I was a strong proponent of Wikileaks, hell I even bought one of their T-shirts to support them. Right up to the point when they were always singularly highlighting grievances in the US and the West in general, while seemingly giving real police states like Russia and China with desolate human rights conditions a free pass.
Wikileaks is mostly just an intermediary between the person(s) leaking data and journalists and the public. If they don't get any leaks from Russia or China they cannot leak them. Or are you claiming that Wikileaks is intentionally burying leaks from inside Russia and China? Or is it more a feeling that when they get leaks from Western sources they focus on the dirty deeds of Western governments?
Extradition is permitted, provided that the act for which extradition is requested is equivalent to a crime that is punishable under Swedish law by imprisonment for at least one year. If sentence has been passed in the state applying for extradition, the penalty must be imprisonment for at least four months or other institutional detention for an equivalent period. Thus, extradition requires an offence punishable under the law of both countries ("dual criminality") that, in principle, is of a certain degree of seriousness.
Extradition may not be granted for military or political offences. Nor may extradition be granted if there is reason to fear that the person whose extradition is requested runs a risk - on account of his or her ethnic origins, membership of a particular social group or religious or political beliefs - of being subjected to persecution threatening his or her life or freedom, or is serious in some other respect. Nor, moreover, may extradition be granted if it would be contrary to fundamental humanitarian principles, e.g. in consideration of a person's youth or the state of this person's health. Finally, in principle, extradition may not be granted if a judgment has been pronounced for the same offence in this country. Nor may extradition be granted if the offence would have been statute-barred by limitation under Swedish law.
The state requesting for extradition must show that there is reason for extradition in the specific case. The outcome of the crime investigation in the requesting state - generally a conviction or a detention order - must be enclosed with the request for extradition. When extradition is granted, certain conditions may be laid down. For example, without the consent of the Government in the particular case, the person who is extradited may not be prosecuted or punished in the other state for any other offence committed prior to extradition (the "principle of speciality"). Nor may he or she be re-extradited to another state without the consent of the Government. Furthermore, nor may the person who is extradited be sentenced to death.
I'm not sure how Swedish law is on foreign nationals leaking government secrets, but one could argue that that resides under "military or political offences". I'm actually a bit surprised that there does not appear to be a provision requiring an expectation of a fair trial, though that could be what "being subjected to persecution threatening his or her life or freedom, or is serious in some other respect" refers to. Also note that:
If the person whose extradition is requested opposes extradition, it falls to the Supreme Court to examine whether extradition can be legally granted under the conditions laid down by law.
The temporal cold war story was weak, but season 3 was mostly pretty good. It had potential, many of the classic Trek elements like reflecting the problems of today and exploring moral dilemmas...
Time travel can be ok for a single episode, but as the main plot device for most of a series... it is crap. After seeing the pilot, I hoped that it would just be one or two episodes with that crap and the rest of the show would be classic episodic trek. No such luck. As I remember it, I found season 4 to be the best. Just make sure to skip the last episode.
It seemed that the Xindi attack against Earth and the ensuing war was a jab at the war on terror, but it fell flat for one, single reason: With their attack, the Xindi proved that they were an existential thread against Earth. Terrorism is not and never has been an existential thread against the US. Battlestar Galactica was much, much better at raising these questions in a thought provoking way.
Season 1 was on Netflix outside of the US, so one could hope that Season 2 will be as well. Even if CBS decides not to make the additional money this time around, some USians on vacation may want to see the trailer? Finally, region restrictions on trailers is a good way to piss of fans not in the white listed regions.
Adding to other replies, remember that most of us are not really that interested in the operating system. We are interested in the applications that we can run on the operating system.
This bit is crucial, because Google has an effective monopoly on distribution of apps for Android. Yes, you can download and install applications from the wild, and yes it is possible to make your own app store, but if you want to get the official X App, it is usually only uploaded to Google Play. You can try a pirate site, but how do you know that the uploader did not include some nasty stuff with the application? Amazon and others have tried with their own app stores, but they have been unable to get traction.
Now, if Google allowed phone manufacturers to just include Google Play and whatever other apps that they want, the EU would likely not have a case. However, Google takes an all or nothing stance. Either you load all Google apps or you load no Google apps. If a phone manufacturers wants to include a different internet browser as the default browser, the phone manufacturers cannot include Google Play, making the phone much less valuable.
