He is being charged in the alternative. Either he stole the hard drive himself, in which case, he would be a thief, or he receive the stolen hard drive from a third-party culprit, in which case, he would be a receiver of stolen merchandise.
You are only looking at one side of the coin. Even if we believe your unsupported contentions that thousands each year are being killed by effective medicines the FDA is keeping off the market, you have to consider how many lives have been saved by the FDA keeping dangerous and ineffective cures off the market. Just look at the supplements market to get an idea of the snake oil that would exist if the FDA did not exist.
People like you forced the FDA not to regulate medical devices because it wasn't a food or drug. The Dalkon Shield was marketed, sold to millions, and promptly killed or sterilized thousands of women due to its defective design. Then we passed a law to give the FDA authority to regulate medical devices. Again, you make no mention of this because you are biased.
It's a trade-off. We want to keep quacks off the market but in the process, good medications may get delayed. It's not perfect, but there's a reason things are the way that they are.
That's not true. Libertarians believe that government should not interfere absent a market failure, or defined instances where the free market will not work properly. Libertarians would support the SEC, to some extent, to cure the problem of asymmetric information. The SEC regulation regime is basically founded on truthful and standardized disclosure of material facts.
Libertarians would regulate pollution because there are negative externalities. A business can spend $10,000 to install pollution control systems, or dump toxins into a creek for free, causing $10,000,000 in damages to the surrounding area that no one would know about until it was too late. Without government regulation, businesses would pollute because they don't have to pay for the suffering of others from their pollution. Consumers are on the Internet without knowing how to secure their systems. It's causing everyone else to get spammed and DDOS'd but the nitwits don't care because their computers still work. It's time for the government to walk in and take some sort of action to reallocate the responsibility onto those parties best situated to prevent costs.
The study you refer to had a sample size of twenty married solders. How many times are they having sex without a soldier being on deployment? Are there other kinds of birth control at play? Are the women of fertile age? The study says that complete protection was achieved within six weeks of starting the therapy. What happened in the first six weeks to lead them to believe that? There are many questions that are left unanswered.
Contraception is reversible. Vasectomies are not always so. Young adults, married and otherwise, can use contraception to avoid unwanted pregnancies, then have kids when they're ready for that commitment.
And I guess doctors should be allowed to sell whatever treatments they want without any government interference. The Dalkon Shield, thalidomide, etc. should have all been allowed without any government regulation. Yay! Doctor knows best. Government is ineffective and useless, etc.
The CRA had very little to do with the collapse of the economy. Most notably, many of the subprime lenders were non-bank entities that were not subject to the CRA. The problem was that banks paid $200 million to lobby for the repeal of Glass Steagall, a venture in which they were successful. From that point on, banks were allowed to participate in hedge-fund like activities like buying up mortgage-backed securities. When GS was repealed in 1999, a senator noted that "we would regret this in ten years." He was spot on.
It may surprise you to learn that Norton Internet Security 2009 is considered a very good security suite. Norton realized that they were writing shitty code and rewrote the entire thing from scratch with an emphasis on stability and speed. From the article: "That said, Norton Internet Security 2009 presents a remarkable transformation of a product and is worth a second look." I also picked up NIS 2009 and Ghost 14 for free after rebate. You can't beat that.
Hey, look, a knee-jerk troll. Norton Internet Security 2009 was completely rewritten from the ground up. It now is a streamlined piece of software that doesn't take up too much system utilities. Neutral tests say that it is very effective in preventing viruses and spyware from being installed but only average in removing them on already-infected systems.
But you don't really care about facts. You're stuck on antiquated notions like "Norton is bad" and "Windows is shit."
It doesn't matter that much if the software eats up RAM because you can get 4 gigs of it for $50, and that's without any discount or sales or rebates. A two gig stick costs $20.
Vista 64 is a very stable operating system when your computer is fast enough to support it and the drivers are good. I have been running Windows Vista 64 on a Dell XPS 210 I bought in December 2006. Dell has good drivers for all the components, and I bought a printer and wireless card that had well-supported drivers. I plugged in 4 GBs of RAM that I bought for $40 on sale at Frys. It is one of the most stable operating systems I have ever used. Ubuntu 8.04 freezes my Dell Mini 9 when connecting to a wireless network while booting Firefox.
Software compatibility is very good. I have Norton Internet Security 2009, and it keeps the OS safe. Office 2007 is very stable. Games are good but not my focus.
