Why? He put IP-Adresses of his new places on the internet. He uses the usual channels, Google+ and Facebook and Twitter. The new places are on servers his IT genius friends has set up. He gets the logfiles and analyses the addresses. Three adresses he can't put a name on.
Why you seemed to understand that he got the logfiles from Facebook is beyond me. It's described differently in the article.
And how does that in any way contradict me, or how did I mess something up? Pray tell!
I just said, that in general, there is no "drinking age" comparable to the U.S., but there are several age limits which are i) valid only to shopowners and pub landlords ii) heavily depending on the type of alcoholic beverage and food (yes, it covers also brandy containing food like certain chocolate candies) and iii) the circumstances they get sold.
The simple statement, that the legal drinking age in Germany would be 14 is wrong. A barkeeper, who serves a cocktail to a 17 year old still breaks the law in Germany.
No, it's more complicated. Shops and pubs are not allowed to give brandy and brandy containing drinks to people under 18 (9 JuSchG 1(1)) in general, and other alcoholic drinks to people under 16, if not accompagnied by adults (9 1(2)). It is possible to serve non-brandy-alcohol to people under 16, if they are accompagnied by adults, whose responsibility it is to decide if underage persons should drink alcohol.
So Motorola should go to the Mannheim court where it got the injunction and file a "contempt of court" motion against Microsoft for trying to circumvent the injunction without following proper procedure (filing a motion to lift the injunction in the proper courts in Germany). It won't help Motorola directly, but Microsoft might get some hefty fine for it.
The invasion in Iraq is an example for people who watched to much crime movies on TV and confused stories with reality. There are enough movies where the lone investigator/detective is convinced that someone specific is a perpetrator of a crime but can't prove it. As such he invents quite illegal means to find the evidence for his allegations he surely knows is there. But in the end, everything is dandy, because he manages to find the proof in the end.
In reality, and in Iraq, it's not that way. If you can't prove someone is the perpetrator, it's often because there simply is no evidence. And all illegality will not help you to uncover it. Faked evidence like the yellow cake blunder won't cure it either. Iraq is a prime example how not to handle a perceived thread. If we had continued the confinement of Iraq and the embargo, maybe we had some Arab Spring in 2004 instead of a bloody and murderous country and 1 billion people considering the U.S. the prime enemy of all muslims.
When Budvar registered the Budweiser brand in the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1895, they were the first to do so. And Budvar is incorporated in Budweis (as it was called then), and thus they had a natural right to describe their beer as being "from Budweis" or "being Budweiser". Anheuser-Busch didn't intervene, though they had the Budweiser brand registered in the U.S. since 1860. No one even thought in 1895, that this could lead to any problems, Anheuser-Busch selling their beer in North America, and Budvar serving the European market. It wasn't until the 1920ies before Anheuser-Busch Budweiser even reached Europe.
Even today, it's still possible to have the same trademark for the same product class registered to different entities in different countries.
And the prices for Germany are messed up to. They put it at an average of $1.90 in Germany, but in reality the average is closer to $1.25. Maybe they falsely included the refund you get if you return the empty bottle or can to the store.
No, because of the name clash between Budweiser (Anheuser-Busch) and Budweiser (Budvar), Anheuser-Busch is not allowed to sell a beer called "Budweiser" in Germany (and in some other european countries).
Funnily there are people in Germany who argue that Germany has no constitution, because the german constitution is called Grundgesetz (fundamental law) instead of Verfassung (constitution).
That's all prejudices and misconceptions about health care rolled into one.
1. Everyone is going to pay for it. Each one according to his possibilities. And you know what? It will be inversely to your actual needs. People without severe conditions will pay more than sick people in the end. Young people will pay more than the old ones. That's because being sick is by definition not being able care for yourself. To cure a sick person, you need a healthy person to take care of him. A health care system that lets sick people care for their sickness and lets healthy people go free can't work, protestant work ethic be damned. Whoever tells you something else lies to you.
2. Most health care services are services that are nearly completely useless to healthy people. There is no point in eating antibiotics if you don't have an infection. There is no point in wearing a splint if your leg isn't bend or broken. And there is no point in getting tubefed if you are not comatose. There are a few services which are interesting also for people in good shape, for instance painkillers and physiotherapy. Those have to be controlled for. But for the most, health care services will not be used by healthy people - they are not worth it if you are not sick. And so the abuse of those free (more correctly: pre-paid) services will be low.
