I think Wikipedia needs to do advertising, make it obvious it's an ad, and use something like google/bing, so they have no direct contact with the people being advertised.
Additionally, they should stick to their guns if a sponsor makes pressure. I suggest this, as I see plenty of people saying I would contribute money if..., so the donation model is already demonstrating that it can corrupt. Arms length advertising would be less corrupting, and could be done transparently.
Does spreadingsantorum.com have any info on butt fucking? It appears to have the definition at one point, but generally be a political blog about the candidate.
I understand that just like I wouldn't let my 7 year old out into the world unsupervised I wouldn't let them into the internet as such either. Look into Safe Search. It cleans up the vulgar sites. The guy uses power, and not vulgarity to try and inflict pain on others in the name of righteousness, it doesn't make his actions any better.
There are plenty of gatekeepers for you to use for the internet on your wee ones, schools already install them. Even the 10 year old is likely starting to look into that stuff, sorry to tell you. The interest in sex comes earlier than the interest in national politics, the risk of finding assfucking on the internet is way higher with a search for that in any child than one looking into santorum.
The fact is, there are more people writing about Santorum as gross byproduct of assfucking done wrong, than there are of him as a candidate.
You can't accurately discuss the candidate without bringing up sex (homosexual marriage, and strait sex without procreation are both issues he's against). The wikipedia entry about him is hardly about butt sex (the second link, after his official page using google itself as the gatekeeper).
As a politician, his job is to right the rules of lifestyle in this country. True he doesn't technically enforce it, I should have said dictate. If I'm having strait sex, I don't expect Rick Santorum to be involved, but he wants that power and thinks the fact he didn't have it as senator was a miscarriage of justice.
And please, don't let your children (especially the 7 year old) onto the raw internet, much like older peers/schoolmates, it's full of disgusting and vulgar misinformation. The gatekeeper to the internet in your house is you, and the companies like google give you tools to be such.
Additionally, the fact that searches for sex and fun/recreation don't turn up a list of politicians against such acts is a problem, not a virtue, of the internet. I am sure if Romney/Santorum's stance on strait birth control was widely known it would cause them issue (note they are against a right to access in marriage too).
Santorum isn't simply some public figure speaking out about things he disapproves of, he is someone that wants to make them illegal.
The old testament (genesis at least) is a story about a small badass band of people surviving at all costs, leaving destruction in their path. History is a bitch, and the old testament documents it wonderfully.
As a PA resident when he was a senator, I sadly have to disagree.
We were able to wipe Santorum off the senate floor, but not wash him out of our political system. The same hateful views, and desire to be involved in our sex lives that got a redefinition eventually cost him his senate seat.
And to the strait conservative crowd, he believes that birth control should be prevented by law, this is a horrifying man.
I don't believe their search index is 100% coherent, it could be a matter of different servers too (as in, two people in the US could get different results).
I would expect the dirty (as in, yuck, time to wash the sheets) definition would be more popular in Canada, as the meta discussion of his google problem would be more interesting than his candidacy.
The only reason there is a link between Rick and anal sex is is desire to enforce a lifestyle.
Also, I'd be pretty surprised if a 12 year old hasn't searched for the term anal sex yet, somebody in class has been talking about it (probably as an eww gross type thing). Just speaking from my pre-internet, but existence of people with older siblings experience.
He is not a man that shares your views of non-interference with others lives.
Of course, as a strait person, I fear of Rick. He wants to maintain the status quo and prevent progress on civil rights for homosexuals, but wants to set things back and take away contraception for me. I like my "license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be", and I wish more (as in all) of the conservative politicians took your, and your churches view, than his.
Also, as an aside, anybody that claims there's no right to privacy in the constitution needs to tell me what the fourth amendment describes (though I suppose one could argue it reasonable to find out the details of sex-life, I would seriously question their motives (that's a little ad hominem I think, but I stand by it)).
Actually, considering the old testament is about essentially a gang travelling around while fighting and beating more powerful gangs (with the help of an invisible friend according to the book), it would make for a great strategic RPG.
Make sure to tell Pharaoh your wife is your daughter, then release utter destruction when he thinks she's available. Let's not forget the plot where you arrange a marriage between your sister and the other gang, but use it as a ruse to get all the other gang to cut off their foreskin so you can slaughter them during recovery. Without the framework of rich narrative, you couldn't design that into gameplay, but I imagine the killing of people in too much pain to get out of bed would make for one of the more controversial games of the year (that's just from memory of the first book too, very rich content for a game).
Link one appears to be a political blog, that focuses on the candidate to me.