I have read that the implementation of the no execute bit in Vista 64 is much better in protecting you from malware than any other OS. If that's true, add it to the list of pluses with Vista.
I think Vista suffered from growing pains. But once the driver support was there, and the service pack came out, everything fell into place for it to be a great operating system.
Fuck Harry Palmer. In real life, Agent Garbo got Adolf Hitler to believe that the Normandy invasion was not going to take place at Normandy. He claimed that it was going to be a huge feint to hide the real attack at Pas de Calais. Along with a bunch of other counterintelligence programs (Operation QUICKSILVER invented the First United States Army Group [FUSAG] that was poised to attack Pas de Calais; Operation GLITTER faked a huge armada about to attack; Operation MINCEMEAT used a corpse to pass bad intelligence to the Germans regarding Allied intentions in Normandy), the Allies used Garbo to have the Germans withhold crucial military reinforcements from Normandy for days after the attack, waiting for an attack at Pas de Calais that never came. One guy was pretty instrumental in getting the Nazis to misplace their military assets while the Allied established a beachhead at Normandy.
Patients report that a more expensive placebo is more effective in treating their symptoms. Perhaps that's why medical expenses are out of control in the United States.
True story. I had a high school teacher who was caught molesting a 14 year old girl. He felt her up, and also masturbated in front of her. She reported it, and an undercover police officer posing as her brother got him to admit to it on tape.
The "punishment" was that he was allowed to retire early with full pension. He wasn't fired. He later settled the criminal case. The whole thing was bizarre.
SIGINT will never be as good as a man on the ground. Our national intelligence agencies have become scared of taking risks. A satellite doesn't risk capture and torture. After all, there are 89 stars in the CIA wall, and no one wants to add another one during peacetime. But you just can't help think what we could have done if we maintained our aggressiveness with HUMINT during peacetime. A white guy named John Walker Lindh was able to walk into Pakistan and get a face-to-face meeting with Bin Laden after a few months. Now Al Qaeda is all on guard so it's tough to compromise them. But peacetime would have been the best time to break into their organizations, though civil liberty folks might freak out.
The dastardly part of all this is that the NSA/CIA may not be allowed to disclose all of their successes. Methods and processes that produce good intelligence have to be protected from public disclosure. For all we know, Hotmail has been cracked and the NSA/CIA made a false disclosure to get the terrorists all happy about their ability to elude the vaunted three-letter agencies. I mean, when the FBI makes an arrest based on an informant, they make sure to bust the informant as well, even making sure to smack him around a little so as to allay his concerns.
It's entirely possible that the intelligence organizations suck, but perhaps they have successes that we would not know about for decades. The "secret killing program" in Iraq sounds like one of those things.
You missed the boat entirely by claiming that the federal and state governments failed to overreact to Hurricane Katrina. Governmental response were almost negligently nonchalant. With a storm bearing down on a densely-populated city, the government did not order a mandatory evacuation. They did not activate the National Guard to help evacuations. They did not bus people out in advance of the storms.
You could say that the residents should have left on their own accord. You could, but you'd be wrong. Many of the poor did not have access to cars or other means of transportation. Roads were clogged by hasty evacuations. Cars were breaking down or running out of gas on the road, stymieing transportation.
The author loses a lot of credibility by starting off the article with snarky remarks about President Obama. ("The law makes a job for yet another bureaucrat to oversee the vast program - is this change we can believe in?") He initially attacks the creation of a standards-creating body for electronic health records ("It defines rules for health information standards by designating a new standards board - everyone desires more data standards and standards groups"), but concludes that we need to create a uniform standard for the development of an electronic health record infrastructure. It seems as though his bias overwhelms his sense.
He blames Obama's proposal before it even started because he had a bad experience. It makes no sense. His anecdote only shows that his doctors were ignoring him. That had nothing to do with the electronic health record system. His allergist wrote a memo that no one at the hospital read. That is not a failure of the EHR.
Bullshit. That's just people learning from the past to avoid mistakes in the future. Evacuations were delayed on 9/11, and many lives were lost. Waiting for a plane to hit a building before evacuating is a bad idea. I mean, nowadays, passengers will resist a hijacker to the death because of what happened on 9/11. Would you call that a victory of terrorism or common sense?
