If all the precedents went one way, then there wouldn't be a need for a judicial decision. The fact that precedents are going in a variety of directions is where higher courts - and this is almost bound to go to the Supremes - have to decide which way to jump.
Whilst you are theoretically correct, actual nor, like whom, are largely extinct in the English spoken today. As this excellent article reminds us, things move on. A lot. http://www.economist.com/news/...
Once you're up in front of a court. playing games like that gets your legs chopped off. It's too late for the present scenario, but the need to move Apple overseas - which also lets them avoid a lot of corporation tax - is now apparent.
The idea behind a PhD is that it is a piece of research of approved quality that is worthy of the degree granted. The theses sit in the institution's library - which is the traditional definition of publication. Making degree granting institutions publish them to the net free make a lot of sense.
And can we establish a university department to run courses challenging it? I get to be the overpaid professor in charge as I thought of the idea, but I'm sure that there will be plenty of teaching posts focusing on the need to avoid such an elementary form of discrimination...
But there are far too many people who would regard such a nuke as a wonderful achievement; Iran, North Korea, IS and Al Qaeda being the obvious candidates, whilst elements within China, Russia and the revolutionary left in Latin America aren't inconceivable. Remember that on 10th September 2001 noone conceived of 9/11 as a possibility. Put the bomb in a large container ship coming somewhere where the bomb definitely didn't start - Lagos springs to mind - and it would offer no routing information. I'd bet it will happen in the next 20 years.
The discussion is about people complaining about being unable to invest in property. I'm arguing that it is possible to do so with the support of other family members... The reference to 'deposit' is the amount the mortgage provider requires you to provide as cash before it will lend you the rest of the purchase price of a property. I imagine the word is something different on the west side of the pond, but I assumed in the context it would be clear enough. Mea culpa.
One starbucks and one paid for sandwich for lunch every day @ 250 days a year is probably $2,000 a year. a well chosen rental property will pay for itself - i.e. maintenance and mortgage payments. Ask your parents to borrow the deposit...
Actually there is the Old Testament option that requires the return of capital assets to their original owner after 50 years. It's a bit messy, and the terminology only applies to farmland. But it is an alternative approach; one British politician did propose replacing all freeholds with a 50 year leasehold from the state.
I like to think that there are many alternatives short of nukes that would render China so damaged that it would have to withdraw; cruise missiles onto all major power stations, water treatment works and oil storage and refineries would render the country chaotic very fast. But you may well be right about the need to demonstrate the viability of deterrence.
I'm dubious - I suspect conventional weapons would be enough to prevent the need for such a step. Given the turkey shot that the Iraq wars were, and the probability that China doesn't have the technology to prevent that sort of experience, there's no need to go there.
Chinese first use of nukes? More plausible, but still, I suspect, unlikely. At least I hope so... Though of course in the context of war, everyone does things that were inconceivable before its start. If a shooting war does happen, it will leave China economically crippled, because its dependence on overseas supplies of oil remains critical.
The opportunity for journalists to trash future presentations by the people involved in these cases is getting enormous. The FBI director claimed it wouldn't set a precedent, but has now retracted. Sadly journalists, despite their reputation for addressing issues with 'no fear or favour', in practice realise that if they demolish the person they are challenging, there WILL be consequences for their employer. Let's hope that defence counsels up and down the land take the lesson however.
Sadly an elected official is only accountable to the people who vote for them. Therefore doing something which 98% of the world's population regards as stupid, but which will play well in your constituency, is not a sign of stupidity, it's a sign of being in tune with your electorate. It's for this reason that democracy is quite such a painful process. The reality is that most of our elected representatives aren't stupid, they just know exactly what will get them reelected.
In the UK a murders gets a mandatory life sentence. If he is released, he is always 'on licence', meaning that his life is far more constrained that that of a person on the sex offender register, which is little more than a registration of where you are resident
Depends on your perspective, doesn't it? If you are aiming to ensure that a cyber attack by the People's Liberation Army on the Imperialists will do a lot of damage, it seems like a GREAT idea...
If the media are closed to you, then you just disappear. Never heard of again. Stalin had no problem with opposition - they just disappeared, and nobody dared ask where they were. The disappearance of most of the clergy of the Orthodox Church under Stalin is the most obvious example of that.
Slashdot Mirror
Mainly proving that it's HARD to get megacorps to comply I guess
If all the precedents went one way, then there wouldn't be a need for a judicial decision. The fact that precedents are going in a variety of directions is where higher courts - and this is almost bound to go to the Supremes - have to decide which way to jump.
