How exactly does whether Amazon has to send details of NC customers to the NC government affect sellers? And how does it have anything to do with you being subject to taxation?
Sure NC is trying to do that, but this particular ruling has nothing to do with it at all.
Because if I was going to commit voter fraud I'd arrange, in a county with 22% Hispanic/Latino for my guy to get accidentally selected when you pick Spanish, and for the opponent to get accidentally selected when you pick English.
Well I guess they are pretty stupid... They need to import some advisors from Chicago or New Jersey.
Given the claim is for taste receptors which don't send anything to the brain, surely you can conclude they just might be different from something that can actually result in "tasting" something.
Have you seen someone drive while blindfolded? they are worse than drunks.
Have you seen someone drive while masturbating? they are even worse than drunks.
Have you seen someone drive while asleep? they are worse than drunks.
Have you seen someone drive while playing WoW on their laptop? they are worse than drunks.
None of that matters in terms of whether blindfolds, masturbating, sleeping, or playing WoW should be illegal. Just as safety while diving is irrelevant to whether alcohol or pot shoiuld be illegal.
Sure, illegal to drive after taking/while doing but we can already make things have that property without making them illegal to use/possess in general.
For your phone you can "jailbreak" in order to install non-pirated software or connect to a different carrier.
For your xbox you can "jailbreak" to investigate security flaws. Note that "running homebrew software" is not investigating security flaws, neither is running pirated software.
So they have proof that these bees solve the travelling salesman problem? Not just get a good approximation? Not just solve a slightly constrained version? Not just solve a slightly different problem? You know all the things that computers do just fine thank you very much, and aren't NP-hard.
I notice the journal is a Naturalist one and the researchers aren't are bioligists and chemists not computer scientists.
I have no difficulty believing bees have evolved (or been designed with if you must for those I don't feel like arguing with) a very efficient way of collecting pollen - it is after all fundamnental to their survival and reproduction. But that they happened to solve an NP-Hard problem that they have no need of solving (does an individual bee really visit *every* location on one trip? surely some imperfection would help in discovering new plants by having bees follow different paths?) - that seems a bit of a stretch.
That would depend on the reference frame the time machine happens to be using. Maybe it's the very chaotic accelerating frame that happens to exactly match the point on the Earth's surface the machine was occupying?
Obviously it's not the only method. But keeping the President in the loop on such a critical piece would seem to me to be an important part of being a democratic republic.
I would have assumed it wouldn't be possible to launch a first strike via that mechanism in the first place. But both sides played faster and looser with their nuclear head butting than I was comfortable with back when I was young enough to actually worry...
In which case there's no MAD, and the other side can just launch their nukes at you knowing that you won't nuke them back. Given you don't have anyone to make the actual decision.
There is no "save yourself" in the first place, you're already dead since the other side has launched. The millions have already been killed.
The idea is that there isn't a choice to make, it's already been decided that the response is to launch everything we have at them before our laucnh capability is destroyed. The decision being made is "is this really happening or is it just a huge mistake". You only have minutes to decide. And in a democractic republic the elected President gets to make the final call (well in theory).
Hence the loss of the codes isn't a problem at all, it is really irrelevant whether you launch of not since it doesn't change that you are dead. You just need the other side to believe you have the capability and will to retaliate, and a stupid "football" serves that purpose just fine. There are spies and espionage going on, so if you are just pretending and the "football" does nothing at all, then only the very top of the chain will know that so from out perspective (not being at the top) nothing changes.
MAD is a very stupid situation to be in. But once you are there you are stuck...
Cities are irrelevant. The "football" scenario is a surprise ICBM strike against our nuclear response capability.
The response is not wiping out cities, the response is wiping out civilization and possibly humanity.
It's he "AD" part of MAD.
Who do you think should be making the choice to potentially wipe out humanity or just accept being wiped out ourselves? You have minutes to decide before you no longer have a choice to make. Leave it to a career military guy? Or the elected President?
A pressed accelerator does not overpower brakes. Well except for people who press the wrong pedal.
And don't forget said pickup is grinding along concrete.
You really think if selective laws of physics stopped applying and he couldn't bring the pickup to stop that he wouldn't be able to floor his own accelerator and pull ahead and to the side?
Some pretty amazing things have to happen for it to be a disaster (for him).
