Firstly, If you have representatives, its not a democracy, its a republic.
That's at least a rather outdated use of the word. I don't think you'd find a modern dictionary agreeing with you, though in the 18th century they might have. The inconsistent use of the term "republic" in the US to mean a representative democracy, goes back to James Madison. However one of the problems with that terminology is that republics historically haven't necessarily been representative democracies. (Venice for example was a republic ruled by aristocrats.)
The popular theory that a "republic guards against mob rule" is a little strange, too. Mob rule was frequent in the roman republic - despite it being representative.
Well the German law was already an implementation of a EU directive. However while the constitutional court has rejected the implementation, it did not declare the EU directive illegal. So it's still possible (actually mandatory under EU law) to implement a revised data storage law.
US courts have to base their decisions on the US constitution, having different laws the German courts their decisions must necessarily be different. While the German constitution has weaknesses which the US' doesn't have, the reverse is also true.
Restrictions on car use (e.g. requiring a driving license) are reasonable, because operating a car incorrectly usually poses a serious danger to the lives of others. That's not typically the case for computers, so these cases are just not comparable.
I think you are aiming too low. I'm aware of many factors in which France is better than Germany, others in which the UK is better than France, and yet a different set in which Germany is better than the UK. The US outshines Europe in many areas, but the reverse is also true. Criticism is not hate, and learning from the best will serve you better in the long term than pretending to be the best at everything.
Well, we don't have a comprehensive archive of medieval shopping lists either. And something like that would certainly interest some people too. (Like: How did common people eat in 1168? How wealthy was a smith in comparison to a farmer? How much of a person's income would go to food?) Being able to go a few hundred years back in time and seeing how people lived would be interesting.
However that doesn't mean that it should be a primary goal of our culture to preserve the mundane details of our lives in the most mind numbing detail. It might be interesting for future generations, sure - but we also have better things to do with our time and our money.
I'm sure that form factor is one thing, and the iPad could be interesting there. However netbooks have actually become a bit bigger over time - one of the drivers for that was a desire for a somewhat bigger keyboard. That suggests that a decent number of users want to use applications on their netbooks which require keyboards. The iPad is not going to be very interesting for them.
In my experience another major application for netbooks is skype - but for that you want video. I presume they'll add that soon to the iPad, but currently it's not available yet.
I think the iPad might find a market, but it won't be the netbook market - simply because it's not able to do what a netbook does.
So what you're saying is that you can't maintain control over your own computers
Well in fairness: he did manage to maintain control over his computers. He shut down his neighbors network to do it (which is not very nice) but he ultimately he got the result he desired.
You'll find stupid laws in any country, just because you heard of the minaret ban doesn't mean that's representative of Switzerland. Besides free speech does not mean you can build whatever you want, the minaret ban does not prevent anyone from saying what they want.
Well Swiss politicians like to be re-elected. If you don't like what they are doing you can elect someone else, or make it clear to the current bunch that they might not be re-elected if they bring in stupid laws. There is a pirate party in Switzerland which opposes this law: http://piraten-partei.ch/ supporting them might make the currently elected politicians think again, or get them replaced eventually.
Yeah, but the tool doesn't tell you if the house is just occupied by the person doing the twittering, right? So just because it tells you "this person is not at home, rob them" doesn't mean the person is single, or that the house is empty. There could still be the luddite roommate who collects guns as a hobby.
We are not going to get any more scientific consensus than what we already have.
Here is the list of scientific organizations (national academies of sciences etc) which agree with the theory of global warming: list (Global warming in the sense of: predominantly caused by humans and transforming the environmental conditions on Earth.)
On the other hand, here is the list of scientific organizations which disagree list
Yeah, the latter list is empty. There are a just five organizations which don't make a clear statement supporting all aspects of global warming, but don't oppose it either. There will never be more scientific agreement on any issue. That doesn't prove it's correct - just because it's the overwhelming consensus opinion of the scientific community doesn't mean it's necessarily right, but it's as clear an indication of the scientific opinion as it can possibly be.
If you can't make a decision based on that, you'll not make a decision based on more research.
That's a lot of nonsense. War is waged according to the Geneva conventions which the US have agreed to and the US constitution demands that the US follows it's treaties. As for the cause of war - you are lying and you know you are lying. You have blood on your hands for supporting the Bush government in this, and you are too chickenshit to admit it.
The "enemy combatant concept" didn't suspend the rules of war in 1942, so that's another neocon evasion.
Sorry I'm not going to pretend you are engaging in an honest discussion here, you are clearly not.
I don't know about the money, but torture, going to war on false pretenses, compromising FBI agents, the enemy combatant concept - these things are far more important to me. Sure Obama has been a great disappointment on that, basically failing to clean up anything the previous administration did but at least he didn't actually come up with that stuff.
The test just needs to be repeatable on one of the samples. If you do the test several times on one sample and you always get the same result - then that's consistent with a reliable test method.
If your test methods are fine and you get a different result on another sample - well then it's probably because the samples are different for some reason.
And a lot less unconstitutional than the previous one. Still wouldn't it be reasonable to expect the government just to stick to the constitution? Election in the US is not a choice between good and evil but between very evil and not quite so evil. There is room for improvement methinks.
