preposterous statement you made?
There is some degree of sense to it, though; I am very unlikely to ever vote democrat, mostly because I fundamentally disagree with them on the role and proper size of government.
The problem is how you basically have two people you can vote for today who will have a chance of being elected.
Why don't laws, when tested, only need a majority of the Supremes to pass them? Shouldn't any decent law require unanimous approval of the supreme court to be good enough to apply to everyone?
Youre citing a single study, whose very title calls the brains in question "adult". It also does not claim that the brain "isnt fully developed", merely that it continues to change.
The adults in the situation should bear more responsibility than the minors.
Historically, 15-year olds were considered adults (by several years), and responsible for their actions. I am not sure that human physiology has changed so significantly in the last few hundred years that we can pretend that these students cheating have no responsibility.
Calling them children seems to be just playing with words and equivocating. I dont believe that the legal definition of minor vs adult has any bearing on whether or not the person can really be considered a "child", or exempt from responsibility. It is my opinion that, as regards decision making, most people's thinking is as fully developed by the end of highschool as it will ever be; from then on, they simply add knowledge and experience.
Finally, why do you think the adults know better? Do you think tolerating in the slightest degree dishonesty in testing helps those students learn their lesson? Heres a tough life fact: failure and punishment build character. Take them away, and you will end with a spineless, convictionless, irresponsible generation.
Which is why we have things like PKI infrastructures, pre-shared keys, and RSA tokens. At least there you know what the threat is, and can fortify around it.
Im not sure Ive ever heard of a scenario where someone broke into a secure network by bruteforcing both the PKS and the secondary form of authentication; invariably, breaches are because someone made a stupid mistake like getting a virus, or by letting someone walk out with un-secured media, or connecting a wifi device to the secured network.
And with your parallel infrastructure, the problem is that (unless you have other control mechanisms in place) a single wifi device on the network compromises the security of the whole segment.
And you never addressed what _I_ said. I wasnt backing up GP's assertion, I was noting that your post was a phenomenal fallacy-- you presented a false dichotomy and resorted to ridicule, without even addressing what he was talking about.
But of course, I cant have simply been irked by the fallacy; clearly, if I attack your post as being garbage, it must mean that I agreed with him, right?
Just because you can show its equally rational to donate under each scenario, doesnt mean people will. I know people who do/have donated because of the deduction.
but the government needs to overhaul the system of taxation to a simple system without loopholes
Just recognize what some (many?) of these loopholes are: incentives to encourage certain desirable behaviors. Eg: charity deductions, environmentalism write-offs, tax credits for keeping jobs domestic, etc.
So if you get rid of all tax loopholes, dont be suprised when some of those behaviors cease.
Thats what VPNs and ACLs are for. You dont think you could securely configure VPNs and ACLs for less than it would cost for a parallel infrastructure? What happens when someone bridges a wifi device onto your network?
If ALL the students in a class feel they have to take performance enhancing drugs just to keep up, then we are putting students into an exceptionally damaging and destructive learning environment.
And this, friends, is what we call "spin". The topic was the fact that many students cheat, and parent has flipped this into the schools being the problem. Well done, now the students dont have to take personal responsibility!
Er, the fracking will NOT result in a higher intensity earthquake-- think about the amount of energy required to move the amount of earth as much as a 5.6 does. Then explain to me how the amount of liquid injected during fracking is going to deliver that amount of energy.
For the record, a quick googling indicates that a 5.0 involves about as much energy as released by the Hiroshima A-bomb-- 2 * 10^12 joules.
Earthquakes that otherwise might well not have happened within the lifespan of human civilization.
Im sure one could argue that those earthquakes WOULD have happened, but they wouldnt have been 5.6 or 2.1s-- they would have been 7.5s or 8.3s. So it seems like its kind of a wash to say whether or not its doing ultimate good or bad to trigger them early/
Slashdot Mirror
When I can buy a DVD for the price of a cinema ticket + parking + snacks
Cinema ticket is about $8. Parking is usually around $2-- this is in Chinatown, in Washington DC-- and assumes youre not a moron using $20 garage parking. Elsewhere (suburbs) its usually free, and many many many places do it for free with validation.
And are you seriously comparing the price of an outing with parking and food to the price of a dvd? Thats not even close to fair.
Movie theatres are expensive as others have said, and I generally prefer to get the DVD and avoid the price + hassle, but it really bugs the heck out of me when people try to twist things to prove something thats just not true. Theres no way you can buy a new in-theatre movie as a dvd for less than the price of the cinema ticket, and its dishonest for you to try to pretend otherwise by throwing in "snacks" and "parking".
. People who download movies usually cannot afford to go and see them,
Ba-loney.
Every single person I know who downloads movies has a full time job, a vehicle, a cellphone, pays insurance, goes out regularly, etc. And youre telling me they cant afford a movie?
Being against IP or the RIAA or the MPAA doesnt excuse spouting flat out lies. Unless you have a source to back up that rather preposterous statement you made?
It can also be called blackmail.