They should have an "about" link where they mention the comments he said that earned him the name, that would be even more informative, but still, it's hardly a blog about lube and fecal matter.
We have a hard disk that makes the round through a circle of friends accumulating various videos and recordings along the way (legal bootlegs only of course).
I'm just stating it the way it is, I do understand your argument.
A piece of paper is hearsay and therefore not a fact, it's only once it is authenticated that it becomes part of the record. So if your providing it somehow authenticates the connection to you (the case of a multi-user computer), then you cannot be forced to reveal it.
Hell, a non authenticated video is not really a fact until someone can authenticate it (I'm working on a case where that is an issue, the video, which was public, was found after the close of discovery, therefore nobody who was present can be called to say "yes, this is an accurate record of what happened".
Once the files are found, it will be an experts job to say they are accurate documents and why (basically saying they were what's on the computer, and that they are business records, as business records get an exception to hearsay).
How can someone be compelled to tell a cop where they buy their ammo? Stored their gun? Provide financial records? Can't all of that wind up in court as testimony against you? How can the fifth possibly not apply pre-trial?
They can't, they can however be told to provide their ammo, provide their gun, and provide financial records.
Evidence does not count as facts, and it's only facts you cannot be forced to reveal. If there were multiple computer users, and it was un-known who accessed the encrypted file, compelling access from a group of computer users would be revealing a fact, and not permitted.
2-years later, I forgot it is a pretty compelling defense IMO. But a judge may want to put someone in holding for long enough that they believe it could be forever just to be sure (judges are powerful WRT contempt, as Scalia has said, the judges power clearly demonstrates that the 8th amendment only applies to people convicted of a crime, therefore torture is legal).
Let's see, from the linked page a caption "Don Pettit prepares to insert biological samples in the Minus Eighty Laboratory Freezer for ISS (MELFI-1) in the Kibo laboratory."
That really sounds like actual research to me. These videos definitely look like off-the-cuff demos too.
And contempt doesn't even need that necessarily. It's at a judges discretion. They could choose to hold you, and if it was determined you'd never give it up by the judge, they could turn-around and release you.
The fact that contempt can be arbitrary was part of Scalia's thinking in the legitimacy of torture. The 8th amendment is specific about punishment, contempt (and interrogation) are not about punishment, therefore it does not apply. This (in his mind) makes enhanced interrogation the domain of the legislative branch to ban or permit.
They certainly don't require hover events to get to UI elements, and Unity does in at least two situations (taskbar, and top menu).
Definitely not a tablet UI (yet). It was started as a small screen (netbook UI), which it's pretty decent for. I suspect it will be a decent full computer on a tablet UI, but never a great one (as it will not be tablet through and through).
The real problem with that is generation to generation planes could be untouchable (better jamming, more stealth, better radar).
I don't know what the ratio really is, but to say, "it's a little older, but we have way more of them" may not mean anything, when a single of the new ones can drop a half-dozen of the old ones without being detected. It's not a matter of twice as good, it's a matter of infinitely better until ammo runs out often times.
But India isn't ready to fight the US, any of the major euro players, or even China (unless the behave poorly, they can could on the US there). India wants domanance over SE Asia, and perhaps to not be a cake-walk for China (which is probably slightly behind the cutting edge itself).
If India can be a recognized as a potential player in the area it gives them something, they already have the nuke to deter a full-scale invasion.
As an American I wish we purchased less and cheaper shit too, we have the nuke ourselves, it seams stupid to work on total world dominance, as being a true empire is distasteful for even our most militaristic leaders.
I think it's fair to say, that even for the German's the diverse ideas and relative peace in the developed world worked out for the best. A Nazi regime would of been at best a Soviet Union in the long run, and I think many a Russian could of benefited from a US plan to keep moving east into there, and then instituting a Marshal plan too.
I hope that's a joke, the last three phones purchased in my household were Christmas season, one for a child, the other two as I can justify spending this on myself gifts.
Most Christmas money spent are self-gifts, and I'll use it as an excuse to buy gifts (TVs, laptops, etc.).
Slashdot Mirror
I was in Scotland once, and ran into that at a rural area.
I was about 12 at the time, and I had to ask my pops if they spoke English in Scotland, because I always thought they did (apparently they were).
I think Wikipedia needs to do advertising, make it obvious it's an ad, and use something like google/bing, so they have no direct contact with the people being advertised.
Additionally, they should stick to their guns if a sponsor makes pressure. I suggest this, as I see plenty of people saying I would contribute money if..., so the donation model is already demonstrating that it can corrupt. Arms length advertising would be less corrupting, and could be done transparently.
