BMI is a good calculation for the population as a whole. For individuals it is often inaccurate, but taken over an entire population it is perfectly useful. Active people with a high BMI but low bodyfat are the exception, not the rule. Of course with such a small sample set they could have ended up having only those exceptions...
That said, I'd much rather they used a body fat calculation.
Not really. The device can not work without spoofing. That spoofing requires that the OS register that device as a specific type of device. The third party software then treats that device as the type it claims it is. Not different at all. That they have to spoof it to allow compatibility with the third party software is the fault of the third party.
I wish I had mod points, I feel exactly the same way.
That said, one of the problems with this is that there really is no way to know who will commit the crime again and again until they do so (which is why we have Three Strikes Laws and similar). This leads the "Think of the Children" brigade to outrages cries of "They did it before, why aren't they still in jail!?!?". A Catch-22 for our elected officials, who cave in and give us the bullshit that is our current system...
A man raping a man would also involve penetration. Also, a woman raping a man (or more often boy child) frequently involves penetration with a foreign object. All of that is violent.
Sexual battery is the charge frequently used when actual intercourse (i.e. penetration) does not occur. When children are involved molestation charged.
Why not use the actual definition of the crime and phrase your argument appropriately? "Statutory Rape" between consenting partners should not be considered a violent crime. Hell, the criminal code for it should be dropped and lumped in with "Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor", but that is just personal opinion.
Giving the broad definition of rape leaves your intention open to misinterpretation, as was the case here. Of course, your "What is a violent rape" argument leaves too much open. Rape through coercion, for example, should be considered a violent crime even though the victim may not fight back.
You're correct about definitions of rape that aren't actually non-consensual sex. Shakrai is correct that any sex that isn't consensual is a violent act. Being forced into an intimate act against your will is an act of violence, and the victim shouldn't be treated as anything but a victim, even if she (and, in some cases he) doesn't fight back because of fear of additional consequences.
"Utility officials have already stated"? Oh yeah, that's comforting. Are these the same "utility officials" who mismanaged the power grid in CA so badly a few years back that we had rolling blackouts all summer?
By that you mean the California voters who voted to deregulate to the system we got? I really wish I could blame the officials, but we did that to ourselves... sort of like our current budget.
But you didn't ask about Mac or OS X in the query. Also, try "Why is OSX better than Windows Vista?" and you get the same thing. The very first link is literally titled "Five reasons why Vista beats Mac OS X ". The second link sort of answers my question, but only about viruses.
Your reply doesn't make a whole lot of sense. People obeying the traffic laws and guidelines are far less likely to be in a position to need to be highly skilled at controlling their vehicle. Moreover, since average skill is, by definition, the norm, you can't really assume that any driver has above average driving skill.
There are two main contributors to accidents. The first is inattention. The second is stupidly reckless behavior such as what the article covers. I don't care how good you think you are, if you're doing something like driving down the shoulder of the road to avoid traffic you are making the situation more dangerous for everyone around you. You can't know that someone else won't pull over into that lane for an emergency stop, for example. They certainly have no reason to expect that someone will be speeding down that lane when their vehicle is overheating and they need to get out of the flow of traffic.
Based on the comments so far, I don't think the problem is a silver spoon. He appears to have been born with his head up his ass, and has been unable to extract it to this day.
Well, in Orange County, CA there is now at least one.
Gender should have nothing to do with it, but frankly these lists shouldn't exist. Once you've served your time, including probation, your time is served. It is ridiculous to enforce a lifelong sentence against them.
Agreed! Nothing says "Thug Life" like being a whore for a company that makes Operating Systems! Just last week my homies and I got Zune tats and then pulled the card of some Apple wannabes!
Yeah, I'm out. I think it might have been funny if I'd put a "Yo" in there somewhere...
I live a couple of miles away and I'd be happy to swing by once the store opens.
If Microsoft is going to be selling a Microsoft-branded computer (i.e. not Dell or some other manufacturer) it might be win-win for them; someone sues because they're a monopoly using this (they make the computer, the OS, and they own the store) and they, in turn, bring a suit against Apple since this is Apple's exact business model.
So the store is successful and we get Microsoft in-store tech support or it has a lawsuit brought against it and they can use that to slow down a company that is rapidly becoming a strong competitor.
Absolutely not. You cannot, by law, waive certain rights. If someone changes the contract you do not lose the right to back out of it at your discretion.
