I think you're probably right, but as I say the fundamental problem is that he has absolutely no reason to be tried in US court in the first place, as he has not broken any law (outside the rape case if he's deemed to be guilty) so does not even have any case to answer in the US.
Well, and Assange hasn't been indicted or charged with anything. If he ever does, we can look at whether the indictment is justified. Right now, Assange and you are accusing the US over something you yourself fabricated.
But I get the impression you're not the sort of person who cares about the facts of the case and are simply trying to push the political ideology
I'm just assuming that US, UK, and Swedish courts, judges, and prosecutors are generally doing their job until there is clear evidence to the contrary.
that seeks revenge for his embarassment of the US and other world governments, so I doubt what I say matters to you.
I think Assange is probably not guilty under US law, due to First Amendment protections. But I would have no problem with a US court making that determination; the case is important enough that clarity either way would be good for everybody. Of course, so far, he hasn't been indicted yet.
All this b.s. about "revenge" and "embarassment" is tin-foil-hat conspiracies that exist only in your mind.
they resort to just bending the rules and as the Swedes feel they have had to bend the rules so much in these cases
You do not have the slightest idea whether the Swedes are "bending the rules" or what the rules in Sweden even are.
Assange may well be guilty and I could care less if he is, but I want him dealt with fairly, and sensibly
He's had his day in court in the UK, he's going to get his day in court in Sweden, and sooner or later, he's probably going to get his day in court in the US.
And the combination of these two shows me that you don't understand Fitts' law.
I understand Fitts law just fine. But you claimed to have read studies that show that Mac menus are faster than Windows menus, yet you can't produce any such studies. All you can produce is studies that generally demonstrate Fitts law in other contexts, plus people waving their hands about how Fitts law implies that Mac menus must be faster. I'm sorry you don't understand the difference between the two, but the deficiency there is with you, not me.
The problem is that he hasn't even been charged, extradition for mere questioning is pretty odd.
Well, either the extradition request conforms to the treaty or it doesn't. Since a UK court looked at it and found it legal, whatever Sweden has must be sufficient.
The danger is, if he is extradited, the whole thing is dropped because of lack of evidence to actually charge and then they go "Oh, but while you're hear, our friends in the US want a word, so we've booked a flight, it leaves in an hour to take you out of European jurisdiction where you're no longer protected to argue against this kind of illegal rendition...".
If the CIA wants to abduct Assange in violation of EU law, they can do that from the UK, they don't have to go to Sweden.
And if the US wants to extradite Assange under an extradition agreement with Sweden because he has been indicted in the US, that's legal and I don't have a problem with it. I don't see why you should either.
MacKenzie et al. and Meyer et al. merely show general Fitts law relationships for mice, and the others argue based on Fitts law but don't actually show anything.
The (undated) Polaroids are for the Mac's original tiny screen. Even if Apple's engineers actually measured performance on that (which I seriously doubt), you cannot generalize results from that to large screens or multi-screen setups.
So, looks like I was right: you haven't read any studies actually showing that Mac menus are faster.
Sure! Because when an Australian citizen is accused of rape by Swedish feminists and extradited from the UK to Sweden as a consequence, the most natural explanation is that the USA must be behind it all!
Up next: how the USA manipulated the Greek and Spanish governments into adopting socialist policies in order to sabotage the Euro!
(Of course, the US has every right to demand extradition of Assange if he is indicted in the US, just like any other nation that's party to an extradition treaty.)
I'll probably get modded down for this, but the same could be said for Linux, particularly on the desktop.
No, the same can't be said for Linux. The Linux kernel, and the Gnome, KDE, and Android UIs for Linux are rock-solid, efficient, usable, and mature in a way that Windows Phone has never been (and arguably not even Windows desktop).
Seems a bit hypocritical to complain about about this same issue when it comes to a Microsoft product.
Not at all. If you use Windows, you need to give up a lot of money and control to Microsoft; in return, Windows ought to be a lot better than a free and open source product. Even if Windows were comparable to Linux in areas such as stability, efficiency, usability, and maturity, it would be a bad deal.
One author recently summed the situation up stating "Clearly, GM waged a war on electric traction. It was indeed an all out assault, but by no means the single reason for the failure of rapid transit. Also, it is just as clear that actions and inactions by government contributed significantly to the elimination of electric traction."
