Ah, but here's a little-known fact: if you get a ticket for swerving in traffic and pay the fine before your DUI case goes to court, guess what? The probable cause the officer had to pull you over in the first place (swerving) can't be used as it's a "previous bad act" that has no legal bearing on the current case. You essentially admitted you swerved over the line by paying the fine, the DA can't use that against you now to prove his DUI case. Badda-bing, badda-boom, you go free.
A friend of mine who used to be a cop said he used to wait for someone to cross a line twice before pulling them over. Then he'd ticket them for one of them and get them for the DUI on the other. Sneaky, but that's the way the system works.
You can't pull that stunt in the US. You can't charge someone for the same event subsequent to being found not guilty, even if you decide to go after them for a lesser charge. The court would toss that at the arraignment hearing. An example would be if a cop arrested you for drunk driving after seeing you cross lanes without signaling and you then fail a field sobriety test. For whatever reason, you're not convicted of DUI. The cops and DA now cannot issue a citation for failure to signal because that was the same event.
Wish Slashdot had a "nominate for best" button. This post is one of the best examples of what we've lost over the years that I've seen in a while. Kudos.
I have two kids and this is one of those well intentioned potentially good laws. I would want my kids protected as much as possible while they are online, and in "real" life.
I have four children, aged 10 to 21. You know how I protect(ed) them? By limiting and monitoring their Internet usage. Our oldest didn't start to use the Internet freely until she was 15 and had shown herself to be sufficiently responsible. The younger two still don't get to go online, ever, unless mom or dad are around and keeping an eye on things.
You want to protect your kids? Great, go do it. Leave the rest of us the fuck alone and stop pushing your responsibility on other people.
I wonder if this could create a market opportunity for a game that guarantees only people 18+ are playing? Make it a violation of the TOS to allow a minor to use your account and require players to fax/email scanned copies of their driver's license as proof of age. Then if a parent complains to the company about what little Timmy read online, they can shoot back that Timmy was unauthorized to access their servers and is now guilty of a Federal crime himself.
Pikers. Truly repressive parents would have killed their daughter rather than face the shame of having a slut in the house. Come on Georgia, kick it up a notch! Saudi Arabia is making you look weak.
I could not agree more with everything you just said.
People seem to confuse equality of outcome, or even equality of opportunity, with equality before the law. The first one is impossible to guarantee because different people have different abilities, the second is impossible for much the same reason, but you also have to add in different degrees of luck.
The last one is the only one that matters in any real sense. We should strive to treat all people with respect and dignity, but not force someone to be hired (or not hired) due to an accident of birth. Let employers hire the best candidate for the job, and don't assume that just because one gender dominates a field it must be due to societal bias. Maybe men just tend to enjoy sports more so you see more of them in sports-related careers; and maybe women just tend to enjoy being around children more so you see more of them as teachers. It doesn't mean there's a concerted effort in either cases to keep the other gender out.
The argument is that men are physically stronger than women, and that has nothing to do with culture. So name a single culture where women outmass men significantly (not counting obesity) and are physically stronger than men.
A dear friend of mine is a personal trainer who works out six hours a week on her own, plus another 10 to 20 hours with clients. I work out rarely if at all. She can bench about 110 lbs, max lift. I can bench 200 lbs, max lift. While the plural of anecdote is not "data", that's some pretty strong support for the idea that men are just physically stronger than women and are so by nature.
there is a perfectly effective and cheap solution to aids, it's called celibacy.
FTFY. Condoms break, if you're depending on them to keep you safe I hope your will is up to date.
I'll never understand why a disease so easily spread that carries a death sentence never resulted in mandatory quarantines. If we had taken that simple step thousands (millions?) of lives would've been saved.
Presumably you'd have to learn the configuration language for the editor in question and create your own macros to handle this edge case. It's unfortunate and could mean more work, it's up to you to decide if that extra work is worth the effort. But the option does exist, regardless.
"The people" wouldn't be apathetic to the political process.