The engine on the pickup would have to overpower the combined weight of both vehicles, the brakes on the minivan, and the metal on concrete barrier friction. And the two vehicles would have to lock together.
In order for his car to be both be pushed into danger by the pickup and for him not to be able to just accelerate away pickup and let it pass.
Or I guess he could be a really really bad judger of relative velocities...
In a progressive tax system if you lower taxes those who pay more taxes end up getting a bigger percentage gain then those who are in a lower bracket.
Income tax cuts will always disproportionarely benefit those with large incomes since they pay most of the income taxes. Non-income tax cuts or tax credits and rebates that have thresholds at which they no longer apply are basically the tax changes that can manage to not do that.
No matter what tax cut you give to "the middle class" whatever tax bracket it applies to the wealthy have a bigger amount of dollars in. (since they "fill" the bracket) if you reduce taxes by 2% on incomes below $100,000 then the wealthy are getting $2,000 of benefit but those on $60,000 are only getting $1,200 of benefit. So you either have middle class welfare or you benefit the wealthy more. Or of course you go to a consumption based tax which will now tax the poorer harder and hence tax cuts will disproportionalely benefit the them.
Well you could raise taxes by 1% on everything >$100,000 but then you you can't really call it a tax cut. And those people on $200,000 who are self declared "middle class" complain.
Obviously. If you take "inexpensive" as part of the definition, which I clearly do. of course other people might a say >10" screen isn't a netbook as well.
There is after all no authority declaring what the word means.
Slashdot Mirror
No, since you put all those purchases on your state income tax return and paid use tax on them at the appropriate rate it won't affect you at all.
How exactly does whether Amazon has to send details of NC customers to the NC government affect sellers? And how does it have anything to do with you being subject to taxation?
Sure NC is trying to do that, but this particular ruling has nothing to do with it at all.
No.
Just because I can kill you, doesn't mean I want to allow you to be able to kill me.
Because if I was going to commit voter fraud I'd arrange, in a county with 22% Hispanic/Latino for my guy to get accidentally selected when you pick Spanish, and for the opponent to get accidentally selected when you pick English.
Well I guess they are pretty stupid... They need to import some advisors from Chicago or New Jersey.
There's no requirement to be proficient to be a citizen, sure to become on after a given age.
I can not teach my kid any English and that doesn't revoke the citizenship they had at birth (when they also couldn't understand English).
Given the claim is for taste receptors which don't send anything to the brain, surely you can conclude they just might be different from something that can actually result in "tasting" something.
Have you seen someone drive while blindfolded? they are worse than drunks.
Have you seen someone drive while masturbating? they are even worse than drunks.
Have you seen someone drive while asleep? they are worse than drunks.
Have you seen someone drive while playing WoW on their laptop? they are worse than drunks.
None of that matters in terms of whether blindfolds, masturbating, sleeping, or playing WoW should be illegal. Just as safety while diving is irrelevant to whether alcohol or pot shoiuld be illegal.
Sure, illegal to drive after taking/while doing but we can already make things have that property without making them illegal to use/possess in general.
The law they sponsored doesn't let you jailbreak the phone either.
That's a specific exemption that is not part of law itself (well the existance of exemptions is, but not what those excemptions are).
For your phone you can "jailbreak" in order to install non-pirated software or connect to a different carrier.
For your xbox you can "jailbreak" to investigate security flaws. Note that "running homebrew software" is not investigating security flaws, neither is running pirated software.
The Library of Congress gets to make this stuff up: http://www.copyright.gov/1201/
So they have proof that these bees solve the travelling salesman problem? Not just get a good approximation? Not just solve a slightly constrained version? Not just solve a slightly different problem? You know all the things that computers do just fine thank you very much, and aren't NP-hard.
I notice the journal is a Naturalist one and the researchers aren't are bioligists and chemists not computer scientists.
I have no difficulty believing bees have evolved (or been designed with if you must for those I don't feel like arguing with) a very efficient way of collecting pollen - it is after all fundamnental to their survival and reproduction. But that they happened to solve an NP-Hard problem that they have no need of solving (does an individual bee really visit *every* location on one trip? surely some imperfection would help in discovering new plants by having bees follow different paths?) - that seems a bit of a stretch.
That would depend on the reference frame the time machine happens to be using. Maybe it's the very chaotic accelerating frame that happens to exactly match the point on the Earth's surface the machine was occupying?
CS shouldn't even involve touching a computer in the first quarter, so no.