They should start thinking about their children. For example about the part where they grow up and become adults some day. I have a little daughter and as she grows up I want her to be able to enjoy the same kind of freedom I was able to enjoy. I don't want her to have to live in a censorship state.
Slashdot Mirror
Granted this is counterfeiting of car parts.
Come on now - you buy a song you enjoy, and you aren't possibly tempted to check out another song by the same band?
It wasn't, it abolished democracy, called itself "Reich" (roughly: empire) and was obviously a dictatorship.
Therein lines a big difference between the USA and other constitutional democracies, government is limited in it's powers.
Wrong, limiting powers of the state is a standard feature of many constitutions all over the world.
That's at least a rather outdated use of the word. I don't think you'd find a modern dictionary agreeing with you, though in the 18th century they might have. The inconsistent use of the term "republic" in the US to mean a representative democracy, goes back to James Madison. However one of the problems with that terminology is that republics historically haven't necessarily been representative democracies. (Venice for example was a republic ruled by aristocrats.)
The popular theory that a "republic guards against mob rule" is a little strange, too. Mob rule was frequent in the roman republic - despite it being representative.
Well the German law was already an implementation of a EU directive. However while the constitutional court has rejected the implementation, it did not declare the EU directive illegal. So it's still possible (actually mandatory under EU law) to implement a revised data storage law.
US courts have to base their decisions on the US constitution, having different laws the German courts their decisions must necessarily be different. While the German constitution has weaknesses which the US' doesn't have, the reverse is also true.
Restrictions on car use (e.g. requiring a driving license) are reasonable, because operating a car incorrectly usually poses a serious danger to the lives of others. That's not typically the case for computers, so these cases are just not comparable.
It's not really vigilantism if they chose the legal route, go to court and get a judge to approve their case.
I think you are aiming too low. I'm aware of many factors in which France is better than Germany, others in which the UK is better than France, and yet a different set in which Germany is better than the UK. The US outshines Europe in many areas, but the reverse is also true. Criticism is not hate, and learning from the best will serve you better in the long term than pretending to be the best at everything.
However that doesn't mean that it should be a primary goal of our culture to preserve the mundane details of our lives in the most mind numbing detail. It might be interesting for future generations, sure - but we also have better things to do with our time and our money.
In my experience another major application for netbooks is skype - but for that you want video. I presume they'll add that soon to the iPad, but currently it's not available yet.
I think the iPad might find a market, but it won't be the netbook market - simply because it's not able to do what a netbook does.
Well in fairness: he did manage to maintain control over his computers. He shut down his neighbors network to do it (which is not very nice) but he ultimately he got the result he desired.
It's a victory for porn in the workplace. Finally the banks have done something useful.
It's shorthand for "for mature audiences". But you knew that.
You'll find stupid laws in any country, just because you heard of the minaret ban doesn't mean that's representative of Switzerland. Besides free speech does not mean you can build whatever you want, the minaret ban does not prevent anyone from saying what they want.
Well Swiss politicians like to be re-elected. If you don't like what they are doing you can elect someone else, or make it clear to the current bunch that they might not be re-elected if they bring in stupid laws. There is a pirate party in Switzerland which opposes this law: http://piraten-partei.ch/ supporting them might make the currently elected politicians think again, or get them replaced eventually.
Yeah, but the tool doesn't tell you if the house is just occupied by the person doing the twittering, right? So just because it tells you "this person is not at home, rob them" doesn't mean the person is single, or that the house is empty. There could still be the luddite roommate who collects guns as a hobby.
Here is the list of scientific organizations (national academies of sciences etc) which agree with the theory of global warming: list (Global warming in the sense of: predominantly caused by humans and transforming the environmental conditions on Earth.)
On the other hand, here is the list of scientific organizations which disagree list
Yeah, the latter list is empty. There are a just five organizations which don't make a clear statement supporting all aspects of global warming, but don't oppose it either. There will never be more scientific agreement on any issue. That doesn't prove it's correct - just because it's the overwhelming consensus opinion of the scientific community doesn't mean it's necessarily right, but it's as clear an indication of the scientific opinion as it can possibly be.
If you can't make a decision based on that, you'll not make a decision based on more research.
The "enemy combatant concept" didn't suspend the rules of war in 1942, so that's another neocon evasion.
Sorry I'm not going to pretend you are engaging in an honest discussion here, you are clearly not.
I don't know about the money, but torture, going to war on false pretenses, compromising FBI agents, the enemy combatant concept - these things are far more important to me. Sure Obama has been a great disappointment on that, basically failing to clean up anything the previous administration did but at least he didn't actually come up with that stuff.
So the charge is beyond silly. The French don't have a chance to win the tournament, no matter whether they exclude this guy or not.
If your test methods are fine and you get a different result on another sample - well then it's probably because the samples are different for some reason.
And a lot less unconstitutional than the previous one. Still wouldn't it be reasonable to expect the government just to stick to the constitution? Election in the US is not a choice between good and evil but between very evil and not quite so evil. There is room for improvement methinks.
Obviously I intend to raise her better than that. However assuming I fail, I don't see how some insane censorship law is going to help.
They should start thinking about their children. For example about the part where they grow up and become adults some day. I have a little daughter and as she grows up I want her to be able to enjoy the same kind of freedom I was able to enjoy. I don't want her to have to live in a censorship state.