This wasn't especially news in the 80s during the "Satanic Panic" years, and it's far less news now. Peer reviewed studies were done then, showing that roleplaying games build social and problem solving skills. There's nothing new or obscure here.
Only load out books you don't actually care if you get back. Don't loan anyone more than one at a time. When they want to borrow another one, tell them to bring the first on back first. If they say they don't have it, then they lost it, and can't borrow any more until they replace it. If that's a problem, they're not a friend, they're a parasite.
If cars primary function was to kill then they would fall into the same category as guns.
Cars are designed to be as safe as possible. Guns are designed to be as dangerous as possible. Yet, cars kill more people every year than guns, including suicides.
Only if you don't believe in the right of self defense. Otherwise, guns are a tool, and like any tool, can be used for good or bad. (And guns are used at least twice as often to stop or prevent crimes as to commit them, according to every credible study ever done.
Do you see the problem here? Two groups of assholes tries to stand their ground and everyone else gets caught in the crossfire.
The difference being, the law supports one of them, and not the other. You stand the same chance (more, really) of being accidentally shot through the wall when your neighbor shoots a burglar raping his daughter. The thing is, it's exceedingly rare for that to happen.
And since Google owns the models, it would be perfectly logical for said model to start making purchasing decisions on the original's behalf, thus massively increasing the value of Google's advertising/data mining services.
IIRC, she was originally hired because she was willing to let them make a mold of her ass for the airplane toilet segment in episode 2, and they realized they need a hottie to counterbalance the walrus mustache and the annoying childishness.
The problem with Uber's insurance is that it only covers their driver. In an accident where the other driver is at fault, Uber's insurance won't cover the damage, or injuries to their driver or the passenger. If the other driver is uninsured, you're just hosed, because the Uber driver's own insurance won't cover them while they're driving for money. There have been lawsuits over this, and it's not pretty.
But technically it is illegal to strip off the DRM, isn't it?
That's a very fuzzy question. It's commonly accepted that it is in the US, under the circumvention paragraph of the DMCA. but a couple of paragraphs later, there's an exemption specifically allowing stripping of encryption for purposes of cross compatibility - file format conversion, from Kindle to epub, for instance. And there's a long standing fair use right to do so for archival purposes.
So far as I know, this has never been tested in court.
My advice to webvertizers: update your resume and find another line of work.
Or jump off a bridge, because you're talking about people who will not, ever, under any circumstances, earn an honest living. Parasites. Offer them a million honest dollars for an honest day's work, and they'll choose to pick your pocket for the $20 you had for lunch.
That would involve providing goods and services worth paying for. Which is another matter entirely, but equally beyond the ability of the parasites who run most web sites.
If your business model won't work unless you allow criminals to use your services to commit crimes, then your business model is parasitic, and criminal in its own right, and you should be put in prison.
We don't allow drug deals to shoot people because they'd be out of business without shooting people. If ad companies can't stay in business without enabling malware from organized crime, then they should be put out of business.
I rarely get malware from ads or otherwise. The biggest problem is my web browser locking up for several minutes processing the 10 or 15 meg of shit ads for a page with, at most, a couple of hundred words of content.
Turns out, with a decent ad blocker, IE is a pretty stable, usable, and fairly responsive browser. More table than either Chrome or Firefox, in fact. Saying that out loud makes me want to drink bleach, but there it is.
There may be another law that handles it differently, but it sounds like it is feasible to make a citizen's arrest for trespassing. However, the "cutting the seat belt" thing is a bad idea on a citizen's arrest for a misdemeanor, if it happened before the vehicular assault. Waving a knife around that close to someone while, I have no doubt, screaming threats at them is not reasonable force for a misdemeanor. It is, however, entirely reasonable after the (felony) vehicular assault.
We have no idea what actually happened, or in what order, and we won't ever find out from the press.
Good luck convincing a jury of that. Especially if the guards broke out the window and used a knife to cut the driver out of his seat belt before the vehicular assault. Deadly force isn't an option on a citizen's arrest for a misdemeanor (assuming they even made a citizen's arrest.)