It seems to me that phone exclusivity deals, price-fixing, and costly long-term consumer contracts are equally bad regardless of what company uses them. Or am I missing something here?
No, not really. You just don't have the GP's conspiracy theory mindset. In the real world we know that Sprint is actually working in collusion with the Gnomes of Zurich to lay waste to Western Civilization, as is clearly spelled out in the Sprint contract.
How odd. The law here is California is very clear about what constitutes "texting"; manipulating the phone with your hand(s) while operating a motor vehicle. If they adopt a close variation of the California law you'd be just fine. I'm paraphrasing, of course, as the actual law is much more convoluted with legalese but that is what it comes down to.
You're making the argument that everyone can see the overall benefit of public education and has the foresight to realize that an educated population is a good thing. With enough incentives the worker educated elsewhere will stay and not bother to think of the educational well-being of his children, thus triggering a national race to the bottom.
No, that is technically not correct, although it does happen in the real world. The whole purpose of the ETF (which varies these days on provider, I know ATT is pro rating based on how long you have been on contract) is to recoup the cost of the subsidized device you bought from them, in exchange for a 2 year contract.
Like I said though, what something was meant for, and what it is actually being used for, are two totally different things.
While I agree with pretty much everything you've said, the ETF is no longer about the original purpose. If it were still true I would be able to get a discounted rate on a plan if I buy a phone that isn't subsidized. No provider currently allows for this.
No, the ETF is there to screw telco customers if the customer tries to leave no matter how you cut it
Certainly. However, I am also aware that when they change the contract existing contract law allows me to cancel the contract without penalty. I have terminated several cellphone contracts this way.
Whenever you get something from a company that states that they are changing the contract, call them and tell them that you do not agree, no matter how minor the issue is. You now have leverage and bargaining power. The last time I did this Sprint had decided to raise the administrative fee by $0.10/mo. During the ensuing discussion with customer server they lowered my monthly bill by $10 in lieu of me canceling my service.
Slashdot Mirror
BMI is a good calculation for the population as a whole. For individuals it is often inaccurate, but taken over an entire population it is perfectly useful. Active people with a high BMI but low bodyfat are the exception, not the rule. Of course with such a small sample set they could have ended up having only those exceptions...
That said, I'd much rather they used a body fat calculation.
Not really. The device can not work without spoofing. That spoofing requires that the OS register that device as a specific type of device. The third party software then treats that device as the type it claims it is. Not different at all. That they have to spoof it to allow compatibility with the third party software is the fault of the third party.
I wish I had mod points, I feel exactly the same way.
That said, one of the problems with this is that there really is no way to know who will commit the crime again and again until they do so (which is why we have Three Strikes Laws and similar). This leads the "Think of the Children" brigade to outrages cries of "They did it before, why aren't they still in jail!?!?". A Catch-22 for our elected officials, who cave in and give us the bullshit that is our current system...
A man raping a man would also involve penetration. Also, a woman raping a man (or more often boy child) frequently involves penetration with a foreign object. All of that is violent.
Sexual battery is the charge frequently used when actual intercourse (i.e. penetration) does not occur. When children are involved molestation charged.
Why not use the actual definition of the crime and phrase your argument appropriately? "Statutory Rape" between consenting partners should not be considered a violent crime. Hell, the criminal code for it should be dropped and lumped in with "Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor", but that is just personal opinion.
Giving the broad definition of rape leaves your intention open to misinterpretation, as was the case here. Of course, your "What is a violent rape" argument leaves too much open. Rape through coercion, for example, should be considered a violent crime even though the victim may not fight back.
You're correct about definitions of rape that aren't actually non-consensual sex. Shakrai is correct that any sex that isn't consensual is a violent act. Being forced into an intimate act against your will is an act of violence, and the victim shouldn't be treated as anything but a victim, even if she (and, in some cases he) doesn't fight back because of fear of additional consequences.
"Utility officials have already stated"? Oh yeah, that's comforting. Are these the same "utility officials" who mismanaged the power grid in CA so badly a few years back that we had rolling blackouts all summer?
By that you mean the California voters who voted to deregulate to the system we got? I really wish I could blame the officials, but we did that to ourselves... sort of like our current budget.
...My highly trained (MSCE A+) technician tells me...
Stop right there! We've identified the problem.
Hey, as a man I can certify that we reproduce by fission, like any other amoeba.
Just proof that Intelligent Design is entirely accurate. Truly, his Pastaness does bless and love us.