Yes, that's where the badass part comes in.
Does spreadingsantorum.com have any info on butt fucking? It appears to have the definition at one point, but generally be a political blog about the candidate.
I understand that just like I wouldn't let my 7 year old out into the world unsupervised I wouldn't let them into the internet as such either. Look into Safe Search. It cleans up the vulgar sites. The guy uses power, and not vulgarity to try and inflict pain on others in the name of righteousness, it doesn't make his actions any better.
There are plenty of gatekeepers for you to use for the internet on your wee ones, schools already install them. Even the 10 year old is likely starting to look into that stuff, sorry to tell you. The interest in sex comes earlier than the interest in national politics, the risk of finding assfucking on the internet is way higher with a search for that in any child than one looking into santorum.
The fact is, there are more people writing about Santorum as gross byproduct of assfucking done wrong, than there are of him as a candidate.
You can't accurately discuss the candidate without bringing up sex (homosexual marriage, and strait sex without procreation are both issues he's against). The wikipedia entry about him is hardly about butt sex (the second link, after his official page using google itself as the gatekeeper).
As a politician, his job is to right the rules of lifestyle in this country. True he doesn't technically enforce it, I should have said dictate. If I'm having strait sex, I don't expect Rick Santorum to be involved, but he wants that power and thinks the fact he didn't have it as senator was a miscarriage of justice.
And please, don't let your children (especially the 7 year old) onto the raw internet, much like older peers/schoolmates, it's full of disgusting and vulgar misinformation. The gatekeeper to the internet in your house is you, and the companies like google give you tools to be such.
Additionally, the fact that searches for sex and fun/recreation don't turn up a list of politicians against such acts is a problem, not a virtue, of the internet. I am sure if Romney/Santorum's stance on strait birth control was widely known it would cause them issue (note they are against a right to access in marriage too).
Santorum isn't simply some public figure speaking out about things he disapproves of, he is someone that wants to make them illegal.
Hmmm.
The Shechemites? Sarah?
The old testament (genesis at least) is a story about a small badass band of people surviving at all costs, leaving destruction in their path. History is a bitch, and the old testament documents it wonderfully.
As a PA resident when he was a senator, I sadly have to disagree.
We were able to wipe Santorum off the senate floor, but not wash him out of our political system. The same hateful views, and desire to be involved in our sex lives that got a redefinition eventually cost him his senate seat.
And to the strait conservative crowd, he believes that birth control should be prevented by law, this is a horrifying man.
I don't believe their search index is 100% coherent, it could be a matter of different servers too (as in, two people in the US could get different results).
I would expect the dirty (as in, yuck, time to wash the sheets) definition would be more popular in Canada, as the meta discussion of his google problem would be more interesting than his candidacy.
The only reason there is a link between Rick and anal sex is is desire to enforce a lifestyle.
Also, I'd be pretty surprised if a 12 year old hasn't searched for the term anal sex yet, somebody in class has been talking about it (probably as an eww gross type thing). Just speaking from my pre-internet, but existence of people with older siblings experience.
He is not a man that shares your views of non-interference with others lives.
Of course, as a strait person, I fear of Rick. He wants to maintain the status quo and prevent progress on civil rights for homosexuals, but wants to set things back and take away contraception for me. I like my "license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be", and I wish more (as in all) of the conservative politicians took your, and your churches view, than his.
Also, as an aside, anybody that claims there's no right to privacy in the constitution needs to tell me what the fourth amendment describes (though I suppose one could argue it reasonable to find out the details of sex-life, I would seriously question their motives (that's a little ad hominem I think, but I stand by it)).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Santorum#Political_positions
Bible Adventures 2.0
Actually, considering the old testament is about essentially a gang travelling around while fighting and beating more powerful gangs (with the help of an invisible friend according to the book), it would make for a great strategic RPG.
Make sure to tell Pharaoh your wife is your daughter, then release utter destruction when he thinks she's available. Let's not forget the plot where you arrange a marriage between your sister and the other gang, but use it as a ruse to get all the other gang to cut off their foreskin so you can slaughter them during recovery. Without the framework of rich narrative, you couldn't design that into gameplay, but I imagine the killing of people in too much pain to get out of bed would make for one of the more controversial games of the year (that's just from memory of the first book too, very rich content for a game).
Link one appears to be a political blog, that focuses on the candidate to me.
They should have an "about" link where they mention the comments he said that earned him the name, that would be even more informative, but still, it's hardly a blog about lube and fecal matter.
