This is the short (and correct) answer to the ridiculously long-winded submission. Beyond simple torture, the Fifth Amendment (via supremacy) also prevents states from passing laws which make it a crime to fail to confess to a crime.
A reason for opposing testing as the sole metric is that no one yet has found a completely fair and practical way to do it. Additionally, statewide testing usually means that all but the brightest students have to spend the majority of their schooling being taught how to take the test, rather than actually learning anything.
I don't quite understand the level of hate against the MPAA.
I understand the hate against the RIAA, because the only real cost in producing a record is equipment, which is normally handled by the small recording studios anyway (which typically get paid at the point of recording). In the age of digital distribution, the RIAA seems pointless, since it does little to protect artists but seems to only benefit outdated middle men.
But at the moment, bankrolling a Hollywood-quality movie is no small undertaking; if the movie studios have no way of knowing that they'll recoup expenses, how can they shell out the money? (As an aside: we're already seeing some of this manifested as an aversion to financing risk-taking movies. Hence the endless sequels, remakes, and formulaic movies.). While I'll concede that the MPAA members have taken a very long time to make it easy to legally download movies (feeding piracy in the meantime), we're not at the point where high-quality movies can be made without the middle men surviving and taking in profits.
In the future, I'm sure the MPAA will become just as useless and antiquated as the RIAA. But for now, they serve a useful purpose.
But oil is consumed, and is absolutely certain to run out. Lithium can be recovered by recharging the cell, and even once the cell reaches the end of its lifetime, the lithium hasn't gone anywhere and could be recovered.
Besides, no one familiar with energy economics is pushing lithium-ion/next-gen for large-scale installations (read: grid storage), which is where the plan to use lithium-ion would certainly unravel. Once you move larger than a car, fuel cells are much more feasible.
The point of SETI@home is to make use of otherwise unused CPU time. This new application is much more hands-on, allowing for human-based pattern identification (we are awfully good at that, after all).
It happens further up the chain, too: I had a professor in undergrad who found out, from his TA, that a good percentage of students were cheating on his exams. He went berserk, called out every single one of them, and told them they were receiving an "F" for the term.
Turns out a couple of them had a nice little chat with the department chair, and suddenly the professor was instructed to allow them back into class, and give them no less than a "D" on the exam (which would allow them to pass the class; only a 2.0 average was required to graduate). I guess keeping the matriculation rate high among upperclassmen meant more to the department than academic honesty...
Hi, I can read in-depth and reference multiple law requirements at the same time thanks to tabbed browsing.
Can you? In the same article (penal code) you cited:
(f) An offense under Subsection (a)(3) or (a-1)(3) or (4) is a felony of the third degree when the conduct is committed intentionally or knowingly, except that an offense under Subsection (a)(3) is a felony of the second degree when the conduct is committed intentionally or knowingly and the victim is a disabled individual residing in a center, as defined by Section 555.001, Health and Safety Code, or in a facility licensed under Chapter 252, Health and Safety Code, and the actor is an employee of the center or facility whose employment involved providing direct care for the victim. When the conduct is engaged in recklessly, the offense is a state jail felony.
(a)(3) refers to
(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence, by act or intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly by omission, causes to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual:
(1) serious bodily injury;
(2) serious mental deficiency, impairment, or injury; or
(3) bodily injury.
Note that I did not hightlight (a)(1), which refers to just a bit more than bruises. In the same section:
(1) "Child" means a person 14 years of age or younger.
(2) "Elderly individual" means a person 65 years of age or older.
(3) "Disabled individual" means a person older than 14 years of age who by reason of age or physical or mental disease, defect, or injury is substantially unable to protect himself from harm or to provide food, shelter, or medical care for himself.
By this law, which you cited, the girl was not a child. She was, however, disabled, so (a)(3) is the area you should be looking at. Seems like this is what the district attorney knew, which is why the statue of limitations expired. This all means that the statute of limitations is 5 years, since it was not a first-degree felony.
You make the claim in a sub-post that this crime is somehow elevated to a first-degree felony. Care to cite how? The law seems to spell things out pretty clearly here.
According to a quote from the district attorney from the Texas county in question:
"I would expect that yeah, charges would have been pursued but for the inability to proceed due to the statute of limitations," Flanigan said Friday. "You know, whether that would have been a felony or a misdemeanor charge I can't say but I think there would've been some action pursued."
Also according to the article:
Angela Dodge, a U.S. attorney's office spokeswoman, said prosecutors determined there was no federal crime depicted on the 2004 video of Aransas County Court-at-Law Judge William Adams.