I'll take your word on it!
It isn't broadcast in the US either. I think the GP is exaggerating for effect.
But you didn't ask about Mac or OS X in the query. Also, try "Why is OSX better than Windows Vista?" and you get the same thing. The very first link is literally titled "Five reasons why Vista beats Mac OS X ". The second link sort of answers my question, but only about viruses.
Your reply doesn't make a whole lot of sense. People obeying the traffic laws and guidelines are far less likely to be in a position to need to be highly skilled at controlling their vehicle. Moreover, since average skill is, by definition, the norm, you can't really assume that any driver has above average driving skill.
There are two main contributors to accidents. The first is inattention. The second is stupidly reckless behavior such as what the article covers. I don't care how good you think you are, if you're doing something like driving down the shoulder of the road to avoid traffic you are making the situation more dangerous for everyone around you. You can't know that someone else won't pull over into that lane for an emergency stop, for example. They certainly have no reason to expect that someone will be speeding down that lane when their vehicle is overheating and they need to get out of the flow of traffic.
Based on the comments so far, I don't think the problem is a silver spoon. He appears to have been born with his head up his ass, and has been unable to extract it to this day.
Well, in Orange County, CA there is now at least one.
Gender should have nothing to do with it, but frankly these lists shouldn't exist. Once you've served your time, including probation, your time is served. It is ridiculous to enforce a lifelong sentence against them.
I'm pretty sure this isn't an issue that will polarize either party. Maybe they got a really nice tax break?
If they actually server alcohol while you wait these stores will be a huge hit!
Agreed! Nothing says "Thug Life" like being a whore for a company that makes Operating Systems! Just last week my homies and I got Zune tats and then pulled the card of some Apple wannabes!
Yeah, I'm out. I think it might have been funny if I'd put a "Yo" in there somewhere...
I live a couple of miles away and I'd be happy to swing by once the store opens.
If Microsoft is going to be selling a Microsoft-branded computer (i.e. not Dell or some other manufacturer) it might be win-win for them; someone sues because they're a monopoly using this (they make the computer, the OS, and they own the store) and they, in turn, bring a suit against Apple since this is Apple's exact business model.
So the store is successful and we get Microsoft in-store tech support or it has a lawsuit brought against it and they can use that to slow down a company that is rapidly becoming a strong competitor.
Absolutely not. You cannot, by law, waive certain rights. If someone changes the contract you do not lose the right to back out of it at your discretion.
It seems to me that phone exclusivity deals, price-fixing, and costly long-term consumer contracts are equally bad regardless of what company uses them. Or am I missing something here?
No, not really. You just don't have the GP's conspiracy theory mindset. In the real world we know that Sprint is actually working in collusion with the Gnomes of Zurich to lay waste to Western Civilization, as is clearly spelled out in the Sprint contract.
How odd. The law here is California is very clear about what constitutes "texting"; manipulating the phone with your hand(s) while operating a motor vehicle. If they adopt a close variation of the California law you'd be just fine. I'm paraphrasing, of course, as the actual law is much more convoluted with legalese but that is what it comes down to.
You're making the argument that everyone can see the overall benefit of public education and has the foresight to realize that an educated population is a good thing. With enough incentives the worker educated elsewhere will stay and not bother to think of the educational well-being of his children, thus triggering a national race to the bottom.
No, that is technically not correct, although it does happen in the real world. The whole purpose of the ETF (which varies these days on provider, I know ATT is pro rating based on how long you have been on contract) is to recoup the cost of the subsidized device you bought from them, in exchange for a 2 year contract.
Like I said though, what something was meant for, and what it is actually being used for, are two totally different things.
While I agree with pretty much everything you've said, the ETF is no longer about the original purpose. If it were still true I would be able to get a discounted rate on a plan if I buy a phone that isn't subsidized. No provider currently allows for this.
No, the ETF is there to screw telco customers if the customer tries to leave no matter how you cut it
Certainly. However, I am also aware that when they change the contract existing contract law allows me to cancel the contract without penalty. I have terminated several cellphone contracts this way.
Whenever you get something from a company that states that they are changing the contract, call them and tell them that you do not agree, no matter how minor the issue is. You now have leverage and bargaining power. The last time I did this Sprint had decided to raise the administrative fee by $0.10/mo. During the ensuing discussion with customer server they lowered my monthly bill by $10 in lieu of me canceling my service.