Blizzard has plenty of support infrastructure, it's just that they have an insane number of players. Last time I checked they had more then 2,000 people employed in WoW customer support, outnumbering the Devs 10:1.
What are you on about? Children have lots of rights and do count as citizens, they just lack the right to make their own decisions and vote until they're adults.
There's a reason you can't use child labour or beat your children anymore.
It might, but there exists no reason to believe that he's more likely to be extradited from Sweden (officially neutral) then where he is right now in the UK (Officially an ally of the US). If he was going to get extradited and tortured he would already have been.
They were convicted for accessory to copyright infringement, which was a pretty accurate description of what they were doing. What I'm saying is that giving out information where you can buy drugs can be accessory to drug crime.
What they named their site and how they ridiculed DCMA requests does have bearing, because it establishes motive. What they hoped for and their legal defense was built on was being considered a neutral third party that has no responsibility for the contents of the site, but they fucked that up.
No they can't, you have no idea how the legal system works do you? They can't just make up laws at a whim, they have to get them through the riksdag which takes bloody ages and like all civilized countries it can't be applied retroactively.
Barely anyone expected the Pirate Bay to get through that trial, not even their own attorneys if you look at the pathetic defenses they started to try once they realized it was for real and regardless of what you think about copyright laws what they were charged for makes sense. When you name your site "The pirate bay" and make fun of DMCA requests it's pretty hard to claim you're an innocent 3rd party that wasn't aware of all the pirating your service was used for.
Whatever influence the US may or may not have, Sweden believe or not actually does have laws of it's own, and those make it illegal to extradite people unless there's guarantees they'll be treated well.
If some idiot decides to send him away anyhow then that idiot will be in very extensive legal troubles of his own.
The worst thing ever is when two trucks drive next to eachother because they have a maximum speed limit lower then the highways so the entire road crawls. But imagine how much you'd save in fuel costs if you really could focus the rage and make it run the engine for you.
If you think about it logically, the jerks cutting in don't really lose you much time on your trip though it gets pretty annoying to keep having to rebuild a safe distance each time.
I sometimes wonder how much better traffic would be if it was legal to mount massive backwards facing spikes on your vehicle. Sure tailgate me, but it's not my fault if you get impaled when I hit my brakes:=)
So you link me to something that's completely unrelated to tailgating under normal conditions to prove what exactly? Your own link even states that the best way to prevent stop and go traffic is by having a good distance to the car infront of you so you don't have to stop all the time.
You don't need to tailgate to signal that you want him to move over, either he's going to notice that you're faster and let you through, in which case you don't need to tailgate, or he's not, in which case all the tailgating is doing is endangering both of your lives.
And you are getting me wrong, I'm not saying I like driving slow in the fast lane, I'm saying that if you're tailgating you're a fucking retard that deserves to die, however since I don't want to die with you, I want you to stop tailgating because it's moronic.
If I can drive 80 MPH on a 70 mph road without tailgating, then so can you. It's not hard, keeping a safe distance to the car in-front of you isn't rocket science and doesn't even necessarily require you to slow down.
You fail at both driving and physics. To get a safe distance to the car infront of you you only need to slow down for 5 seconds at most then you can match speed with car infront of you, there is no recursive slow down for the entire road.
"It takes two to tailgate, a tailgater and a tailgatee. As I said, accidents usually aren't caused by one single cause, in most cases if just one of a set of circumstances didn't happen there would be no accident."
That's like saying it takes two to punch someone, the puncher and the punchee. It's retarded. There exists none, zero, zip, nada excuse to tailgate. There exists no situation where you're better off tailgating the person infront of you, you don't even get to your destination faster.
And for the record it is already illegal in most of the world to drive slow in the left lane (Usually under some law conserning disrupting traffic ) however that only applies if he's driving slower then the limit, if you think that's to slow then that's your problem. However there's never really any reason to go faster, suppose you drive at 110 on a 100 mph road, now your 30 minute trip takes 27 minutes, who cares? Those 3 minutes are a rounding error of your day.
What the heck are you talking about? Herd Immunity is the concept that as long as a significant amount of the 'herd' are immune to the disease, then the disease can't effectively spread which in practice helps the non-immune members of the herd as well.
This means that even though you don't take your vaccine for whatever reason, you're still safe as long as everyone else does.
Because it's true. You constantly see people that claim they're libertarians while preaching that the free market will fix 'everything'. On another forum I saw a person claim that "All" regulation is "Evil", no exceptions, obviously they're either ignorant or crazy but those are the people that give libertarians such a bad rep.
I have the exact opposite opinion. I think you should get punished for your action not the result. The drunk driver that manages to get home safely should get the exact same punishment as the drunk driver that accidentally runs into 35 people and blows up a gas station. Why should you escape jail just because you're lucky? How the heck is that justice? That's fucking gambling.
I wonder why more countries don't do like Sweden, here the breath-analyzer isn't proof of anything, if its positive you're sent to the police station to take a blood test (That counts as evidence), if you refuse you're sent to the police station for the blood test as well, if its false then you're free to go. There's no downside to taking the test.
