What's preventing the rich dude from paying a lawyer $5k over that $500 case?
Legal fees in Germany are based on the "Gerichtskostengesetz", a law that regulates the courts' official fees, and the "Gesetz ueber die Verguetung der Rechtsanwaeltinnen und Rechtsanwaelte", a law that regulates lawyers' fees. In cases where the losing party is ordered to pay the other side's fees, the winning party just receives a claim against the loser and remains the official debtor. So bankrupting the losing side won't help the party at all regarding legal fees. Everything one spends on lawyers above the official fees can not be reclaimed afaik.
Actually, economists have been saying for decades that a price on carbon is the most effective way to reduce emissions with least impact on the economy.
Yes and politicians have made certain that none of the market based mechanisms implemented so far can help reduce emissions in any meaningful way.
Really? I'm constantly seeing articles about how people made large amounts of money in their spare time, working from home on the internet.
I've read the same articles as well as a couple of others regarding the enhancement of male genitalia. I am currently working on both fronts, with the calluses to prove, and apparently neither work all the time. So I guess correlation rather than causation...:-)
Seriously, it's not even an afterthought. I have worked on a publicly funded research project covering smart home and living crap. While some of it may be interesting from a tinkering with stuff point of view, most of it is creepy surveillance type of shit, like smart metering. When I raised the question of security people stared blankly at me for a second or two and suggested that it wasn't a problem at all and if ever will be fixed later, maybe.
My point is, CIOs do not make relevant security decisions when it comes to product design. No one does. It's all about marketability and cost efficiency, security is neither because it is complex and costs a lot of money. And who care? Honestly, who cares about security? It's not the vendors and it's definitely not the consumers who constantly carry their rarely-if-ever-security-updated-listening-in-and-tracking-devices and provide the world with current information about the vacancy of their homes. So again, who cares? Eventually the insurance companies might care, when some cracker remotely burned down a kitchen or flooded a bathroom or two or ten thousand.
I can't believe there's still a year to go in this process. We had our entire Canadian election in the span of a few of these debates...this seems just a wee bit out of hand.
Canadians haven't figured out that an election can be a real money maker for some influential people and a $Country's Next Supermodel for the plebs....err rest it seems.
"Don't be an asshole!" as a behavioural rule only works when it is safe to assume that the vast majority of the population aren't in fact assholes. Empirical evidence (ie. elections, polls, daily news) unfortunately suggest otherwise.
These are our tax dollars being wasted to spy on us instead of building roads, hospitals and essential services.
They are not wasted. The money is spend to protect the people from terrorism and bad things. Of course now we have to define "people", because it quite obviously does not include all the citizens. It includes only lthe people who actually pay for this through their taxes, so they get to decide... no, wait. That's us, the citizens being spied upon. So it's the citizens who make most of the money and don't pay any taxes. If we were to accept this, it would make perfect sense to withhold proper education, a decent health and social welfare system. The taxpayers otherwise might have the knowledge and time to actually question and do something about this system.
The problem is, that far too many citizens are too occupied worrying about losing the few privilleges left will be taken away from them by mexicans, refugees, muslims or whatever fits the current agenda, depending on where they live. It has become so easy to manipulate the masses into believing any exaggerated or even non-existant threat, the few people actually deciding anything must be crying with joy.
That begs the question: Why use it at all? Traditional text editors like vim (or gvim) and xemacs far outperform gedit even for the simplest of tasks if you're comfortable with keyboard shortcuts.
Well, there are two organizations which use this acronym. One is an utterly useless bunch of bureaucrats, running the servers of one of the most successful open content projects, with no clue whatsoever about what its projects are doing or the people actually providing the content and the other is known for excellence in some areas of kitchenware.
That to lose weight, you have to eat less food and that this means sometimes feeling hungry.
No, one definitely does not have to eat less food or feel hungry to lose weight. One has to control for the food energy density to avoid feeling hungry, which is usually rather counterproductive when long term weight loss is the goal. See for example http://www.nutrition.org.uk/healthyliving/fuller/what-is-energy-density.html
Never forget that psychological factors will influence every diet and feeling hungry all the time is not the way to go.
