I understand your argument and probably don't agree with the google manipulation either.
However, you are failing to understand what McCann actually said. He said that we can stay up to 100 year, then add "as long as no Americans are harmed". The first part sounds tough and committed which appeals to his hawkish supporters.
But then he tags on the tail which said "Well I mean only if there is no risk or harm done to Americans" which is a sop to those despairing of the human and financial costs to the USA.
There IS a principled way to interpret this, "As long as US people are not harmed, then we can station they in Iraq." But if he really belives this as the primary criterion, then he would advocate immediate withdrawal. Now we don't belive that that's what he means, do we?
So in combination, the statement is total irrelevant. It's like saying "I'm going to move to the Park Avenue apartment next to Michael Bloomberg... so long as the rent is lower than $500..."
- a totally meaningless statement since the precondition can NEVER be met in our lifetime!
Being a physics graduate student doesn't give you a privileged position of perception, I don't believe.
The problem is that this is not a falsifiable statment. If I show you a phenomenon that appears to be random, you can always say that there are as yet unobserved variables accounting for it. There would be no way to convince you since you have 'faith'.
Just open your eyes. Geodesic radar domes are used everywhere. They work!
His Dymaxion map significantly reduces the projective distortions found in common projections (Huge Greenland...)
He's a big idea man. His mind travel in different directions compared to most of us. We NEED visionaries like him. We already have many practical engineers. In this aspect, he is similar to Tesla.
'when McCain was asked whether U.S. troops might have to remain in Iraq for as long as 50 years, he replied, "Maybe 100" -- explaining, "As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, it's fine with me"'
So McCann said 100 years is OK as long as no Americans are being harmed. How about 1 year? Is he advocating immediate withdrawal since obviously Americans are being killed RIGHT NOW?
He sounds tough and committed --- as long as there is no cost!
From the UK Register article, to bundle in a MS Vista and Office cost a bit over $1000. I don't know the OEM costs in US, Europe, or Africa. Does any one have real data for comparison?
"The PRC was never very socialist anyway, most European democracies went much farther down that path"
Really?
Did they organize all farmers into Colletives? Did their government take over virtually all manufacturing enterprises (i.e. state own enterprise) ? Did their Communist Party install representatives in all enterprises to enforce doctrinal purity?
There has been tremendous change in people's thinking and the organization of productive activies within the last 10 years - since Teng Xiao Peng redirected China toward a more pragmatic path.
Listen to people who've visited China and don't rely on academic abstractions. US people have a bipolar attitude toward China. When they spout cliches toward one another, nothing is learnt and they will not gain a realistic picture of China as potential partner or competitor.
Tony Stark will be helpless once he's swaddled in reams of Shareholders' proposals and Warrants investigating his options-back dating schemes.... He'll have to go for a Presidential pardon.
"For example, the earlier poster thinks that the court is conservative, while I think that it's dangerously liberal - just look at the gaping hole that is the commerce clause today."
I would like to refer you to a recent article in the NY Times which pointed out that in the first year of the Roberts court, a great majority of the decisions came down to 5-4 votes split along the typical ideological line. Even Judge Posner criticized this record. So far this year, there are signs that the Chief Justice is working harder to achive a stronger consensus, thus we're getting more 6-3 or 7-2 votes and presumably decision with nuance. So while GW Bush nominated Roberts on his conservative plus judicial credentials, Roberts appears to wish to avoid looking too partisan.
Interesingly enough, the words 'abortion' and 'marriage' does not appear in the US constitution. Nor does the word "internet". So in such cases, should SCOTUS leave them ALL to the states or should they make reasonable extrapolations based on other historical precedents?
That's what some hotel wants to charge for broadband access. That's $300/month or 6-10X what one pays for at home. Those are the hotels I have been staying away from.
As for Starbuck, even paying $100-200/month is miniscule compared to their marketing expenses. Is it worthwhile to drive away customers to save $100-200 a month?
The only benefit that I can see is limiting the time people can use the internet. That way, the tables would not be hogged by people who spend all day in there and buy 2 drinks and would also improve the experiences of the other customers.
From Wikipedia: "As of 2007, it is Asia's largest information technology firm and has the largest number of employees among Indian IT companies with strength of over 110,000[1] employees in 47 countries. The company generated consolidated revenues of US $5.7 billion for fiscal year ended 31 March 2008 and is listed on the National Stock Exchange and Bombay Stock Exchange in India."