Looking at the title of the story I thought it would be something funky, but the entire story is just that they want to make the periodic table slightly more accurate for atoms that have isotopes. Everyone that has gone through high school chemistry should already know that that for unstable elements the table reference is an average at best.
This story is basically "ZOMG, it turns out that the weight of my mac and cheese isn't constant because the ratio of cheese to mac can vary!!!"
[quote] Just this morning I read this story about the pretty crappy way immigrants are treated in Germany. And I know for a fact that in Italy it's even worse, they are very draconian in that regard. And lately in the news are all those budget cuts in Ireland France UK and other EU countries, due to their huge government debt problem... cuts in SOCIAL BENEFITS! Reduced wealth redistribution. This is actually happening in Europe as we speak. It would be UNIMAGINABLE in the USA still, there is no way in hell there will ever be any reduction in welfare or unemployment or healthcare benefits..... at least not while Obama and Pelosi and Reid are still alive. So all in all I would say in many respects, USA is quite liberal even compared to Eurozone. [/quote] The Eurozone isn't liberal, it's socialist. When did Liberal start meaning Socialist in the US anyhow? In the saner parts of the world it's the right wing that's liberal because liberalism is about liberty (Which you've now invented the word Libertarian for instead, it's just so weird)
Anyhow it makes a lot of sense that the European governments are cutting social benefits and that's because unlike the US their governing bodies aren't capable of being deadlocked in the same fashion the US one is. While many of the governments are far far to the left of the US, they still realize that they have to be fiscally responsible otherwise they'll end up like the PIIGS, thus cutting social benefits is the only thing they can do, the question is just/which/ social benefits.
Most European governments wouldn't dream of doing the stuff you're doing in the US with the democrats raising social benefits without raising taxes and the republicans lowering taxes without lowering social benefits, obviously that's so fiscally irresponsible that you could get nightmares.
People who have or are planning to have children are a huge segment of the vote base and having children costs a lot of money. That's why child subsidies will never be touched.
"By your logic, if the news outlets, distribution channels and magazines were owned by one or two large corporations, then the same rules would apply in the real world.... oh wait..."
They would actually. Most civilized countries have all sorts of rules and laws that forces monopolies or near monopolies to play nice with others.
Slashdot Mirror
Blizzard has plenty of support infrastructure, it's just that they have an insane number of players. Last time I checked they had more then 2,000 people employed in WoW customer support, outnumbering the Devs 10:1.
What are you on about? Children have lots of rights and do count as citizens, they just lack the right to make their own decisions and vote until they're adults.
There's a reason you can't use child labour or beat your children anymore.
It might, but there exists no reason to believe that he's more likely to be extradited from Sweden (officially neutral) then where he is right now in the UK (Officially an ally of the US). If he was going to get extradited and tortured he would already have been.
As noted in the wikipedia article what they did was illegal, although I'm not sure what consequences it had for the people responsible.
They were convicted for accessory to copyright infringement, which was a pretty accurate description of what they were doing. What I'm saying is that giving out information where you can buy drugs can be accessory to drug crime.
What they named their site and how they ridiculed DCMA requests does have bearing, because it establishes motive. What they hoped for and their legal defense was built on was being considered a neutral third party that has no responsibility for the contents of the site, but they fucked that up.
No they can't, you have no idea how the legal system works do you? They can't just make up laws at a whim, they have to get them through the riksdag which takes bloody ages and like all civilized countries it can't be applied retroactively.
Barely anyone expected the Pirate Bay to get through that trial, not even their own attorneys if you look at the pathetic defenses they started to try once they realized it was for real and regardless of what you think about copyright laws what they were charged for makes sense. When you name your site "The pirate bay" and make fun of DMCA requests it's pretty hard to claim you're an innocent 3rd party that wasn't aware of all the pirating your service was used for.
Whatever influence the US may or may not have, Sweden believe or not actually does have laws of it's own, and those make it illegal to extradite people unless there's guarantees they'll be treated well.
If some idiot decides to send him away anyhow then that idiot will be in very extensive legal troubles of his own.
No there isn't, Assange is under no risk of getting extracted to the USA.
The worst thing ever is when two trucks drive next to eachother because they have a maximum speed limit lower then the highways so the entire road crawls. But imagine how much you'd save in fuel costs if you really could focus the rage and make it run the engine for you.
If you think about it logically, the jerks cutting in don't really lose you much time on your trip though it gets pretty annoying to keep having to rebuild a safe distance each time.
I sometimes wonder how much better traffic would be if it was legal to mount massive backwards facing spikes on your vehicle. Sure tailgate me, but it's not my fault if you get impaled when I hit my brakes :=)
So you link me to something that's completely unrelated to tailgating under normal conditions to prove what exactly? Your own link even states that the best way to prevent stop and go traffic is by having a good distance to the car infront of you so you don't have to stop all the time.
You don't need to tailgate to signal that you want him to move over, either he's going to notice that you're faster and let you through, in which case you don't need to tailgate, or he's not, in which case all the tailgating is doing is endangering both of your lives.