I am willing to bet 150 million, or 2% was one of the largest.
I know the best way to fix that.
The patent system...
damn, never mind.
Me too.
We have a hard disk that makes the round through a circle of friends accumulating various videos and recordings along the way (legal bootlegs only of course).
"...and forget that we've gotten used to not paying for our movies and getting them instantly!"
Your 90's must have been way different than mine.
I'm just stating it the way it is, I do understand your argument.
A piece of paper is hearsay and therefore not a fact, it's only once it is authenticated that it becomes part of the record. So if your providing it somehow authenticates the connection to you (the case of a multi-user computer), then you cannot be forced to reveal it.
Hell, a non authenticated video is not really a fact until someone can authenticate it (I'm working on a case where that is an issue, the video, which was public, was found after the close of discovery, therefore nobody who was present can be called to say "yes, this is an accurate record of what happened".
Once the files are found, it will be an experts job to say they are accurate documents and why (basically saying they were what's on the computer, and that they are business records, as business records get an exception to hearsay).
How can someone be compelled to tell a cop where they buy their ammo? Stored their gun? Provide financial records? Can't all of that wind up in court as testimony against you? How can the fifth possibly not apply pre-trial?
They can't, they can however be told to provide their ammo, provide their gun, and provide financial records.
Evidence does not count as facts, and it's only facts you cannot be forced to reveal. If there were multiple computer users, and it was un-known who accessed the encrypted file, compelling access from a group of computer users would be revealing a fact, and not permitted.
2-years later, I forgot it is a pretty compelling defense IMO. But a judge may want to put someone in holding for long enough that they believe it could be forever just to be sure (judges are powerful WRT contempt, as Scalia has said, the judges power clearly demonstrates that the 8th amendment only applies to people convicted of a crime, therefore torture is legal).
Let's see, from the linked page a caption "Don Pettit prepares to insert biological samples in the Minus Eighty Laboratory Freezer for ISS (MELFI-1) in the Kibo laboratory."
That really sounds like actual research to me. These videos definitely look like off-the-cuff demos too.
And contempt doesn't even need that necessarily. It's at a judges discretion. They could choose to hold you, and if it was determined you'd never give it up by the judge, they could turn-around and release you.
The fact that contempt can be arbitrary was part of Scalia's thinking in the legitimacy of torture. The 8th amendment is specific about punishment, contempt (and interrogation) are not about punishment, therefore it does not apply. This (in his mind) makes enhanced interrogation the domain of the legislative branch to ban or permit.
They certainly don't require hover events to get to UI elements, and Unity does in at least two situations (taskbar, and top menu).
Definitely not a tablet UI (yet). It was started as a small screen (netbook UI), which it's pretty decent for. I suspect it will be a decent full computer on a tablet UI, but never a great one (as it will not be tablet through and through).
I think netbook, it definitely needs a mouse.
Is unity useable at all on tablets?
The new release appears to have removed the start button for me.
Without a mouse to throw left, I don't think I could launch anything. The mouse is also required to reveal app menus.
Where did everyone get the idea unity is designed for tablets?
Sad reality, I suspect my account is that age, and yet I still pass as functioning adult.
The real problem with that is generation to generation planes could be untouchable (better jamming, more stealth, better radar).
I don't know what the ratio really is, but to say, "it's a little older, but we have way more of them" may not mean anything, when a single of the new ones can drop a half-dozen of the old ones without being detected. It's not a matter of twice as good, it's a matter of infinitely better until ammo runs out often times.
But India isn't ready to fight the US, any of the major euro players, or even China (unless the behave poorly, they can could on the US there). India wants domanance over SE Asia, and perhaps to not be a cake-walk for China (which is probably slightly behind the cutting edge itself).
If India can be a recognized as a potential player in the area it gives them something, they already have the nuke to deter a full-scale invasion.
As an American I wish we purchased less and cheaper shit too, we have the nuke ourselves, it seams stupid to work on total world dominance, as being a true empire is distasteful for even our most militaristic leaders.
Unfortunately for the Germans
I think it's fair to say, that even for the German's the diverse ideas and relative peace in the developed world worked out for the best. A Nazi regime would of been at best a Soviet Union in the long run, and I think many a Russian could of benefited from a US plan to keep moving east into there, and then instituting a Marshal plan too.
I hope that's a joke, the last three phones purchased in my household were Christmas season, one for a child, the other two as I can justify spending this on myself gifts.
Most Christmas money spent are self-gifts, and I'll use it as an excuse to buy gifts (TVs, laptops, etc.).