But only rich people can easily move to other states. Your vote by where you live idea onyl takes into account the votes of middle class and above. If you cannot afford to spend a few hundred dollars moving and setting up internet/phone ect, you have a horrible job but cannot afford to lose it, or you have a child and depend on the free daycare of a grandparent/neighbor you are completely out of luck.
Just was I was thinking. In my mind it means anarchists. But it could be would be just as applicable to those tea party corporatists who want less regulation of businesses.
But I think "liberty" has just become a buzzword, and these activists could be in any political spectrum and still use it.
"IT group is ineffective, loathed by all other departments, and runs at roughly twice the budget of what the CFO has deemed appropriate for the company's size and industry."
The CFO already knows that the manager is incompetent, as evidenced by him calling in a second party to look into it. Theoretically he has already asked the IT head what the problem is, and got an unsatisfactory answer. I really do not see you obtaining any more evidence about his incompetence than already exists.
I think in general you would expect a difference. Obviously at the $10 stage you are cutting corners. But when you go over $100 or thereabout it is just about brand image.
You do not need a study using fallible people to tell that.
I have put a lot of thought into that argument, and I think it is not that straightforward. Obviously well armed civilians would lose to the military and police. But the civilian guns do offer a huge protection in my opinion, they force the military to actually kill the civilian. It is like someone protesting deforestation chaining themselves to a tree, in such a way that prevented police from just easily pulling them out of the way.
There are legitimate comedians who even joke about female rape. And if professionals can joke about the rape of a woman, than I think it is very obvious that man rape is firmly is the acceptable category of comedy.
Geology. It is all recorded in the rocks. Earth Story (1998) is probably the best and most complete explanation of general geography you will get in documentary form.
What does taking credit for someone elses work and not paying a royalty for a copy of someone elses work have to do with themselves?
Me torrenting Game of Thrones is a very different thing from me getting a copy of Game of Thrones, and editing the credits so it is just one long list of my name over and over again. Then distributing that recredited work as my own.
Well technically a quote from Conan the Barbarian is offtopic to this discussion. It might also be funny or epic, but it would forever remain offtopic.
That the roof was high enough to actually allow the formation of clouds. Also, I believe you need dust in the air to form clouds, and I would think that their would be a lot less than normal in a server room. Intense condensation on the roof causing rain is another thing.
You could say the same thing about TVs, as halve of their value lies in being able to be hooked up to a cable company (much like a carrier) to get and show content. But A cable company does not need to know what TV I use to view their content, and a carrier does not need to know what phone I use to use their service. They should keep their hands out of my business.
If you wallet is stolen, you don't expect to get any cash in in back. If your watch in stolen, or your TV, you should not expect to see either again. And if your phone is stolen, like every other object on the planet, you most likely will not see it again.
They are both the same thing. You cannot just have the freedom to not incriminate yourself through speak, or the prosecution would just ask you to drive them to your meth lab instead of asking you if you have one.
At the same time. The law does have certain abilities, like warranted searches. Where you are not allowed to stop them from searching your house.
First off, I disagree, you need a jury and a trial for guilt. And here is one example using this case of why. They say it is child pornography, and they say that he put it there and saw it and that those drives are his. 1. We do not KNOW that those drives are his or what evidence that the prosecution even has for this belief. 2. We do not KNOW that there were exclusively his or that others did not have access to them. Or what viruses or remote access hacks/programs were on the computer this drive was attached to. 3. Porn, and child porn, both are relative. We have no idea what the FBI found. Was it a copy of Hounddog (2007); A picture of a flat chested porn star: An image of his niece at the beach; A video of his girlfriend, from high school?
And even if he was already proven guilty, he can still incriminate himself in other crimes/a more serious version of this crime.
He is not guilty until after trial with a jury determines his guilt. Until then, he is innocent by legal definition. And even prosecuted criminals on death row still have all of their rights, and laws still apply to them.
In the States they have a law that protects your right not not incriminate yourself. I think, basically it is not illegal to look out for your own interests with regard to a criminal case. But, being the States it is really only applicable if you have lots of money OR the government doesn't want anything from you.
As long as you are not a child, or elderly, or a criminal (where the definition of criminal is left completely up to the discretion of a police officer).
I disagree, it become far more powerful. With many laws you can prosecute and jail any undesirable you want, as we all break half a dozen laws everyday.
Slashdot Mirror
But only rich people can easily move to other states. Your vote by where you live idea onyl takes into account the votes of middle class and above. If you cannot afford to spend a few hundred dollars moving and setting up internet/phone ect, you have a horrible job but cannot afford to lose it, or you have a child and depend on the free daycare of a grandparent/neighbor you are completely out of luck.