First and foremost, after ousting the dictator by popular mobilization, the rebel leaders allowed the army to take power in a year long interim period and send the masses home. This broke the power of the masses. Furthermore, it allowed the deep state to use its propaganda to demobilize the hearts and minds of the population. Contrast this to Tunisia where the elections were held shortly after the uprising.
One of the arguments for the interim period was partly to set the stage with some rules to govern the elections, but also for opposition parties to get ready. Everybody knew that the Muslim Brotherhood would win if the elections were held immediately (and they were likely right). So, the army got the rest of the opposition leaders to agree to an interim period by pointing out that they would not win an immediate election.
As you remember, Mohammad Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood won the election, fair and square. When he won, he started to gather power in his hands and in the hands of his supporters. Some say it was because he was an autocrat trying to become a dictator. And they may have been right. However, looking back at modern Egyptian history (the revolution of 1952), he is likely to have anticipated that the army was gearing up for a coup and he was simply trying to get ready. Note that the two opinions do not conflict: He could have been both trying to become a dictator and anticipated a coup at the same time.
His power grab did serve to give the army both an excuse (that he was grabbing a lot of power) and got them the support of most of the opposition. Thus, the army could go in, take power and start a nasty campaign of repression against the Muslim Brotherhood with the support of the opposition. After having finished off the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Sisi could then turn on the remaining opposition as well as the ringleaders in the uprising against Mubarak, effectively finishing the counter revolution.
What went wrong? Comparing Egypt with Tunisia should show it clearly: Whenever the masses has ousted a nasty dictator, the rulers are on the defensive. That is when you apply pressure to get changes. If you demobilize the masses, you demobilize the force that put the rulers on the defensive and the major source of revolutionary power. This gives the rulers the time to regroup and start all sorts of campaigns to make it hard to remobilize the masses, setting the stage for counter revolution. As we saw in Egypt.
So, even for 99% that claim to live Paycheck-to-Paycheck it IS a choice; they could cancel their cable TV and save $50 a month and make sure NOT to substitute those savings by purchasing anything else, which is $600 a Year saved that will easily grow to a million$ if they keep consistently putting that $50/Month in for 50 years
$600 per year x 50 years = $30,000. Where do you get interest rates that makes those savings become $1,000,000?
Some things are easily recyclable, other things are hard. Electronics are VERY hard.
That puzzles me a bit. Compared to digging into the ground and melting various minerals, often with a low density and "polluted" by other minerals, one should think that the same process with electronics where the density is high should be easier.
Rest of world, including europe:
Offspring inherits house, everyone lives together, multi-generational families.
Depends a lot on where you live in Europe, how easy it is for said offspring to find gainful employment and how high the cost of living is. Where I live, adult offspring usually move out when they are between 19 and 21.
EVERY Azimov Robot story was designed to show the unintended consequences of the Three Laws....
If he did not explore the failure modes of the Three Laws of Robotics, there would be little robot left in the robot stories. The failure modes investigated through his stories could be seen as an investigation into the pit falls to avoid.
On a more basic level, Asimov included the three laws in the design of the positronic brain, so there would be no way to make robots without the three laws. In the real world, the three laws would need to be implemented in software, likely by each manufacturer (including the various militaries). Even assuming that all manufacturers would want to do that (Asimov investigated attempts to circumvent the three laws), the level of abstraction needed by the AI in order to understand and follow the three laws is way beyond our current capabilities.
It's actually worse than that. As the numbers represent national emissions divided by the number of people in the nation, it follows that consumption of imported goods are not included. Given that a lot of resource extraction and manufacturing over the last 50 years has been moved from the US and the EU, a significant portion of our actual CO2 emissions are actually included in the emissions of other countries, e.g. China.
According to wikipedia, in 2015 the US emitted 16.1 tonnes per person while China emitted 7.7 tonnes and the EU 6.9 tonnes. So, compared to the EU and China, the US has quite a lot of catching up to do. The explosive growth of China is a problem, but they are also taking large scale initiatives to do something about it.
I am also a lot more curious about Venus than I am about Mars. And it is not just the US that focuses on Mars. All the extra terrestrial activities of our space agencies either focus on the Moon (makes sense given its proximity), Mars or both.
I prefer using "his or her" if the gender is not known. Just like I prefer "human" to "men" when referring to human beings, e.g "that all humans are created equal". Using the masculine form just strikes my as very odd and old fashioned (in the bad sense).
I have blocked a few uploaders from appearing in my stream some 5-6 years ago. It wasn't easy to find the functionality, though. According to the internet, you go to the channel/user, select the About tab, click the flag and select Block user.
