References are the one and only - because Wikipedia articles stay alife even if no active editor takes care of them anymore. If the knowledge condensed in the Wikipedia article can't be supported by any references, no one will be able to acquire the knowledge to take care of the article again.
As an ideal, Wikipedia articles should contain all the references necessary to check every sentence of it - so someone new to the topic can work through them until he's able to maintain the article. That's what "no original research" means in the end: keeping Wikipedia articles maintainable.
But on the other hand, the Solstice celebrations in Rome were a new fashion to begin with, starting around 270 AD, when soldiers who had fought in the southeastern part of the Roman Empire, brought the Mithras-cult to Rome and with it the feast of Sol Invictus. Just about 70 years later, in 340 AD, the first christmas was celebrated in Rome. The Roman tradition didn't celebrate the Solstice at all, and the Saturnalia were extended from Dec 17 to Dec 23 (later till Dec 30) only after Iulius Caesar's calendar reform in 45 BC.
And still no. VW owns only 49.9 percent of the Porsche AG. So Porsche is not part of the VW group, VW just happens to be the largest shareholder. And while there is a long history of cooperation between VW and Porsche, starting with the VW Beetle in 1938, and covering such cars as the 814/816 or the 924/944 or most recently the Porsche Cayenne/VW Touareg, the pickups sold by VW were either designed inhouse (VW Transporter, Caddy, Caddy III), designs of Skoda (Caddy II), Autolatina (Amarok), of Toyota (Taro), or M.A.N. (LT Series).
There was the engineering company Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche G.m.b.H, which designed cars for other companies, but didn't have their own production facilities. It designed for instance the Typ 12 for Zündapp, which created the base for the later Volkswagen, but never left the prototype state. An improved prototype (Typ 32) was developped for NSU, and based on those, the Porsche Typ 60 was developped, and a new company was founded by the Deutsche Arbeiterfront, to build the Typ 60 as KdF-Wagen (Volkswagen) and its military twin, the Kübelsitzwagen or Kübelwagen (Typ 82). But the Kübelwagen was no pickup. The Porsche GmbH itself was neither part nor owner of the KdF-Werke, it only provided the construction plans for the KdF-Wagen and earned more than 20 Mio Reichsmarks for it till 1945. It still worked for other companies too, designed for instance the Auto Union Typ D racing car for the Auto Union, one of the most successful pre-WWII racing cars. And in 1937, it started the development of the Volkstraktor, a diesel powered tractor to motorize the german farming sector. Still no pickup. And still no production facilities.
The first of those was founded in Austria in 1944, the Porsche-Werk Gmünd, where the first car called Porsche (the 356) was manufactured after 1947.
So Ron Paul's position is that by strengthening property rights, civil lawsuits would provide adequate disincentive to polluters. In reality, he want's to weaken protections for polluters. The opposite of what you've said.
... which is a pipe dream. There is no disincentive for short term profits, that is strong enough. And strong property rights (whose property will be strengthened anyway?) will solve nothing e.g. when it comes to contamination. If you poison your own property, no one can hinder you without regulations forbidding exactly that. If later the borders break that were designed to limit the intoxication, and people get sick or die, how will you solve that problem with property rights? Paying for the lower value of the poisoned property?
The property rights of home and land owners are very strong, but there are still burglars and trespassers. How will you solve that problem with even stronger property laws? How much money do you get out in a civil court from someone who steals? If he has no money left to pay, he can't be made paying more. But he could still break into the next house and start stealing again. How do you hinder him with strong property law? What disincentive gives an even stronger property law?
People who think that property laws will solve anything always forget the most important part of the law: the ability of the intruder to actually pay. If a company can get away with setting up a shell company doing the contamination which will be dissolved or defaults as soon as the work is completed, then what use is a stronger property law?
But not as common as Silicon, which you can literally shovel in your backyard - the upper layer of the Earth crust is called Sial because of the two most abundant metals, Silicon and Aluminium. Iron comes in as a strong third.
There is a reason, why the three commerically most used metals are also the three most abundant. Molybdenum is often found in the compounds iron ore consists of, but it takes quite some energy to extract the Molybdenum from the iron ore.
Which are alive and kicking in Europe, and get even extended in China. It seems that's not the concept of a railroad, which was on demise. It was a certain idea how to handle a railroad, that failed.
The main stance of the Catholic Church in terms of Bible translations was, that translations were a-ok, if and only if the Catholic Church condoned it. Wyclif's translation for instance was not licensed by the Catholic Church, so Wyclif got into trouble (even if he probably wasn't the sole translator). Other translations (e.g. the valencian translation by Bonifacius Ferrer, brother of Vincenc Ferrer, saint of the spanish church or the german Mentelin-Bible), were accepted. And the translations themselves weren't the problem for the Catholic Church, their main grief was with not authorized interpretations of the Bible. The Waldensians and the Cathars were reading the Vulgata, and interpreting it differently. There was a time when reading the bible in private was forbidden (Innocencius III, 1199), in 1229 the Synode of Toulouse forbid even ownership of a bible (be it latin or else). On the other hand, the slavic rite and slavic translations of the bible were a completely different kettle of fish. It was at times allowed (880), then forbidden (920), then at least the slawic language was allowed, the permission was withdrawn (1080), and finally language and ritus were allowed again (1248). The first slawic and hungaran translations of the bible thus predate most western languages. If you concentrate too hard on the english situation, you will miss most points. England may have felt at times, that they were the navel of the world. But for the Catholic Church, the situation in the Middle Age was completely different. In most of western Europe, the Catholic Church was fighting to keep its authority at all cost. Thus, especially in France, England and the Holy Roman Empire, it was fighting off anything and anyone who took a slightly different stance than the official Chuch. In eastern Europe, it was trying to win as many people over from the orthodox churches as possible. Thus slawic rite and slawic language were accepted. And in Southeastern Europe, with the constant thread from the turkish invasion, the Church even prepared for a church in diaspora.
"The Catholic Church was forbidding Bible Translations", just because John Wyclif got conviced for heresy 30 years after his dead, thus misses the point completely.
The information Carrier IQ tracks is not published. So no - collecting information and not sharing them with the public is not ok. Collecting information and keeping them secret to get an advantage against all the others not having those information is not ok either.
No, that's just another way to describe the so called "intrinsic value" - it's the effort you have to put in to create yet another copy of a product. While for instance the effort you have to put in to create yet another car is still high, even if you have all the documentation, and all the tools, because the steel and alloy, the plastics and electronics cost money, and it's still a labour intensive task to mount them together to get a working car, the intrinsic value of yet another copy of a 3:20 min track of music is very low, because the effort to create said copy is approaching (but still not reaching) zero.
Economic theory yields that every product, given enough copies are made and asked for, will be valued in the long term with its intrinsic value.
No. Fraud is fraud, and theft is theft. There are frauds, which don't cause the transfer of ownership of something to the fraudster or any person affiliated with him.
You know how a system is called, who only the ones considered worthy and able on their respective field of knowledge are allowed to make decisions? It's called "rule of the worthy" or in greek: aristokratia.
The Latin bible (the most important of the latin bibles is the Vulgata) itself is just a translation, the original texts being hebrew (Old Testament) and greek (New Testament). There were other translations, Wulfila's translation into the Goth language, the pretty popular Bible historiale (Middle Age French), the Spanish Biblia Alfonsina, the Catalanian Bible, Wyclif's English translation and many more.
The Catholic Church just discouraged not authorised translations.
The original bible is partly hebrew, which was only spoken during jewish rituals at the time. The daily language in Palaestina was Aramaic. And the New Testament was mainly greek, which was ok for the scholars of the time, but not for daily use. There were several aramaic translations of the Old Testament. The septuagint is a greek translation of the hebrew Old Testament from the 3th century BC. The latin bibles themselves (be it the Vulgata or any other latin translation, often called Vetus latina if they predate the Vulgata) were further translations of the bible into languages people actually used. That's why the Vulgata bears its name, it's a vulgar version of the bible. And then there is Wulfila's translation of the bible into the goth language in the 4th century. Then there is the Hexapla, an edition of the Bible in six versions by Origen from the 3th century. In the 5th century, you have translations into the Armenian, Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic and Georgian languages.
So, the bible was translated heavily into lots of languages during the ages. Your point being?
Make this about 5% of their lifetime. The dogma about the infallibility of the pope was set in the papal encyclica Humani generis by Pope Pius XII and published in 1950. It basicly means that if the pope voices his opinion in a theological controverse, even if it is not ex cathedra, his statement is sufficiently authoritative to end said debate.
According to your logic, we should get rid of the police, the justice and the military, because protecting yourself and punishing perpetrators is solely your responsibility.
Slashdot Mirror
No, you don't understand the stance of Wikipedia.
References are the one and only - because Wikipedia articles stay alife even if no active editor takes care of them anymore. If the knowledge condensed in the Wikipedia article can't be supported by any references, no one will be able to acquire the knowledge to take care of the article again.
As an ideal, Wikipedia articles should contain all the references necessary to check every sentence of it - so someone new to the topic can work through them until he's able to maintain the article. That's what "no original research" means in the end: keeping Wikipedia articles maintainable.
But on the other hand, the Solstice celebrations in Rome were a new fashion to begin with, starting around 270 AD, when soldiers who had fought in the southeastern part of the Roman Empire, brought the Mithras-cult to Rome and with it the feast of Sol Invictus. Just about 70 years later, in 340 AD, the first christmas was celebrated in Rome.
The Roman tradition didn't celebrate the Solstice at all, and the Saturnalia were extended from Dec 17 to Dec 23 (later till Dec 30) only after Iulius Caesar's calendar reform in 45 BC.
And still no. VW owns only 49.9 percent of the Porsche AG. So Porsche is not part of the VW group, VW just happens to be the largest shareholder. And while there is a long history of cooperation between VW and Porsche, starting with the VW Beetle in 1938, and covering such cars as the 814/816 or the 924/944 or most recently the Porsche Cayenne/VW Touareg, the pickups sold by VW were either designed inhouse (VW Transporter, Caddy, Caddy III), designs of Skoda (Caddy II), Autolatina (Amarok), of Toyota (Taro), or M.A.N. (LT Series).
No. You got things messed up.
There was the engineering company Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche G.m.b.H, which designed cars for other companies, but didn't have their own production facilities. It designed for instance the Typ 12 for Zündapp, which created the base for the later Volkswagen, but never left the prototype state. An improved prototype (Typ 32) was developped for NSU, and based on those, the Porsche Typ 60 was developped, and a new company was founded by the Deutsche Arbeiterfront, to build the Typ 60 as KdF-Wagen (Volkswagen) and its military twin, the Kübelsitzwagen or Kübelwagen (Typ 82). But the Kübelwagen was no pickup. The Porsche GmbH itself was neither part nor owner of the KdF-Werke, it only provided the construction plans for the KdF-Wagen and earned more than 20 Mio Reichsmarks for it till 1945. It still worked for other companies too, designed for instance the Auto Union Typ D racing car for the Auto Union, one of the most successful pre-WWII racing cars. And in 1937, it started the development of the Volkstraktor, a diesel powered tractor to motorize the german farming sector. Still no pickup. And still no production facilities.
The first of those was founded in Austria in 1944, the Porsche-Werk Gmünd, where the first car called Porsche (the 356) was manufactured after 1947.
So no, Porsche never designed or sold a pickup.
So Ron Paul's position is that by strengthening property rights, civil lawsuits would provide adequate disincentive to polluters. In reality, he want's to weaken protections for polluters. The opposite of what you've said.
... which is a pipe dream. There is no disincentive for short term profits, that is strong enough. And strong property rights (whose property will be strengthened anyway?) will solve nothing e.g. when it comes to contamination. If you poison your own property, no one can hinder you without regulations forbidding exactly that. If later the borders break that were designed to limit the intoxication, and people get sick or die, how will you solve that problem with property rights? Paying for the lower value of the poisoned property?
The property rights of home and land owners are very strong, but there are still burglars and trespassers. How will you solve that problem with even stronger property laws? How much money do you get out in a civil court from someone who steals? If he has no money left to pay, he can't be made paying more. But he could still break into the next house and start stealing again. How do you hinder him with strong property law? What disincentive gives an even stronger property law?
People who think that property laws will solve anything always forget the most important part of the law: the ability of the intruder to actually pay. If a company can get away with setting up a shell company doing the contamination which will be dissolved or defaults as soon as the work is completed, then what use is a stronger property law?
But not as common as Silicon, which you can literally shovel in your backyard - the upper layer of the Earth crust is called Sial because of the two most abundant metals, Silicon and Aluminium. Iron comes in as a strong third.
There is a reason, why the three commerically most used metals are also the three most abundant. Molybdenum is often found in the compounds iron ore consists of, but it takes quite some energy to extract the Molybdenum from the iron ore.
Which are alive and kicking in Europe, and get even extended in China. It seems that's not the concept of a railroad, which was on demise. It was a certain idea how to handle a railroad, that failed.
Kodak is pretty much a north american name. In Europe, if anyone thinks about cameras, it's not really Kodak, that comes to mind.
The main stance of the Catholic Church in terms of Bible translations was, that translations were a-ok, if and only if the Catholic Church condoned it. Wyclif's translation for instance was not licensed by the Catholic Church, so Wyclif got into trouble (even if he probably wasn't the sole translator). Other translations (e.g. the valencian translation by Bonifacius Ferrer, brother of Vincenc Ferrer, saint of the spanish church or the german Mentelin-Bible), were accepted.
And the translations themselves weren't the problem for the Catholic Church, their main grief was with not authorized interpretations of the Bible. The Waldensians and the Cathars were reading the Vulgata, and interpreting it differently. There was a time when reading the bible in private was forbidden (Innocencius III, 1199), in 1229 the Synode of Toulouse forbid even ownership of a bible (be it latin or else).
On the other hand, the slavic rite and slavic translations of the bible were a completely different kettle of fish. It was at times allowed (880), then forbidden (920), then at least the slawic language was allowed, the permission was withdrawn (1080), and finally language and ritus were allowed again (1248). The first slawic and hungaran translations of the bible thus predate most western languages.
If you concentrate too hard on the english situation, you will miss most points. England may have felt at times, that they were the navel of the world. But for the Catholic Church, the situation in the Middle Age was completely different. In most of western Europe, the Catholic Church was fighting to keep its authority at all cost. Thus, especially in France, England and the Holy Roman Empire, it was fighting off anything and anyone who took a slightly different stance than the official Chuch. In eastern Europe, it was trying to win as many people over from the orthodox churches as possible. Thus slawic rite and slawic language were accepted. And in Southeastern Europe, with the constant thread from the turkish invasion, the Church even prepared for a church in diaspora.
"The Catholic Church was forbidding Bible Translations", just because John Wyclif got conviced for heresy 30 years after his dead, thus misses the point completely.
Yes, they have. It's called a bowl with hot water. Hold the envelope in the steam and wait until the glue comes off.
The information Carrier IQ tracks is not published. So no - collecting information and not sharing them with the public is not ok. Collecting information and keeping them secret to get an advantage against all the others not having those information is not ok either.
No, that's just another way to describe the so called "intrinsic value" - it's the effort you have to put in to create yet another copy of a product.
While for instance the effort you have to put in to create yet another car is still high, even if you have all the documentation, and all the tools, because the steel and alloy, the plastics and electronics cost money, and it's still a labour intensive task to mount them together to get a working car, the intrinsic value of yet another copy of a 3:20 min track of music is very low, because the effort to create said copy is approaching (but still not reaching) zero.
Economic theory yields that every product, given enough copies are made and asked for, will be valued in the long term with its intrinsic value.
No. Fraud is fraud, and theft is theft. There are frauds, which don't cause the transfer of ownership of something to the fraudster or any person affiliated with him.
Actually, the mayonaisse comes from the town of Mahón (cast.) or Maó (kat.), the capital town of Menorca, one of the islands of the spanish Baleares.
You know how a system is called, who only the ones considered worthy and able on their respective field of knowledge are allowed to make decisions? It's called "rule of the worthy" or in greek: aristokratia.
It's pretty hard. You don't even know which brands belong to Nestlé, and how many strains of seed and how many herbicides from Monsanto were used.
Actually no.
The Latin bible (the most important of the latin bibles is the Vulgata) itself is just a translation, the original texts being hebrew (Old Testament) and greek (New Testament). There were other translations, Wulfila's translation into the Goth language, the pretty popular Bible historiale (Middle Age French), the Spanish Biblia Alfonsina, the Catalanian Bible, Wyclif's English translation and many more.
The Catholic Church just discouraged not authorised translations.
You are about 1700 years wrong.
The original bible is partly hebrew, which was only spoken during jewish rituals at the time. The daily language in Palaestina was Aramaic. And the New Testament was mainly greek, which was ok for the scholars of the time, but not for daily use. There were several aramaic translations of the Old Testament. The septuagint is a greek translation of the hebrew Old Testament from the 3th century BC. The latin bibles themselves (be it the Vulgata or any other latin translation, often called Vetus latina if they predate the Vulgata) were further translations of the bible into languages people actually used. That's why the Vulgata bears its name, it's a vulgar version of the bible.
And then there is Wulfila's translation of the bible into the goth language in the 4th century. Then there is the Hexapla, an edition of the Bible in six versions by Origen from the 3th century. In the 5th century, you have translations into the Armenian, Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic and Georgian languages.
So, the bible was translated heavily into lots of languages during the ages. Your point being?
Make this about 5% of their lifetime. The dogma about the infallibility of the pope was set in the papal encyclica Humani generis by Pope Pius XII and published in 1950. It basicly means that if the pope voices his opinion in a theological controverse, even if it is not ex cathedra, his statement is sufficiently authoritative to end said debate.
If this causes Facebooks popularity to detoriate, more power to the E.U.!
And not going on sites that have a Facebook like button. Or are somehow affiliated with Facebook without telling you.
According to your logic, we should get rid of the police, the justice and the military, because protecting yourself and punishing perpetrators is solely your responsibility.
No, you can't. Try to buy food without giving money to Nestlé or Monsanto for instance!
That's ok as long as American companies don't understand that those Europeans can have all the laws they want.
There is not much flooding at 6500 ft. about Sea level.