Obviously it's not the only method. But keeping the President in the loop on such a critical piece would seem to me to be an important part of being a democratic republic.
I would have assumed it wouldn't be possible to launch a first strike via that mechanism in the first place. But both sides played faster and looser with their nuclear head butting than I was comfortable with back when I was young enough to actually worry...
In which case there's no MAD, and the other side can just launch their nukes at you knowing that you won't nuke them back. Given you don't have anyone to make the actual decision.
There is no "save yourself" in the first place, you're already dead since the other side has launched. The millions have already been killed.
The idea is that there isn't a choice to make, it's already been decided that the response is to launch everything we have at them before our laucnh capability is destroyed. The decision being made is "is this really happening or is it just a huge mistake". You only have minutes to decide. And in a democractic republic the elected President gets to make the final call (well in theory).
Hence the loss of the codes isn't a problem at all, it is really irrelevant whether you launch of not since it doesn't change that you are dead. You just need the other side to believe you have the capability and will to retaliate, and a stupid "football" serves that purpose just fine. There are spies and espionage going on, so if you are just pretending and the "football" does nothing at all, then only the very top of the chain will know that so from out perspective (not being at the top) nothing changes.
MAD is a very stupid situation to be in. But once you are there you are stuck...
Cities are irrelevant. The "football" scenario is a surprise ICBM strike against our nuclear response capability.
The response is not wiping out cities, the response is wiping out civilization and possibly humanity.
It's he "AD" part of MAD.
Who do you think should be making the choice to potentially wipe out humanity or just accept being wiped out ourselves? You have minutes to decide before you no longer have a choice to make. Leave it to a career military guy? Or the elected President?
A pressed accelerator does not overpower brakes. Well except for people who press the wrong pedal.
And don't forget said pickup is grinding along concrete.
You really think if selective laws of physics stopped applying and he couldn't bring the pickup to stop that he wouldn't be able to floor his own accelerator and pull ahead and to the side?
It's not a HUGE risk.
Some pretty amazing things have to happen for it to be a disaster (for him).
The engine on the pickup would have to overpower the combined weight of both vehicles, the brakes on the minivan, and the metal on concrete barrier friction. And the two vehicles would have to lock together.
In order for his car to be both be pushed into danger by the pickup and for him not to be able to just accelerate away pickup and let it pass.
Or I guess he could be a really really bad judger of relative velocities...
They were free to jump out when he told them what he was about to do.
No way!
In a progressive tax system if you lower taxes those who pay more taxes end up getting a bigger percentage gain then those who are in a lower bracket.
Income tax cuts will always disproportionarely benefit those with large incomes since they pay most of the income taxes. Non-income tax cuts or tax credits and rebates that have thresholds at which they no longer apply are basically the tax changes that can manage to not do that.
No matter what tax cut you give to "the middle class" whatever tax bracket it applies to the wealthy have a bigger amount of dollars in. (since they "fill" the bracket) if you reduce taxes by 2% on incomes below $100,000 then the wealthy are getting $2,000 of benefit but those on $60,000 are only getting $1,200 of benefit.
So you either have middle class welfare or you benefit the wealthy more. Or of course you go to a consumption based tax which will now tax the poorer harder and hence tax cuts will disproportionalely benefit the them.
Well you could raise taxes by 1% on everything >$100,000 but then you you can't really call it a tax cut. And those people on $200,000 who are self declared "middle class" complain.
But not all. If you qualify for some tax credits and they are more than your total income tax then you get more than you paid back.
No way!
The people who pay more taxes are benefit most from tax cuts.
Next you'll claim a reduction the price of gas benefits people who drive their car to work more than those who ride a bicycle.
that doesn't have encryption software on it.
Or a cell phone for that matter.
And no ATMs for you. Oh and I guess you can't enter your pin into keypad at the supermarket, or at the bank teller you now have to use.
And don't even think of using that TV which supports HDCP. And step away from that Xbox.
At least he's only 15 and doesn't have to worry about whether they bothered putting any encryption into the voting machine this time.
Hopefully they defined computer more carefully than just "computer"...
Obviously. If you take "inexpensive" as part of the definition, which I clearly do. of course other people might a say >10" screen isn't a netbook as well.
There is after all no authority declaring what the word means.
small, lightweight, and inexpensive. two out of three doesn't cut it.
Something less harsh.