It's more that the higher courts are arguing over the appropriate definition of "aggravated assault", a lower court having decided it doesn't apply to a particular action. If they're found to have ruled incorrectly on the matter, the ruling can probably be set aside. You still need a new trial, of course.
Making a new law that applies to prior acts is generally considered bad form, but it can be done. Of course, if a higher court redefines existing law, all bets are off.
I don't know, maybe you run a chat or website for a computer game that appeals to children? Creatures springs to mind . . . we had children as young as nine or ten dropping in there all the time, and this was back at the start of the decade. Oh, and you'd have adults and children cooperating on addon development, too.
Children are people too, they have similar interests and activities as adults. Think back to when you were 13; would you have wanted to restrict your world of interaction to your parents, your peers, and your teacher?
I don't know . . . I got exposed to everything the Internet had to offer, and now I run a major furry wiki.
. . . huh, perhaps you have a point there.;-)
Seriously, though, this is good-intentioned but it makes for bad law. Think how it'll be for the people running chats - suddenly, asking people their age will not only be a good idea, but mandatory to avoid the risk of a jail sentence for yourself or others in chat. Oh, and everyone else in chat needs to know how old (or rather, how young) everyone is, too.
Heh, I know the skeleton battle you're talking about. You need to use tactics - like sending one guy ahead to test while the others hold back. Sometimes you can split them up. And take it slowly! Real adventurers who just ran into every battle would get slaughtered, and rightly so.
You also have to read the location. For example, if there's a bunch of webs around, maybe you should be on the watch for a spider ambush - or if there's a huge pile of bones and rusting weapons on the ground, chances are you shouldn't touch that vial . . . they give you lots of hints.
I made the patch to the kernel at (bytes 0x30C43A and 0x30C47B for SP2), signed with a test certificate, set the necessary bcdedit configuration, and rebooted. It works and I now have 4GB where I once had 3GB. Everything seems to be working so far. Kudos to TFA. I always wondered why I couldn't find a technical limitation in the Vista binaries.
Not sure what you're running, but I have a bog-standard Dell and this fix works fine for me. YMMD, but I think most chipsets nowadays support 4GB. Especially the ones that can, you know, plug 4GB into them. Linux uses it, after all.
Your car is governed to keep you driving at a sane speed. Wanting to use all the memory that you purchased is not insane.
. . . after having destroyed its competition, which sounds a lot like Atlas Shrugged.
As he says, most sites need more simple advice
on
Even Faster Web Sites
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The average webmaster doesn't need this book; they need tools like Page Speed that highlight very simple issues that webmasters can fix, usually without any code changes. And they need clear instructions on how to do it, and why it will benefit their users.
I recently ran a project to cut the fluff on large furry websites. Most failed to even gzip their HTML, CSS or JS, or were resizing images into thumbnails. It's not hard, people just don't think to do it, or don't know how.
I'm probably not the best person to ask that, being the admin of a site for people who roleplay and dress up as cartoon-style animal characters.:-)
Call me cuckoo, but I'm living the dream . . . *munches puffs*
I respectfully disagree. It's called the awesomebar and not the horrificbar for a reason. Yes, the very first betas of it were horrific. It's really pretty damn good now.
Speaking as a furry, I'm disappointed in section IV of the guidelines. Who will give us our fluffy tails, or make Piccinini's disturbing sculptures a reality now? At this rate I might as well just buy my own island and experiment there . . .
Preferably, a furry convention - Anthrocon's coming up - but whatever floats your boat. Meet strange and interesting people. You are likely to find some attractive, despite the various stereotypes (you know, the same ones they have about geeks in general). Take it from there.
Of course. I would be disappointed if an article reached good article status without mentioning such things, as coverage of the topic should be broad. In fact, the very first article concerned, furry convention, had to have coverage of critical response to such events added before it could become a good article.
Wikipedia has a reward board where people can offer cash or other rewards for articles to be created or (usually) improved to a certain standard. There is also a bounty board to offer donations to the Wikimedia Foundation for similar tasks.
I have personally given $300 to individuals who have worked to raise furry articles to good article status. I see nothing wrong with this. A good article must, by definition, be neutral, and if it is not on a notable subject, it is very unlikely to achieve the status. Frankly, given the amount of skill and effort it takes to meet the requirements (I've done it myself, I know how tough it is), $50 an article is cheap.
Slashdot Mirror
It's more that the higher courts are arguing over the appropriate definition of "aggravated assault", a lower court having decided it doesn't apply to a particular action. If they're found to have ruled incorrectly on the matter, the ruling can probably be set aside. You still need a new trial, of course.
