Because if a drug is better than nothing, but only as good as (or worse than) a sugar pill or saline solution then who cares? We have an ample supply of sugar pills and saline solutions, and they're cheap...
There are jurisdictions where truth is not a defence against libel. A few of the Australian states, for example, require both truth and that the publication of the statement were in the public interest (or for the public benefit, depending on the state). Free speech is not as sacred as it is in the USA in some other parts of the world.
And a few years ago the High Court in Australia ruled, in Gutnick vs Dow Jones & Company Inc, that action could be taken under an Australian state law (Victoria in this case) over something published on a web site in the USA but viewed in Australia.
Of course a foreign court's ruling has little relevance, unless you happen to also operate in/visit that country.
So the right to bear arms is just for self defense?
I can't have a hand grenade because other people think that's overkill? Because I want to carry my lucky hand grenade I should get shot by strangers who feel a bit uncomfortable about it?
Ahh yes, you did. You're right of course, who needs the consitution, we are at war with terrorists!!
Huh?
I'm arguing that it makes sense not allow someone with explosives to fly on a passenger plane.
You're arguing that's fine since the other passenger will just shoot them on sight anyway.
Make it a closer analogy then.
I want to carry my freshly brewed nitroglycerine on my weekend trip to visit grandma in Florida. I'm not a terrorist. I have no intent to hurt anyone, let alone blow them up. So it's fine for me to take a few jars in my carry-on?
Why does it matter what a reasonable person would conclude? Surely the second amendment means I can carry a hand grenade whenever I choose without having to strangers shoot me just because they happen to catch the same plane?
If a reasonable person would conclude that the driver who almost crashed into me is drunk and will almost certainly crash into someone else before they get home, can I shoot them to protect the public?
I'm providing an example of a situation in which it is illegal to do something (take explosives onto a passenger plane) because of something you may do (blow up the plane) but haven't actually done yet and may well not do.
As always it's a cost versus benefits analysis.
In the plane case there isn't much benefit in letting someone take explosives on board, stuff can be transported by other means. There's the freedom issues, society is more free if you can do so. The costs are clear enough, it makes the job of a suicide bomber reasonably easy
In the drink driving case there are more benefits, it allows people to get home from the pub easily, and so on. The costs are reasonably clear too, the chances of having an accident are increased which decreases the safety of everyone else.
How the costs and benefits stack up against each other is the hard bit of course. And people disagree, some people want safety at all costs, others want freedom at all costs. Then of course people disagree on what freedom is in the first place...
Letting the government lock people up because they might do something is a bad thing if it is completely general. If the police can throw you in jail because they think you might rob a bank in a few years time, then clearly it's time to find a new country.
Drink driving is not like that, it's just another law that reduces your freedoms but it's still something you have to do - they can't throw you in jail because they think you might drink drive tomorrow.
Almost all driving rules are like that. You can't run a red light, not because it's a bad thing in itself but because doing so puts other people in danger. Whether things like drink driving should be criminal offences or just driving ofences is another matter.
It doesn't take a lot of time to push a button. Are people really fast enough to kill you before you do? Can they really tell the difference between you trying to turn off your mobile phone, or turn on your laptop, and detonating a bomb?
What if the bomb is set to automatically detonate when it gets out of range of some radio broadcast?
Giving the police the power to prevent someone from driving while drunk by taking them to jail instead of letting them drive home and possibly kill someone, is something the public has decided is worth while.
I thought Apple had given up using expensive parts when cheap ones are good enough (SCSI vs IDE for example). Last time I bought SRAM chips they were $4 for 32KB, but they were DIP, the SOP version was only $1 - and that's Australian dollars too. You must get such good prices when you buy in bulk...
It must suck when the battery runs out of charge and you lose all your songs.
Why wouldn't they use flash memory like everyone else?
So people should be able to take large stacks of explosives on passenger flights along with an assault weapon (as long as it can fit in the storage bin) since they haven't actually caused someone else harm. They MAY cause harm, but if they do you can then punish them (in their next life I guess).
I played EVE a few weeks ago, for just the length of a trial account.