Please cite statistics that you get better health care on average than Canadians
I didn't say "better health care", I said "better treatments". That is, provided you can pay for good health care, you are better off in the US than in Canada. That includes less waiting and better outcomes.
because statistics also show that over 16% of US citizens have zero health care at all.
Everybody in the US gets health care, by law. But if you don't have insurance, it will be a lot worse than if you do have insurance. Many of those who don't have insurance don't have it because of choices they made.
The US system clearly has serious problems, foremost the ties of private insurance to employers, and the fact that insurers can weasel out of insurance contracts through excessive rate hikes. But the solution is not to adopt a Canadian system. For the majority of Americans, the Canadian system would be no better than what they have now, and for many it would probably be worse.
They already have. One million dollars and counting for a very close relative. So once again you are wrong.
If that is true, then your relative is a dumb, selfish prick who is wasting other people's money. Dumb because he is being ripped off and subjected to unnecessary procedures and expensive new drugs. And selfish because he imposes these kinds of unreasonable costs on others. Society does not owe anybody million dollar medical treatments, even if the alternative is death. I certainly don't want that kind of coverage for myself, and I don't see why I should pay for you or your relative to have it.
You are the exception that happens to be wealthy to self-fund your own health insurance and you are trying to use this as an argument to deny the value of treatment to the general population.
No, I'm not wealthy. I just managed to save money from a regular engineering salary. I have lived frugally, paid off my home, saved money. It pisses me off that people like you don't bother to save, make foolish financial and medical decisions, and then expect others to pay for them.
As I was saying: there are plenty of free and low-cost textbooks (and lecture notes) available already. If your professors weren't using them, complain to them.
I call BS. If you contract a chronic condition your expenditures would be in the millions of dollars, which cannot be covered from savings from a regular salary.
That's ridiculous. HIV is about $20000/year and even expensive cancers usually cost less than $50000 total. Average lifetime medical costs are around $300000 but with a fairly small variance (even the 95th percentile isn't a lot more). For comparison, that's like saving around $200/month at 3% real interest over the same period as a typical policy. For anybody in the middle class or above, current health "insurance", government or private, is largely a scam; you'd be better off saving the money, with only a cheap insurance against catastrophic illnesses.
And if you think that the Canadian public health service is going to pay "millions of dollars" for your chronic condition, you are in for a rude awakening.
So either you have private insurance and you are hoping they won't drop you, or you will have to rely on medicare which is a government program.
For various reasons, I happen to have private insurance. But even if they were to drop me, I have enough saved to be able to pay for pretty anything that I want to do to myself and my body. If you don't, you really haven't saved enough money.
No, you're mistaken. I specifically used the term "heliocentric solar system", not "heliocentric universe". The question whether the sun revolves around the earth or vice versa is the historically relevant question, it is well defined, explainable and verifiable with high school science, and not affected by the slight corrections that come from more advanced physics.
Climate science, in contrast, doesn't ask a well-defined question, isn't explainable or verifiable with high school science, and it is strongly affected by theories that are still even debated among the experts.
With checks and balances, marking the lower level students could be an assignment for the higher grade ones
That already is practiced widely. But there's a limit to how much teaching load you can impose on students. Furthermore, you can't use higher grade students as slave labor, you need to pay them too.
No, sorry, that's not supported either by experience or evidence. With my insurance plan in the US, I can see any doctor I want any time. Furthermore, statistics show that people in the US get better treatment than most other places, including Canada.
The higher income and the money I saved in taxes in the US allowed me to save more than enough money to retire and take care of my health care needs myself. Thanks, but I'll take private health insurance and private retirement over a government program any day.
There are plenty of good, free and low-cost textbooks, and many professors use them.
But, given that students are willing to pay tens of thousands per year to go to college in the first place, a few hundreds dollars in books hardly make a big difference.
Is it not reasonable that when they become successful, they too should pay into the system in order to pay for the education and health of the current generation just as others paid into the system to provide these services to them
They didn't have a choice about where they grew up and they didn't enter into a binding contract for these services or benefits, so you can't infer that they have an obligation to the Finnish state now. It's a fundamental principle of liberal societies that you should be able to leave when you want to and not have to pay back the benefits you received while you were there. And they will already pay for their choice in future benefits that they are losing (such as health and retirement systems that they paid into but will receive less in benefits from than people who stay in Finland).