3. Private health insurance plans have a high overhead. The current rate in the U.S. is about 30%. You pay a third of your insurance fee to keep the staff and the private owners of the insurance companies happy. The current overhead for governmentally controlled health care services as Western Europe has them is 10%. You might argue that this goes against conventional wisdom, but maybe the wisdom in this case is not as wise as it thinks it is.
If stories don't generate clicks from the nerd folk, then they don't matter to the nerds. So they aren't enough news for nerds and don't matter to them.
From the outside, Romansh looks like an italian dialect written with german phonetics. From the inside - you better never mentioned this to someone from Grischun.
Don't forget, in the U.S. everyone assumes the government can't handle anything, not even operating a railway, except that the government perfectly knows how to hush up alien landings. I wonder why everyone competent in the U.S. government seems to work in the alien-landing-hushing-up departement. They must have a vast campus somewhere, probably hidden from public view by alien technology.
No. It is quite possible to ensure the integrity of the ballot without being racist. Voter registration is one of the methods. Making it unusually complicated to register for certain groups is racist. And it is unnecessary for the integrity of the ballot.
It's an often repeated argument, but it is not correct nevertheless.
A structure is democratic if it provides the means to remove the ruling entity from power without bloodshed or revolution. So a republic can be democratic, if it's possible to remove the rulers of the republic form power using means provided in the constitution of the republic. A republic gets more and more undemocratic if it gets more and more complicated to legally remove someone from power, be it, because the laws build more and more hurdles to do so, or because traditions get more and more entrenched and any changes are frowned upon, or if a group within the structure is completely removed from power.
Especially if there is no real support for feeling superior, it's always nice to have a stereotype to fall back to. The part of the U.S. that makes jokes about France surrendering seems to be in a dire need to feel superior.
France was involved in about 1400 wars since the High Middle Age. And it managed to survive until today. (Next in line is Austria with about 600 and Brandenburg-Prussia with 550). They wouldn't have if they didn't score one or two victories.
There is no reason to run hearing aids solely on batteries. At the price tag current hearing aids have, you could power them with the energy your body emits anyway, via a thermoelectric element or a generator that turns body movements into electricity. Said that I know there are probably no hearing aids out there actually featuring those, that are more than proof of concepts. But as a former poster already said: It looks like a worthwhile kickstarter project.
The officer is not doing his job, if he doesn't for the same reason stop a white person dressed like a craftman, who carries a TV in a gated community where he does know all the residents, and this guy is not one of them.
This is inherently exactly the same situation: Some person not personally known carries a valuable object. So why stop the one and let the other go?
For my company the case for not upgrading to Windows 7 is the program to track tickets and working hours which does not work there. This tool was long since supposed to be replaced by some new shiny thing, but hasn't. Yes, it's an internal problem. Yes, it's even older than XP. No, there is no business case in pressuring for Windows 7.
We even had to setup a Windows 98B system just recently, because one of the controlling PCs for an old system broke, and the software runs only under Windows 98B, and I had to relearn that you have to install Internet Explorer 5.5 to get an important upgrade for the Windows 98 system. This was when Microsoft decided to so tightly couple Windows and Internet Explorer, that it triggered the anti monopoly case. We have systems out there which were installed in the early 1990ies, and whose administration tools were originally released for Windows 3.11. They use V.24 ports, not ethernet. And they just work. We have hardware in stock for replacement parts to keep the old stuff running another 5 to 10 years. There are systems whose remote administration runs via 56k baud modems and pcAnywhere. You just don't upgrade for the sake of upgrading. Because there are customers, who refuse to pay the upgrade of a working system. And why should they pay?
Luckily I live in a non-diamond-proposing part of the world.:) Diamond-rings are some item in U.S. movies like Lincoln Town Car cabs or phone numbers that start with 555. They just add some local flair to the plot like the pyramids do for a movie set in ancient Egypt.
Slashdot Mirror
Why? He put IP-Adresses of his new places on the internet. He uses the usual channels, Google+ and Facebook and Twitter. The new places are on servers his IT genius friends has set up. He gets the logfiles and analyses the addresses. Three adresses he can't put a name on.
