Should you limit the jury selection to IT professionals?
Well, at least in the US, it's supposed to be "a jury of your peers", so they should select only from people with similar qualifications and similar intelligence. I'd never be worried about going before a jury of my peers, but I'd never want my fate in the hands of the average retards picked for jury duty.
Except headphones are uncomfortable (and also some tasks, like trying to concentrate on reading a document, don't work so well with music playing in your ears), so you're still distracted.
It's entirely about running wild, especially since children don't have the mental capacity / reasoning skills to understand "why" what they did was wrong. Fear of getting spanked they understand and can remember, a long rant about "This hurts mommy's feelings" does nothing but bore them and provides them no incentive not to repeat the same behavior. There is a time for positive reinforcement as well as negative reinforcement, as well as methods of discipline changing over time as the child gets older and their intelligence increases.
But if they don't have evidence, then they are not criminals. So, either they're willfully letting known criminals commit crimes so they can use it to justify spying on innocent people, or they are labeling people criminals without evidence.
Well, that also only works if you live long enough to have the charges thrown out. As we've seen recently, even peacefully protesting being arrested can result in being executed without trial and no charges filed against your attackers.
Police are not allowed to break the law in order to enforce the law.
Really? Because I seem to recall them doing it pretty much every goddamn day. Then, if lowly peasants like us say anything about it, it's "SUBMIT, MOTHER FUCKER!" and politicians ranting about how you have to give up your freedom to protect freedom and other illogical bullshit.
Wait...your response to police / government corruption is to stop being a supporter of civil rights / small government and instead support the corrupt people? WHAT?! To use a quote from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, "Your logic does not resemble our Earth logic".
Exactly. I had a cop try that shit on me when I was in college and they were just looking for someone to mess with (no joke, my friends and I were merely walking around campus late at night and they insisted that we must be committing vandalism / stealing because otherwise we wouldn't be walking around). Cops love to lie just to try and cause trouble.
So because something wasn't IDENTICAL and was an earlier version, you're claiming that they're completely different and that those who used them couldn't see where things were going? That's a stupid as saying that since 20 years ago we only used "primitive" hard drives with moving parts and low capacity, scientists and tech enthusiasts didn't know that hard drive storage capacity and read / write speeds would continue to increase.
Sorry, the Girandoni rifle was MADE (1779) and was standard issue for the Austrian army before the Bill of Rights was ratified (thus the Founders knew about it) and it was later issued to Lewis and Clark because of its capabilities. The Puckle Gun was the first machine gun and it was invented in 1718. Again, they knew exactly where firearms technology was going when the wrote the Second Amendment.
By the time the Bill of Rights was written, the Founding Fathers had seen the invention of the first machine gun and had personally issues a 22-round "semi-automatic" rifle to Lewis & Clark for their famous expedition. To claim that "they didn't intend for modern weapons" to be covered by the Second Amendment is absurd. They knew exactly where guns were going (which, in all reality, guns haven't changed much in the past century) and they wanted to ensure that the people had the means to fight back against the government.
Also, "Most countries have police that are responsible to the people" is laughable, seeing how the police are only responsible to politicians and routinely violate the rights of "the people" at both the request of their political masters and to satisfy their own desire to feel powerful.
The problem is that, while Steam itself is on Linux, only the games that have been written to support Linux will work.....and those are few and far between.
Yes, but are those economic benefits worth the loss of sovereignty? Why should people in the UK or France be forced to live by rules determined by the people of Germany (or any other nation)?
All of your response had nothing to do with the issue in the article. None of those people were giving up money by doing what they did, at most they gave up a few minutes of their time. That is completely different than knowing that if you act like a jerk, you will be financially rewarded. All over the world, regardless of race, religion, gender, or nationality, the majority of people will go to great lengths to get more money.
This is why I've been saying for years that Android needs to take a page from Linux. Make the "skin" that manufacturers put on their phones a download via the play store (or a pre-installed manufacturer specific store) and let Google push all updates directly. That way users don't complain about updates and manufacturers can still put an awful skin on their phone.
Slashdot Mirror
Should you limit the jury selection to IT professionals?
Well, at least in the US, it's supposed to be "a jury of your peers", so they should select only from people with similar qualifications and similar intelligence. I'd never be worried about going before a jury of my peers, but I'd never want my fate in the hands of the average retards picked for jury duty.
Except headphones are uncomfortable (and also some tasks, like trying to concentrate on reading a document, don't work so well with music playing in your ears), so you're still distracted.
Additionally, since I suffer from microseizures, and you don't, you may be able to travel more safely at higher speeds than I.