1. You pay money to motivate somebody to be interested in creating a cure, and you don't die
2. You say "paying money for a cure is unethical!", nothing ever gets done, and you die
In option 1 you have the profit motive as the underlying assumption of a cure getting developed. This is not true.
In most of the world roads and schools are funded by tax payers because it is significantly more efficient than having private companies doing the same. It is not a great leap to envision medical research being funded and turned into medicine by tax payers, and the companies working on it being publicly held and working for the good of the public rather than Goldman Sachs. If I recall correctly, the vast majority of medical research is publicly funded, some 80% I believe.
Säll said: “There is no electricity on the surface. There are two tracks, just like an outlet in the wall. Five or six centimetres down is where the electricity is. But if you flood the road with salt water then we have found that the electricity level at the surface is just one volt. You could walk on it barefoot.”
It is also a failure on the part of regulators. Most software updates includes bug fixes, that is, fixes to errors that was in the device as it was shipped. In many jurisdictions these errors that came with the device are covered by a two year warrenty from the date of sale, but I don't remember ever hearing regulators actually forcing device vendors to update the software to fix the errors.
Your questions are all answered in the Steam EULA.
Depending on your juristiction, the EULA is not a legally binding document. Some parts (or all) of it can be void if they are in violation of local rights that cannot be signed away. Given that the button says "buy" and not "rent until Steam goes out of business" and "buy" indicates ownership, I would not be surprised if courts in juristictions with a high degree of consumer protection would find against Steam.
That depends a lot on where you are in Europe. Airports in Northern Europe generally cope a lot better with snow and freezing temperatures than airports to the South and West. The difference between the US East Coast and Southern and Western Europe is not surprising as the Gulf stream means that snow and freezing temperatures in Lisbon is rare compared to Washington DC, even though they are at the same latitude.
Slashdot Mirror
I was a strong proponent of Wikileaks, hell I even bought one of their T-shirts to support them. Right up to the point when they were always singularly highlighting grievances in the US and the West in general, while seemingly giving real police states like Russia and China with desolate human rights conditions a free pass.
Wikileaks is mostly just an intermediary between the person(s) leaking data and journalists and the public. If they don't get any leaks from Russia or China they cannot leak them. Or are you claiming that Wikileaks is intentionally burying leaks from inside Russia and China? Or is it more a feeling that when they get leaks from Western sources they focus on the dirty deeds of Western governments?
Extradition is permitted, provided that the act for which extradition is requested is equivalent to a crime that is punishable under Swedish law by imprisonment for at least one year. If sentence has been passed in the state applying for extradition, the penalty must be imprisonment for at least four months or other institutional detention for an equivalent period. Thus, extradition requires an offence punishable under the law of both countries ("dual criminality") that, in principle, is of a certain degree of seriousness.
Extradition may not be granted for military or political offences. Nor may extradition be granted if there is reason to fear that the person whose extradition is requested runs a risk - on account of his or her ethnic origins, membership of a particular social group or religious or political beliefs - of being subjected to persecution threatening his or her life or freedom, or is serious in some other respect. Nor, moreover, may extradition be granted if it would be contrary to fundamental humanitarian principles, e.g. in consideration of a person's youth or the state of this person's health. Finally, in principle, extradition may not be granted if a judgment has been pronounced for the same offence in this country. Nor may extradition be granted if the offence would have been statute-barred by limitation under Swedish law.
The state requesting for extradition must show that there is reason for extradition in the specific case. The outcome of the crime investigation in the requesting state - generally a conviction or a detention order - must be enclosed with the request for extradition. When extradition is granted, certain conditions may be laid down. For example, without the consent of the Government in the particular case, the person who is extradited may not be prosecuted or punished in the other state for any other offence committed prior to extradition (the "principle of speciality"). Nor may he or she be re-extradited to another state without the consent of the Government. Furthermore, nor may the person who is extradited be sentenced to death.
I'm not sure how Swedish law is on foreign nationals leaking government secrets, but one could argue that that resides under "military or political offences". I'm actually a bit surprised that there does not appear to be a provision requiring an expectation of a fair trial, though that could be what "being subjected to persecution threatening his or her life or freedom, or is serious in some other respect" refers to. Also note that:
If the person whose extradition is requested opposes extradition, it falls to the Supreme Court to examine whether extradition can be legally granted under the conditions laid down by law.
