"Apple's shiny new PowerMacintosh G5 tower is perhaps the most exquisitely designed professional computer ever produced. With its gleaming aluminum colored surfaces, its shining details, and smartly detailed front panel, this is as much a work of art as it is a computer. And, works of art do not belong on the floor.
The PowerPerch works with all models of the newest PowerPC 970 based G5 Power Macintosh."
Weigh our two acceptances and your fate will either be one of two things...
1) If you are right, looking back and then nothing, conceding to the end. 2) If God is right, suffering eternally with satan.
False dichotomy. What if we're both wrong? What if I decided to worship your god and it turns out that Baal or Zeus get angry and smite me for worshipping the false christian god?
The constitution act, 1867 did not include what is there now. That was added later.
Wrong. Section 17 was not added later. The link points to the Constitution Act, 1867 consildated with amendments. Section 17 does not have a note indicating any amendment. It is section 17 that establishes the existence of Parliament. Section 18, and the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875 to which you refer, simply clarified the wording of section 18.
Part 4 (The part to which you refer) was repealed in 1931, and the new one was introduced in 1982.
The Statute of Westminster in 1931 did not repeal part 4 of the (then) BNA Act. The Constitution Act 1982, does not establish the Parliament of Canada.
Originally (Until 1982) none of Canada's democratic institutions existed in Canada's constitution.
Not true. See part IV of the Constitution Act, 1867, for example.
A major constitutional ammendment requires: The support of all ten provincial legislatures and a 70% majority in a federal referrendum, and a 2/3 majority in the Commons and Senate.
Where are you getting this from? A referendum is not required, let alone a majority of 70%, and a 2/3 majority in the House of Commons and Senate is not required either. Furthermore, many amendments only require 2/3 of the provinces representing 50% of the population. See part V of the Constitution Act, 1982.
It's pretty easy for us on/. to decry law enforcement aids like facial recognition hardware and software when times are good. However, it's at times of senseless tragedy like this when we really need to stop and think about letting law enforcement have the tools they need to prevent wanton acts of distruction like this...When the time comes when you're able to voice your support for tools and methods to stop these methods of terrorism, don't be silent.
I've quoted this before, and I'll quote it again.
"Those who would trade their essential Liberty for a perceived temporary Security deserve neither Liberty nor Security." --Benjamin Franklin.
Inductors and capacitors have a complex impedance (resistance).
Not to be picky, but impedance != resistance. Resistance is only the real part of impedance. The imaginary part of the impedance is call the reactance. Although many dictionaries will describe impedance as "AC resistance," that's not entirely precise.
They just got a bad rap since they were originally called imaginary.
Imaginary numbers and complex numbers are not the same. Imaginary numbers are complex numbers with no real part.
With all due respect, this is not about choice nor is it about "legislation through the judicial branch." In this case, the woman was severely burned by the coffee. McDonald's, or anyone who sells a product, has a duty of care to ensure that their product does not harm the eventual consumer.
McDonald's, or anyone, has a responsibility to warn its customers when it sells a product that is dangerous enough that the danger of using it can increase greatly when it's used in a way in which it can reasonably be expected to be used. In this case, McDonald's sells near-boiling coffee to people going through drive-throughs and gives them no warning that it's so hot that it can severely burn them.
The purpose of tort law, of which this case is only one example, is to compensate victims of torts -- people who suffer damages due to the actions of others. In this case, the court found that McDonald's was at fault. It's not about choice, or anything else. It's about companies warning consumers that their products are dangerous.
I think this is a perfect example of the subject that this item is about: Geeks commenting on law without necessarily fully understanding it.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and do not practise law. The above is not intended as a legal opinion.
Slashdot Mirror
Check out http://www.macmice.com/powerperch.html:
Confirmation?
The headquarters for Sears Canada is near Jarvis/Dundas. That's probably the signal they were picking up.
Weigh our two acceptances and your fate will either be one of two things...
1) If you are right, looking back and then nothing, conceding to the end.
2) If God is right, suffering eternally with satan.
False dichotomy. What if we're both wrong? What if I decided to worship your god and it turns out that Baal or Zeus get angry and smite me for worshipping the false christian god?