Sounds more like you just shouldn't be driving then, if you're aware that you can't be in control of your vehicle at all times.
It's entirely about running wild, especially since children don't have the mental capacity / reasoning skills to understand "why" what they did was wrong. Fear of getting spanked they understand and can remember, a long rant about "This hurts mommy's feelings" does nothing but bore them and provides them no incentive not to repeat the same behavior. There is a time for positive reinforcement as well as negative reinforcement, as well as methods of discipline changing over time as the child gets older and their intelligence increases.
So if a cop gets a warrant to search your home and finds nothing, that automatically makes you a criminal?
Every parent who lets their kid runs wild says what you just wrote, it doesn't make it true.
Let me see how well behaved said neuroscientist's kids are. If their kids act like total brats, then clearly their method doesn't work.
But if they don't have evidence, then they are not criminals. So, either they're willfully letting known criminals commit crimes so they can use it to justify spying on innocent people, or they are labeling people criminals without evidence.
Well, that also only works if you live long enough to have the charges thrown out. As we've seen recently, even peacefully protesting being arrested can result in being executed without trial and no charges filed against your attackers.
FYI, courts have ruled it's perfectly legal for a cop to have sex with a hooker before arresting her for prostitution.
Police are not allowed to break the law in order to enforce the law.
Really? Because I seem to recall them doing it pretty much every goddamn day. Then, if lowly peasants like us say anything about it, it's "SUBMIT, MOTHER FUCKER!" and politicians ranting about how you have to give up your freedom to protect freedom and other illogical bullshit.
Wait...your response to police / government corruption is to stop being a supporter of civil rights / small government and instead support the corrupt people? WHAT?! To use a quote from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, "Your logic does not resemble our Earth logic".
Exactly. I had a cop try that shit on me when I was in college and they were just looking for someone to mess with (no joke, my friends and I were merely walking around campus late at night and they insisted that we must be committing vandalism / stealing because otherwise we wouldn't be walking around). Cops love to lie just to try and cause trouble.
So because something wasn't IDENTICAL and was an earlier version, you're claiming that they're completely different and that those who used them couldn't see where things were going? That's a stupid as saying that since 20 years ago we only used "primitive" hard drives with moving parts and low capacity, scientists and tech enthusiasts didn't know that hard drive storage capacity and read / write speeds would continue to increase.
Sorry, the Girandoni rifle was MADE (1779) and was standard issue for the Austrian army before the Bill of Rights was ratified (thus the Founders knew about it) and it was later issued to Lewis and Clark because of its capabilities. The Puckle Gun was the first machine gun and it was invented in 1718. Again, they knew exactly where firearms technology was going when the wrote the Second Amendment.
By the time the Bill of Rights was written, the Founding Fathers had seen the invention of the first machine gun and had personally issues a 22-round "semi-automatic" rifle to Lewis & Clark for their famous expedition. To claim that "they didn't intend for modern weapons" to be covered by the Second Amendment is absurd. They knew exactly where guns were going (which, in all reality, guns haven't changed much in the past century) and they wanted to ensure that the people had the means to fight back against the government.
Also, "Most countries have police that are responsible to the people" is laughable, seeing how the police are only responsible to politicians and routinely violate the rights of "the people" at both the request of their political masters and to satisfy their own desire to feel powerful.
The unthinkable has happened: people have grown up.
Since when is giving up and letting yourself be treated like shit been considered "being a grown up"?
The problem is that, while Steam itself is on Linux, only the games that have been written to support Linux will work.....and those are few and far between.
A large portion of Americans are already driving around 85 mph on the highway, this would just make it legal (for those in Montana).
Yeah, people said that about Yahoo! and AOL as well. Now most people barely remember that they exist.
Yes, but are those economic benefits worth the loss of sovereignty? Why should people in the UK or France be forced to live by rules determined by the people of Germany (or any other nation)?
Google Drive / Google Docs are all included in that too.
All of your response had nothing to do with the issue in the article. None of those people were giving up money by doing what they did, at most they gave up a few minutes of their time. That is completely different than knowing that if you act like a jerk, you will be financially rewarded. All over the world, regardless of race, religion, gender, or nationality, the majority of people will go to great lengths to get more money.
You must work in a family business then.
This is why I've been saying for years that Android needs to take a page from Linux. Make the "skin" that manufacturers put on their phones a download via the play store (or a pre-installed manufacturer specific store) and let Google push all updates directly. That way users don't complain about updates and manufacturers can still put an awful skin on their phone.