That depends on whether trespassing is a misdemeanor or an infraction. Which can be very, very fuzzy in some states. In California, you don't make a citizen's arrest on trespassing, which is a traffic ticket. Holding them against their will becomes unlawful imprisonment, a misdemeanor in its own right. Holding them and moving them elsewhere becomes kidnapping, a felony, which justifies the use of deadly force in self defense.
And Tesla's own account says their security guards tried to detain the trespassers, but not that they made a citizen's arrest. And even if they did, a citizen's arrest on a misdemeanor doesn't justify the use of deadly force, and breaking a window and using a knife to cut a seat belt off the driver becomes a felony assault in its own right, which does justify running them down to get away.
But we don't know who did what, or in what order it happened. And those are both very important factors. We can presume that the cops found the security guys' account more plausible, since they arrested the trespassers. But you have to keep in mind, the security guards work for a billionaire who is brining hundreds of millions of dollars and who knows how many jobs into the county, and the cops are going to be very inclined to arrest somebody just to separate the combatants, and the ones who were clearly trespassing are the easiest to drag off at the time.
And the press isn't capable of accurately reporting on any story that involves one of their darlings, which Elon Musk is. The only credible source of details is the trial transcripts. In the meantime, adjusting one tiny little detail changes it from a felony on one side to a felony on the other, or to nothing at all.
I dunno, depends on circumstance. If the employee broke the driver side window and tried to wrestle the driver out by cutting the seat belt, then a reasonable driver might fear for his life.
My thought exactly. Trespassing is usually an infraction in California, not a misdemeanor, and I suspect it's the same in Nevada. That makes it pretty iffy as to whether or not the private security had any legal right to detail them at all. If they can't make a case for a misdemeanor - and used the magic words "You're under arrest" - then the security guards could be looking at unlawful imprisonment charges.
Slashdot Mirror
This wasn't especially news in the 80s during the "Satanic Panic" years, and it's far less news now. Peer reviewed studies were done then, showing that roleplaying games build social and problem solving skills. There's nothing new or obscure here.
Only load out books you don't actually care if you get back. Don't loan anyone more than one at a time. When they want to borrow another one, tell them to bring the first on back first. If they say they don't have it, then they lost it, and can't borrow any more until they replace it. If that's a problem, they're not a friend, they're a parasite.
In other words, act like a fucking grown up.
If cars primary function was to kill then they would fall into the same category as guns.
Cars are designed to be as safe as possible. Guns are designed to be as dangerous as possible. Yet, cars kill more people every year than guns, including suicides.
Only if you don't believe in the right of self defense. Otherwise, guns are a tool, and like any tool, can be used for good or bad. (And guns are used at least twice as often to stop or prevent crimes as to commit them, according to every credible study ever done.
Do you see the problem here? Two groups of assholes tries to stand their ground and everyone else gets caught in the crossfire.
The difference being, the law supports one of them, and not the other. You stand the same chance (more, really) of being accidentally shot through the wall when your neighbor shoots a burglar raping his daughter. The thing is, it's exceedingly rare for that to happen.
It wasn't a bullet, it was shotgun pellets, birdshot IIRC. So no, it wasn't an especially dangerous situation. The guy knew exactly what he was doing.
Because conservatives need stuff repeated over and over before they understand?
(The joke works equally well if you reverse the labels.)
And since Google owns the models, it would be perfectly logical for said model to start making purchasing decisions on the original's behalf, thus massively increasing the value of Google's advertising/data mining services.
IIRC, she was originally hired because she was willing to let them make a mold of her ass for the airplane toilet segment in episode 2, and they realized they need a hottie to counterbalance the walrus mustache and the annoying childishness.
The problem with Uber's insurance is that it only covers their driver. In an accident where the other driver is at fault, Uber's insurance won't cover the damage, or injuries to their driver or the passenger. If the other driver is uninsured, you're just hosed, because the Uber driver's own insurance won't cover them while they're driving for money. There have been lawsuits over this, and it's not pretty.
That should be "in whose lifetime plus 75 years."
So it's OK if the cattle prod they shove up your butt is only 100,000 volts?
Nobody wants to, but the only guarantee that you won't is to not have a computer. Because these days, some of them come pre-infected from the factory.
But technically it is illegal to strip off the DRM, isn't it?
