A summary of the law from the BBC is not the law. The restriction is on "use" which implies interaction of some sort. If you just set your phone to play music and don't need to skip tracks, then headphone connection is fine. Similarly, if it's in your pocket, or even on the seat next to you you should be fine.
It's a bad article. The point is valid though. Sure, ask for fizzbuzz. That's something that any developer should be able to work out from scratch. A sorting algorithm? Not all that useful, especially if it's explicitly a bubble sort they want. What if I give an insertion sort instead? Understanding time complexity makes sense, but memorising the algorithm is pointless.
The locking scheme always feels like a "I've read a book on basic threading algorithms and I want to prove it" questions. The issue I always come up with here is race conditions. Much harder to track down!
Regulation wouldn't work. I want twitter and facebook to allow me to post what I want. The nerdy forum on skyscrapers I lurk on though, I want them to banish any post that isn't about skyscrapers.
I do agree that we need some means to know if and when private companies are censoring us though - especially the ones that do appear to allow free posting.
Most households have at least one TV. That will be the big screen. But if you want to watch something different from the rest of the family, curling up with a tablet is okay for a lot of media. I'd probably be happy with this if I didn't want to play a console video game from time to time.
Her claim to fame is being a victim of harassment. She is challenging a successful incumbent with broad appeal, whereas her own policies are niche concerns. She has a very high opinion of herself but is not all that bright and terrible at politics. Essentially she's a crank. Don't give her the headlines.
Intent matters. If you punch someone, it's because you want to injure them. This guy presumably didn't.
In driving, there's a difference between running someone down deliberately (which is probably attempted murder, or at least GBH), driving like an idiot - dangerously fast for the conditions, for example - would be reckless. You should know there's a high chance of injury but act dangerously anyway. Careless driving is simply not paying enough attention. Being distracted by other things. Even though all of these could cause the same injury, the penalty will be greater if the intent is greater.
Large drones can be dangerous in the same way as cars, so it makes sense to make the same considerations.
He was. And it became clear after America entered the war. But he was careful to keep those views private when he was part of the America First committee. Here's an excerpt from a speech.
It is not difficult to understand why Jewish people desire the overthrow of Nazi Germany. The persecution they suffered in Germany would be sufficient to make bitter enemies of any race. No person with a sense of the dignity of mankind can condone the persecution the Jewish race suffered in Germany.
Absolutely. AntiFa are the embodiment of this. They may be fascist authoritarians but I would never suggest they were racist. In fact they go to great lengths not to be.
My mention of their policy here was mainly to show that they wanted to distance themselves from Nazi sympathisers
All the time he was spreading lies about 350 million pound a week that were going to the NHS
No he wasn't. That was from Vote Leave. Farage wasn't part of that group.
about the UK being invaded by Turkish muslims.
He was critical of Turkey being fast tracked. As were many; including pro-EU politicians. He never said anything about any "invasion" and I don't think he mentioned muslims.
He's being paid £85,000 for a job where he never turns up for work as an MEP.
Yes. There are many things to criticise him for. There are many things to criticise anyone for. Or praise them for. By focussing on one side or the other, you can make them a saint or a sinner. The point is that this is what the media are doing.
Then he kissed Trump's ass to get himself a better paying job as ambassodor to the US. Embarrassing.
Being friends with the president of the US is only embarrassing if you see yourself as left wing. I strongly suspect Farage doesn't consider himself part of that group.
Most of the cameras are private security cameras inside shops and banks. I guess a few might but generally they'll provide a privacy screen in this situation.
How widely reported was Caitlyn Jenner's support of Donald Trump? The left wing are critical of Farage's views on the NHS, but never bring up his support of drug decriminilisation. Le Pen has pushed for much more liberal attitudes towards same sex partnerships and the death penalty.
Maybe they're not nice people but you have to include the good with the bad, and let the readers make the decision. Otherwise you're pushing an agenda.
(America first is literally a fascist slogan from the 40s)
That's bollocks.
The "America First Committee" was a pacifist anti-war movement. It was supported by people who later became president, and a number of progressive socialists. They actively pushed anyone anti-semitic off the board because that was not the organisation they wanted to be.
They weren't pro-fascist. They were just against US involvement in the war.
Sure. I can see why people want to cut ties with him. It was a joke in poor taste, that caused understandable, or at least predictable anger.
The attempts to paint him as a neo-Nazi go overboard though. Especially by a publication such as WSJ, that trades off its reputation for honesty, and not doing this sort of hit piece.
At a certain point, money no longer matters. You can buy a slightly nicer car or a slightly nicer house, or you can buy the feeling that what you do every day matters.