According to the link you posted (emphasis mine):
Five Years
Theft, burglary, robbery; kidnapping; injury to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual that is not punishable as a felony of the first degree under Section 22.04, Penal Code; abandoning or endangering a child; or insurance fraud;
I don't agree with beating children, and especially disabled children, but the crime was not severe enough under current laws to be a felony, and the statute of limitations expired.
Yes, the Mainstream Media is carefully covering up the biggest story, copyright infringement, and instead focusing on the lesser evil, battery against a 16-year-old suffering from ataxic cerebral palsy.
Capacitors have low energy density but very high rate capability. Batteries have much higher energy densities but lower rate capability. The two technologies serve different purposes, but can also complement each other.
Also, I know of many photocatalysts that conduct water splitting, though many require a light sensitizer (way too complex to explain when I'm this tired) or a separate semiconductor with an appropriate band gap. The only thing that's potentially exciting for the photocatalysis guys I know is that the doped semiconductor could serve as a complete system that could beat other complete systems (like titania)...but only experimentation will say for sure.
ChE here. I read the article (hooray for university journal access), and I know exactly why there's so much hedging: this is a purely computational, DFT paper, with no experimental results to back it up. In the academic world this is not particularly uncommon, and DFT studies are an amazingly powerful tool to identify (potentially) optimal material combinations that would take researchers centuries to discover by systematic experimentation. But that's just it: "potentially". DFT often (necessarily) overlooks potential external effects that only occur in real systems. Somebody higher up really jumped the gun by making a full press release on a typical journal article in the photocatalysis field.
...is a whole lot of hits. Even if Google wanted Chrome to dominate, I still don't think they'd want to let all of Firefox users who use whatever's in the search bar out of convenience leave for another engine.
Of course, the article makes this pretty clear, but why ruin the Slashdot tradition and publish a descriptive, non-flamebait summary?
Slashdot Mirror
I particularly like all of the "TODO" comments in production code.
Ok, where in the hell are you getting that the victim was wearing dark clothing?
This is the short (and correct) answer to the ridiculously long-winded submission. Beyond simple torture, the Fifth Amendment (via supremacy) also prevents states from passing laws which make it a crime to fail to confess to a crime.
But wait: shouldn't it be the charge of the plaintiff to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the speech was indeed libel (false and malicious)?
To be fair, Chrome is at version 23 now. I'd say no one thinks of that browser as the "grandfather".
Really, people put way too much stock in version numbers, especially for projects with rapid release cycles.
And so begins the Great War of Semantics (undeclared)!
*gets popcorn*
A reason for opposing testing as the sole metric is that no one yet has found a completely fair and practical way to do it. Additionally, statewide testing usually means that all but the brightest students have to spend the majority of their schooling being taught how to take the test, rather than actually learning anything.
It's Facebook Connect, which is a pretty standard login method now...
I don't quite understand the level of hate against the MPAA.
I understand the hate against the RIAA, because the only real cost in producing a record is equipment, which is normally handled by the small recording studios anyway (which typically get paid at the point of recording). In the age of digital distribution, the RIAA seems pointless, since it does little to protect artists but seems to only benefit outdated middle men.
But at the moment, bankrolling a Hollywood-quality movie is no small undertaking; if the movie studios have no way of knowing that they'll recoup expenses, how can they shell out the money? (As an aside: we're already seeing some of this manifested as an aversion to financing risk-taking movies. Hence the endless sequels, remakes, and formulaic movies.). While I'll concede that the MPAA members have taken a very long time to make it easy to legally download movies (feeding piracy in the meantime), we're not at the point where high-quality movies can be made without the middle men surviving and taking in profits.
In the future, I'm sure the MPAA will become just as useless and antiquated as the RIAA. But for now, they serve a useful purpose.
But oil is consumed, and is absolutely certain to run out. Lithium can be recovered by recharging the cell, and even once the cell reaches the end of its lifetime, the lithium hasn't gone anywhere and could be recovered.
Besides, no one familiar with energy economics is pushing lithium-ion/next-gen for large-scale installations (read: grid storage), which is where the plan to use lithium-ion would certainly unravel. Once you move larger than a car, fuel cells are much more feasible.
The point of SETI@home is to make use of otherwise unused CPU time. This new application is much more hands-on, allowing for human-based pattern identification (we are awfully good at that, after all).
It happens further up the chain, too: I had a professor in undergrad who found out, from his TA, that a good percentage of students were cheating on his exams. He went berserk, called out every single one of them, and told them they were receiving an "F" for the term.
Turns out a couple of them had a nice little chat with the department chair, and suddenly the professor was instructed to allow them back into class, and give them no less than a "D" on the exam (which would allow them to pass the class; only a 2.0 average was required to graduate). I guess keeping the matriculation rate high among upperclassmen meant more to the department than academic honesty...