What evidence do you have to support this claim? Because all the historical evidence for thousands of years is that most people can't be bothered with worrying about anything beyond the end of their nose. Why do you think, if given the awesome responsibility of policing Congress and the laws, that the average person would suddenly rise to the occasion? They can't even be bothered to vote out incumbents but you think they could override lobbyists and multi-thousand page laws?
A confidential internal memo detailing plans for building a new type of engine could "promote the Progress of Science"; ergo, it deserves copyright protection. It also details trade secrets that could damage the company it belongs to; ergo, it deserves to be treated as confidential. Using this example, I'm having a hard time understanding your complaint.
Use a modern editor that can store the strings of all previously used variables and allow for autocompletion when you start typing them. Emacs does this, vim does this, countless IDEs do this. Take your pick.
Don't kid yourself that there was ever a time when ethical journalists were the norm. There's a reason the most highly coveted prize in journalism is named for a notorious muckraker and yellow journalist.
You made an emotionally charged comment that was designed to illicit a response. That's a classic troll.
I understand it's not always avoidable; I do it myself from time to time. And when I get modded Troll because of it, I might be momentarily upset by it but I generally don't whine about it in a subsequent post. Because that's another classic troll technique.
Try to provide something more substantive to the conversation, and when those times occur when you just can't then don't whine about how others view your opinion.
You seem to be confusing an institution in the UK with what would happen in the US. There is nothing that Parliament can do that cannot be made worse by Congress. Just remember that old saw: to err is human; to really screw up takes an act of Congress.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know why people can't get the story straight.
You missed the part where tequila was involved, didn't you?
Did you read the bloody rest of my post?
Nope, which should be obvious by the tone of mine. Apologies.
Ah, but here's a little-known fact: if you get a ticket for swerving in traffic and pay the fine before your DUI case goes to court, guess what? The probable cause the officer had to pull you over in the first place (swerving) can't be used as it's a "previous bad act" that has no legal bearing on the current case. You essentially admitted you swerved over the line by paying the fine, the DA can't use that against you now to prove his DUI case. Badda-bing, badda-boom, you go free.
A friend of mine who used to be a cop said he used to wait for someone to cross a line twice before pulling them over. Then he'd ticket them for one of them and get them for the DUI on the other. Sneaky, but that's the way the system works.
You can't pull that stunt in the US. You can't charge someone for the same event subsequent to being found not guilty, even if you decide to go after them for a lesser charge. The court would toss that at the arraignment hearing. An example would be if a cop arrested you for drunk driving after seeing you cross lanes without signaling and you then fail a field sobriety test. For whatever reason, you're not convicted of DUI. The cops and DA now cannot issue a citation for failure to signal because that was the same event.
Wish Slashdot had a "nominate for best" button. This post is one of the best examples of what we've lost over the years that I've seen in a while. Kudos.
I have two kids and this is one of those well intentioned potentially good laws. I would want my kids protected as much as possible while they are online, and in "real" life.
I have four children, aged 10 to 21. You know how I protect(ed) them? By limiting and monitoring their Internet usage. Our oldest didn't start to use the Internet freely until she was 15 and had shown herself to be sufficiently responsible. The younger two still don't get to go online, ever, unless mom or dad are around and keeping an eye on things.
You want to protect your kids? Great, go do it. Leave the rest of us the fuck alone and stop pushing your responsibility on other people.
I wonder if this could create a market opportunity for a game that guarantees only people 18+ are playing? Make it a violation of the TOS to allow a minor to use your account and require players to fax/email scanned copies of their driver's license as proof of age. Then if a parent complains to the company about what little Timmy read online, they can shoot back that Timmy was unauthorized to access their servers and is now guilty of a Federal crime himself.
Pikers. Truly repressive parents would have killed their daughter rather than face the shame of having a slut in the house. Come on Georgia, kick it up a notch! Saudi Arabia is making you look weak.
So you admit you have no proof to back up your assertion? Gotcha, thanks.
I could not agree more with everything you just said.