Congress messed up the Hubble Space Telescope project a few decades ago by similarly setting unrealistically low budgets. The scientists agreed to the budget because that was the only way to go forward. Perkin Elmers, the prime subcontractor for the lens, had to take all sorts of shortcuts to meet that budget. They had to skimp on quality control. Instead of multiple tests, they used the same system that guided the polishing of the lens to verify the polishing was correct. It turns out that a bolt was inserted backwards in the measuring laser. Of course, this meant that the mirror was wrongly-ground and that the error was not caught.
The Ares Project is more important not only because it represents the next generation of American rocketry, but also because lives will be depending on the rocket. The early Apollo and Shuttle projects claimed lives because of shoddy work. History is in danger of repeating itself.
Congress and NASA should either do it right, or not do it at all. Astronauts assume the risks at every launch, but we should not let them take that risk if it is too significant. NASA should just put the ball down and walk away if it believes that the project cannot be done correctly on the current budget. Not for political gamesmanship, but to protect astronauts.
Actually, until the latest incident, Somali pirates have universally treated captured hostages with the utmost care, including those who unsuccessfully resisted with LRAD and other non-lethal devices. They feed their captives and treat them nicely. The pirates have no incentive to kill or harm their hostages, as doing so would cause every future sailor under attack to fight to the death. The status quo had been something akin to a bank robber; you walk in with a note demanding money, and the teller gives it to you even if you don't show a weapon because the company doesn't want anyone killed.
Now that pirates have been killed, it is an open question whether or not they will continue acting in this manner.
Does your company count major defense contractors such as GE as a client? Do you work for a cell phone company that makes radiation-spewing devices that give people brain cancer? Do you work for a car manufacturer that makes cars that pollute and run people over? Do you work for a company that makes computers, which get people addicted and detract from human interaction?
A man in the loop makes the kill shot decision. Did you watch the ending of Syriana? Yeah. Like that. These drones are not flying around doing their own thing.
The problem is that underaged sex and bestiality would also be legal under legal regimes based on your principles. Trying to shuffle homosexuality under genetics is an attempt to get it more akin to racial discrimination than anything else.
Slashdot Mirror
He is being charged in the alternative. Either he stole the hard drive himself, in which case, he would be a thief, or he receive the stolen hard drive from a third-party culprit, in which case, he would be a receiver of stolen merchandise.
You are only looking at one side of the coin. Even if we believe your unsupported contentions that thousands each year are being killed by effective medicines the FDA is keeping off the market, you have to consider how many lives have been saved by the FDA keeping dangerous and ineffective cures off the market. Just look at the supplements market to get an idea of the snake oil that would exist if the FDA did not exist.
People like you forced the FDA not to regulate medical devices because it wasn't a food or drug. The Dalkon Shield was marketed, sold to millions, and promptly killed or sterilized thousands of women due to its defective design. Then we passed a law to give the FDA authority to regulate medical devices. Again, you make no mention of this because you are biased.
It's a trade-off. We want to keep quacks off the market but in the process, good medications may get delayed. It's not perfect, but there's a reason things are the way that they are.
That's not true. Libertarians believe that government should not interfere absent a market failure, or defined instances where the free market will not work properly. Libertarians would support the SEC, to some extent, to cure the problem of asymmetric information. The SEC regulation regime is basically founded on truthful and standardized disclosure of material facts.
Libertarians would regulate pollution because there are negative externalities. A business can spend $10,000 to install pollution control systems, or dump toxins into a creek for free, causing $10,000,000 in damages to the surrounding area that no one would know about until it was too late. Without government regulation, businesses would pollute because they don't have to pay for the suffering of others from their pollution. Consumers are on the Internet without knowing how to secure their systems. It's causing everyone else to get spammed and DDOS'd but the nitwits don't care because their computers still work. It's time for the government to walk in and take some sort of action to reallocate the responsibility onto those parties best situated to prevent costs.
The study you refer to had a sample size of twenty married solders. How many times are they having sex without a soldier being on deployment? Are there other kinds of birth control at play? Are the women of fertile age? The study says that complete protection was achieved within six weeks of starting the therapy. What happened in the first six weeks to lead them to believe that? There are many questions that are left unanswered.
Proposing that men get vasectomies is like asking women to get tubal ligations instead of using the pill. It fails for the same reasons.
There are side-effects to vasectomies. Erectile dysfunction or decreased sexual desire can occur in the form of impotence, premature ejaculation, and painful intercourse. The cause is believed to be, mostly psychological in nature and the vasectomy is believed to exacerbate previous difficulties and problems between sexual partners. Counseling and investigation is required to resolve difficulties.