Sure, there have been failures, but the process has been refined and expectations set to more relistic level now. One may not be able to off-shore 100% of the software work, but one could off-shore 75-85% and keep the business liasons and system architects in the US. DE Shaw is one among many firms doing something like that.
Even Stock Equity analysis has been off-shored to India. If you think that your job will never be affected, don't be too sure unless that is a real need for your physical presence.
I do agree that it's very painful and as a society we need to help people adapt to changes in job demands. However, it is extremely futile to try to protect informational industries such as software. For example, medical Transcriptionists are virtually extinct within the USA. All off-shored.
Even without H1B, it's extremely easy for companies to move their opearations off-shore. Even if you can do the jobs of 3 of the workers off-shore (quite generous, I think), the wage differentials STILL makes it cheaper to go off-shore.
That said, I do believe that we need to produce more scientists and innovators locally. How it can be done probably will not be solved on/.....
Google licensed PRC geographic data from Beijing United Map Technology Limited (just a guess translation) who has a electronic map service license from the National Survey Department (apparently the prime driver for the regulatory initiative). The reporter speculates that the regulatory initiave may be related to the competition between Beijing United Map Technology with its duopoly competitior, Beijing Map Advanced Technology.
The official reasons given by the Deputy Director of the National Survey Department are: 1. Inaccurate boundaries show parts of PRC as soil of other nations 2. Omission of south sea islands (disputed islands with Japan) 3. Omission of Taiwan or labeling of Taiwan as independent 4. Inaccurate boundaries between administrative regions and dissemination of important geographical data 5. Annotation of sensitive, nonpublic, or national security information on the map.
(Think of Dick Cheney's house...)
Part of Google's objection is that there are no clear laws pertaining to online maps in PRC. Thus the regulators are not acting on a solid foundation. There remains wide spread confuson on what exactly is required by these regulations.
As for Google's choices, they are actively protesting this initiative. But unless they prevail or pull out of China they would be subjected to their laws and likely to adapt to publishing only authorized versions of PRC maps.
How is that a bad thing? It clearly shows that it's not just a concordance. Once something is reworded or paraphrase, copyright no longer applies. There could possibly be a trademark issue though.
Secondly, links to an external site is irrelevant in juding how 'transformative' a text is.
seems more sensible. It comes down to how much originality and how transformative the Lexicon book is. Since it's not been published, I don't see how all these bloggers can render judgement when they've not even read the book (not the website, which may not be the same).
Interstingly enough, if they keep their own interpretation of "alohorama (whatever)", it would help their defense! As it could be view as as an original interpretation. Even by incorporating JKR's explanation in the court, the Lexicon is still adding information not contained within the books. By faithfully using quotes, they are actually diminishing their own defense!
Blake never went around acting crazy for no good reason at all.... He did it for freedom.... Certainly no character on Farscape can rival Avon.
With B7, I could not predict how the plot will move, who will live and die. With Farscape, I didn't care. It was interesting, but not worth any emotional investment.
Your 1.5 million # is based on an extrapolation from 19 reports out of 45 ! A sample of FORTY FIVE! Furthermore, they are self reported incidents with no means of verification.
The report actually states on page 10: "Regardless of which estimates one believes, only a small fraction of adults have used guns defensively in 1994. The only question is whether that fraction is 1 in 1,800 (as one would conclude from the NCVS) or 1 in 100 (as indicated by the NSPOF estimate based on Kleck and Gertz's criteria)."
If one takes the the NCVS #, one should extrapolate ~83,000 incidents. So the original poster would not be as far off the mark as you make it out to be.
Slashdot Mirror
HTML, etc. is a jumble. But it's an Open jumble.
Nuff said.
Ever heard of it? It kinda morphed into this other thing called the Internet...
"But, these things take time and patience, which is what McCain was showing he has."
By avoiding the question, he's shown himself to be an able politician, but hardly the 'straight talk express'.
Let me update your signature for you:
--
To imprison men in GITMO forever, judicial proof is unnecessary -- GW Buch.
I understand your argument and probably don't agree with the google manipulation either.
However, you are failing to understand what McCann actually said.
He said that we can stay up to 100 year, then add "as long as no Americans are harmed". The first part sounds tough and committed which appeals to his hawkish supporters.
But then he tags on the tail which said "Well I mean only if there is no risk or harm done to Americans" which is a sop to those despairing of the human and financial costs to the USA.