People seem to confuse equality of outcome, or even equality of opportunity, with equality before the law. The first one is impossible to guarantee because different people have different abilities, the second is impossible for much the same reason, but you also have to add in different degrees of luck.
The last one is the only one that matters in any real sense. We should strive to treat all people with respect and dignity, but not force someone to be hired (or not hired) due to an accident of birth. Let employers hire the best candidate for the job, and don't assume that just because one gender dominates a field it must be due to societal bias. Maybe men just tend to enjoy sports more so you see more of them in sports-related careers; and maybe women just tend to enjoy being around children more so you see more of them as teachers. It doesn't mean there's a concerted effort in either cases to keep the other gender out.
The argument is that men are physically stronger than women, and that has nothing to do with culture. So name a single culture where women outmass men significantly (not counting obesity) and are physically stronger than men.
A dear friend of mine is a personal trainer who works out six hours a week on her own, plus another 10 to 20 hours with clients. I work out rarely if at all. She can bench about 110 lbs, max lift. I can bench 200 lbs, max lift. While the plural of anecdote is not "data", that's some pretty strong support for the idea that men are just physically stronger than women and are so by nature.
It sure does among polar bears. Male polar bears who don't speak Esperanto don't have a snowball's chance of reproducing.
You know what I tell my kids when they whine about something being unfair? "Get used to it, life is never fair."
So quit your bitching and work harder if you want to be noticed. No one owes you anything, the sooner you realize that the happier you'll be.
there is a perfectly effective and cheap solution to aids, it's called celibacy.
FTFY. Condoms break, if you're depending on them to keep you safe I hope your will is up to date.
I'll never understand why a disease so easily spread that carries a death sentence never resulted in mandatory quarantines. If we had taken that simple step thousands (millions?) of lives would've been saved.
You're in North Carolina. Most of the people you just described aren't acting. ;)
Presumably you'd have to learn the configuration language for the editor in question and create your own macros to handle this edge case. It's unfortunate and could mean more work, it's up to you to decide if that extra work is worth the effort. But the option does exist, regardless.
What historical evidence do you have to the contrary? I don't see a single system similar to ours at any point.
You made the first claim; it is incumbent upon you to prove your assertion first. I won't continue with this conversation until you do.
"The people" wouldn't be apathetic to the political process.
What evidence do you have to support this claim? Because all the historical evidence for thousands of years is that most people can't be bothered with worrying about anything beyond the end of their nose. Why do you think, if given the awesome responsibility of policing Congress and the laws, that the average person would suddenly rise to the occasion? They can't even be bothered to vote out incumbents but you think they could override lobbyists and multi-thousand page laws?
If it were up to the people to police Congress, do you honestly think things would be better?
I'd stick around for your answer but my DVR is almost full and I have to start watching the rest of The Biggest Loser before I run out of space.
A confidential internal memo detailing plans for building a new type of engine could "promote the Progress of Science"; ergo, it deserves copyright protection. It also details trade secrets that could damage the company it belongs to; ergo, it deserves to be treated as confidential. Using this example, I'm having a hard time understanding your complaint.
Don't worry, CmdrTaco. I may not hire you, but I'll keep visiting your site.
Use a modern editor that can store the strings of all previously used variables and allow for autocompletion when you start typing them. Emacs does this, vim does this, countless IDEs do this. Take your pick.
Don't kid yourself that there was ever a time when ethical journalists were the norm. There's a reason the most highly coveted prize in journalism is named for a notorious muckraker and yellow journalist.
You made an emotionally charged comment that was designed to illicit a response. That's a classic troll.
I understand it's not always avoidable; I do it myself from time to time. And when I get modded Troll because of it, I might be momentarily upset by it but I generally don't whine about it in a subsequent post. Because that's another classic troll technique.
Try to provide something more substantive to the conversation, and when those times occur when you just can't then don't whine about how others view your opinion.
You seem to be confusing an institution in the UK with what would happen in the US. There is nothing that Parliament can do that cannot be made worse by Congress. Just remember that old saw: to err is human; to really screw up takes an act of Congress.