Extortion perhaps, but not blackmail: blackmail is when someone threatens to make private information public if you do not comply with their wishes.
You mean the ones that already do?
The US doesn't make ANYTHING
Ford will be so disappointed to hear that.
There is some degree of sense to it, though; I am very unlikely to ever vote democrat, mostly because I fundamentally disagree with them on the role and proper size of government.
The problem is how you basically have two people you can vote for today who will have a chance of being elected.
Why don't laws, when tested, only need a majority of the Supremes to pass them? Shouldn't any decent law require unanimous approval of the supreme court to be good enough to apply to everyone?
Because no decisions would ever get reached.
How does that address judges legislating from the bench?
this is based on Transparency International's 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index
Corruption Perceptions Index
Perceptions
You were saying?
While I might be taking a bit of liberty
Why yes, you were.
The CPI measures perception of corruption due to the difficulty of measuring absolute levels of corruption.
Guess that list doesnt say what you thought it said.
Wait, so who's on first?
What baffles me in this case is that they COULD HAVE GOTTEN A WARRANT!
How do you know they didnt?
Im pretty sure Canonical gets no money no matter which hardware you buy, and that the Windows 8 GUI is LESS gpu intensive than 7's.
So no, not THIS.
Youre citing a single study, whose very title calls the brains in question "adult". It also does not claim that the brain "isnt fully developed", merely that it continues to change.
Color me unconvinced.
The adults in the situation should bear more responsibility than the minors.
Historically, 15-year olds were considered adults (by several years), and responsible for their actions. I am not sure that human physiology has changed so significantly in the last few hundred years that we can pretend that these students cheating have no responsibility.
Calling them children seems to be just playing with words and equivocating. I dont believe that the legal definition of minor vs adult has any bearing on whether or not the person can really be considered a "child", or exempt from responsibility. It is my opinion that, as regards decision making, most people's thinking is as fully developed by the end of highschool as it will ever be; from then on, they simply add knowledge and experience.
Finally, why do you think the adults know better? Do you think tolerating in the slightest degree dishonesty in testing helps those students learn their lesson? Heres a tough life fact: failure and punishment build character. Take them away, and you will end with a spineless, convictionless, irresponsible generation.
Not all of those connections will be legitimate
Which is why we have things like PKI infrastructures, pre-shared keys, and RSA tokens. At least there you know what the threat is, and can fortify around it.
Im not sure Ive ever heard of a scenario where someone broke into a secure network by bruteforcing both the PKS and the secondary form of authentication; invariably, breaches are because someone made a stupid mistake like getting a virus, or by letting someone walk out with un-secured media, or connecting a wifi device to the secured network.
And with your parallel infrastructure, the problem is that (unless you have other control mechanisms in place) a single wifi device on the network compromises the security of the whole segment.
And you never addressed what _I_ said. I wasnt backing up GP's assertion, I was noting that your post was a phenomenal fallacy-- you presented a false dichotomy and resorted to ridicule, without even addressing what he was talking about.
But of course, I cant have simply been irked by the fallacy; clearly, if I attack your post as being garbage, it must mean that I agreed with him, right?
Just because you can show its equally rational to donate under each scenario, doesnt mean people will. I know people who do /have donated because of the deduction.
but the government needs to overhaul the system of taxation to a simple system without loopholes
Just recognize what some (many?) of these loopholes are: incentives to encourage certain desirable behaviors. Eg: charity deductions, environmentalism write-offs, tax credits for keeping jobs domestic, etc.
So if you get rid of all tax loopholes, dont be suprised when some of those behaviors cease.
Wow, fallacy alert. Thats totally not what parent said; he simply said that trading being less profitable would not help things.
Thats what VPNs and ACLs are for. You dont think you could securely configure VPNs and ACLs for less than it would cost for a parallel infrastructure? What happens when someone bridges a wifi device onto your network?
If ALL the students in a class feel they have to take performance enhancing drugs just to keep up, then we are putting students into an exceptionally damaging and destructive learning environment.
And this, friends, is what we call "spin". The topic was the fact that many students cheat, and parent has flipped this into the schools being the problem. Well done, now the students dont have to take personal responsibility!
Er, the fracking will NOT result in a higher intensity earthquake-- think about the amount of energy required to move the amount of earth as much as a 5.6 does. Then explain to me how the amount of liquid injected during fracking is going to deliver that amount of energy.
For the record, a quick googling indicates that a 5.0 involves about as much energy as released by the Hiroshima A-bomb-- 2 * 10^12 joules.
Because the constitution is a living document and changes with the ages, I think is the standard answer.
I think Ron Paul is a little crazy in more than one way, but he certainly gets that part right.
Earthquakes that otherwise might well not have happened within the lifespan of human civilization.
Im sure one could argue that those earthquakes WOULD have happened, but they wouldnt have been 5.6 or 2.1s-- they would have been 7.5s or 8.3s. So it seems like its kind of a wash to say whether or not its doing ultimate good or bad to trigger them early/