Starting from scratch without even understanding how you are supposed to play the game I could generate a million isk in 15 minutes transporting some crappy trading goods.
The problem was it just isn't fun to click 'buy' type in a number, click 'set destination', drag something to you cargo hold, click 'launch', click 'autopilot', wait 15 minutes, click 'dock', drag something from your cargo hold, click 'sell'. And repeat.
Playing 5c poker is more fun, and costs less per month than the subscription fee of EVE. Of course you could do that during the 'wait 15 minutes' step, I guess...
To a scientist or engineer it is trivial, however to a (European) cop, or to someone buying butter it is not so trivial. Reporting the perp's weight in grams would not be sound practice. For everyday use the base unit needs to be visualisable/imaginable on a human scale.
Half a kilo of butter, or a pound of butter is a reasonable purchase. Grams just don't cut it. What am I getting if I ask for 80 grams of salami? Well I guess I can visualize it and some Europeans buy it that way, but the average everyday user of a measuring system is nearly innumerate. They want to buy one or two or maybe a half of something.
Do you think European cops say "I'm in pursuit, west bound on Main, at 33m/s"? Or do you think they might stuff using base units and say 120km/h?
Do you really say things like "It's a 100000m drive" and "I'll meet you there in 2700 seconds"?
I've even programmed them. Heck, I used C to do so at one point.
Readability still mattered more than anything else. Then again the microcontroller I was using had more grunt than the computers I first wrote BASIC programs for.
Unless of course there is a large enough set of people who will say yes to 1) unless 2) is also available in which case they will say no to 1).
Assuming there are no costs (which is of course stupid but makes for simpler numbers) for every person who will buy the $30 DVD only if there is no $5 download, there need to be six people who wouldn't buy the $30 DVD no matter what but would buy a $5 download.
Five people to break even, but what is the point of introducing a new product without making more money?
No one would disagree that there are a bunch of people who would pay $5 for a download but wouldn't buy a $30 DVD. The difficult part is working out whether they will more than make up for lost sales of the more expensive product.
No Texas is a state (but probably not a nation) within the country of the US. Wales is a principality and a nation (now with its own legislative National Assembly thanks to the UK gov.) within the country of the UK. Bug difference. Are you by any chance in the US (going by your lack of knowledge of geography)?
The US is a country which has both states and nations within it, surely they should teach the meanings of the terms in school?
It's a shortcoming in any language which wasn't designed with doing exactly that in mind from the beginning.
Hacking it in is very difficult, and none of the python attempts I've seen actually work.
Just think how many languages which have been designed with that in mind end up with bugs/flaws that result in holes - it's hard to get right when it is designed in from the start...
That hasn't stopped Troika Games using it for Greyhawk or Irrational using it for Freedom Force. Not for the entire game engine but as the level scripting engine. The bit that actually matters in the game, the bit which makes the *fun* stuff rather than the pretty stuff.
And of course there's BaseGolf which is completely implemented in python.
The problem I see with using python as a modding language is that it makes it very difficult to enforce safety in mods. It'd be nice if the modding language was sandboxed so that you could download a mod and know it won't format your hard drive.
But it makes sense to use an existing language engine instead of creating yet another scripting language for the level designers to use. And python is much easier for non-programmers to write in than lua, in my opinion anyway...
Slashdot Mirror
Because if a drug is better than nothing, but only as good as (or worse than) a sugar pill or saline solution then who cares? We have an ample supply of sugar pills and saline solutions, and they're cheap...
It would allow players to move computer generate pieces as well... There's a reasonable picture of it in action.
I used one back at uni, they work well but I suspect aren't cheap.
There are jurisdictions where truth is not a defence against libel. A few of the Australian states, for example, require both truth and that the publication of the statement were in the public interest (or for the public benefit, depending on the state). Free speech is not as sacred as it is in the USA in some other parts of the world.
And a few years ago the High Court in Australia ruled, in Gutnick vs Dow Jones & Company Inc, that action could be taken under an Australian state law (Victoria in this case) over something published on a web site in the USA but viewed in Australia.
Of course a foreign court's ruling has little relevance, unless you happen to also operate in/visit that country.