There seem to be two dominant viewpoints that come to the same conclusion for different reasons. Essentially these can be summarised as "Booth babes are an insult to women", and "Booth babes are an insult to customers"
That is to say, some people are offended by the idea that they're going to be so impressed by the hot chicks that they'll spend tens of thousands of dollars on a security product. I think a lot of the attendees agree with this viewpoint and are pretty neutral about the first. Although a lot of older, more conservative, (and paradoxically younger ultra-progressive) attendees will agree with the first.
Presumably there is a voice for "I like booth babes", but it's a pretty tricky argument to make compellingly. Anyone who claims they need them is basically claiming to have a bad product.
It may not be "fear" so much as simple disinterest.
As a hypothetical attendee, the booth babe is paid to talk to me. I am aware of this. She doesn't care about me. Talking to an attractive woman is of no interest to me. There's no way I'm charming enough for her to be interested in me. I may have a wife/gf that I'm loyal to. So from a personal level, there's nothing in it for me.
Professionally, I may be interested in the product. The product I want is dull and worthy Trying to make it "fun" makes it less interesting to me. I may well be showing my own shallowness, but I really doubt the lycra clad blonde really has a solid understanding of my business needs. Someone in a suit - sure. Scruffy nerd in a t-shirt; I'm a little sceptical of their professionalism, but if they have a good enough product I'll consider it.
We really need to change the way we look at downloads. The "intellectual property" analogy more or less worked when each copy was tied to an actual physical object. Transfer the object, and you transfer the copy. There were still flaws but it largely did what it was intended to do.
Now, when a large proportion of data is sold in an intangible, trivially copyable format, the analogy just falls over. It makes no sense to treat the data this way.
Give it a rest. The term's been around for centuries wit this meaning. The idea that movie pirates are anything like the same is the setup to a joke.
Even if it isn't, nobody gives a shit. The public perception of the high seas pirate is a comical adventurer played by Johnny Depp, or a swashbuckling hero played by Cary Elwes!
It's publishing personally identifying information without the subject's permission. Reddit comes down pretty hard on this ever since the Boston bombing balls-up.
But surely it doesn't cost anything like the amount of tax income from cigarettes (approx £10 billion plus VAT). That's what? Around 9% of the NHS budget.
Well, if we're talking about a logical analysis, how many ducks are exploding? About 50? Because that means that out of every million ducks I see, one is an exploding version. And the odds of it exploding at this moment are even lower. Ducks are safe.
Statistically, you must realise that you're likely to be shot by a white guy with a gun than killed by a muslim terrorist. Hell, it's repeatedly pointed out that toddlers kill more people than terrorists!
Relax! The world is not out to blow you up with an exploding duck or an exploding Muslim.
Slashdot Mirror
A summary of the law from the BBC is not the law. The restriction is on "use" which implies interaction of some sort. If you just set your phone to play music and don't need to skip tracks, then headphone connection is fine. Similarly, if it's in your pocket, or even on the seat next to you you should be fine.
This is a long standing and well publicised law. The only change is the penalty has become more harsh.
It's a bad article. The point is valid though. Sure, ask for fizzbuzz. That's something that any developer should be able to work out from scratch. A sorting algorithm? Not all that useful, especially if it's explicitly a bubble sort they want. What if I give an insertion sort instead? Understanding time complexity makes sense, but memorising the algorithm is pointless.
The locking scheme always feels like a "I've read a book on basic threading algorithms and I want to prove it" questions. The issue I always come up with here is race conditions. Much harder to track down!
Regulation wouldn't work. I want twitter and facebook to allow me to post what I want. The nerdy forum on skyscrapers I lurk on though, I want them to banish any post that isn't about skyscrapers.
I do agree that we need some means to know if and when private companies are censoring us though - especially the ones that do appear to allow free posting.
Most households have at least one TV. That will be the big screen. But if you want to watch something different from the rest of the family, curling up with a tablet is okay for a lot of media. I'd probably be happy with this if I didn't want to play a console video game from time to time.
Her claim to fame is being a victim of harassment. She is challenging a successful incumbent with broad appeal, whereas her own policies are niche concerns. She has a very high opinion of herself but is not all that bright and terrible at politics. Essentially she's a crank. Don't give her the headlines.
Intent matters. If you punch someone, it's because you want to injure them. This guy presumably didn't.
In driving, there's a difference between running someone down deliberately (which is probably attempted murder, or at least GBH), driving like an idiot - dangerously fast for the conditions, for example - would be reckless. You should know there's a high chance of injury but act dangerously anyway. Careless driving is simply not paying enough attention. Being distracted by other things. Even though all of these could cause the same injury, the penalty will be greater if the intent is greater.
Large drones can be dangerous in the same way as cars, so it makes sense to make the same considerations.
Absolutely. AntiFa are the embodiment of this. They may be fascist authoritarians but I would never suggest they were racist. In fact they go to great lengths not to be.