Read about the many problems with Pascal's wager.
The constitution act, 1867 did not include what is there now. That was added later.
Wrong. Section 17 was not added later. The link points to the Constitution Act, 1867 consildated with amendments. Section 17 does not have a note indicating any amendment. It is section 17 that establishes the existence of Parliament. Section 18, and the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875 to which you refer, simply clarified the wording of section 18.
Part 4 (The part to which you refer) was repealed in 1931, and the new one was introduced in 1982.
The Statute of Westminster in 1931 did not repeal part 4 of the (then) BNA Act. The Constitution Act 1982, does not establish the Parliament of Canada.
Check out Parliament's own web site: The Constitution Act, 1867 established Parliament, consisting of the Queen, an appointed Senate and an elected House of Commons.
In order for a bill to pass parliament, it need a 2/3 majority vote. Therefore ALL ammendments need a 2/3 majority.
Then given that the current government only has 169 seats out of 301, how does it pass any legislation? If a 2/3 majority were required, it would need 201 votes to pass any legislation.
Originally (Until 1982) none of Canada's democratic institutions existed in Canada's constitution.
Not true. See part IV of the Constitution Act, 1867, for example.
A major constitutional ammendment requires: The support of all ten provincial legislatures and a 70% majority in a federal referrendum, and a 2/3 majority in the Commons and Senate.
Where are you getting this from? A referendum is not required, let alone a majority of 70%, and a 2/3 majority in the House of Commons and Senate is not required either. Furthermore, many amendments only require 2/3 of the provinces representing 50% of the population. See part V of the Constitution Act, 1982.
It's pretty easy for us on /. to decry law enforcement aids like facial recognition hardware and software when times are good. However, it's at times of senseless tragedy like this when we really need to stop and think about letting law enforcement have the tools they need to prevent wanton acts of distruction like this...When the time comes when you're able to voice your support for tools and methods to stop these methods of terrorism, don't be silent.
I've quoted this before, and I'll quote it again.
"Those who would trade their essential Liberty for a perceived temporary Security deserve neither Liberty nor Security." --Benjamin Franklin.
Eliminating carnivore would make the FBI less effective. Unless you would like more terrorists and kidnappers running around.
"Those who would trade their essential Liberty for a perceived temporary Security deserve neither Liberty nor Security." --Benjamin Franklin.
The numbers are accurate, but DDR memory isn't actually being manufactured yet
Actually, DDR memory modules are being manufactured.Inductors and capacitors have a complex impedance (resistance).
Not to be picky, but impedance != resistance. Resistance is only the real part of impedance. The imaginary part of the impedance is call the reactance. Although many dictionaries will describe impedance as "AC resistance," that's not entirely precise.
They just got a bad rap since they were originally called imaginary.
Imaginary numbers and complex numbers are not the same. Imaginary numbers are complex numbers with no real part.
The only web page editor I can think of that's that horrible is... but wait -- what's this? --
<FONT face="verdana,tahoma,geneva,arial" size=1 color="#ffcc66">
All Microsoft fonts. Could this be evidence of a cover-up?
Geneva is not a Microsoft font. It's an Apple font.Uhh... Sorry, but the Windows 95 "Start" button is a rip-off of the Apple Menu.
With all due respect, this is not about choice nor is it about "legislation through the judicial branch." In this case, the woman was severely burned by the coffee. McDonald's, or anyone who sells a product, has a duty of care to ensure that their product does not harm the eventual consumer.
McDonald's, or anyone, has a responsibility to warn its customers when it sells a product that is dangerous enough that the danger of using it can increase greatly when it's used in a way in which it can reasonably be expected to be used. In this case, McDonald's sells near-boiling coffee to people going through drive-throughs and gives them no warning that it's so hot that it can severely burn them.
The purpose of tort law, of which this case is only one example, is to compensate victims of torts -- people who suffer damages due to the actions of others. In this case, the court found that McDonald's was at fault. It's not about choice, or anything else. It's about companies warning consumers that their products are dangerous.
I think this is a perfect example of the subject that this item is about: Geeks commenting on law without necessarily fully understanding it.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and do not practise law. The above is not intended as a legal opinion.