Contraception is reversible. Vasectomies are not always so. Young adults, married and otherwise, can use contraception to avoid unwanted pregnancies, then have kids when they're ready for that commitment.
And I guess doctors should be allowed to sell whatever treatments they want without any government interference. The Dalkon Shield, thalidomide, etc. should have all been allowed without any government regulation. Yay! Doctor knows best. Government is ineffective and useless, etc.
The CRA had very little to do with the collapse of the economy. Most notably, many of the subprime lenders were non-bank entities that were not subject to the CRA. The problem was that banks paid $200 million to lobby for the repeal of Glass Steagall, a venture in which they were successful. From that point on, banks were allowed to participate in hedge-fund like activities like buying up mortgage-backed securities. When GS was repealed in 1999, a senator noted that "we would regret this in ten years." He was spot on.
It may surprise you to learn that Norton Internet Security 2009 is considered a very good security suite. Norton realized that they were writing shitty code and rewrote the entire thing from scratch with an emphasis on stability and speed. From the article: "That said, Norton Internet Security 2009 presents a remarkable transformation of a product and is worth a second look." I also picked up NIS 2009 and Ghost 14 for free after rebate. You can't beat that.
Hey, look, a knee-jerk troll. Norton Internet Security 2009 was completely rewritten from the ground up. It now is a streamlined piece of software that doesn't take up too much system utilities. Neutral tests say that it is very effective in preventing viruses and spyware from being installed but only average in removing them on already-infected systems.
But you don't really care about facts. You're stuck on antiquated notions like "Norton is bad" and "Windows is shit."
It doesn't matter that much if the software eats up RAM because you can get 4 gigs of it for $50, and that's without any discount or sales or rebates. A two gig stick costs $20.
Vista 64 is a very stable operating system when your computer is fast enough to support it and the drivers are good. I have been running Windows Vista 64 on a Dell XPS 210 I bought in December 2006. Dell has good drivers for all the components, and I bought a printer and wireless card that had well-supported drivers. I plugged in 4 GBs of RAM that I bought for $40 on sale at Frys. It is one of the most stable operating systems I have ever used. Ubuntu 8.04 freezes my Dell Mini 9 when connecting to a wireless network while booting Firefox.
Software compatibility is very good. I have Norton Internet Security 2009, and it keeps the OS safe. Office 2007 is very stable. Games are good but not my focus.
I have read that the implementation of the no execute bit in Vista 64 is much better in protecting you from malware than any other OS. If that's true, add it to the list of pluses with Vista.
I think Vista suffered from growing pains. But once the driver support was there, and the service pack came out, everything fell into place for it to be a great operating system.
Fuck Harry Palmer. In real life, Agent Garbo got Adolf Hitler to believe that the Normandy invasion was not going to take place at Normandy. He claimed that it was going to be a huge feint to hide the real attack at Pas de Calais. Along with a bunch of other counterintelligence programs (Operation QUICKSILVER invented the First United States Army Group [FUSAG] that was poised to attack Pas de Calais; Operation GLITTER faked a huge armada about to attack; Operation MINCEMEAT used a corpse to pass bad intelligence to the Germans regarding Allied intentions in Normandy), the Allies used Garbo to have the Germans withhold crucial military reinforcements from Normandy for days after the attack, waiting for an attack at Pas de Calais that never came. One guy was pretty instrumental in getting the Nazis to misplace their military assets while the Allied established a beachhead at Normandy.
Patients report that a more expensive placebo is more effective in treating their symptoms. Perhaps that's why medical expenses are out of control in the United States.
True story. I had a high school teacher who was caught molesting a 14 year old girl. He felt her up, and also masturbated in front of her. She reported it, and an undercover police officer posing as her brother got him to admit to it on tape.
The "punishment" was that he was allowed to retire early with full pension. He wasn't fired. He later settled the criminal case. The whole thing was bizarre.
SIGINT will never be as good as a man on the ground. Our national intelligence agencies have become scared of taking risks. A satellite doesn't risk capture and torture. After all, there are 89 stars in the CIA wall, and no one wants to add another one during peacetime. But you just can't help think what we could have done if we maintained our aggressiveness with HUMINT during peacetime. A white guy named John Walker Lindh was able to walk into Pakistan and get a face-to-face meeting with Bin Laden after a few months. Now Al Qaeda is all on guard so it's tough to compromise them. But peacetime would have been the best time to break into their organizations, though civil liberty folks might freak out.