Hi, I can read in-depth and reference multiple law requirements at the same time thanks to tabbed browsing.
Can you? In the same article (penal code) you cited:
(f) An offense under Subsection (a)(3) or (a-1)(3) or (4) is a felony of the third degree when the conduct is committed intentionally or knowingly, except that an offense under Subsection (a)(3) is a felony of the second degree when the conduct is committed intentionally or knowingly and the victim is a disabled individual residing in a center, as defined by Section 555.001, Health and Safety Code, or in a facility licensed under Chapter 252, Health and Safety Code, and the actor is an employee of the center or facility whose employment involved providing direct care for the victim. When the conduct is engaged in recklessly, the offense is a state jail felony.
(a)(3) refers to
(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence, by act or intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly by omission, causes to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual:
(1) serious bodily injury;
(2) serious mental deficiency, impairment, or injury; or
(3) bodily injury.
Note that I did not hightlight (a)(1), which refers to just a bit more than bruises. In the same section:
(1) "Child" means a person 14 years of age or younger.
(2) "Elderly individual" means a person 65 years of age or older.
(3) "Disabled individual" means a person older than 14 years of age who by reason of age or physical or mental disease, defect, or injury is substantially unable to protect himself from harm or to provide food, shelter, or medical care for himself.
By this law, which you cited, the girl was not a child. She was, however, disabled, so (a)(3) is the area you should be looking at. Seems like this is what the district attorney knew, which is why the statue of limitations expired. This all means that the statute of limitations is 5 years, since it was not a first-degree felony.
You make the claim in a sub-post that this crime is somehow elevated to a first-degree felony. Care to cite how? The law seems to spell things out pretty clearly here.
According to a quote from the district attorney from the Texas county in question:
"I would expect that yeah, charges would have been pursued but for the inability to proceed due to the statute of limitations," Flanigan said Friday. "You know, whether that would have been a felony or a misdemeanor charge I can't say but I think there would've been some action pursued."
Also according to the article:
Angela Dodge, a U.S. attorney's office spokeswoman, said prosecutors determined there was no federal crime depicted on the 2004 video of Aransas County Court-at-Law Judge William Adams.
According to the link you posted (emphasis mine):
Five Years
Theft, burglary, robbery; kidnapping; injury to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual that is not punishable as a felony of the first degree under Section 22.04, Penal Code; abandoning or endangering a child; or insurance fraud;
I don't agree with beating children, and especially disabled children, but the crime was not severe enough under current laws to be a felony, and the statute of limitations expired.
Yes, the Mainstream Media is carefully covering up the biggest story, copyright infringement, and instead focusing on the lesser evil, battery against a 16-year-old suffering from ataxic cerebral palsy.
Nothing takes the fun out of gambling like a statistics class.
Depends which game you're gambling on...
Capacitors have low energy density but very high rate capability. Batteries have much higher energy densities but lower rate capability. The two technologies serve different purposes, but can also complement each other.
The article mentions that they discovered lies on Zhao's citizenship application, and thus invalidated it.
Also, I know of many photocatalysts that conduct water splitting, though many require a light sensitizer (way too complex to explain when I'm this tired) or a separate semiconductor with an appropriate band gap. The only thing that's potentially exciting for the photocatalysis guys I know is that the doped semiconductor could serve as a complete system that could beat other complete systems (like titania)...but only experimentation will say for sure.
ChE here. I read the article (hooray for university journal access), and I know exactly why there's so much hedging: this is a purely computational, DFT paper, with no experimental results to back it up. In the academic world this is not particularly uncommon, and DFT studies are an amazingly powerful tool to identify (potentially) optimal material combinations that would take researchers centuries to discover by systematic experimentation. But that's just it: "potentially". DFT often (necessarily) overlooks potential external effects that only occur in real systems. Somebody higher up really jumped the gun by making a full press release on a typical journal article in the photocatalysis field.
...is a whole lot of hits. Even if Google wanted Chrome to dominate, I still don't think they'd want to let all of Firefox users who use whatever's in the search bar out of convenience leave for another engine.
Of course, the article makes this pretty clear, but why ruin the Slashdot tradition and publish a descriptive, non-flamebait summary?
The inability to see this is only a lack of imagination.
I wouldn't call it a lack of imagination. The fixation on doomsday scenarios, though, is simply a lack of sanity.
The second two children sold were male, and worth more in that society than the young girl.
you're bound to be good. All the finest improve with age.
"Enhanced" as in "enhanced interrogation".