Except one of these sides actually knows the truth, or the closest thing to it, and is a primary source, the other side are just internet idiots trying to push an anti "Red" agenda left over from the Soviet Union and American anti communist propaganda.
The Russian government is likely the most knowledge institution in the world when it comes to this incident. Sharing that knowledge with Wikipedia is just transparency, unless we know that they are knowingly disseminating false information. Not that this is unlikely, just that it is a possibility that they are telling the truth (I have absolutely no knowledge of modern Russian politics or this incident, but last I heard we know next to nothing).
Granted, a good portion of this includes people who are violent criminals and are also booked on drug charges.
But that number does not include the likely bigger number of people driven into other crimes because of the illegal nature of their drug addiction. The illegal drug trade not only puts some mostly innocent people in a compromised position, but also fuels the vast majority of crime.
When Prohibition was introduced, I hoped that it would be widely supported by public opinion and the day would soon come when the evil effects of alcohol would be recognized. I have slowly and reluctantly come to believe that this has not been the result. Instead, drinking has generally increased; the speakeasy has replaced the saloon; a vast army of lawbreakers has appeared; many of our best citizens have openly ignored Prohibition; respect for the law has been greatly lessened; and crime has increased to a level never seen before.
Relevant quote: "I have slowly and reluctantly come to believe that this has not been the result. Instead, drinking has generally increased; the speakeasy has replaced the saloon; a vast army of lawbreakers has appeared; many of our best citizens have openly ignored Prohibition; respect for the law has been greatly lessened; and crime has increased to a level never seen before." - John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
It might cause a few deaths but it also sustains the multi billion dollar prison industry and employs well over 1 million people in the US alone, and that it just counting the lawfully employed.
The government profits from illegal drugs even more than drug cartels do.
It is 1,000 out of 4,000,000 tickets, not.025% of the total population.
So the pool of people is not everyone, it is all convicted criminals (.025% who happen to be innocent), which is far far below the percentage of wrongly convicted murders/people eligible for execution.
I would not say that, the justice system is geared towards finding someone to blame and demonstrating the power of the government, the worse the crime the more important someone is found and made an example of, it does not matter who.
How is less mistakes ever a bad thing regardless of convicting or not convicting an innocent person.
Wrong. Most of the justice system is designed to scare people away from breaking the law by showing off the might of the government (aka make an example of them). Yes, putting people in jail is an economic strain in many ways, but society is designed around needing X number of "examples". It does not particularly matter if "them" are innocent or guilty.
I do not think you understand how the justice system works, even if sentenced.025% of innocent people to death it would be doing far better than current efforts.
Since when did people not commonly live into old age? People may live 5-10 years longer now than they did in 1800, but that is still at least well into their 60 on average (and of course that means 50% live far longer).
Exactly. I have sworn off shopping at Canadian Tire ever since the month that they tried to sell Canadian Tire bank accounts by putting someone in the store on commision.
"but that doesn't mean they should slap tits and a vagina onto existing male characters and hope they stick"
Someone needs to make a parody of this, by turning a super hero into a tranny, and have their plastic lady parts constantly fall off when they use their superpowers.
Well since a company cannot feel the emotion of grief, what they really mean is that by saying this they think they can make slightly more money than if they said something else or nothing at all.
The last decade has been one huge push everyone into tech movement, definitely going to be far far too many people by the time current high school students get to it in 3-4 years (if not already).
AI can create art just fine, this has been concretely demonstrated in a few experiments, it is just that there are millions of people who are willing to do the same for free or minimum wage so their is absolutely no reason to program computers to produce consumable entertainment.
Also getting a JOB in art just sounds horrible.You do not become an artists because your Uncle told you that it was a profitable career path.
From what I can tell it is getting worse and more intrusive, basically it just ends up degrading the experience (as they just blur out everything).
I always wondered why they did not just make the watermarks less obtrusive. All they would need to do is change a few pixels here and a few pixels there. Invisible to the human eye, but easy enough for a computer to identify.
Yes, but due to bandwidth, harddrive, and video player restrictions most of us do not download 20 gig movies, we download the 800 mb file that looks and sounds OK.
And those critic BRs often have watermarking all over them, which are annoying to watch through.
What? "willing to make the extra effort and take the (albeit) small risk"
What extra effort, it is literally as easy as it is possible for it to ever be. You are complaining because films to be auto download themselves onto your hard drive?
And there are loads of countries where the risk is 0. Where 0 people have been sued/the laws do not even make it illegal technically. Hell, for most of teh world this is true for DOWNLOADING a movie.