So the right to bear arms is just for self defense?
I can't have a hand grenade because other people think that's overkill? Because I want to carry my lucky hand grenade I should get shot by strangers who feel a bit uncomfortable about it?
Ahh yes, you did. You're right of course, who needs the consitution, we are at war with terrorists!!
Huh?
I'm arguing that it makes sense not allow someone with explosives to fly on a passenger plane.
You're arguing that's fine since the other passenger will just shoot them on sight anyway.
Make it a closer analogy then.
I want to carry my freshly brewed nitroglycerine on my weekend trip to visit grandma in Florida. I'm not a terrorist. I have no intent to hurt anyone, let alone blow them up. So it's fine for me to take a few jars in my carry-on?
Why does it matter what a reasonable person would conclude? Surely the second amendment means I can carry a hand grenade whenever I choose without having to strangers shoot me just because they happen to catch the same plane?
If a reasonable person would conclude that the driver who almost crashed into me is drunk and will almost certainly crash into someone else before they get home, can I shoot them to protect the public?
I'm providing an example of a situation in which it is illegal to do something (take explosives onto a passenger plane) because of something you may do (blow up the plane) but haven't actually done yet and may well not do.
As always it's a cost versus benefits analysis.
In the plane case there isn't much benefit in letting someone take explosives on board, stuff can be transported by other means. There's the freedom issues, society is more free if you can do so. The costs are clear enough, it makes the job of a suicide bomber reasonably easy
In the drink driving case there are more benefits, it allows people to get home from the pub easily, and so on. The costs are reasonably clear too, the chances of having an accident are increased which decreases the safety of everyone else.
How the costs and benefits stack up against each other is the hard bit of course. And people disagree, some people want safety at all costs, others want freedom at all costs. Then of course people disagree on what freedom is in the first place...
Letting the government lock people up because they might do something is a bad thing if it is completely general. If the police can throw you in jail because they think you might rob a bank in a few years time, then clearly it's time to find a new country.
Drink driving is not like that, it's just another law that reduces your freedoms but it's still something you have to do - they can't throw you in jail because they think you might drink drive tomorrow.
Almost all driving rules are like that. You can't run a red light, not because it's a bad thing in itself but because doing so puts other people in danger. Whether things like drink driving should be criminal offences or just driving ofences is another matter.
It doesn't take a lot of time to push a button. Are people really fast enough to kill you before you do? Can they really tell the difference between you trying to turn off your mobile phone, or turn on your laptop, and detonating a bomb?
What if the bomb is set to automatically detonate when it gets out of range of some radio broadcast?
Giving the police the power to prevent someone from driving while drunk by taking them to jail instead of letting them drive home and possibly kill someone, is something the public has decided is worth while.
But then he hasn't actually done anything wrong.
So they are killing him for something he MAY do. How is that any different from making drink driving illegal because of what a drunk driver MAY do?
So how did anyone in the world get "flash memory" and "static in the music" confused?
How does the other passengers being armed prevent a suicide bomber from detonating the plastic exposives he is wrapped in?
A static memory chip?
I thought Apple had given up using expensive parts when cheap ones are good enough (SCSI vs IDE for example). Last time I bought SRAM chips they were $4 for 32KB, but they were DIP, the SOP version was only $1 - and that's Australian dollars too. You must get such good prices when you buy in bulk...
It must suck when the battery runs out of charge and you lose all your songs.
Why wouldn't they use flash memory like everyone else?
So people should be able to take large stacks of explosives on passenger flights along with an assault weapon (as long as it can fit in the storage bin) since they haven't actually caused someone else harm. They MAY cause harm, but if they do you can then punish them (in their next life I guess).
I played EVE a few weeks ago, for just the length of a trial account.
Starting from scratch without even understanding how you are supposed to play the game I could generate a million isk in 15 minutes transporting some crappy trading goods.
The problem was it just isn't fun to click 'buy' type in a number, click 'set destination', drag something to you cargo hold, click 'launch', click 'autopilot', wait 15 minutes, click 'dock', drag something from your cargo hold, click 'sell'. And repeat.