Whilst you are theoretically correct, actual nor, like whom, are largely extinct in the English spoken today. As this excellent article reminds us, things move on. A lot. http://www.economist.com/news/...
They would be chopped off at the legs for that
Once you're up in front of a court. playing games like that gets your legs chopped off. It's too late for the present scenario, but the need to move Apple overseas - which also lets them avoid a lot of corporation tax - is now apparent.
That would constitute contempt of court - which is a bad idea. Nice thought though.
OK - so OLD phones will be subject to this problem but new phones need a new signature from now on.
The idea behind a PhD is that it is a piece of research of approved quality that is worthy of the degree granted. The theses sit in the institution's library - which is the traditional definition of publication. Making degree granting institutions publish them to the net free make a lot of sense.
And can we establish a university department to run courses challenging it? I get to be the overpaid professor in charge as I thought of the idea, but I'm sure that there will be plenty of teaching posts focusing on the need to avoid such an elementary form of discrimination...
But there are far too many people who would regard such a nuke as a wonderful achievement; Iran, North Korea, IS and Al Qaeda being the obvious candidates, whilst elements within China, Russia and the revolutionary left in Latin America aren't inconceivable. Remember that on 10th September 2001 noone conceived of 9/11 as a possibility. Put the bomb in a large container ship coming somewhere where the bomb definitely didn't start - Lagos springs to mind - and it would offer no routing information. I'd bet it will happen in the next 20 years.
The discussion is about people complaining about being unable to invest in property. I'm arguing that it is possible to do so with the support of other family members... The reference to 'deposit' is the amount the mortgage provider requires you to provide as cash before it will lend you the rest of the purchase price of a property. I imagine the word is something different on the west side of the pond, but I assumed in the context it would be clear enough. Mea culpa.
Which means that there's noone who really believes that sort of logic. But it could make an argument to slow the proceedings down.
One starbucks and one paid for sandwich for lunch every day @ 250 days a year is probably $2,000 a year. a well chosen rental property will pay for itself - i.e. maintenance and mortgage payments. Ask your parents to borrow the deposit...
Actually there is the Old Testament option that requires the return of capital assets to their original owner after 50 years. It's a bit messy, and the terminology only applies to farmland. But it is an alternative approach; one British politician did propose replacing all freeholds with a 50 year leasehold from the state.
Shoot the landlords and move the poor in wholesale... Also worked in China.
No idea why you got modded down. The only problem is that it's probably true...
I like to think that there are many alternatives short of nukes that would render China so damaged that it would have to withdraw; cruise missiles onto all major power stations, water treatment works and oil storage and refineries would render the country chaotic very fast. But you may well be right about the need to demonstrate the viability of deterrence.
I'm dubious - I suspect conventional weapons would be enough to prevent the need for such a step. Given the turkey shot that the Iraq wars were, and the probability that China doesn't have the technology to prevent that sort of experience, there's no need to go there.
Chinese first use of nukes? More plausible, but still, I suspect, unlikely. At least I hope so... Though of course in the context of war, everyone does things that were inconceivable before its start. If a shooting war does happen, it will leave China economically crippled, because its dependence on overseas supplies of oil remains critical.
The American president is going to launch a nuclear war because China invades Japan? Not a chance.
The opportunity for journalists to trash future presentations by the people involved in these cases is getting enormous. The FBI director claimed it wouldn't set a precedent, but has now retracted. Sadly journalists, despite their reputation for addressing issues with 'no fear or favour', in practice realise that if they demolish the person they are challenging, there WILL be consequences for their employer. Let's hope that defence counsels up and down the land take the lesson however.
Sadly an elected official is only accountable to the people who vote for them. Therefore doing something which 98% of the world's population regards as stupid, but which will play well in your constituency, is not a sign of stupidity, it's a sign of being in tune with your electorate. It's for this reason that democracy is quite such a painful process. The reality is that most of our elected representatives aren't stupid, they just know exactly what will get them reelected.
since they aren't Christians... this will provide it. ;) And all the Christians have been expelled... :(
In the UK a murders gets a mandatory life sentence. If he is released, he is always 'on licence', meaning that his life is far more constrained that that of a person on the sex offender register, which is little more than a registration of where you are resident
Depends on your perspective, doesn't it? If you are aiming to ensure that a cyber attack by the People's Liberation Army on the Imperialists will do a lot of damage, it seems like a GREAT idea...
If the media are closed to you, then you just disappear. Never heard of again. Stalin had no problem with opposition - they just disappeared, and nobody dared ask where they were. The disappearance of most of the clergy of the Orthodox Church under Stalin is the most obvious example of that.