Slashdot Mirror
Except one of these sides actually knows the truth, or the closest thing to it, and is a primary source, the other side are just internet idiots trying to push an anti "Red" agenda left over from the Soviet Union and American anti communist propaganda. The Russian government is likely the most knowledge institution in the world when it comes to this incident. Sharing that knowledge with Wikipedia is just transparency, unless we know that they are knowingly disseminating false information. Not that this is unlikely, just that it is a possibility that they are telling the truth (I have absolutely no knowledge of modern Russian politics or this incident, but last I heard we know next to nothing).
But that number does not include the likely bigger number of people driven into other crimes because of the illegal nature of their drug addiction. The illegal drug trade not only puts some mostly innocent people in a compromised position, but also fuels the vast majority of crime.
- John D. Rockefeller, Jr., 1932
Relevant quote: "I have slowly and reluctantly come to believe that this has not been the result. Instead, drinking has generally increased; the speakeasy has replaced the saloon; a vast army of lawbreakers has appeared; many of our best citizens have openly ignored Prohibition; respect for the law has been greatly lessened; and crime has increased to a level never seen before." - John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
Doctor Rockso does Cocaine
You want to ban video games now too?
It might cause a few deaths but it also sustains the multi billion dollar prison industry and employs well over 1 million people in the US alone, and that it just counting the lawfully employed.
The government profits from illegal drugs even more than drug cartels do.
It is 1,000 out of 4,000,000 tickets, not .025% of the total population.
So the pool of people is not everyone, it is all convicted criminals (.025% who happen to be innocent), which is far far below the percentage of wrongly convicted murders/people eligible for execution.
I would not say that, the justice system is geared towards finding someone to blame and demonstrating the power of the government, the worse the crime the more important someone is found and made an example of, it does not matter who. How is less mistakes ever a bad thing regardless of convicting or not convicting an innocent person.
Wrong. Most of the justice system is designed to scare people away from breaking the law by showing off the might of the government (aka make an example of them). Yes, putting people in jail is an economic strain in many ways, but society is designed around needing X number of "examples". It does not particularly matter if "them" are innocent or guilty.
I do not think you understand how the justice system works, even if sentenced .025% of innocent people to death it would be doing far better than current efforts.
Your condiments will be missed.
US GDP/capita in 1940 $10,000. US GDP/capita in 2000 $40,000. (Adjusted for inflation using 2005 dollars)
Since when did people not commonly live into old age? People may live 5-10 years longer now than they did in 1800, but that is still at least well into their 60 on average (and of course that means 50% live far longer).
Exactly. I have sworn off shopping at Canadian Tire ever since the month that they tried to sell Canadian Tire bank accounts by putting someone in the store on commision.
Sarcasm?
"but that doesn't mean they should slap tits and a vagina onto existing male characters and hope they stick" Someone needs to make a parody of this, by turning a super hero into a tranny, and have their plastic lady parts constantly fall off when they use their superpowers.
Well since a company cannot feel the emotion of grief, what they really mean is that by saying this they think they can make slightly more money than if they said something else or nothing at all.
The last decade has been one huge push everyone into tech movement, definitely going to be far far too many people by the time current high school students get to it in 3-4 years (if not already).
AI can create art just fine, this has been concretely demonstrated in a few experiments, it is just that there are millions of people who are willing to do the same for free or minimum wage so their is absolutely no reason to program computers to produce consumable entertainment. Also getting a JOB in art just sounds horrible.You do not become an artists because your Uncle told you that it was a profitable career path.
Depends on if you have the bandwidth to download a 20Gig Bluray file, or instead opt for the OK compressed 800mb file.
From what I can tell it is getting worse and more intrusive, basically it just ends up degrading the experience (as they just blur out everything). I always wondered why they did not just make the watermarks less obtrusive. All they would need to do is change a few pixels here and a few pixels there. Invisible to the human eye, but easy enough for a computer to identify.
Yes, but due to bandwidth, harddrive, and video player restrictions most of us do not download 20 gig movies, we download the 800 mb file that looks and sounds OK. And those critic BRs often have watermarking all over them, which are annoying to watch through.
What? "willing to make the extra effort and take the (albeit) small risk" What extra effort, it is literally as easy as it is possible for it to ever be. You are complaining because films to be auto download themselves onto your hard drive? And there are loads of countries where the risk is 0. Where 0 people have been sued/the laws do not even make it illegal technically. Hell, for most of teh world this is true for DOWNLOADING a movie.
So are you saying that there is no shortage or anything, or that you need more people to stop the children from throttling each other when they lose?