Why you seemed to understand that he got the logfiles from Facebook is beyond me. It's described differently in the article.
And what is punishing people good for? If punishing wasn't done for some reason, why even bother?
And how does that in any way contradict me, or how did I mess something up? Pray tell!
I just said, that in general, there is no "drinking age" comparable to the U.S., but there are several age limits which are i) valid only to shopowners and pub landlords ii) heavily depending on the type of alcoholic beverage and food (yes, it covers also brandy containing food like certain chocolate candies) and iii) the circumstances they get sold.
The simple statement, that the legal drinking age in Germany would be 14 is wrong. A barkeeper, who serves a cocktail to a 17 year old still breaks the law in Germany.
No, it's more complicated. Shops and pubs are not allowed to give brandy and brandy containing drinks to people under 18 (9 JuSchG 1(1)) in general, and other alcoholic drinks to people under 16, if not accompagnied by adults (9 1(2)). It is possible to serve non-brandy-alcohol to people under 16, if they are accompagnied by adults, whose responsibility it is to decide if underage persons should drink alcohol.
So Motorola should go to the Mannheim court where it got the injunction and file a "contempt of court" motion against Microsoft for trying to circumvent the injunction without following proper procedure (filing a motion to lift the injunction in the proper courts in Germany). It won't help Motorola directly, but Microsoft might get some hefty fine for it.
The invasion in Iraq is an example for people who watched to much crime movies on TV and confused stories with reality. There are enough movies where the lone investigator/detective is convinced that someone specific is a perpetrator of a crime but can't prove it. As such he invents quite illegal means to find the evidence for his allegations he surely knows is there. But in the end, everything is dandy, because he manages to find the proof in the end.
In reality, and in Iraq, it's not that way. If you can't prove someone is the perpetrator, it's often because there simply is no evidence. And all illegality will not help you to uncover it. Faked evidence like the yellow cake blunder won't cure it either. Iraq is a prime example how not to handle a perceived thread. If we had continued the confinement of Iraq and the embargo, maybe we had some Arab Spring in 2004 instead of a bloody and murderous country and 1 billion people considering the U.S. the prime enemy of all muslims.
When Budvar registered the Budweiser brand in the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1895, they were the first to do so. And Budvar is incorporated in Budweis (as it was called then), and thus they had a natural right to describe their beer as being "from Budweis" or "being Budweiser". Anheuser-Busch didn't intervene, though they had the Budweiser brand registered in the U.S. since 1860. No one even thought in 1895, that this could lead to any problems, Anheuser-Busch selling their beer in North America, and Budvar serving the European market. It wasn't until the 1920ies before Anheuser-Busch Budweiser even reached Europe.
Even today, it's still possible to have the same trademark for the same product class registered to different entities in different countries.
They probably messed up and included the refund for the bottle or can.
And the prices for Germany are messed up to. They put it at an average of $1.90 in Germany, but in reality the average is closer to $1.25. Maybe they falsely included the refund you get if you return the empty bottle or can to the store.
No, because of the name clash between Budweiser (Anheuser-Busch) and Budweiser (Budvar), Anheuser-Busch is not allowed to sell a beer called "Budweiser" in Germany (and in some other european countries).
Funnily there are people in Germany who argue that Germany has no constitution, because the german constitution is called Grundgesetz (fundamental law) instead of Verfassung (constitution).
That's all prejudices and misconceptions about health care rolled into one.
1. Everyone is going to pay for it. Each one according to his possibilities. And you know what? It will be inversely to your actual needs. People without severe conditions will pay more than sick people in the end. Young people will pay more than the old ones. That's because being sick is by definition not being able care for yourself. To cure a sick person, you need a healthy person to take care of him. A health care system that lets sick people care for their sickness and lets healthy people go free can't work, protestant work ethic be damned. Whoever tells you something else lies to you.
2. Most health care services are services that are nearly completely useless to healthy people. There is no point in eating antibiotics if you don't have an infection. There is no point in wearing a splint if your leg isn't bend or broken. And there is no point in getting tubefed if you are not comatose. There are a few services which are interesting also for people in good shape, for instance painkillers and physiotherapy. Those have to be controlled for. But for the most, health care services will not be used by healthy people - they are not worth it if you are not sick. And so the abuse of those free (more correctly: pre-paid) services will be low.
3. Private health insurance plans have a high overhead. The current rate in the U.S. is about 30%. You pay a third of your insurance fee to keep the staff and the private owners of the insurance companies happy. The current overhead for governmentally controlled health care services as Western Europe has them is 10%. You might argue that this goes against conventional wisdom, but maybe the wisdom in this case is not as wise as it thinks it is.
If stories don't generate clicks from the nerd folk, then they don't matter to the nerds. So they aren't enough news for nerds and don't matter to them.
From the outside, Romansh looks like an italian dialect written with german phonetics. From the inside - you better never mentioned this to someone from Grischun.
Don't forget, in the U.S. everyone assumes the government can't handle anything, not even operating a railway, except that the government perfectly knows how to hush up alien landings.
I wonder why everyone competent in the U.S. government seems to work in the alien-landing-hushing-up departement. They must have a vast campus somewhere, probably hidden from public view by alien technology.
No. It is quite possible to ensure the integrity of the ballot without being racist. Voter registration is one of the methods. Making it unusually complicated to register for certain groups is racist. And it is unnecessary for the integrity of the ballot.
It's an often repeated argument, but it is not correct nevertheless.
A structure is democratic if it provides the means to remove the ruling entity from power without bloodshed or revolution. So a republic can be democratic, if it's possible to remove the rulers of the republic form power using means provided in the constitution of the republic. A republic gets more and more undemocratic if it gets more and more complicated to legally remove someone from power, be it, because the laws build more and more hurdles to do so, or because traditions get more and more entrenched and any changes are frowned upon, or if a group within the structure is completely removed from power.
France survived 1400 wars in the last 600 years. The french obviously know how to standing up for themselves.
Especially if there is no real support for feeling superior, it's always nice to have a stereotype to fall back to. The part of the U.S. that makes jokes about France surrendering seems to be in a dire need to feel superior.
France was involved in about 1400 wars since the High Middle Age. And it managed to survive until today. (Next in line is Austria with about 600 and Brandenburg-Prussia with 550).
They wouldn't have if they didn't score one or two victories.
There is no reason to run hearing aids solely on batteries. At the price tag current hearing aids have, you could power them with the energy your body emits anyway, via a thermoelectric element or a generator that turns body movements into electricity. Said that I know there are probably no hearing aids out there actually featuring those, that are more than proof of concepts. But as a former poster already said: It looks like a worthwhile kickstarter project.
Most beers I drink come in both versions. Budvar, Pilsner Urquell, Radeberger, Köstritzer... :)
(Fun fact: The beer Charlie Harper drank in the Two and a Half Men movies is Radeberger.)
The officer is not doing his job, if he doesn't for the same reason stop a white person dressed like a craftman, who carries a TV in a gated community where he does know all the residents, and this guy is not one of them.
This is inherently exactly the same situation: Some person not personally known carries a valuable object. So why stop the one and let the other go?
For my company the case for not upgrading to Windows 7 is the program to track tickets and working hours which does not work there. This tool was long since supposed to be replaced by some new shiny thing, but hasn't. Yes, it's an internal problem. Yes, it's even older than XP. No, there is no business case in pressuring for Windows 7.
We even had to setup a Windows 98B system just recently, because one of the controlling PCs for an old system broke, and the software runs only under Windows 98B, and I had to relearn that you have to install Internet Explorer 5.5 to get an important upgrade for the Windows 98 system. This was when Microsoft decided to so tightly couple Windows and Internet Explorer, that it triggered the anti monopoly case. We have systems out there which were installed in the early 1990ies, and whose administration tools were originally released for Windows 3.11. They use V.24 ports, not ethernet. And they just work. We have hardware in stock for replacement parts to keep the old stuff running another 5 to 10 years. There are systems whose remote administration runs via 56k baud modems and pcAnywhere. You just don't upgrade for the sake of upgrading. Because there are customers, who refuse to pay the upgrade of a working system. And why should they pay?
Luckily I live in a non-diamond-proposing part of the world. :) Diamond-rings are some item in U.S. movies like Lincoln Town Car cabs or phone numbers that start with 555. They just add some local flair to the plot like the pyramids do for a movie set in ancient Egypt.