Not to mention you have to have a crime to charge him with, then impeach him, then convict him (which actually gets him out of office). And then we would have Biden...
I felt the same way during the last administration when people started talking about impeaching Bush - I'm no fan, but I'll take Jar Jar Binks over Emperor Palpatine any day of the week.
Just re-elect Obama for 4 more years, or Romney to replace him, and we'll head down that path where Americans are getting round-up and thrown in jail. The sooner we reach tyranny, the sooner we can impeach the joker, and restore the Bill of Rights.
Bad news, bruddah - only Congress has the power to impeach the President, and considering that they are just-as-if-not-more corrupt than the leader of the Executive... we're pretty much fucked on that avenue.
He accepted money for medical advice. That makes him a medical professional.
*sigh*
No, it doesn't. It might make him a crook and a fraud, but only education and certification can 'make' a person a medical professional.
If Billy Mays had sold diet pills on his infomercials, would you consider Billy Mays a "medical professional?" What if he had a disclaimer on the infomercial explicitly stating that he had no medical training or education whatsoever (as Cooksey did on his blog)? If you are a reasonably prudent, the obvious answer is "of course not."
If you are not a reasonably prudent person, well, may $deity have mercy on your dumb ass.
So he should be up on charges of false advertising and fraud, in addition to all the current charges.
False advertising (if indeed what he advertises is false) and fraud I accept and agree with, because he was charging money for a "life-coaching" service and I personally find all life-coaching to be fraudulent. However, the charge of practicing medicine without a license is pure bullshit intended to intimidate and harass a private citizen that the ADA has determined to be their enemy, and should not be tolerated as it is a mockery of our legal system to even entertain the notion that a fucking blog contains any valid medical advice whatsoever.
If "had to be" is taken to mean is most probably and "earth-like" is using the unique ability of carbon to form a ridiculous variety of molecules then your question becomes:
"most probably" is not a synonym to "has to;""Required to be" would be a more accurate descriptor.
And the answer to that is virtually every biologist who's ever thought about what alien life would look like at the bio-chemical level.
Whose research is solely performed on terrestrial, carbon-based lifeforms. Which makes their opinions on the topic of extraterrestrial life moot.
"The researchers used a Bayesian analysis—which weighs how much of a scientific conclusion stems from actual data and how much comes from the prior assumptions of the scientist—to determine the probability of extraterrestrial life once the influence of these presumptions is minimized."
Source
...possibility of also finding Earth-like life on those worlds
Whoever said extraterrestrial life had to be "Earth-like?"
Sounds a lot like the argument made regarding political parties: Both are going to rob and bugger you, so would you prefer they be forward about it, or try and make it seem like they're doing you a favor?
Regardless of which you choose, you still end up with an empty wallet and sore asshole - the definition of 'lose-lose'
You'd probably say, and I would agree, that such a blatant security flatulence should cause the producer to take back and repair his device. The producer will probably disagree and then? A court of law... because of a WiFi router? Probably not going to happen, if not done by some consumer advocacy group.
I think it will most likely be handled in a similar manner to automotive recalls: The manufacturer will weigh the cost of litigation against the cost of recall, and go with the cheaper option.
Fortunately, unlike with automotive recalls, no one is likely to die if the manufacturer decided litigation is cheaper
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention you have to have a crime to charge him with, then impeach him, then convict him (which actually gets him out of office). And then we would have Biden...
I felt the same way during the last administration when people started talking about impeaching Bush - I'm no fan, but I'll take Jar Jar Binks over Emperor Palpatine any day of the week.
Well, if ND(G?)T said it, I'm inclined to agree.
Side note: Both Tyson and Michio Kaku were on the Daily Show last night, talking about the plan to mine asteroids; Linky
Is it me, or does Tyson come off as the rock star of astrophysics?
is purely subjective.
Just re-elect Obama for 4 more years, or Romney to replace him, and we'll head down that path where Americans are getting round-up and thrown in jail. The sooner we reach tyranny, the sooner we can impeach the joker, and restore the Bill of Rights.
Bad news, bruddah - only Congress has the power to impeach the President, and considering that they are just-as-if-not-more corrupt than the leader of the Executive... we're pretty much fucked on that avenue.
Technically, the motto is "In God We Trust". Don't worry, Obama forgot too :-)
No, it's not; the actual national motto is
E
Pluribus
Unum
"Out of many, One."
He accepted money for medical advice. That makes him a medical professional.
*sigh*
No, it doesn't. It might make him a crook and a fraud, but only education and certification can 'make' a person a medical professional.