Rovio needs to look at whether Ireland has sufficient public infrastructure and workforce to support their business, and whether the benefits of moving outweigh the costs. If they come to that conclusion, then Finland did something wrong, not Rovio.
When governments (collective entities) try to act like businesses (competitive entities) it seldom works out. Usually only a few who are able to take advantage of the situation benefit.
Governments are always in competition with one another, and that's a good thing. The fact that the US, US states, European nations, etc. all are trying to attract people and companies means that they have to think about how to become more attractive. It's what keeps government in check. We should encourage that.
There is no reason the US cannot provide the same level of benefits except for political bickering and the close to 2 billion *per day* the US spends on its military.
Why would I want a Canadian-style health care and retirement plan when I already have a better private plan in the US?
Slashdot Mirror
Well, and Assange hasn't been indicted or charged with anything. If he ever does, we can look at whether the indictment is justified. Right now, Assange and you are accusing the US over something you yourself fabricated.
I'm just assuming that US, UK, and Swedish courts, judges, and prosecutors are generally doing their job until there is clear evidence to the contrary.
I think Assange is probably not guilty under US law, due to First Amendment protections. But I would have no problem with a US court making that determination; the case is important enough that clarity either way would be good for everybody. Of course, so far, he hasn't been indicted yet.
All this b.s. about "revenge" and "embarassment" is tin-foil-hat conspiracies that exist only in your mind.
You do not have the slightest idea whether the Swedes are "bending the rules" or what the rules in Sweden even are.
He's had his day in court in the UK, he's going to get his day in court in Sweden, and sooner or later, he's probably going to get his day in court in the US.
I understand Fitts law just fine. But you claimed to have read studies that show that Mac menus are faster than Windows menus, yet you can't produce any such studies. All you can produce is studies that generally demonstrate Fitts law in other contexts, plus people waving their hands about how Fitts law implies that Mac menus must be faster. I'm sorry you don't understand the difference between the two, but the deficiency there is with you, not me.
Well, either the extradition request conforms to the treaty or it doesn't. Since a UK court looked at it and found it legal, whatever Sweden has must be sufficient.
If the CIA wants to abduct Assange in violation of EU law, they can do that from the UK, they don't have to go to Sweden.
And if the US wants to extradite Assange under an extradition agreement with Sweden because he has been indicted in the US, that's legal and I don't have a problem with it. I don't see why you should either.
MacKenzie et al. and Meyer et al. merely show general Fitts law relationships for mice, and the others argue based on Fitts law but don't actually show anything.
The (undated) Polaroids are for the Mac's original tiny screen. Even if Apple's engineers actually measured performance on that (which I seriously doubt), you cannot generalize results from that to large screens or multi-screen setups.
So, looks like I was right: you haven't read any studies actually showing that Mac menus are faster.
Since it's the woman who gets pregnant, there are indeed two standards there.
So what do you propose? Assange should go free because he managed to get to the UK before a Swedish court could look at his case? Or what?
The proper place to settle whether this was rape or not is in Sweden, by a Swedish court.
Sure! Because when an Australian citizen is accused of rape by Swedish feminists and extradited from the UK to Sweden as a consequence, the most natural explanation is that the USA must be behind it all!
Up next: how the USA manipulated the Greek and Spanish governments into adopting socialist policies in order to sabotage the Euro!
(Of course, the US has every right to demand extradition of Assange if he is indicted in the US, just like any other nation that's party to an extradition treaty.)
No, the same can't be said for Linux. The Linux kernel, and the Gnome, KDE, and Android UIs for Linux are rock-solid, efficient, usable, and mature in a way that Windows Phone has never been (and arguably not even Windows desktop).
Not at all. If you use Windows, you need to give up a lot of money and control to Microsoft; in return, Windows ought to be a lot better than a free and open source product. Even if Windows were comparable to Linux in areas such as stability, efficiency, usability, and maturity, it would be a bad deal.
And the article continues...
Yes, all zero studies you have seen on that subject, because there actually are no such studies.