If we are being pedantic, everything is in finite supplies in this solar system/galaxy/universe ;-)
Yeah, I know, it just baffles me how anyone in 2018 can think that it is a good idea to put region restrictions on a trailer.
The temporal cold war story was weak, but season 3 was mostly pretty good. It had potential, many of the classic Trek elements like reflecting the problems of today and exploring moral dilemmas...
Time travel can be ok for a single episode, but as the main plot device for most of a series ... it is crap. After seeing the pilot, I hoped that it would just be one or two episodes with that crap and the rest of the show would be classic episodic trek. No such luck. As I remember it, I found season 4 to be the best. Just make sure to skip the last episode.
It seemed that the Xindi attack against Earth and the ensuing war was a jab at the war on terror, but it fell flat for one, single reason: With their attack, the Xindi proved that they were an existential thread against Earth. Terrorism is not and never has been an existential thread against the US. Battlestar Galactica was much, much better at raising these questions in a thought provoking way.
Season 1 was on Netflix outside of the US, so one could hope that Season 2 will be as well. Even if CBS decides not to make the additional money this time around, some USians on vacation may want to see the trailer? Finally, region restrictions on trailers is a good way to piss of fans not in the white listed regions.
Adding to other replies, remember that most of us are not really that interested in the operating system. We are interested in the applications that we can run on the operating system.
This bit is crucial, because Google has an effective monopoly on distribution of apps for Android. Yes, you can download and install applications from the wild, and yes it is possible to make your own app store, but if you want to get the official X App, it is usually only uploaded to Google Play. You can try a pirate site, but how do you know that the uploader did not include some nasty stuff with the application? Amazon and others have tried with their own app stores, but they have been unable to get traction.
Now, if Google allowed phone manufacturers to just include Google Play and whatever other apps that they want, the EU would likely not have a case. However, Google takes an all or nothing stance. Either you load all Google apps or you load no Google apps. If a phone manufacturers wants to include a different internet browser as the default browser, the phone manufacturers cannot include Google Play, making the phone much less valuable.
A number of things went wrong.
First and foremost, after ousting the dictator by popular mobilization, the rebel leaders allowed the army to take power in a year long interim period and send the masses home. This broke the power of the masses. Furthermore, it allowed the deep state to use its propaganda to demobilize the hearts and minds of the population. Contrast this to Tunisia where the elections were held shortly after the uprising.
One of the arguments for the interim period was partly to set the stage with some rules to govern the elections, but also for opposition parties to get ready. Everybody knew that the Muslim Brotherhood would win if the elections were held immediately (and they were likely right). So, the army got the rest of the opposition leaders to agree to an interim period by pointing out that they would not win an immediate election.
As you remember, Mohammad Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood won the election, fair and square. When he won, he started to gather power in his hands and in the hands of his supporters. Some say it was because he was an autocrat trying to become a dictator. And they may have been right. However, looking back at modern Egyptian history (the revolution of 1952), he is likely to have anticipated that the army was gearing up for a coup and he was simply trying to get ready. Note that the two opinions do not conflict: He could have been both trying to become a dictator and anticipated a coup at the same time.
His power grab did serve to give the army both an excuse (that he was grabbing a lot of power) and got them the support of most of the opposition. Thus, the army could go in, take power and start a nasty campaign of repression against the Muslim Brotherhood with the support of the opposition. After having finished off the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Sisi could then turn on the remaining opposition as well as the ringleaders in the uprising against Mubarak, effectively finishing the counter revolution.
What went wrong? Comparing Egypt with Tunisia should show it clearly: Whenever the masses has ousted a nasty dictator, the rulers are on the defensive. That is when you apply pressure to get changes. If you demobilize the masses, you demobilize the force that put the rulers on the defensive and the major source of revolutionary power. This gives the rulers the time to regroup and start all sorts of campaigns to make it hard to remobilize the masses, setting the stage for counter revolution. As we saw in Egypt.
So, even for 99% that claim to live Paycheck-to-Paycheck it IS a choice; they could cancel their cable TV and save $50 a month and make sure NOT to substitute those savings by purchasing anything else, which is $600 a Year saved that will easily grow to a million$ if they keep consistently putting that $50/Month in for 50 years
$600 per year x 50 years = $30,000. Where do you get interest rates that makes those savings become $1,000,000?
Some things are easily recyclable, other things are hard. Electronics are VERY hard.