"Every month or two" is a myth. Update Pack 6 is LMDE 201303, Update Pack 7 was released in September and we haven't seen an update since.
Ubuntu became crap, ok, ish;-), IMHO for making a couple of very unfortunate decisions, you mention some of them. I ran it on a number of systems for years, now I have to fiddle a little more since I am back on Debian. In the end, choice is good.
I am pretty sure he will slip a systemd dependency into wayland somehow. Wayland is developed by xorg developers and will eventually replace xorg, so yes.:-)
I don't do that much fiddling on LMDE, but a system for which security updates are released every once in a while is completely unacceptable. They should just call it quits. And again, what is it with the installer? What is wrong with taking/forking/whatever a very good, capable and mature installer (I am talking about debian now...;-)) and customise it to include the mint specific stuff?
Thing is, I really like the Mint desktop stuff, but the distros are so far a joke unfortunately.
If only we had places where information could be stored and searched so people who think they've figured out something new can actually look to see if it's new.
It's often easier to do a full save, a fresh install, and then restore whatever you need. My Linux Mint upgrades take about a day of work to get everything back to where I want it.
Dear Mint users, please stop calling it an upgrade when in fact you're doing a complete reinstall of the OS. I know that this idiocy is coming from the project's website ("In a "fresh" upgrade you use the liveCD of the new release to perform a new installation and to overwrite your existing partitions."), but that doesn't mean you have to use it outside the linuxmint forums.
It's only easier in case you don't use full disk encryption, which the installer still doesn't support. Why the project decided to write an installler from scratch I will never understand, and don't get me started on LMDE...;-)
...you hide the drugs in regular fruit shipments, dispense with the costly and annoying consumer distribution system and let the local discounter handle it.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Legal fees in Germany are based on the "Gerichtskostengesetz", a law that regulates the courts' official fees, and the "Gesetz ueber die Verguetung der Rechtsanwaeltinnen und Rechtsanwaelte", a law that regulates lawyers' fees. In cases where the losing party is ordered to pay the other side's fees, the winning party just receives a claim against the loser and remains the official debtor. So bankrupting the losing side won't help the party at all regarding legal fees. Everything one spends on lawyers above the official fees can not be reclaimed afaik.
Actually, economists have been saying for decades that a price on carbon is the most effective way to reduce emissions with least impact on the economy.
Yes and politicians have made certain that none of the market based mechanisms implemented so far can help reduce emissions in any meaningful way.
Really? I'm constantly seeing articles about how people made large amounts of money in their spare time, working from home on the internet.
I've read the same articles as well as a couple of others regarding the enhancement of male genitalia. I am currently working on both fronts, with the calluses to prove, and apparently neither work all the time. So I guess correlation rather than causation... :-)
Seriously, it's not even an afterthought. I have worked on a publicly funded research project covering smart home and living crap. While some of it may be interesting from a tinkering with stuff point of view, most of it is creepy surveillance type of shit, like smart metering. When I raised the question of security people stared blankly at me for a second or two and suggested that it wasn't a problem at all and if ever will be fixed later, maybe.
My point is, CIOs do not make relevant security decisions when it comes to product design. No one does. It's all about marketability and cost efficiency, security is neither because it is complex and costs a lot of money. And who care? Honestly, who cares about security? It's not the vendors and it's definitely not the consumers who constantly carry their rarely-if-ever-security-updated-listening-in-and-tracking-devices and provide the world with current information about the vacancy of their homes. So again, who cares? Eventually the insurance companies might care, when some cracker remotely burned down a kitchen or flooded a bathroom or two or ten thousand.
Easy to find free housing when you kill or kick out the people who were living in said housing.
Whole countries were built following this model...
Canadians haven't figured out that an election can be a real money maker for some influential people and a $Country's Next Supermodel for the plebs....err rest it seems.
"Don't be an asshole!" as a behavioural rule only works when it is safe to assume that the vast majority of the population aren't in fact assholes. Empirical evidence (ie. elections, polls, daily news) unfortunately suggest otherwise.