There IS a principled way to interpret this, "As long as US people are not harmed, then we can station they in Iraq." But if he really belives this as the primary criterion, then he would advocate immediate withdrawal. Now we don't belive that that's what he means, do we?
So in combination, the statement is total irrelevant. It's like saying "I'm going to move to the Park Avenue apartment next to Michael Bloomberg ... so long as the rent is lower than $500..."
- a totally meaningless statement since the precondition can NEVER be met in our lifetime!
Being a physics graduate student doesn't give you a privileged position of perception, I don't believe.
The problem is that this is not a falsifiable statment.
If I show you a phenomenon that appears to be random, you can always say that there are as yet unobserved variables accounting for it. There would be no way to convince you since you have 'faith'.
Just open your eyes. Geodesic radar domes are used everywhere. They work!
His Dymaxion map significantly reduces the projective distortions found in common projections (Huge Greenland...)
He's a big idea man. His mind travel in different directions compared to most of us.
We NEED visionaries like him. We already have many practical engineers. In this aspect, he is similar to Tesla.
'when McCain was asked whether U.S. troops might have to remain in Iraq for as long as 50 years, he replied, "Maybe 100" -- explaining, "As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, it's fine with me"'
So McCann said 100 years is OK as long as no Americans are being harmed.
How about 1 year? Is he advocating immediate withdrawal since obviously Americans are being killed RIGHT NOW?
He sounds tough and committed --- as long as there is no cost!
Who is really shoveling polically motivated BS?
From the UK Register article, to bundle in a MS Vista and Office cost a bit over $1000. I don't know the OEM costs in US, Europe, or Africa. Does any one have real data for comparison?
"The PRC was never very socialist anyway, most European democracies went much farther down that path"
Really?
Did they organize all farmers into Colletives? Did their government take over virtually all manufacturing enterprises (i.e. state own enterprise) ? Did their Communist Party install representatives in all enterprises to enforce doctrinal purity?
There has been tremendous change in people's thinking and the organization of productive activies within the last 10 years - since Teng Xiao Peng redirected China toward a more pragmatic path.
Listen to people who've visited China and don't rely on academic abstractions. US people have a bipolar attitude toward China. When they spout cliches toward one another, nothing is learnt and they will not gain a realistic picture of China as potential partner or competitor.
You've succumb to the shuttered view of Analytic Philosophy which consider the field only about manipulation of languages and symbols.
Get out more. Read some Kierkergaard and Tao Te Ching. Check out existentialism, phenonemology, and sunyata in buddhism....
Please!
If they can connect their cut in service to loss of revenue, it might make them think harder before doing something like this again....
Tony Stark will be helpless once he's swaddled in reams of Shareholders' proposals and Warrants investigating his options-back dating schemes.... He'll have to go for a Presidential pardon.
"For example, the earlier poster thinks that the court is conservative, while I think that it's dangerously liberal - just look at the gaping hole that is the commerce clause today."
I would like to refer you to a recent article in the NY Times which pointed out that in the first year of the Roberts court, a great majority of the decisions came down to 5-4 votes split along the typical ideological line. Even Judge Posner criticized this record. So far this year, there are signs that the Chief Justice is working harder to achive a stronger consensus, thus we're getting more 6-3 or 7-2 votes and presumably decision with nuance. So while GW Bush nominated Roberts on his conservative plus judicial credentials, Roberts appears to wish to avoid looking too partisan.
Interesingly enough, the words 'abortion' and 'marriage' does not appear in the US constitution. Nor does the word "internet". So in such cases, should SCOTUS leave them ALL to the states or should they make reasonable extrapolations based on other historical precedents?
in jail and fine him xxx virtual sheckles.
That's what some hotel wants to charge for broadband access.
That's $300/month or 6-10X what one pays for at home.
Those are the hotels I have been staying away from.
As for Starbuck, even paying $100-200/month is miniscule compared to their marketing expenses. Is it worthwhile to drive away customers to save $100-200 a month?
The only benefit that I can see is limiting the time people can use the internet. That way, the tables would not be hogged by people who spend all day in there and buy 2 drinks and would also improve the experiences of the other customers.
Whether registrars are verifying domain owners has NOTHING whatever to do with which TLD the 'dangerous' websites are located in.
.COM with no impact to them whatsoever.
If they believe this article, those 'dangerous' website operators will just put their domain under
are just as silly. It's pretty trivial to use fake IDs esp. with lazy notaries.