Making a new law that applies to prior acts is generally considered bad form, but it can be done. Of course, if a higher court redefines existing law, all bets are off.
If they didn't want to be prosecuted, maybe they shouldn't have taken up racketeering.
Children are people too, they have similar interests and activities as adults. Think back to when you were 13; would you have wanted to restrict your world of interaction to your parents, your peers, and your teacher?
If they did that, we'd lose half our Wikipedia administrators.
. . . huh, perhaps you have a point there. ;-)
Seriously, though, this is good-intentioned but it makes for bad law. Think how it'll be for the people running chats - suddenly, asking people their age will not only be a good idea, but mandatory to avoid the risk of a jail sentence for yourself or others in chat. Oh, and everyone else in chat needs to know how old (or rather, how young) everyone is, too.
That's a good joke - but no, I mean it literally is a ! symbol. :-)
Heh, I know the skeleton battle you're talking about. You need to use tactics - like sending one guy ahead to test while the others hold back. Sometimes you can split them up. And take it slowly! Real adventurers who just ran into every battle would get slaughtered, and rightly so. You also have to read the location. For example, if there's a bunch of webs around, maybe you should be on the watch for a spider ambush - or if there's a huge pile of bones and rusting weapons on the ground, chances are you shouldn't touch that vial . . . they give you lots of hints.
It's a !
FreeBSD is already at 7.2! No way they can catch up now, unless they pull a Windows.
I made the patch to the kernel at (bytes 0x30C43A and 0x30C47B for SP2), signed with a test certificate, set the necessary bcdedit configuration, and rebooted. It works and I now have 4GB where I once had 3GB. Everything seems to be working so far. Kudos to TFA. I always wondered why I couldn't find a technical limitation in the Vista binaries.
Not sure what you're running, but I have a bog-standard Dell and this fix works fine for me. YMMD, but I think most chipsets nowadays support 4GB. Especially the ones that can, you know, plug 4GB into them. Linux uses it, after all. Your car is governed to keep you driving at a sane speed. Wanting to use all the memory that you purchased is not insane.
Damn right. You have no real privacy anymore. Get over it.
. . . after having destroyed its competition, which sounds a lot like Atlas Shrugged.
The average webmaster doesn't need this book; they need tools like Page Speed that highlight very simple issues that webmasters can fix, usually without any code changes. And they need clear instructions on how to do it, and why it will benefit their users. I recently ran a project to cut the fluff on large furry websites. Most failed to even gzip their HTML, CSS or JS, or were resizing images into thumbnails. It's not hard, people just don't think to do it, or don't know how.
Just goes to show: you can lead a man to the door, but you can't make him use your keys and walk through it.
I'm probably not the best person to ask that, being the admin of a site for people who roleplay and dress up as cartoon-style animal characters. :-)
Call me cuckoo, but I'm living the dream . . . *munches puffs*
The point being that 10-year-olds will be "the rest of us" soon enough.
I respectfully disagree. It's called the awesomebar and not the horrificbar for a reason. Yes, the very first betas of it were horrific. It's really pretty damn good now.
Speaking as a furry, I'm disappointed in section IV of the guidelines. Who will give us our fluffy tails, or make Piccinini's disturbing sculptures a reality now? At this rate I might as well just buy my own island and experiment there . . .
Preferably, a furry convention - Anthrocon's coming up - but whatever floats your boat. Meet strange and interesting people. You are likely to find some attractive, despite the various stereotypes (you know, the same ones they have about geeks in general). Take it from there.
Of course. I would be disappointed if an article reached good article status without mentioning such things, as coverage of the topic should be broad. In fact, the very first article concerned, furry convention, had to have coverage of critical response to such events added before it could become a good article.
Sure. Just tell me what articles you're interested in, and I'll be sure to let you know how much it'll cost you to keep them the way they are.
Which works great right up to the point where someone is actually convicted for something that should never have been a crime to begin with.
Wikipedia has a reward board where people can offer cash or other rewards for articles to be created or (usually) improved to a certain standard. There is also a bounty board to offer donations to the Wikimedia Foundation for similar tasks. I have personally given $300 to individuals who have worked to raise furry articles to good article status. I see nothing wrong with this. A good article must, by definition, be neutral, and if it is not on a notable subject, it is very unlikely to achieve the status. Frankly, given the amount of skill and effort it takes to meet the requirements (I've done it myself, I know how tough it is), $50 an article is cheap.