Yet this committee is now going to contract to provide it to everyone, jack up the association dues to pay for it and those who didn't want it in the first place are going to take it in the ass.
I think one of the more egregious misleading statements is the one about harming a "friend or family member". They classified "friend" and anyone you had even passing knowledge of. Since real random crimes are rare, most of the gun violence crimes fall under their definition.
And you want a cite? I give you the collected works of John Lott.
I would suggest that Justice is implemented via a set of instructions. And that the fact the interpretation of a law changing over time due to different interpretations is a bad thing.
Primary example is the Constitution. It has a very well defined mechanism to make changes that insure those changes are the result of a very broad agreement, which in itself requires a great amount of deliberation. Instead of the interpretation changing, the should change the document.
Laws are more easily changed of course but the same principal applies. Don't interpret it differently, change it.
What would be even nicer is if they required all Bills to be written in some form of structural language.
Imagine being able to query a bill to find the salient points...who it applies to, each specific provision, etc. That would go a long way towards simplification and clarity. Conceivably, you could also do some form of syntax check and "compile" in the sense that you could find provisions that are vague. References to a population that do not have a previously declared definition.
For instance..."All doctors must...or go to jail". Is that doctor of medicine? What about Psychologists and Chemists with a PhD? They are are "Doctors". Are they included? Etc. So you would expect to find at the top of the Bill a definition of Dr.
"The House Appropriations Committee is considering holding off on modernizing THOMAS until the system "owners" finalize the specifications."
It is entirely reasonable to put a hold on a project until everyone knows what it's going to be and buys off on the changes.
I am pretty sure that the majority of people on Slashdot agree that to dive into a project that will undoubtedly be large and expensive and is highly visible without nailing down the details first is irresponsible and a recipe for failure.
Voter ID laws, despite the hyper-partisan rhetoric about disenfranchisement, are all about the voter proving they are who they say they are.
If advocating for Voter ID laws are portrayed now as tantamount to KKK level Racism, how will internet participation be policed so that only those who should be voting (as in a legal resident of the jurisdiction) actually vote?
If anything, the complaints about electronic voting system now will only be upped by an order of magnitude if elections and plebiscites are moved onto the web.
First, the IT people trend heavily to being introverts and poor people skills in general. So they are pretty much ineffective when it comes to recruiting talent.
Second, HR has no idea what IT needs, either in skills or personality. So they resort to a list of buzzwords. Anyone who has ever applied to a state position has gone through being rejected because they lacks a single buzzword in their resume, or,. are one month shy of the experience requirements.
So on the Can't Find Talent statement, I call the ultimate bullshit. They aren't looking and when they do find someone, they stupidly screen them out on stupid, irrelevant requirements.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone who doesn't think this is funny as hell has no sense of humor and probably don't get invited to many parties.
BTW, here is a free cat for the next helicopter.
Further, those without it probably don't want it.
Yet this committee is now going to contract to provide it to everyone, jack up the association dues to pay for it and those who didn't want it in the first place are going to take it in the ass.
I hate Condo/Home owner associations.
As long as it's not an fully automatic shovel
Less deaths is not necessarily a good thing.
Here, when a home owner kills an intruder, we call that a Happy Ending.
Think of it as being a tool of Darwin.
I think one of the more egregious misleading statements is the one about harming a "friend or family member". They classified "friend" and anyone you had even passing knowledge of. Since real random crimes are rare, most of the gun violence crimes fall under their definition.
And you want a cite? I give you the collected works of John Lott.
I always say, if banging your head against the wall achieves nothing else, it will at least leave a mark on the wall.
I would suggest that Justice is implemented via a set of instructions. And that the fact the interpretation of a law changing over time due to different interpretations is a bad thing.
Primary example is the Constitution. It has a very well defined mechanism to make changes that insure those changes are the result of a very broad agreement, which in itself requires a great amount of deliberation. Instead of the interpretation changing, the should change the document.
Laws are more easily changed of course but the same principal applies. Don't interpret it differently, change it.
...While trying to figure out the best way to proceed before pouring money down a rat hole.
Hear Hear!
What would be even nicer is if they required all Bills to be written in some form of structural language.
Imagine being able to query a bill to find the salient points...who it applies to, each specific provision, etc. That would go a long way towards simplification and clarity. Conceivably, you could also do some form of syntax check and "compile" in the sense that you could find provisions that are vague. References to a population that do not have a previously declared definition.
For instance..."All doctors must...or go to jail". Is that doctor of medicine? What about Psychologists and Chemists with a PhD? They are are "Doctors". Are they included? Etc. So you would expect to find at the top of the Bill a definition of Dr.
You both are delusional because there is no mention of taking THOMAS offline while they decide on how to upgrade it.
I would be very surprised if ObamaCare even made it into THOMAS.
I forgot to mention that there is no discussion of taking THOMAS offline pending the upgrade.
Let's try a more reasonable one...
"The House Appropriations Committee is considering holding off on modernizing THOMAS until the system "owners" finalize the specifications."
It is entirely reasonable to put a hold on a project until everyone knows what it's going to be and buys off on the changes.
I am pretty sure that the majority of people on Slashdot agree that to dive into a project that will undoubtedly be large and expensive and is highly visible without nailing down the details first is irresponsible and a recipe for failure.
Then there's the problem of which estimates should be used?
Some people are saying over six meters.
How can you make public policy based on theories and projections that even those making them can't agree on?
Plus, it is easily imagined that zealous planners with political agendas could pick and choose data to shape development according to their agenda.
Smart money will undoubtedly become too smart by half. Exploits, hacking, etc. etc.
Cash is king.
The Cloud is down...we're going for bagels.
Voter ID laws, despite the hyper-partisan rhetoric about disenfranchisement, are all about the voter proving they are who they say they are.
If advocating for Voter ID laws are portrayed now as tantamount to KKK level Racism, how will internet participation be policed so that only those who should be voting (as in a legal resident of the jurisdiction) actually vote?
If anything, the complaints about electronic voting system now will only be upped by an order of magnitude if elections and plebiscites are moved onto the web.
I'm going to call it an HR problem.
First, the IT people trend heavily to being introverts and poor people skills in general. So they are pretty much ineffective when it comes to recruiting talent.
Second, HR has no idea what IT needs, either in skills or personality. So they resort to a list of buzzwords. Anyone who has ever applied to a state position has gone through being rejected because they lacks a single buzzword in their resume, or,. are one month shy of the experience requirements.
So on the Can't Find Talent statement, I call the ultimate bullshit. They aren't looking and when they do find someone, they stupidly screen them out on stupid, irrelevant requirements.
Absolutely Not.
I was actually kind of giddy when Facebook shares started dropping the first day out.
I just head they are predicting $25 by mid-summer.
Is it too late to say I was talking about Padmé ?
Or have we sunk too far into the depths of incest and homosexual activity?
If we can shoot zombies why not these guys?
Ah yes, you want room 12A, Just along the corridor.
Monday, Memorial Day, BBQ and Beer. Lots of it.
And you want what?
But, do I get to bang the princess?