That's a very fuzzy question. It's commonly accepted that it is in the US, under the circumvention paragraph of the DMCA. but a couple of paragraphs later, there's an exemption specifically allowing stripping of encryption for purposes of cross compatibility - file format conversion, from Kindle to epub, for instance. And there's a long standing fair use right to do so for archival purposes.
So far as I know, this has never been tested in court.
My advice to webvertizers: update your resume and find another line of work.
Or jump off a bridge, because you're talking about people who will not, ever, under any circumstances, earn an honest living. Parasites. Offer them a million honest dollars for an honest day's work, and they'll choose to pick your pocket for the $20 you had for lunch.
That would involve providing goods and services worth paying for. Which is another matter entirely, but equally beyond the ability of the parasites who run most web sites.
If your business model won't work unless you allow criminals to use your services to commit crimes, then your business model is parasitic, and criminal in its own right, and you should be put in prison.
We don't allow drug deals to shoot people because they'd be out of business without shooting people. If ad companies can't stay in business without enabling malware from organized crime, then they should be put out of business.
I rarely get malware from ads or otherwise. The biggest problem is my web browser locking up for several minutes processing the 10 or 15 meg of shit ads for a page with, at most, a couple of hundred words of content.
Turns out, with a decent ad blocker, IE is a pretty stable, usable, and fairly responsive browser. More table than either Chrome or Firefox, in fact. Saying that out loud makes me want to drink bleach, but there it is.
"Would you rather see ads on a web page or have a 1,000,000 volt cattle prod shoved up your ass? Those are the only two options."
Survey data is completely useless in all cases.
I disagree. I'd pay real money for a live video stream of that. I'm not alone.
There may be another law that handles it differently, but it sounds like it is feasible to make a citizen's arrest for trespassing. However, the "cutting the seat belt" thing is a bad idea on a citizen's arrest for a misdemeanor, if it happened before the vehicular assault. Waving a knife around that close to someone while, I have no doubt, screaming threats at them is not reasonable force for a misdemeanor. It is, however, entirely reasonable after the (felony) vehicular assault.
We have no idea what actually happened, or in what order, and we won't ever find out from the press.
Good luck convincing a jury of that. Especially if the guards broke out the window and used a knife to cut the driver out of his seat belt before the vehicular assault. Deadly force isn't an option on a citizen's arrest for a misdemeanor (assuming they even made a citizen's arrest.)
That depends on whether trespassing is a misdemeanor or an infraction. Which can be very, very fuzzy in some states. In California, you don't make a citizen's arrest on trespassing, which is a traffic ticket. Holding them against their will becomes unlawful imprisonment, a misdemeanor in its own right. Holding them and moving them elsewhere becomes kidnapping, a felony, which justifies the use of deadly force in self defense.
And Tesla's own account says their security guards tried to detain the trespassers, but not that they made a citizen's arrest. And even if they did, a citizen's arrest on a misdemeanor doesn't justify the use of deadly force, and breaking a window and using a knife to cut a seat belt off the driver becomes a felony assault in its own right, which does justify running them down to get away.
But we don't know who did what, or in what order it happened. And those are both very important factors. We can presume that the cops found the security guys' account more plausible, since they arrested the trespassers. But you have to keep in mind, the security guards work for a billionaire who is brining hundreds of millions of dollars and who knows how many jobs into the county, and the cops are going to be very inclined to arrest somebody just to separate the combatants, and the ones who were clearly trespassing are the easiest to drag off at the time.
And the press isn't capable of accurately reporting on any story that involves one of their darlings, which Elon Musk is. The only credible source of details is the trial transcripts. In the meantime, adjusting one tiny little detail changes it from a felony on one side to a felony on the other, or to nothing at all.
I dunno, depends on circumstance. If the employee broke the driver side window and tried to wrestle the driver out by cutting the seat belt, then a reasonable driver might fear for his life.
My thought exactly. Trespassing is usually an infraction in California, not a misdemeanor, and I suspect it's the same in Nevada. That makes it pretty iffy as to whether or not the private security had any legal right to detail them at all. If they can't make a case for a misdemeanor - and used the magic words "You're under arrest" - then the security guards could be looking at unlawful imprisonment charges.
In theory.
As you say, we don't know shit at this point.
Seems a little severe for an infraction that cannot carry a jail sentence, to me.
Of course, if they tried to run down security, at that point, yes, they should have been shot.