The dastardly part of all this is that the NSA/CIA may not be allowed to disclose all of their successes. Methods and processes that produce good intelligence have to be protected from public disclosure. For all we know, Hotmail has been cracked and the NSA/CIA made a false disclosure to get the terrorists all happy about their ability to elude the vaunted three-letter agencies. I mean, when the FBI makes an arrest based on an informant, they make sure to bust the informant as well, even making sure to smack him around a little so as to allay his concerns.
It's entirely possible that the intelligence organizations suck, but perhaps they have successes that we would not know about for decades. The "secret killing program" in Iraq sounds like one of those things.
You missed the boat entirely by claiming that the federal and state governments failed to overreact to Hurricane Katrina. Governmental response were almost negligently nonchalant. With a storm bearing down on a densely-populated city, the government did not order a mandatory evacuation. They did not activate the National Guard to help evacuations. They did not bus people out in advance of the storms.
You could say that the residents should have left on their own accord. You could, but you'd be wrong. Many of the poor did not have access to cars or other means of transportation. Roads were clogged by hasty evacuations. Cars were breaking down or running out of gas on the road, stymieing transportation.
So...basically you're a Limbaugh Republican who wishes his country ill for your political gain. America First!
The author loses a lot of credibility by starting off the article with snarky remarks about President Obama. ("The law makes a job for yet another bureaucrat to oversee the vast program - is this change we can believe in?") He initially attacks the creation of a standards-creating body for electronic health records ("It defines rules for health information standards by designating a new standards board - everyone desires more data standards and standards groups"), but concludes that we need to create a uniform standard for the development of an electronic health record infrastructure. It seems as though his bias overwhelms his sense.
He blames Obama's proposal before it even started because he had a bad experience. It makes no sense. His anecdote only shows that his doctors were ignoring him. That had nothing to do with the electronic health record system. His allergist wrote a memo that no one at the hospital read. That is not a failure of the EHR.
Bullshit. That's just people learning from the past to avoid mistakes in the future. Evacuations were delayed on 9/11, and many lives were lost. Waiting for a plane to hit a building before evacuating is a bad idea. I mean, nowadays, passengers will resist a hijacker to the death because of what happened on 9/11. Would you call that a victory of terrorism or common sense?
Congress messed up the Hubble Space Telescope project a few decades ago by similarly setting unrealistically low budgets. The scientists agreed to the budget because that was the only way to go forward. Perkin Elmers, the prime subcontractor for the lens, had to take all sorts of shortcuts to meet that budget. They had to skimp on quality control. Instead of multiple tests, they used the same system that guided the polishing of the lens to verify the polishing was correct. It turns out that a bolt was inserted backwards in the measuring laser. Of course, this meant that the mirror was wrongly-ground and that the error was not caught.
The Ares Project is more important not only because it represents the next generation of American rocketry, but also because lives will be depending on the rocket. The early Apollo and Shuttle projects claimed lives because of shoddy work. History is in danger of repeating itself.
Congress and NASA should either do it right, or not do it at all. Astronauts assume the risks at every launch, but we should not let them take that risk if it is too significant. NASA should just put the ball down and walk away if it believes that the project cannot be done correctly on the current budget. Not for political gamesmanship, but to protect astronauts.
Actually, until the latest incident, Somali pirates have universally treated captured hostages with the utmost care, including those who unsuccessfully resisted with LRAD and other non-lethal devices. They feed their captives and treat them nicely. The pirates have no incentive to kill or harm their hostages, as doing so would cause every future sailor under attack to fight to the death. The status quo had been something akin to a bank robber; you walk in with a note demanding money, and the teller gives it to you even if you don't show a weapon because the company doesn't want anyone killed.
Now that pirates have been killed, it is an open question whether or not they will continue acting in this manner.
Does your company count major defense contractors such as GE as a client? Do you work for a cell phone company that makes radiation-spewing devices that give people brain cancer? Do you work for a car manufacturer that makes cars that pollute and run people over? Do you work for a company that makes computers, which get people addicted and detract from human interaction?
You can play this moral-outrage game with anyone.
A man in the loop makes the kill shot decision. Did you watch the ending of Syriana? Yeah. Like that. These drones are not flying around doing their own thing.
The problem is that underaged sex and bestiality would also be legal under legal regimes based on your principles. Trying to shuffle homosexuality under genetics is an attempt to get it more akin to racial discrimination than anything else.