Do you mean failure like this one?
From Wikipedia: "As of 2007, it is Asia's largest information technology firm and has the largest number of employees among Indian IT companies with strength of over 110,000[1] employees in 47 countries. The company generated consolidated revenues of US $5.7 billion for fiscal year ended 31 March 2008 and is listed on the National Stock Exchange and Bombay Stock Exchange in India."
Sure, there have been failures, but the process has been refined and expectations set to more relistic level now. One may not be able to off-shore 100% of the software work, but one could off-shore 75-85% and keep the business liasons and system architects in the US. DE Shaw is one among many firms doing something like that.
Even Stock Equity analysis has been off-shored to India. If you think that your job will never be affected, don't be too sure unless that is a real need for your physical presence.
Look at those examples.
/.....
I do agree that it's very painful and as a society we need to help people adapt to changes in job demands. However, it is extremely futile to try to protect informational industries such as software. For example, medical Transcriptionists are virtually extinct within the USA. All off-shored.
Even without H1B, it's extremely easy for companies to move their opearations off-shore. Even if you can do the jobs of 3 of the workers off-shore (quite generous, I think), the wage differentials STILL makes it cheaper to go off-shore.
That said, I do believe that we need to produce more scientists and innovators locally. How it can be done probably will not be solved on
"Communism on paper was never about putting antifreeze in toothpaste or lead in child toy's paint
And yet somehow, it always seems to end up that way."
Really? It seems that Capitalism got there first.
Try Reading "UNsafe at Any Speed" or "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair.
It's all to do with Greed, not so much with political system...
This link has more info: http://tech.sina.com.cn/i/2008-03-25/21362099485.shtml
Google licensed PRC geographic data from Beijing United Map Technology Limited (just a guess translation) who has a electronic map service license from the National Survey Department (apparently the prime driver for the regulatory initiative). The reporter speculates that the regulatory initiave may be related to the competition between Beijing United Map Technology with its duopoly competitior, Beijing Map Advanced Technology.
The official reasons given by the Deputy Director of the National Survey Department are:
1. Inaccurate boundaries show parts of PRC as soil of other nations
2. Omission of south sea islands (disputed islands with Japan)
3. Omission of Taiwan or labeling of Taiwan as independent
4. Inaccurate boundaries between administrative regions and dissemination of important geographical data
5. Annotation of sensitive, nonpublic, or national security information on the map.
(Think of Dick Cheney's house...)
Part of Google's objection is that there are no clear laws pertaining to online maps in PRC. Thus the regulators are not acting on a solid foundation. There remains wide spread confuson on what exactly is required by these regulations.
As for Google's choices, they are actively protesting this initiative. But unless they prevail or pull out of China they would be subjected to their laws and likely to adapt to publishing only authorized versions of PRC maps.
How is that a bad thing? It clearly shows that it's not just a concordance.
Once something is reworded or paraphrase, copyright no longer applies.
There could possibly be a trademark issue though.
Secondly, links to an external site is irrelevant in juding how 'transformative' a text is.
seems more sensible. It comes down to how much originality and how transformative the Lexicon book is. Since it's not been published, I don't see how all these bloggers can render judgement when they've not even read the book (not the website, which may not be the same).
Interstingly enough, if they keep their own interpretation of "alohorama (whatever)", it would help their defense! As it could be view as as an original interpretation. Even by incorporating JKR's explanation in the court, the Lexicon is still adding information not contained within the books. By faithfully using quotes, they are actually diminishing their own defense!
And don't say I can't call you Shirly.
Blake never went around acting crazy for no good reason at all....
He did it for freedom....
Certainly no character on Farscape can rival Avon.
With B7, I could not predict how the plot will move, who will live and die.
With Farscape, I didn't care. It was interesting, but not worth any emotional investment.
Your 1.5 million # is based on an extrapolation from 19 reports out of 45 !
A sample of FORTY FIVE! Furthermore, they are self reported incidents with no means of verification.
The report actually states on page 10:
"Regardless of which estimates one believes, only a small fraction of adults have used guns defensively in 1994. The only question is whether that fraction is 1 in 1,800 (as one would conclude from the NCVS) or 1 in 100 (as indicated by the NSPOF estimate based on Kleck and Gertz's criteria)."
If one takes the the NCVS #, one should extrapolate ~83,000 incidents.
So the original poster would not be as far off the mark as you make it out to be.