My mention of their policy here was mainly to show that they wanted to distance themselves from Nazi sympathisers
No. The comment I replied to did before me, and the comment above that also mentioned him. The first person I mentioned was Trump.
No he wasn't. That was from Vote Leave. Farage wasn't part of that group.
He was critical of Turkey being fast tracked. As were many; including pro-EU politicians. He never said anything about any "invasion" and I don't think he mentioned muslims.
Yes. There are many things to criticise him for. There are many things to criticise anyone for. Or praise them for. By focussing on one side or the other, you can make them a saint or a sinner. The point is that this is what the media are doing.
Being friends with the president of the US is only embarrassing if you see yourself as left wing. I strongly suspect Farage doesn't consider himself part of that group.
Most of the cameras are private security cameras inside shops and banks. I guess a few might but generally they'll provide a privacy screen in this situation.
How widely reported was Caitlyn Jenner's support of Donald Trump? The left wing are critical of Farage's views on the NHS, but never bring up his support of drug decriminilisation. Le Pen has pushed for much more liberal attitudes towards same sex partnerships and the death penalty.
Maybe they're not nice people but you have to include the good with the bad, and let the readers make the decision. Otherwise you're pushing an agenda.
Those who have an issue with the excessive authoritarianism of this part of the left have a vested interest in bringing focus to this attitude though.
That's bollocks.
The "America First Committee" was a pacifist anti-war movement. It was supported by people who later became president, and a number of progressive socialists. They actively pushed anyone anti-semitic off the board because that was not the organisation they wanted to be.
They weren't pro-fascist. They were just against US involvement in the war.
Sure. I can see why people want to cut ties with him. It was a joke in poor taste, that caused understandable, or at least predictable anger.
The attempts to paint him as a neo-Nazi go overboard though. Especially by a publication such as WSJ, that trades off its reputation for honesty, and not doing this sort of hit piece.
At a certain point, money no longer matters. You can buy a slightly nicer car or a slightly nicer house, or you can buy the feeling that what you do every day matters.
Most coders had memorised their powers of 2, as well. At least up to 2^16.
And if they're wearing business attire and are able to talk to be about the product, then great! Bring them along!
There seem to be two dominant viewpoints that come to the same conclusion for different reasons. Essentially these can be summarised as "Booth babes are an insult to women", and "Booth babes are an insult to customers"
That is to say, some people are offended by the idea that they're going to be so impressed by the hot chicks that they'll spend tens of thousands of dollars on a security product. I think a lot of the attendees agree with this viewpoint and are pretty neutral about the first. Although a lot of older, more conservative, (and paradoxically younger ultra-progressive) attendees will agree with the first.
Presumably there is a voice for "I like booth babes", but it's a pretty tricky argument to make compellingly. Anyone who claims they need them is basically claiming to have a bad product.
It may not be "fear" so much as simple disinterest.
As a hypothetical attendee, the booth babe is paid to talk to me. I am aware of this. She doesn't care about me. Talking to an attractive woman is of no interest to me. There's no way I'm charming enough for her to be interested in me. I may have a wife/gf that I'm loyal to. So from a personal level, there's nothing in it for me.
Professionally, I may be interested in the product. The product I want is dull and worthy Trying to make it "fun" makes it less interesting to me. I may well be showing my own shallowness, but I really doubt the lycra clad blonde really has a solid understanding of my business needs. Someone in a suit - sure. Scruffy nerd in a t-shirt; I'm a little sceptical of their professionalism, but if they have a good enough product I'll consider it.
We really need to change the way we look at downloads. The "intellectual property" analogy more or less worked when each copy was tied to an actual physical object. Transfer the object, and you transfer the copy. There were still flaws but it largely did what it was intended to do.
Now, when a large proportion of data is sold in an intangible, trivially copyable format, the analogy just falls over. It makes no sense to treat the data this way.
Give it a rest. The term's been around for centuries wit this meaning. The idea that movie pirates are anything like the same is the setup to a joke.
Even if it isn't, nobody gives a shit. The public perception of the high seas pirate is a comical adventurer played by Johnny Depp, or a swashbuckling hero played by Cary Elwes!
It's publishing personally identifying information without the subject's permission. Reddit comes down pretty hard on this ever since the Boston bombing balls-up.
Did he commit the crime? Tell the police!
But surely it doesn't cost anything like the amount of tax income from cigarettes (approx £10 billion plus VAT). That's what? Around 9% of the NHS budget.
Well, if we're talking about a logical analysis, how many ducks are exploding? About 50? Because that means that out of every million ducks I see, one is an exploding version. And the odds of it exploding at this moment are even lower. Ducks are safe.
Statistically, you must realise that you're likely to be shot by a white guy with a gun than killed by a muslim terrorist. Hell, it's repeatedly pointed out that toddlers kill more people than terrorists!
Relax! The world is not out to blow you up with an exploding duck or an exploding Muslim.