It must be nice to never be at risk of catastrophic injury or chronic illness. Lupus for example averages a cost of six to ten thousand a year. Rheumatoid arthritis averages 853 per month. Paying cash is not an option for a low income person at those prices.
I agree that little piracy is civil disobedience, some of it is. Several people I know download Spore just to protest the DRM, they had no interest in the game.
Plaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories.
Did you read the allegations you posted? This is not a case of oh no you don't give poor people enough loans. This is an accusation of hey you give one group loans while not doing so for other races with the same credit background. Redling is a terrible practice.
Okay if we take your guess of a few hundred per year in India and scale it to the population of the UK it still does not seem to justify the press attention and expenditures.
The CRA never stated that people with poor credit histories had to be considered merely that a bank had to give loans where it was located. It also only applied to FDIC insured banks which damn well should have been kept separate from the investment arm.
http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/6500-2515.html
Unfortunately politicians as a group have done little to inspire me to place much trust in them. Yes, I will agree that the headings could be innocent. i also believe we should hold our political figures to a higher standard, not just avoiding impropriety but also the appearance of such.
People who can politely disagree are pretty rare on both sides. Now on with the show. Yes, I would be equally fine with the publishing. In my case that consists of shock and general dismay, but I disagree that there is nothing in the emails. Many of the headings seem to rather strongly imply that government work was being handled through back channels. I don't believe that justifies the actions of the hacker, but it points to a potential case of major misconduct on her part as well. While such actions are nothing new in the corridors of power I firmly believe that we should do all we can to stop or prevent such behavior. (by this I am not refering to the hacking rather a more proactive use of the vote)
I agree in a court of law his findings mean nothing and should mean nothing. That said she is up for election for a pretty major (if rather cushy)office. In a situation like that fishy email subjects are something to be asked about. If this were Obama, Biden, or even Kucinich, I would still condemn the act and hope for a discussion of the contents of any damning material found.
I agree wrong is wrong. That is why I condemn the acts of hacking. I think most of the people that are drawing attention to potential misdeeds hold the view as I do that the topic of conversation should be on the pre-existing allegations of wrongdoing, because it is already obvious that the kid is in the wrong. The more interesting hazy moral ground is what it means for her and us if, as some of the subject headings seem to imply, this kid did find evidence of wrongdoing. Do you think it is irrational to discuss what his unethical actions may have brought to light about her own actions?
Actually as a hate filled person on the left I find the hacking of the email account and website to be a silly juvenile tactic, and one that should be punished. That said I would rather see her strung up for any misuse of email through proper legal channels. Life is so much sweeter when you can both win and do the right thing.
I will say this comparing meth and coffee is at least comparing two drugs with related efeects. Both addictive stimulants. The same does not hold true for pot and alcohol.
"repeated, intrusive or unwanted acts, words or gestures that are intended to adversely affect the safety, security or privacy of another, regardless of the relationship between the actor and the intended target." (M.S. Â 609.749, Subd. I)
Criminal harassment is defined as "engag(ing) in intentional conduct which the actor [harasser] knows or has reason to know would cause the victim, under the circumstances, to feel frightened, threatened, oppressed, persecuted, or intimidated; and causes this reaction on the part of the victim. (M.S. Â 609.749, Subd. I). Such conduct can include following or pursuing you, returning to your property without your consent, making repeated phone calls, inducing you to make calls, causing your phone to repeatedly ring, repeatedly mailing or delivering unwanted letters, objects, or gifts to you.
While it is a nightmare to prove there are laws on the books governing such behavior.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, legal penalties seem to deter people from very little.
It must be nice to never be at risk of catastrophic injury or chronic illness. Lupus for example averages a cost of six to ten thousand a year. Rheumatoid arthritis averages 853 per month. Paying cash is not an option for a low income person at those prices.
opening the conversation with Cheese? kind of gives away the fact that it is not human
I agree that little piracy is civil disobedience, some of it is. Several people I know download Spore just to protest the DRM, they had no interest in the game.
and if your boss makes you work through a legally mandated break and then says you made the choice?
Plaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories.
Did you read the allegations you posted? This is not a case of oh no you don't give poor people enough loans. This is an accusation of hey you give one group loans while not doing so for other races with the same credit background. Redling is a terrible practice.
I am in Cleveland Oh. While not as big as it was it is hardly rural. I spend under ten percent of my day on camera.
You can't use a credit counselor on a mortgage anyway. http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/337823/credit_counseling_facts_and_faqs.html?page=4&cat=3
The great lakes water compact has finally been passed by both sides,not a good example.
and if you can get into the WTO you are still boned
Move to a better area. I am under surveillance a very small portion of my time.
Okay if we take your guess of a few hundred per year in India and scale it to the population of the UK it still does not seem to justify the press attention and expenditures.
and rights are still rights even if you have a pocket full of meth
The CRA never stated that people with poor credit histories had to be considered merely that a bank had to give loans where it was located. It also only applied to FDIC insured banks which damn well should have been kept separate from the investment arm. http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/6500-2515.html
So Clinton pushed for the CRA as attorney general of Arkansas?
Unfortunately politicians as a group have done little to inspire me to place much trust in them. Yes, I will agree that the headings could be innocent. i also believe we should hold our political figures to a higher standard, not just avoiding impropriety but also the appearance of such.
People who can politely disagree are pretty rare on both sides. Now on with the show. Yes, I would be equally fine with the publishing. In my case that consists of shock and general dismay, but I disagree that there is nothing in the emails. Many of the headings seem to rather strongly imply that government work was being handled through back channels. I don't believe that justifies the actions of the hacker, but it points to a potential case of major misconduct on her part as well. While such actions are nothing new in the corridors of power I firmly believe that we should do all we can to stop or prevent such behavior. (by this I am not refering to the hacking rather a more proactive use of the vote)
I agree in a court of law his findings mean nothing and should mean nothing. That said she is up for election for a pretty major (if rather cushy)office. In a situation like that fishy email subjects are something to be asked about. If this were Obama, Biden, or even Kucinich, I would still condemn the act and hope for a discussion of the contents of any damning material found.
I agree wrong is wrong. That is why I condemn the acts of hacking. I think most of the people that are drawing attention to potential misdeeds hold the view as I do that the topic of conversation should be on the pre-existing allegations of wrongdoing, because it is already obvious that the kid is in the wrong. The more interesting hazy moral ground is what it means for her and us if, as some of the subject headings seem to imply, this kid did find evidence of wrongdoing. Do you think it is irrational to discuss what his unethical actions may have brought to light about her own actions?
Actually as a hate filled person on the left I find the hacking of the email account and website to be a silly juvenile tactic, and one that should be punished. That said I would rather see her strung up for any misuse of email through proper legal channels. Life is so much sweeter when you can both win and do the right thing.
I will say this comparing meth and coffee is at least comparing two drugs with related efeects. Both addictive stimulants. The same does not hold true for pot and alcohol.
"repeated, intrusive or unwanted acts, words or gestures that are intended to adversely affect the safety, security or privacy of another, regardless of the relationship between the actor and the intended target." (M.S. Â 609.749, Subd. I) Criminal harassment is defined as "engag(ing) in intentional conduct which the actor [harasser] knows or has reason to know would cause the victim, under the circumstances, to feel frightened, threatened, oppressed, persecuted, or intimidated; and causes this reaction on the part of the victim. (M.S. Â 609.749, Subd. I). Such conduct can include following or pursuing you, returning to your property without your consent, making repeated phone calls, inducing you to make calls, causing your phone to repeatedly ring, repeatedly mailing or delivering unwanted letters, objects, or gifts to you. While it is a nightmare to prove there are laws on the books governing such behavior.
and yet a cop following you all day in public is harrassment
or cleveland or detroit or kansas city or atlanta or...
It fits well with what I have seen.