That puzzles me a bit. Compared to digging into the ground and melting various minerals, often with a low density and "polluted" by other minerals, one should think that the same process with electronics where the density is high should be easier.
Rest of world, including europe: Offspring inherits house, everyone lives together, multi-generational families.
Depends a lot on where you live in Europe, how easy it is for said offspring to find gainful employment and how high the cost of living is. Where I live, adult offspring usually move out when they are between 19 and 21.
EVERY Azimov Robot story was designed to show the unintended consequences of the Three Laws....
If he did not explore the failure modes of the Three Laws of Robotics, there would be little robot left in the robot stories. The failure modes investigated through his stories could be seen as an investigation into the pit falls to avoid.
On a more basic level, Asimov included the three laws in the design of the positronic brain, so there would be no way to make robots without the three laws. In the real world, the three laws would need to be implemented in software, likely by each manufacturer (including the various militaries). Even assuming that all manufacturers would want to do that (Asimov investigated attempts to circumvent the three laws), the level of abstraction needed by the AI in order to understand and follow the three laws is way beyond our current capabilities.
It's actually worse than that. As the numbers represent national emissions divided by the number of people in the nation, it follows that consumption of imported goods are not included. Given that a lot of resource extraction and manufacturing over the last 50 years has been moved from the US and the EU, a significant portion of our actual CO2 emissions are actually included in the emissions of other countries, e.g. China.
According to wikipedia, in 2015 the US emitted 16.1 tonnes per person while China emitted 7.7 tonnes and the EU 6.9 tonnes. So, compared to the EU and China, the US has quite a lot of catching up to do. The explosive growth of China is a problem, but they are also taking large scale initiatives to do something about it.
I am also a lot more curious about Venus than I am about Mars. And it is not just the US that focuses on Mars. All the extra terrestrial activities of our space agencies either focus on the Moon (makes sense given its proximity), Mars or both.
I prefer using "his or her" if the gender is not known. Just like I prefer "human" to "men" when referring to human beings, e.g "that all humans are created equal". Using the masculine form just strikes my as very odd and old fashioned (in the bad sense).
I have blocked a few uploaders from appearing in my stream some 5-6 years ago. It wasn't easy to find the functionality, though. According to the internet, you go to the channel/user, select the About tab, click the flag and select Block user.
So which do you prefer?
1. You pay money to motivate somebody to be interested in creating a cure, and you don't die
2. You say "paying money for a cure is unethical!", nothing ever gets done, and you die
In option 1 you have the profit motive as the underlying assumption of a cure getting developed. This is not true.
In most of the world roads and schools are funded by tax payers because it is significantly more efficient than having private companies doing the same. It is not a great leap to envision medical research being funded and turned into medicine by tax payers, and the companies working on it being publicly held and working for the good of the public rather than Goldman Sachs. If I recall correctly, the vast majority of medical research is publicly funded, some 80% I believe.
Säll said: “There is no electricity on the surface. There are two tracks, just like an outlet in the wall. Five or six centimetres down is where the electricity is. But if you flood the road with salt water then we have found that the electricity level at the surface is just one volt. You could walk on it barefoot.”
3 to 4 - HTC, Huawei, LG, and Motorola
Motorola just pushed a new patch to my phone. I wonder if it will improve matters.
It is also a failure on the part of regulators. Most software updates includes bug fixes, that is, fixes to errors that was in the device as it was shipped. In many jurisdictions these errors that came with the device are covered by a two year warrenty from the date of sale, but I don't remember ever hearing regulators actually forcing device vendors to update the software to fix the errors.
Your questions are all answered in the Steam EULA.
Depending on your juristiction, the EULA is not a legally binding document. Some parts (or all) of it can be void if they are in violation of local rights that cannot be signed away. Given that the button says "buy" and not "rent until Steam goes out of business" and "buy" indicates ownership, I would not be surprised if courts in juristictions with a high degree of consumer protection would find against Steam.
This is the most helpful thing that can be done.
No...Donating money, food, clothing, furniture, or other necessities would be the most helpful.
Where are my mod points when I need them? Please mod parent up.
That depends a lot on where you are in Europe. Airports in Northern Europe generally cope a lot better with snow and freezing temperatures than airports to the South and West. The difference between the US East Coast and Southern and Western Europe is not surprising as the Gulf stream means that snow and freezing temperatures in Lisbon is rare compared to Washington DC, even though they are at the same latitude.
I would probably start both simpler and maybe with more immediate focus on the stuff that high schoolers interact with: