4. The argument for gun control is childish at best: "daddy maybe if we make the guns go away no one will kill one another anymore".
The problem with this childish argument is that it is supported by evidence. You can't just label it "childish" and hope it would dissappear. Look at this stats: http://www.buzzfeed.com/bookofodds/who-is-most-likely-to-murder-you-1dx6 and see, that most people likely to murder you have easy access to your guns, be them acquaintances, girlfriends, boyfriends, parents, children or spouses.
Given, that 60% percent of gun related deaths are suicides, it looks as if having a gun is dangerous mainly to yourself and your close environment more than to everyone else. Not having a gun in your environment will thus lower your chance of dying by firearms down to slightly more than 1/20 (1,600 deaths vs. 31,000).
Re:Or we're the cavities formed posthumously?
on
Iceman Had Bad Teeth
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Dying in the snow and being frozen for the next 5300 years definitely helps here.
It had more to do with bus speeds. Older cards built to the spec of the original IBM AT03 could run only at 6 MHz or 8 MHz, so when bus speed and processor clock were running at the same frequency, you had to slow down the processor to get those cards working in your computer.
Actually, they used to run at 12 MHz, but you could clock them down to 6 or 8 MHz to get older ISA cards built to the spec of the original IBM AT03 running in your bus.
I don't know of the U.S. tax code, but at least in Germany, where I used to live, exactly this would be considered "help between neighbors" and was explicitely taken out of the tax code. If the plumber wasn't my neighbor or an acquintance of sorts (e.g. if we only met for the deal "plumbing vs. kitchen remodelling"), then it would both be taxable.
It is, because serving employees food at no charge is part of the payment package (as money equivalent) and should be taxed accordingly as a part of the employee's income.
The nuclear winter will happen if we decide to start a nuclear war right now. If we can put off the nuclear war, then there will be no nuclear winter.
This is a completely different problem than global warming.
Or to put it in words more accessible to you: A warning that you might burn yourself when setting that can of gasoline on fire does in no way offset the validity of the warning that you might freeze to death if you get completely drunk and then decide to walk 25 miles through a dark North Canadian winter night.
Differently than you, I actually remember the warnings about the new Ice Age, putting it somewhere between 3000 AD and 5000 AD. This in no way conflicts with a continious warming until 2100 AD.
As far as I can remember, the predictions became worse for some time and now get a little less negative, but are still worse than at the begin of the 2000s. It wouldn't call that backpedalling.
It's not Google, that is to be taxed here, it's the Google employee. Getting free meals on corporate expense is a money-equivalent, and thus should be taxed. Effectively, everyone is paying a higher share of taxes because of the lost tax revenue from Google employees.
(In the countries I've lived so far, corporate meals are taxed, and so are company cars, company provided health insurance and most other money-equivalents.)
No, because you are not the business case for Google. Google is not in the business of bringing search results to people, it's in the business of bringing people to advertisers. You are the product, not the customer. And for the sales to advertisers, Google gets taxed.
Absolutely yes. It wasn't forbidden for Aaron Schwartz to download articles from JSTOR (he had the credentials).
It was a violation of the ToS to use automated means to robo-download thousands of them. And it was a violation of the IT policies to bring his own equipment there and wire it up to the campus network and hiding its existance.
Hm. Don't the States in the U.S. have a chapter in their traffic codes, that states something similar to "drivers are required to use their vehicles in a manner that reduces the harm and the risk of harm to the unavoidable minimum"? It would make a lot of discussions about texting, phoning or checking maps while driving moot.
As there are two companies named Merck, and both are working in the same field, it would be nice to say which Merck you are actually talking about, Merck & Co., Inc, or Merck KGaA? (Both are among the largest pharmaceutical enterprises, with US$ 48 billion resp. US$ 14 billion annual revenue.)
It won't work for all those people that still use WinXP out of necessity. For instance, our company uses a time sheet reporting tool that was supposed to be replaced five years ago and is still not ported to Win7. But the tool is so entrenched in other procedures of the company that somehow the company doesn't know how to migrate to anything else at all.
Yes, Win7 would be much better. Yes WinXP is old and will stop working on any more recent hardware. But I still have it running in a VMWare to do my time sheets, and it has to get online to synchronize with the server.
No, it's not a tragedy. It just shows that the OS itself matters less and less. You can basicly port all applications available for Linux to Windows, if you want to use Cygwin. You can port them to Mac OS X, if you have MacPorts available. And now something strange happens: It's more and more attractive for companies to develop under Linux and then use the available tools to port the software for other plattforms. Linux is ubiquitous. The main programming interface is the same, libc is the same, and the GNU tool chain is the same everwhere.
Here, it gets complicated. The main reason is Dalvik, a layer above the kernel itself. From a pure OS point of view, it's a shell, allowing the starting and stopping of applications. At the same time, it's also the only available interface to the kernel. Thus, from an application point of view, it acts like the OS itself. Often, it's called a platform, abstracting the real OS. Google could replace Linux at any time within Andoid, and for the applications, it wouldn't make any difference. That's why you can develop Android apps in the Android SDK on your computer which is neither ARM based as the Android devices the apps will later installed on nor necessarily runs Linux as its OS - Dalvik is presenting a layer against which the apps are built, and which acts the same on any OS it is running on.
Android is Linux-based, but also comes with a completely own UI (even an own display manager) and own applications.
You know that the UI is not an integral part of Linux? It's a part of the distribution, and different distributions are offering different UIs for Linux. There are X.org based UIs and Wayland based UIs, and HTML-based UIs and command line based UIs... So Android is just shipping Linux with its own UI.
As keeps being pointed out the real bearded ones: The operating system itself is the kernel together with the drivers and kernel modules. Everything else is either shell or application.
You are messing up distributions with operating systems.
The issue is the license (since you are licensing, not buying) and whether or not it should be transferable when it was likely specified in the fine print somewhere that it wasn't transferable.
Sometimes I am glad living in the E.U.. There the European Court of Justice clearly ruled, that any transfer of a digital good (be it via physical media or via download or any other means of transfer) including a permanent use license for an one time payment is a sale, and the First Sale Doctrin applies. There is no "just licensing". Either the license is permanent, then it's a sale, or the license has to be renewed for an additional payment, then it's a rent.
Slashdot Mirror
4. The argument for gun control is childish at best: "daddy maybe if we make the guns go away no one will kill one another anymore".
The problem with this childish argument is that it is supported by evidence. You can't just label it "childish" and hope it would dissappear. Look at this stats: http://www.buzzfeed.com/bookofodds/who-is-most-likely-to-murder-you-1dx6 and see, that most people likely to murder you have easy access to your guns, be them acquaintances, girlfriends, boyfriends, parents, children or spouses.
Given, that 60% percent of gun related deaths are suicides, it looks as if having a gun is dangerous mainly to yourself and your close environment more than to everyone else. Not having a gun in your environment will thus lower your chance of dying by firearms down to slightly more than 1/20 (1,600 deaths vs. 31,000).
Dying in the snow and being frozen for the next 5300 years definitely helps here.
... said the Anonymous Coward.
It had more to do with bus speeds. Older cards built to the spec of the original IBM AT03 could run only at 6 MHz or 8 MHz, so when bus speed and processor clock were running at the same frequency, you had to slow down the processor to get those cards working in your computer.
Actually, they used to run at 12 MHz, but you could clock them down to 6 or 8 MHz to get older ISA cards built to the spec of the original IBM AT03 running in your bus.
Why they should? You don't throw good money after bad.
I don't know of the U.S. tax code, but at least in Germany, where I used to live, exactly this would be considered "help between neighbors" and was explicitely taken out of the tax code. If the plumber wasn't my neighbor or an acquintance of sorts (e.g. if we only met for the deal "plumbing vs. kitchen remodelling"), then it would both be taxable.
It is, because serving employees food at no charge is part of the payment package (as money equivalent) and should be taxed accordingly as a part of the employee's income.
This is a completely different problem than global warming.
Or to put it in words more accessible to you: A warning that you might burn yourself when setting that can of gasoline on fire does in no way offset the validity of the warning that you might freeze to death if you get completely drunk and then decide to walk 25 miles through a dark North Canadian winter night.
Differently than you, I actually remember the warnings about the new Ice Age, putting it somewhere between 3000 AD and 5000 AD. This in no way conflicts with a continious warming until 2100 AD.
As far as I can remember, the predictions became worse for some time and now get a little less negative, but are still worse than at the begin of the 2000s. It wouldn't call that backpedalling.
It's not Google, that is to be taxed here, it's the Google employee. Getting free meals on corporate expense is a money-equivalent, and thus should be taxed. Effectively, everyone is paying a higher share of taxes because of the lost tax revenue from Google employees. (In the countries I've lived so far, corporate meals are taxed, and so are company cars, company provided health insurance and most other money-equivalents.)
No, because you are not the business case for Google. Google is not in the business of bringing search results to people, it's in the business of bringing people to advertisers. You are the product, not the customer. And for the sales to advertisers, Google gets taxed.
Absolutely yes. It wasn't forbidden for Aaron Schwartz to download articles from JSTOR (he had the credentials). It was a violation of the ToS to use automated means to robo-download thousands of them. And it was a violation of the IT policies to bring his own equipment there and wire it up to the campus network and hiding its existance.
Hm. Don't the States in the U.S. have a chapter in their traffic codes, that states something similar to "drivers are required to use their vehicles in a manner that reduces the harm and the risk of harm to the unavoidable minimum"? It would make a lot of discussions about texting, phoning or checking maps while driving moot.
As there are two companies named Merck, and both are working in the same field, it would be nice to say which Merck you are actually talking about, Merck & Co., Inc, or Merck KGaA? (Both are among the largest pharmaceutical enterprises, with US$ 48 billion resp. US$ 14 billion annual revenue.)
It won't work for all those people that still use WinXP out of necessity. For instance, our company uses a time sheet reporting tool that was supposed to be replaced five years ago and is still not ported to Win7. But the tool is so entrenched in other procedures of the company that somehow the company doesn't know how to migrate to anything else at all. Yes, Win7 would be much better. Yes WinXP is old and will stop working on any more recent hardware. But I still have it running in a VMWare to do my time sheets, and it has to get online to synchronize with the server.
Because for instance, the amount of liquids per bottle you can bring from a tax free shop at the airport through security is not limited to 100 ml.
No, it's not a tragedy. It just shows that the OS itself matters less and less. You can basicly port all applications available for Linux to Windows, if you want to use Cygwin. You can port them to Mac OS X, if you have MacPorts available. And now something strange happens: It's more and more attractive for companies to develop under Linux and then use the available tools to port the software for other plattforms. Linux is ubiquitous. The main programming interface is the same, libc is the same, and the GNU tool chain is the same everwhere.
Here, it gets complicated. The main reason is Dalvik, a layer above the kernel itself. From a pure OS point of view, it's a shell, allowing the starting and stopping of applications. At the same time, it's also the only available interface to the kernel. Thus, from an application point of view, it acts like the OS itself. Often, it's called a platform, abstracting the real OS. Google could replace Linux at any time within Andoid, and for the applications, it wouldn't make any difference. That's why you can develop Android apps in the Android SDK on your computer which is neither ARM based as the Android devices the apps will later installed on nor necessarily runs Linux as its OS - Dalvik is presenting a layer against which the apps are built, and which acts the same on any OS it is running on.
Android is Linux-based, but also comes with a completely own UI (even an own display manager) and own applications.
You know that the UI is not an integral part of Linux? It's a part of the distribution, and different distributions are offering different UIs for Linux. There are X.org based UIs and Wayland based UIs, and HTML-based UIs and command line based UIs... So Android is just shipping Linux with its own UI.
Formally spoken, you never use the OS, you are always using a shell running on the OS, may it be a GUI, a command line or a web interface.
As keeps being pointed out the real bearded ones: The operating system itself is the kernel together with the drivers and kernel modules. Everything else is either shell or application. You are messing up distributions with operating systems.
The issue is the license (since you are licensing, not buying) and whether or not it should be transferable when it was likely specified in the fine print somewhere that it wasn't transferable.
Sometimes I am glad living in the E.U.. There the European Court of Justice clearly ruled, that any transfer of a digital good (be it via physical media or via download or any other means of transfer) including a permanent use license for an one time payment is a sale, and the First Sale Doctrin applies. There is no "just licensing". Either the license is permanent, then it's a sale, or the license has to be renewed for an additional payment, then it's a rent.
It's easy. If you can terminate your contract at any time, and all you lose are the benefits, then you are not a slave.