They are not wasted. The money is spend to protect the people from terrorism and bad things. Of course now we have to define "people", because it quite obviously does not include all the citizens. It includes only lthe people who actually pay for this through their taxes, so they get to decide... no, wait. That's us, the citizens being spied upon. So it's the citizens who make most of the money and don't pay any taxes. If we were to accept this, it would make perfect sense to withhold proper education, a decent health and social welfare system. The taxpayers otherwise might have the knowledge and time to actually question and do something about this system.
The problem is, that far too many citizens are too occupied worrying about losing the few privilleges left will be taken away from them by mexicans, refugees, muslims or whatever fits the current agenda, depending on where they live. It has become so easy to manipulate the masses into believing any exaggerated or even non-existant threat, the few people actually deciding anything must be crying with joy.
It's the left--particularly SJWs--leading the push against pr0n, because it promotes rape culture and is demeaning to dinosaurs.
Damn, I hate those social jurassic warriors.
And this is relevant how? In which scenario (ie. where) are these forces going to meet in a battle where the number of soldiers matter?
Welcome to the world of keyboard shortcuts.
That begs the question: Why use it at all? Traditional text editors like vim (or gvim) and xemacs far outperform gedit even for the simplest of tasks if you're comfortable with keyboard shortcuts.
Well, there are two organizations which use this acronym. One is an utterly useless bunch of bureaucrats, running the servers of one of the most successful open content projects, with no clue whatsoever about what its projects are doing or the people actually providing the content and the other is known for excellence in some areas of kitchenware.
No, one definitely does not have to eat less food or feel hungry to lose weight. One has to control for the food energy density to avoid feeling hungry, which is usually rather counterproductive when long term weight loss is the goal. See for example http://www.nutrition.org.uk/healthyliving/fuller/what-is-energy-density.html
Never forget that psychological factors will influence every diet and feeling hungry all the time is not the way to go.
Absolutely! Especially when you're waging a war against your own people, ie. the sovereign.
No, I think he was trying to say "U2"...
From now on you will all be put on double secret probation...
Well, the single person with a spare bedroom and the camera also features quite prominently on a number of porn video sites.... I hear.
"Every month or two" is a myth. Update Pack 6 is LMDE 201303, Update Pack 7 was released in September and we haven't seen an update since.
Ubuntu became crap, ok, ish ;-), IMHO for making a couple of very unfortunate decisions, you mention some of them. I ran it on a number of systems for years, now I have to fiddle a little more since I am back on Debian. In the end, choice is good.
I am pretty sure he will slip a systemd dependency into wayland somehow. Wayland is developed by xorg developers and will eventually replace xorg, so yes. :-)
Today's moderators don't seem to have a clue, the above post is not funny but deeply insightful.
"Every once in a while" as in every other month. I have seen no security updates whatsoever in between the update packages.
If they really customised the Ubuntu installer, did they have to rip out essential functionality?
Debian is apparently not for you and Ubuntu is crap, no doubt.
I don't do that much fiddling on LMDE, but a system for which security updates are released every once in a while is completely unacceptable. They should just call it quits. And again, what is it with the installer? What is wrong with taking/forking/whatever a very good, capable and mature installer (I am talking about debian now... ;-)) and customise it to include the mint specific stuff?
Thing is, I really like the Mint desktop stuff, but the distros are so far a joke unfortunately.
If only we had places where information could be stored and searched so people who think they've figured out something new can actually look to see if it's new.
We do, it's fairly new and we call the "cloud"...
It's often easier to do a full save, a fresh install, and then restore whatever you need. My Linux Mint upgrades take about a day of work to get everything back to where I want it.
Dear Mint users, please stop calling it an upgrade when in fact you're doing a complete reinstall of the OS. I know that this idiocy is coming from the project's website ("In a "fresh" upgrade you use the liveCD of the new release to perform a new installation and to overwrite your existing partitions."), but that doesn't mean you have to use it outside the linuxmint forums. ;-)
It's only easier in case you don't use full disk encryption, which the installer still doesn't support. Why the project decided to write an installler from scratch I will never understand, and don't get me started on LMDE...
...you hide the drugs in regular fruit shipments, dispense with the costly and annoying consumer distribution system and let the local discounter handle it. :-)