London is one of the few places where having a cab license actually means something. They have to take strict tests to prove they know the streets of London, both to get their license and to keep it. They also have to provide a certain level of service and take good routes or they could get it pulled if their fare turns out to be an inspector.
This is exactly the counter argument that came to mind. The story may not be memorable after the game is finished, but if it isn't interesting while I'm still playing I am far less likely to keep playing.
Zhou's definition was predated by the GP's which developed in the 1950s. While Zhou's is the one that more closely resembles the modern world, it is not the one that people usually reference.
While your argument may have some merit, using firearm related deaths as your statistic is ridiculous. Of course you're going to have more firearm deaths in a place that allows firearms, that doesn't mean it's less safe, just that a particular cause of death is more likely. A better comparison would be the intentional homicide rate plus the accidental firearm related death rate.
What you're talking about is a Professional Engineer. Often there will be many engineers working on a project with only one PE to sign off on it. As for requirements on calling yourself an engineer, they are state based, not universal.
The problem is that if everyone pays the per-unit cost, movies can't be made, only distributed. For the system to work everyone has to pay the per-unit cost, a share of the overhead, and a bit of profit.
That said, I disagree that pirates only want to pay the per-unit cost, many would be willing to pay the regular price to get things in the format they want at the time they want. Since this is frequently not available, they resort to piracy.
Your argument only works if police are required to use the device and the case goes to a jury. If they aren't required to use it there's no reason why people should expect there to be a recording. Without the recording, there's a good chance the case will be dismissed for lack of evidence as judges are prone to trusting the word of cops.
A better solution would be to require that everyone have access to the same gear. That way if someone prefers bigger gears or a certain wax, they can use them. To this end you could have every country contribute to a common fund which would then be distributed evenly among the teams.
The winning move in the prisoner's dilemma is always talk, regardless of what the other person does, you talking is always better for you. It's only in the iterated dilemma and, more importantly, the real world that you start to see advantages to not talking.
Slashdot Mirror
London is one of the few places where having a cab license actually means something. They have to take strict tests to prove they know the streets of London, both to get their license and to keep it. They also have to provide a certain level of service and take good routes or they could get it pulled if their fare turns out to be an inspector.
This is exactly the counter argument that came to mind. The story may not be memorable after the game is finished, but if it isn't interesting while I'm still playing I am far less likely to keep playing.
Pennsylvania actually goes even farther, not only does it require all parties be informed, all parties must consent.
You mean allowing two terribly run companies to get government bailouts together.
Zhou's definition was predated by the GP's which developed in the 1950s. While Zhou's is the one that more closely resembles the modern world, it is not the one that people usually reference.
Not psychotic, sociopathic, a significant portion of politicians (and CEOs for that matter) are sociopaths.
She was depressed that she was going bald.
Unless the difference in efficiency drops to the point where the transportation costs are greater.
While your argument may have some merit, using firearm related deaths as your statistic is ridiculous. Of course you're going to have more firearm deaths in a place that allows firearms, that doesn't mean it's less safe, just that a particular cause of death is more likely. A better comparison would be the intentional homicide rate plus the accidental firearm related death rate.
What you're talking about is a Professional Engineer. Often there will be many engineers working on a project with only one PE to sign off on it. As for requirements on calling yourself an engineer, they are state based, not universal.
While I don't disagree with the overall idea, I doubt the government could provide the same benefits without greatly increased costs.
The problem is that if everyone pays the per-unit cost, movies can't be made, only distributed. For the system to work everyone has to pay the per-unit cost, a share of the overhead, and a bit of profit.
That said, I disagree that pirates only want to pay the per-unit cost, many would be willing to pay the regular price to get things in the format they want at the time they want. Since this is frequently not available, they resort to piracy.
The download was probably quite a bit smaller as the audio was compressed for download, it then had to be uncompressed for the installation.
And yet none of those problems are fixed by using uncompressed audio.
Your argument only works if police are required to use the device and the case goes to a jury. If they aren't required to use it there's no reason why people should expect there to be a recording. Without the recording, there's a good chance the case will be dismissed for lack of evidence as judges are prone to trusting the word of cops.
Just because it's heavy oversight doesn't mean it's effective.
Now they just need to prove that the person that died is the person that owned the iPad.
You left your car in a parking lot so I took it, it's mine now.
Just keep in mind, those are just the ones that get caught.
Nobody in government wants to reduce government powers.
As they only had the suits for a month, they most likely only trained against other people wearing the suits.
A better solution would be to require that everyone have access to the same gear. That way if someone prefers bigger gears or a certain wax, they can use them. To this end you could have every country contribute to a common fund which would then be distributed evenly among the teams.
More like they hung a sign, locked the door, and forgot to build the walls.
The winning move in the prisoner's dilemma is always talk, regardless of what the other person does, you talking is always better for you. It's only in the iterated dilemma and, more importantly, the real world that you start to see advantages to not talking.
You don't buzz in on daily doubles though.