Although after you had the second talk you can just let your kid wander free on the net, they will discover material substituting the first one soon enough.
If you get questioned and you are innocent you lose 5 minutes of your time. If the police doesn't question a suspicious person they risk letting a criminal off the hook. Policemen are not mindreaders, they can't decide for sure who is guilty just by looking at them. Expecting them to only stop criminals is unreasonable. You see, those few minutes you spent answering some questions helped the police and made your neighbourhood a safer place. Being infuriated over that is just selfish.
My experience is that light pollution only happens when there is smog in the air. In summer, or after strong winds the sky is usually clear. So I think a better approach would be to reduce air pollution, which in turn would reduce light pollution too.
And how many incidents were before that? My guess is that your friend only became aware of crime after he got interested in the effects street lighting could have on it. Crime rates are higher during the night because there are less people, thus less witnesses on the streets. I have a hard time to believe that shining light on criminals will turn them lawful.
If we really want to get Freud into this, I think the reason most of us got into OS development is to ease our frustration of not getting women. Females, however, don't have such problems.
Freedom of assembly can't be without any regulation, as it would give a small number of radical people the ability to completely block certain parts of a city, thus causing serious damage to the majority if their demands aren't met, which would be undemocratic. The place and duration of protests has to be restricted. Whether those restrictions are overly broad can be debated, but freedom of assembly in its ideal form would only lead to the radicalization of politics and threaten the viability of city centers.
Economy is not a zero-sum game, if everyone else loses you are still not guaranteed to win. Just because you have the strongest economy doesn't mean you couldn't be better off in a world where you cooperate with others even at the cost of losing said leadership. Also, until China has 4x the GDP of America the average American citizen is still better off.
Exactly. This whole hypothesis is based on one data point alone. There were more than one serial killers, why did they try their hypothesis on just this one? Or was he the only one who fit in the equation?
Safety of consumption is just one of the safety concerns. A much bigger problem is crosspollination, and escaping to the wild, messing up the ecosystem. By these standards even safely consumable GMO plants aren't safe.
Hundred years from know futurulogist will write books predicting the same things as those in the article are "just around the corner" and will be available in less than another 100 years.
Slashdot Mirror
Or use a steel device made specifically for this purpose.
Although after you had the second talk you can just let your kid wander free on the net, they will discover material substituting the first one soon enough.
If you get questioned and you are innocent you lose 5 minutes of your time. If the police doesn't question a suspicious person they risk letting a criminal off the hook. Policemen are not mindreaders, they can't decide for sure who is guilty just by looking at them. Expecting them to only stop criminals is unreasonable. You see, those few minutes you spent answering some questions helped the police and made your neighbourhood a safer place. Being infuriated over that is just selfish.
If they are going to search the guy anyway what difference does scanning them first for weapons make?
Exactly that's maybe the only low-level feature where Java is better than C++.
for writing my first 1000 lines of code!
My experience is that light pollution only happens when there is smog in the air. In summer, or after strong winds the sky is usually clear. So I think a better approach would be to reduce air pollution, which in turn would reduce light pollution too.
And how many incidents were before that? My guess is that your friend only became aware of crime after he got interested in the effects street lighting could have on it. Crime rates are higher during the night because there are less people, thus less witnesses on the streets. I have a hard time to believe that shining light on criminals will turn them lawful.
Many lights serve only decorative purposes. Also, having everyone who wants to walk at night bring their own flashlight would be a lot more efficient.
This is effectively the same, removing periods from an address is still no hard task.
The problem with that is that it's trivial to discard the part after the + thus getting the real address.
Having articles detailing the problem is maybe even better than a blackout.
If we really want to get Freud into this, I think the reason most of us got into OS development is to ease our frustration of not getting women. Females, however, don't have such problems.
When I use a piece of software the gender of its developers is the last thing I care about.
Freedom of assembly can't be without any regulation, as it would give a small number of radical people the ability to completely block certain parts of a city, thus causing serious damage to the majority if their demands aren't met, which would be undemocratic. The place and duration of protests has to be restricted. Whether those restrictions are overly broad can be debated, but freedom of assembly in its ideal form would only lead to the radicalization of politics and threaten the viability of city centers.
The Internet isn't a national thing. If something hurts a part of it, the whole net gets hurt.
With this move the Indian government will deal a huge blow to the country's IT sector, the only thing that could save them from poverty.
Economy is not a zero-sum game, if everyone else loses you are still not guaranteed to win. Just because you have the strongest economy doesn't mean you couldn't be better off in a world where you cooperate with others even at the cost of losing said leadership. Also, until China has 4x the GDP of America the average American citizen is still better off.
Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are two totally different things.
You seem to confuse the right to free speech with the right to assemble.
That's what Anonymous did when they still had a goal to fight for.
Tell that to Jack the Ripper.
Exactly. This whole hypothesis is based on one data point alone. There were more than one serial killers, why did they try their hypothesis on just this one? Or was he the only one who fit in the equation?
Safety of consumption is just one of the safety concerns. A much bigger problem is crosspollination, and escaping to the wild, messing up the ecosystem. By these standards even safely consumable GMO plants aren't safe.
Hundred years from know futurulogist will write books predicting the same things as those in the article are "just around the corner" and will be available in less than another 100 years.