I didn't say "better health care", I said "better treatments". That is, provided you can pay for good health care, you are better off in the US than in Canada. That includes less waiting and better outcomes.
http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20080716/cancer-survival-rates-vary-by-country
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2231416/
Everybody in the US gets health care, by law. But if you don't have insurance, it will be a lot worse than if you do have insurance. Many of those who don't have insurance don't have it because of choices they made.
The US system clearly has serious problems, foremost the ties of private insurance to employers, and the fact that insurers can weasel out of insurance contracts through excessive rate hikes. But the solution is not to adopt a Canadian system. For the majority of Americans, the Canadian system would be no better than what they have now, and for many it would probably be worse.
If that is true, then your relative is a dumb, selfish prick who is wasting other people's money. Dumb because he is being ripped off and subjected to unnecessary procedures and expensive new drugs. And selfish because he imposes these kinds of unreasonable costs on others. Society does not owe anybody million dollar medical treatments, even if the alternative is death. I certainly don't want that kind of coverage for myself, and I don't see why I should pay for you or your relative to have it.
No, I'm not wealthy. I just managed to save money from a regular engineering salary. I have lived frugally, paid off my home, saved money. It pisses me off that people like you don't bother to save, make foolish financial and medical decisions, and then expect others to pay for them.
As I was saying: there are plenty of free and low-cost textbooks (and lecture notes) available already. If your professors weren't using them, complain to them.
That's ridiculous. HIV is about $20000/year and even expensive cancers usually cost less than $50000 total. Average lifetime medical costs are around $300000 but with a fairly small variance (even the 95th percentile isn't a lot more). For comparison, that's like saving around $200/month at 3% real interest over the same period as a typical policy. For anybody in the middle class or above, current health "insurance", government or private, is largely a scam; you'd be better off saving the money, with only a cheap insurance against catastrophic illnesses.
And if you think that the Canadian public health service is going to pay "millions of dollars" for your chronic condition, you are in for a rude awakening.
For various reasons, I happen to have private insurance. But even if they were to drop me, I have enough saved to be able to pay for pretty anything that I want to do to myself and my body. If you don't, you really haven't saved enough money.
No, you're mistaken. I specifically used the term "heliocentric solar system", not "heliocentric universe". The question whether the sun revolves around the earth or vice versa is the historically relevant question, it is well defined, explainable and verifiable with high school science, and not affected by the slight corrections that come from more advanced physics.
Climate science, in contrast, doesn't ask a well-defined question, isn't explainable or verifiable with high school science, and it is strongly affected by theories that are still even debated among the experts.
That already is practiced widely. But there's a limit to how much teaching load you can impose on students. Furthermore, you can't use higher grade students as slave labor, you need to pay them too.
No, sorry, that's not supported either by experience or evidence. With my insurance plan in the US, I can see any doctor I want any time. Furthermore, statistics show that people in the US get better treatment than most other places, including Canada.
The higher income and the money I saved in taxes in the US allowed me to save more than enough money to retire and take care of my health care needs myself. Thanks, but I'll take private health insurance and private retirement over a government program any day.
Your point being... what?
There are plenty of good, free and low-cost textbooks, and many professors use them.
But, given that students are willing to pay tens of thousands per year to go to college in the first place, a few hundreds dollars in books hardly make a big difference.
Low taxes in Ireland did what they were supposed to do: they caused rapid growth and wealth. You can't blame them for Ireland's current woes.
The Irish financial crises was the result of mismanagement by banks and moral hazards created by government bailouts and financial guarantees.
They didn't have a choice about where they grew up and they didn't enter into a binding contract for these services or benefits, so you can't infer that they have an obligation to the Finnish state now. It's a fundamental principle of liberal societies that you should be able to leave when you want to and not have to pay back the benefits you received while you were there. And they will already pay for their choice in future benefits that they are losing (such as health and retirement systems that they paid into but will receive less in benefits from than people who stay in Finland).
Rovio needs to look at whether Ireland has sufficient public infrastructure and workforce to support their business, and whether the benefits of moving outweigh the costs. If they come to that conclusion, then Finland did something wrong, not Rovio.
Governments are always in competition with one another, and that's a good thing. The fact that the US, US states, European nations, etc. all are trying to attract people and companies means that they have to think about how to become more attractive. It's what keeps government in check. We should encourage that.
Why would I want a Canadian-style health care and retirement plan when I already have a better private plan in the US?