And you are getting me wrong, I'm not saying I like driving slow in the fast lane, I'm saying that if you're tailgating you're a fucking retard that deserves to die, however since I don't want to die with you, I want you to stop tailgating because it's moronic.
If I can drive 80 MPH on a 70 mph road without tailgating, then so can you. It's not hard, keeping a safe distance to the car in-front of you isn't rocket science and doesn't even necessarily require you to slow down.
Actually fuel efficiency is worse at lower speeds, but don't let facts get in your way or anything.
You fail at both driving and physics. To get a safe distance to the car infront of you you only need to slow down for 5 seconds at most then you can match speed with car infront of you, there is no recursive slow down for the entire road.
"It takes two to tailgate, a tailgater and a tailgatee. As I said, accidents usually aren't caused by one single cause, in most cases if just one of a set of circumstances didn't happen there would be no accident."
That's like saying it takes two to punch someone, the puncher and the punchee. It's retarded. There exists none, zero, zip, nada excuse to tailgate. There exists no situation where you're better off tailgating the person infront of you, you don't even get to your destination faster.
And for the record it is already illegal in most of the world to drive slow in the left lane (Usually under some law conserning disrupting traffic ) however that only applies if he's driving slower then the limit, if you think that's to slow then that's your problem. However there's never really any reason to go faster, suppose you drive at 110 on a 100 mph road, now your 30 minute trip takes 27 minutes, who cares? Those 3 minutes are a rounding error of your day.
Countries generally don't give a flying shit about such clauses. The law always overrides individual agreements.
I suspect the reason that different countries give different numbers of vaccines is because they have different numbers of native diseases?
What the heck are you talking about? Herd Immunity is the concept that as long as a significant amount of the 'herd' are immune to the disease, then the disease can't effectively spread which in practice helps the non-immune members of the herd as well.
This means that even though you don't take your vaccine for whatever reason, you're still safe as long as everyone else does.
Because it's true. You constantly see people that claim they're libertarians while preaching that the free market will fix 'everything'. On another forum I saw a person claim that "All" regulation is "Evil", no exceptions, obviously they're either ignorant or crazy but those are the people that give libertarians such a bad rep.
I have the exact opposite opinion. I think you should get punished for your action not the result. The drunk driver that manages to get home safely should get the exact same punishment as the drunk driver that accidentally runs into 35 people and blows up a gas station. Why should you escape jail just because you're lucky? How the heck is that justice? That's fucking gambling.
I wonder why more countries don't do like Sweden, here the breath-analyzer isn't proof of anything, if its positive you're sent to the police station to take a blood test (That counts as evidence), if you refuse you're sent to the police station for the blood test as well, if its false then you're free to go. There's no downside to taking the test.
Looking at the title of the story I thought it would be something funky, but the entire story is just that they want to make the periodic table slightly more accurate for atoms that have isotopes. Everyone that has gone through high school chemistry should already know that that for unstable elements the table reference is an average at best.
This story is basically "ZOMG, it turns out that the weight of my mac and cheese isn't constant because the ratio of cheese to mac can vary!!!"
[quote]
Just this morning I read this story about the pretty crappy way immigrants are treated in Germany. And I know for a fact that in Italy it's even worse, they are very draconian in that regard. And lately in the news are all those budget cuts in Ireland France UK and other EU countries, due to their huge government debt problem... cuts in SOCIAL BENEFITS! Reduced wealth redistribution. This is actually happening in Europe as we speak. It would be UNIMAGINABLE in the USA still, there is no way in hell there will ever be any reduction in welfare or unemployment or healthcare benefits..... at least not while Obama and Pelosi and Reid are still alive. So all in all I would say in many respects, USA is quite liberal even compared to Eurozone.
[/quote]
The Eurozone isn't liberal, it's socialist. When did Liberal start meaning Socialist in the US anyhow? In the saner parts of the world it's the right wing that's liberal because liberalism is about liberty (Which you've now invented the word Libertarian for instead, it's just so weird)
Anyhow it makes a lot of sense that the European governments are cutting social benefits and that's because unlike the US their governing bodies aren't capable of being deadlocked in the same fashion the US one is. While many of the governments are far far to the left of the US, they still realize that they have to be fiscally responsible otherwise they'll end up like the PIIGS, thus cutting social benefits is the only thing they can do, the question is just /which/ social benefits.
Most European governments wouldn't dream of doing the stuff you're doing in the US with the democrats raising social benefits without raising taxes and the republicans lowering taxes without lowering social benefits, obviously that's so fiscally irresponsible that you could get nightmares.
People who have or are planning to have children are a huge segment of the vote base and having children costs a lot of money. That's why child subsidies will never be touched.
"By your logic, if the news outlets, distribution channels and magazines were owned by one or two large corporations, then the same rules would apply in the real world.... oh wait..."
They would actually. Most civilized countries have all sorts of rules and laws that forces monopolies or near monopolies to play nice with others.