Just was I was thinking. In my mind it means anarchists. But it could be would be just as applicable to those tea party corporatists who want less regulation of businesses.
But I think "liberty" has just become a buzzword, and these activists could be in any political spectrum and still use it.
"IT group is ineffective, loathed by all other departments, and runs at roughly twice the budget of what the CFO has deemed appropriate for the company's size and industry."
The CFO already knows that the manager is incompetent, as evidenced by him calling in a second party to look into it. Theoretically he has already asked the IT head what the problem is, and got an unsatisfactory answer. I really do not see you obtaining any more evidence about his incompetence than already exists.
I think in general you would expect a difference. Obviously at the $10 stage you are cutting corners. But when you go over $100 or thereabout it is just about brand image.
You do not need a study using fallible people to tell that.
Of course you cannot tell how good a wine tastes by some chemical analysis.
I have put a lot of thought into that argument, and I think it is not that straightforward.
Obviously well armed civilians would lose to the military and police. But the civilian guns do offer a huge protection in my opinion, they force the military to actually kill the civilian.
It is like someone protesting deforestation chaining themselves to a tree, in such a way that prevented police from just easily pulling them out of the way.
There are legitimate comedians who even joke about female rape. And if professionals can joke about the rape of a woman, than I think it is very obvious that man rape is firmly is the acceptable category of comedy.
Was I the only one who broke out laughing when I was reading this description of the "unfunny" act of sodomy?
Geology. It is all recorded in the rocks. Earth Story (1998) is probably the best and most complete explanation of general geography you will get in documentary form.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYtMoDcwAoQ
This ^^.
I see no reason to believe that your original employer is being an ass or would go out of his way to hurt you.
What does taking credit for someone elses work and not paying a royalty for a copy of someone elses work have to do with themselves?
Me torrenting Game of Thrones is a very different thing from me getting a copy of Game of Thrones, and editing the credits so it is just one long list of my name over and over again. Then distributing that recredited work as my own.
Well technically a quote from Conan the Barbarian is offtopic to this discussion. It might also be funny or epic, but it would forever remain offtopic.
That the roof was high enough to actually allow the formation of clouds. Also, I believe you need dust in the air to form clouds, and I would think that their would be a lot less than normal in a server room. Intense condensation on the roof causing rain is another thing.
To apply for a patent before a given technology has been is widespread use for years?
You could say the same thing about TVs, as halve of their value lies in being able to be hooked up to a cable company (much like a carrier) to get and show content.
But A cable company does not need to know what TV I use to view their content, and a carrier does not need to know what phone I use to use their service. They should keep their hands out of my business.
If you wallet is stolen, you don't expect to get any cash in in back. If your watch in stolen, or your TV, you should not expect to see either again.
And if your phone is stolen, like every other object on the planet, you most likely will not see it again.
There is too much wrong with this last statement to even try to counter it.
They are both the same thing. You cannot just have the freedom to not incriminate yourself through speak, or the prosecution would just ask you to drive them to your meth lab instead of asking you if you have one.
At the same time. The law does have certain abilities, like warranted searches. Where you are not allowed to stop them from searching your house.
First off, I disagree, you need a jury and a trial for guilt.
And here is one example using this case of why. They say it is child pornography, and they say that he put it there and saw it and that those drives are his.
1. We do not KNOW that those drives are his or what evidence that the prosecution even has for this belief.
2. We do not KNOW that there were exclusively his or that others did not have access to them. Or what viruses or remote access hacks/programs were on the computer this drive was attached to.
3. Porn, and child porn, both are relative. We have no idea what the FBI found. Was it a copy of Hounddog (2007); A picture of a flat chested porn star: An image of his niece at the beach; A video of his girlfriend, from high school?
And even if he was already proven guilty, he can still incriminate himself in other crimes/a more serious version of this crime.
He is not guilty until after trial with a jury determines his guilt. Until then, he is innocent by legal definition.
And even prosecuted criminals on death row still have all of their rights, and laws still apply to them.
PS: You're*
In the States they have a law that protects your right not not incriminate yourself. I think, basically it is not illegal to look out for your own interests with regard to a criminal case.
But, being the States it is really only applicable if you have lots of money OR the government doesn't want anything from you.
But 7 is pretty good.
As long as you are not a child, or elderly, or a criminal (where the definition of criminal is left completely up to the discretion of a police officer).
I disagree, it become far more powerful.
With many laws you can prosecute and jail any undesirable you want, as we all break half a dozen laws everyday.