Playing 5c poker is more fun, and costs less per month than the subscription fee of EVE. Of course you could do that during the 'wait 15 minutes' step, I guess...
To a scientist or engineer it is trivial, however to a (European) cop, or to someone buying butter it is not so trivial. Reporting the perp's weight in grams would not be sound practice. For everyday use the base unit needs to be visualisable/imaginable on a human scale.
Half a kilo of butter, or a pound of butter is a reasonable purchase. Grams just don't cut it. What am I getting if I ask for 80 grams of salami? Well I guess I can visualize it and some Europeans buy it that way, but the average everyday user of a measuring system is nearly innumerate. They want to buy one or two or maybe a half of something.
Do you think European cops say "I'm in pursuit, west bound on Main, at 33m/s"? Or do you think they might stuff using base units and say 120km/h?
Do you really say things like "It's a 100000m drive" and "I'll meet you there in 2700 seconds"?
It's idiomatic and hence readable to anyone with any experience in the language at all.
Just like naming loop counters i.
There's no discomfort reading ptr == NULL, but there's also no discomfort reading !ptr. Context matters, it all depends on what ptr actually is.
If it's:Then I'd argue the boolean use of the pointer is better since it reads better than "node->parent==NULL".
Yeah.
I've even programmed them. Heck, I used C to do so at one point.
Readability still mattered more than anything else. Then again the microcontroller I was using had more grunt than the computers I first wrote BASIC programs for.
Ten years of programming in the language and you:
1) Don't know when two things are obviously equivalent to any non-brain dead compiler.
2) Think something other than readability matters.
3) Think the non-idiomatic way of doing something is more readable.
But I'm sure I'm just repeating the comments I can't be bothered reading.
Eve is a non-twitch MMORPG, good if you like mindless repetitive click a button every minute or two gaming...
Unless of course there is a large enough set of people who will say yes to 1) unless 2) is also available in which case they will say no to 1).
Assuming there are no costs (which is of course stupid but makes for simpler numbers) for every person who will buy the $30 DVD only if there is no $5 download, there need to be six people who wouldn't buy the $30 DVD no matter what but would buy a $5 download.
Five people to break even, but what is the point of introducing a new product without making more money?
No one would disagree that there are a bunch of people who would pay $5 for a download but wouldn't buy a $30 DVD. The difficult part is working out whether they will more than make up for lost sales of the more expensive product.
No Texas is a state (but probably not a nation) within the country of the US. Wales is a principality and a nation (now with its own legislative National Assembly thanks to the UK gov.) within the country of the UK. Bug difference. Are you by any chance in the US (going by your lack of knowledge of geography)?
The US is a country which has both states and nations within it, surely they should teach the meanings of the terms in school?
I have no desire to look at pictures on my TV
Maybe you should have saved some money and bought a radio...
It's a hashing function, so broken means it is possible to generate a collision in less work than brute force (try all possibilities) needs.
Of course TFA gives a more precise definition.
Just tax gas and provide a rebate to buses/trucks/whatever you want to encourage.
Which I suspect is what is already done in most places.
If you know of such cases I would suspect you are more likely to respond to such a survey - to get the word out...
It's a shortcoming in any language which wasn't designed with doing exactly that in mind from the beginning.
Hacking it in is very difficult, and none of the python attempts I've seen actually work.
Just think how many languages which have been designed with that in mind end up with bugs/flaws that result in holes - it's hard to get right when it is designed in from the start...
That hasn't stopped Troika Games using it for Greyhawk or Irrational using it for Freedom Force. Not for the entire game engine but as the level scripting engine. The bit that actually matters in the game, the bit which makes the *fun* stuff rather than the pretty stuff.
And of course there's BaseGolf which is completely implemented in python.
The problem I see with using python as a modding language is that it makes it very difficult to enforce safety in mods. It'd be nice if the modding language was sandboxed so that you could download a mod and know it won't format your hard drive.
But it makes sense to use an existing language engine instead of creating yet another scripting language for the level designers to use. And python is much easier for non-programmers to write in than lua, in my opinion anyway...