If Billy Mays had sold diet pills on his infomercials, would you consider Billy Mays a "medical professional?" What if he had a disclaimer on the infomercial explicitly stating that he had no medical training or education whatsoever (as Cooksey did on his blog)? If you are a reasonably prudent, the obvious answer is "of course not."
If you are not a reasonably prudent person, well, may $deity have mercy on your dumb ass.
So he should be up on charges of false advertising and fraud, in addition to all the current charges.
False advertising (if indeed what he advertises is false) and fraud I accept and agree with, because he was charging money for a "life-coaching" service and I personally find all life-coaching to be fraudulent. However, the charge of practicing medicine without a license is pure bullshit intended to intimidate and harass a private citizen that the ADA has determined to be their enemy, and should not be tolerated as it is a mockery of our legal system to even entertain the notion that a fucking blog contains any valid medical advice whatsoever.
If "had to be" is taken to mean is most probably and "earth-like" is using the unique ability of carbon to form a ridiculous variety of molecules then your question becomes:
"most probably" is not a synonym to "has to;""Required to be" would be a more accurate descriptor.
And the answer to that is virtually every biologist who's ever thought about what alien life would look like at the bio-chemical level.
Whose research is solely performed on terrestrial, carbon-based lifeforms. Which makes their opinions on the topic of extraterrestrial life moot.
Fair enough.
The good news is it sounds like this one will get the big V.
That's what he said about the NDAA, and we all know how that turned out.
Here
Pass it on.
Are you sure it's not Earth-like as in "carbon-based" or "oxygen-loving?"
I don't know, as the summary's reference article is paywalled.
AC's source makes no mention of the terms 'wet' or 'warm.'
It's statistical probability, you Philistine!
"The researchers used a Bayesian analysis—which weighs how much of a scientific conclusion stems from actual data and how much comes from the prior assumptions of the scientist—to determine the probability of extraterrestrial life once the influence of these presumptions is minimized." Source
...possibility of also finding Earth-like life on those worlds
Whoever said extraterrestrial life had to be "Earth-like?"
Thus is the fallacy of the analysis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
Sayeth the AC who apparently has nothing better to do than troll /.
Pot, may I introduce you to kettle.
It's statistical probability, you Philistine!
Sounds a lot like the argument made regarding political parties: Both are going to rob and bugger you, so would you prefer they be forward about it, or try and make it seem like they're doing you a favor?
Regardless of which you choose, you still end up with an empty wallet and sore asshole - the definition of 'lose-lose'
References here and here.
Did OP specify that they were only referring to OS companies?
'Cause if not, the US military beat Apple to the punch:
F-117 Nighthawk
F-22 Raptor
F-18 Hornet
Tiger tank
Desert Eagle
M8 Greyhound(Armored car)
M10 Wolverine
M18 Hellcat
M29 Weasel
Buffalo(Anti-Mine)
Cougar(Anti-Mine)
Operation Golden Pheasant
Operation Sand Flea
Operation Fatcat
Operation Treasure Trolls
Operation Hawkeye XVIII
Operation Condor
Operation Pig Stick
.. just to name a few...
Lycos. FTW.
Anyone remember HotSpot?
Google is a marketing agency who makes their money off selling their users' data
Almost...
Google is an advertising company that makes money selling data about their users.
A subtle, but important, distinction.
Indeed, thanks for the clarification.
OK, well, not all that shocked.
Whoever doesn't realize by now that Google is a marketing agency who makes their money off selling their users' data, deserves to get screwed.
You'd probably say, and I would agree, that such a blatant security flatulence should cause the producer to take back and repair his device. The producer will probably disagree and then? A court of law... because of a WiFi router? Probably not going to happen, if not done by some consumer advocacy group.
I think it will most likely be handled in a similar manner to automotive recalls: The manufacturer will weigh the cost of litigation against the cost of recall, and go with the cheaper option.
Fortunately, unlike with automotive recalls, no one is likely to die if the manufacturer decided litigation is cheaper
Generally speaking, you're talking sensibly... but you open with saying "they're just following orders"
Are there still actually people that think that's a reason to abandon basic ethics?
You say that as if you believe the people who take these kind of jobs suffer from an existence of ethics in the first place...
Perhaps you are merely suffering from the misconception that all Americans are cowed, pussified turncoats like yourself?
You've obviously never met an actual Libertarian.
It's nice to see the "brown people are terrorists" propaganda has properly programmed you to jump to Middle-Eastern people when you think terrorist.
Funny, when I hear the term I envision white guys in three-piece suits...
Natch.