Anybody with flashblock can hopefully convert a number in seconds to one in minutes and seconds. If no they are using a computer of some sort, I'm sure it can manage.
Surely you don't need to plain make stuff up if you have a valid argument?
160,794 H1-Bs were issued last year (potentially more if there were any that were succesfully appealed after September)., so you are only off by about 250%.
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2011NIVWorkloadbyVisaCategory.pdf is my reference for the count, straight from the department of state. Where is your number from? Did you just assume that a limit with a bunch of exemptions to it will only reach the on-exemption limit? Or did you just make it up?
And are you also seriously claiming there are 150 million people working the US in the fields that H1-B visas apply to? Or did you make that up as well.
It's not unfair, it's an expected part of the intentional business decision. If the casual market has moved on to tablets and smartphones though that very successful short and medium term decision mightn't have been so great in the long term.
There is no "jury of peers" in the US. In fact that's one of the things the ideals of the US stand in direct opposition to. Sure once upon a time a commoner was not considered a peer of a noble and a commoner could never judge a noble, but the US (in theory) left that behind.
There is no mention of "jury of peers" in the consitution, it's just a Jury or "impartial jury"
"Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury" - Article 3 Section 2
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed" - Sixth Amendment.
A jury of peers as you describe would be just about the worst possible jury system. Do you really want a police officer on trial for beating someone in custody to have a jury of fellow police officers? Do you really want a Wall Street banker accused of misusing client funds to have a jury consisting entirely of Wall Street bankers?
Impartial has been interpreted to mean that the jury should be representative of the community - precisely not only peers of the accused.
So what do you propose for say a boxing in match in which both boxers king hit each other at the same time and both are knocked out? Declare the guy who gets up first (even if it is in 2 minutes time) the winner? Wake them both up and have at it again? Both of those are making the decision on something that isn't supposed to be part of the sport, might as have them play a game of chess to decide.
In a two person swimming race both competitors drown, do you declare the guy who swam further the winner?
In cricket the idea isn't just to see who is best, you also have be able to get the other side out. So you can be better than the other team but not good enough to win. If your bowlers aren't good enough to get their batsmen out then it doesn't matter if your batsmen are far superior you still don't win.
It also adds an extra factors to the strategy: do you keep batting and ensure a draw, or do you declare your innings over early and risk them winning in order to have a chance to win yourself? Do you bat safely aiming for the draw, or do you risk getting out an losing in order to try and win?
Just as long? Show me a five day game of baseball that ends in a draw. And if you are going to count "best of X playoff" multiple games as a single game, then cricket has the 5 test series, for 25 days of playing also ending in a draw.
The grill near the first triangular shadow at the bottom, is far more lit on the right. The triangular shadow is also different. However, those labels do seem far too similar...
Slashdot Mirror
Given the 70-80k range, the 0.03% (not 3%, 0.03%) difference is meaningless.
It's not a prison, they can migrate leave the country and live elsewhere.
And you don't need tax lists to see who has bought nice stuff, so that list isn't helping.
Anybody with flashblock can hopefully convert a number in seconds to one in minutes and seconds. If no they are using a computer of some sort, I'm sure it can manage.
That's hardly a good metric for determining slack jawed idiotness. Many smart people don't know about that. And some idiots do.
Surely you don't need to plain make stuff up if you have a valid argument?
160,794 H1-Bs were issued last year (potentially more if there were any that were succesfully appealed after September)., so you are only off by about 250%.
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2011NIVWorkloadbyVisaCategory.pdf is my reference for the count, straight from the department of state. Where is your number from? Did you just assume that a limit with a bunch of exemptions to it will only reach the on-exemption limit? Or did you just make it up?
And are you also seriously claiming there are 150 million people working the US in the fields that H1-B visas apply to? Or did you make that up as well.
It's not unfair, it's an expected part of the intentional business decision. If the casual market has moved on to tablets and smartphones though that very successful short and medium term decision mightn't have been so great in the long term.
There is no "jury of peers" in the US. In fact that's one of the things the ideals of the US stand in direct opposition to. Sure once upon a time a commoner was not considered a peer of a noble and a commoner could never judge a noble, but the US (in theory) left that behind.
There is no mention of "jury of peers" in the consitution, it's just a Jury or "impartial jury"
"Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury" - Article 3 Section 2
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed" - Sixth Amendment.
A jury of peers as you describe would be just about the worst possible jury system. Do you really want a police officer on trial for beating someone in custody to have a jury of fellow police officers? Do you really want a Wall Street banker accused of misusing client funds to have a jury consisting entirely of Wall Street bankers?
Impartial has been interpreted to mean that the jury should be representative of the community - precisely not only peers of the accused.
But it's not funded from military budgets so that's irrelevant. And of course cutting something by 50% or 80% does not mean not funding it at all.
No. He's saying they don't invest in a certain type of R&D, they still produce progress via other types.
And of course he offered no evidence for his claim anyway.
They know how TCP works and you don't.
How do you expect an author to provide for his great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grand children? You selfish bastard!
So what do you propose for say a boxing in match in which both boxers king hit each other at the same time and both are knocked out? Declare the guy who gets up first (even if it is in 2 minutes time) the winner? Wake them both up and have at it again? Both of those are making the decision on something that isn't supposed to be part of the sport, might as have them play a game of chess to decide.
In a two person swimming race both competitors drown, do you declare the guy who swam further the winner?
In cricket the idea isn't just to see who is best, you also have be able to get the other side out. So you can be better than the other team but not good enough to win. If your bowlers aren't good enough to get their batsmen out then it doesn't matter if your batsmen are far superior you still don't win.
It also adds an extra factors to the strategy: do you keep batting and ensure a draw, or do you declare your innings over early and risk them winning in order to have a chance to win yourself? Do you bat safely aiming for the draw, or do you risk getting out an losing in order to try and win?
Pity the person incapable of seeing a tie as a fourth possible outcome.
There is nothing bad about it, in fact a side struggling to hold on for the draw is where the game is at its best.
But you ignore that when trying to win a "my sport is more boring than your sport" argument.
is clearly the only option.
Sadly that will prbbaly seem reasonable considering your display of logic and reason so far.
Just as long? Show me a five day game of baseball that ends in a draw. And if you are going to count "best of X playoff" multiple games as a single game, then cricket has the 5 test series, for 25 days of playing also ending in a draw.
To be fair "How about a $2 billion program to build some remote control planes" might have been a harder sell :)
Given they "think its their turn" they are going to get a ticket and hence "the message" from a marked police car as well.
So what? Nothing about a UAV requires any sort of autonomous operation.
An RC model airplane is a UAV. Unless you squeeze a person into it of course...
Because people who "think its their turn" will magically think it isn't if an unmarked police car is in the vicinity?
I agree it's a been flipped (the labels make no sense otherwise), but that grill is different (or my eyes are going in my old age of course).
Except it came first and "neoliberal" implies it is a late comer.
The grill near the first triangular shadow at the bottom, is far more lit on the right. The triangular shadow is also different. However, those labels do seem far too similar...