Apple doesn't need a large market share to be MORE profitable then other companies. It will stifle Apple's market share, but increase their profitability.
It's always possible to beleive that "someone else" did it. but is that more likely then the owner? It isn't that they don't believe that someone else could have. It is just far more likely that someone else didn't.
Reasonable doubt is a pretty low threshold. It is not he "Shadow of a doubt" that TV makes it out to be. Google maps searches on your laptop - yeah, a reasonable person would believe that you made the search.
No legal system is perfect. Unless you refuse to jail anyone, you always run the risk of jailing an innocent. The fact that we have an appeals system to review cases and try to catch those errors and a testament to the US legal system. Perfect? No. But looking at legal systems through history, it is one fo the best.
If anything is to be taken from this, is that Treyvon failed by NOT killing Zimmerman. If threatened, under Florida law, Treyvon was within his rights to kill Zimmerman.
It certainly does. But that isn't happening is it? Do US Citizens need to fear the government knocking on the door at midnight? Were John Stewart or Stephen Colbert or Glenn Beck or Bill Orielly arrested for their blatant attacks of the government? No? Ohh ok. Then once again, I bring up that while not perfect, the US is far from the Totalitarian state some think it is.
The word totalitarian has a meaning. A country working towards gay rights is not a country that it becoming totalitarian.
Actually you did imply that when you asked how it can be harmful if it is the "simple truth".
But OK. So you just didn't understand how implying that the US is issuing warrants on "shaky evidence" is attempt to bring into question the quality of the evidence that the US is using to issue warrants for Russian Citizens and how that might be harmful to US interests. But you do understand enough about the situation to make the determination that the evidence being used is indeed "shaky"
The fact that you would call the US a Totalitarian Police State means that you have very little understanding of the a Totalitarian Police State actually is.
Is the US doing things it shouldn't be (Spying on its citizens, TSA, etc.), sure. But that is far from Soviet Union, North Korea, Nazi Germany. You know, actual Totalitarian Police States.
Yeah, and you're on slashdot. I'm willing to bet that you are not the "Average person". OR do you claim to not no more about how computers/tech works then the average teenager?
Slashdot Mirror
This is why the ACLU gets so much bad press. They tend to protect the rights of everyone by protecting he rights of the worst of us.
Using that same logic, no court ordered warrant was needed then.
I know some people that would be happy to have a 17" phone
Apple doesn't need a large market share to be MORE profitable then other companies. It will stifle Apple's market share, but increase their profitability.
Useless for content creation?
So it seems Madison was right: The larger the republic, the less influence a single faction can have.
How/Why is the ACA your example?
I fear for education in the future as many states fund it through sin taxes.
Yeah, because choosing national policy should be done in similar fashion has selecting who wins a karaoke contest.
It's always possible to beleive that "someone else" did it. but is that more likely then the owner? It isn't that they don't believe that someone else could have. It is just far more likely that someone else didn't.
Reasonable doubt is a pretty low threshold. It is not he "Shadow of a doubt" that TV makes it out to be. Google maps searches on your laptop - yeah, a reasonable person would believe that you made the search.
No legal system is perfect. Unless you refuse to jail anyone, you always run the risk of jailing an innocent. The fact that we have an appeals system to review cases and try to catch those errors and a testament to the US legal system. Perfect? No. But looking at legal systems through history, it is one fo the best.
My statement has nothing to do with race. It has to do more with "a dead man can't tell his side of the story".
If anything is to be taken from this, is that Treyvon failed by NOT killing Zimmerman. If threatened, under Florida law, Treyvon was within his rights to kill Zimmerman.
No, drug use does not indicate him being a bad person.
Obviously it does: President Obama admitted to smoking Pot, Cocaine charges against President George W. Bush, and President Clinton "didn't inhale".
As for the rest. If Kids (Under 18) were to be killed for the stupid photos they post, well, not many would be left alive now...
Hmm.. We can become Magneto?
I appreciate that you dropped the term Totalitarian from your description of the US.
Who were they? Do you know? Can you name people that are missing?
A Gay Totalitarian State would make a great sketch for a comedy show. And I do believe that is what Pat Robertson is afraid we are moving towards.
It certainly does. But that isn't happening is it? Do US Citizens need to fear the government knocking on the door at midnight? Were John Stewart or Stephen Colbert or Glenn Beck or Bill Orielly arrested for their blatant attacks of the government? No? Ohh ok. Then once again, I bring up that while not perfect, the US is far from the Totalitarian state some think it is.
The word totalitarian has a meaning. A country working towards gay rights is not a country that it becoming totalitarian.
Actually you did imply that when you asked how it can be harmful if it is the "simple truth".
But OK. So you just didn't understand how implying that the US is issuing warrants on "shaky evidence" is attempt to bring into question the quality of the evidence that the US is using to issue warrants for Russian Citizens and how that might be harmful to US interests. But you do understand enough about the situation to make the determination that the evidence being used is indeed "shaky"
Actually, this article is about how other countries are assisting the US against Russia.
The fact that you would call the US a Totalitarian Police State means that you have very little understanding of the a Totalitarian Police State actually is.
Is the US doing things it shouldn't be (Spying on its citizens, TSA, etc.), sure. But that is far from Soviet Union, North Korea, Nazi Germany. You know, actual Totalitarian Police States.
Notice that your definition of propaganda doesn't say "false information".
Yeah, and you're on slashdot. I'm willing to bet that you are not the "Average person". OR do you claim to not no more about how computers/tech works then the average teenager?