I actually agreed with the parent logic, but the reason for Apple to do this, for me, is to save their behind in the future. The prevention is not about what's going on right now (most people are doing the right thing), but it is to save their own behind in the future from even one misused case. The breech through the Internet is a lot more difficult to stop, let alone the cost to detect. Even those who are doing the right thing could make a mistake and open a hole to those who are looking to exploit.
Anyway, I don't defend Apple of doing so, but I am trying to understand why they do it.
For decades the media has been dripping vague fears into our collective souls...
Please clarify the word media. If you are talking about people, then I would agree. However, if you are talking about tools/contents, e.g. news, newspaper, advertisement, etc., then I have to disagree. Why? Because it is an intention of people who make/create the news that want to deliver/push their messages to viewers, not the news as a media itself. Thus, media is simply a tool and it can't push out messages by itself.
However, one could counter the fear with education+knowledge (academic is only a part of education). This education in this case is similar to doing research. Nowadays, it is easy to look for information, but one must be open minded in order to gather enough informations for more useful/accurate analysis. The sad part is that many people don't seek knowledge/education. If they do, they aren't open minded but rather seek only informations that confirm their belief... So the fear won't go away...
This study is racist and xenophobic and slashdot is also for posting it. America is a country of immigrants and Indians have just as much right to a programming job as anyone who was born here.
You are trolling. Did you even read the study? I guess not because of your comment. Stop playing a victim here.
Overall, our results suggest that high-skill foreign workers contribute to the well-being of the typical US consumer, mainly through the assumption that these workers contribute to innovation at the same rate as US high-skill workers. Indeed, under our calibrations, accounting for foreign workers’ effect on innovation, the gains to consumers are an order of magnitude larger than gains excluding this effect. At some level, this is hardly surprising. While simple models of the impact of immigration on native welfare suggests the immigrant surplus is second order (Borjas, 1999), if the immigrants shift out the production possibility frontier, their effect will be first order.
...
Although our results suggest that the introduction and expansion of the H-1B program in the 1990s brought gains to both US consumers and IT sector entrepreneurs, we also found indications of losses for US computer scientists and potential computer scientists. Recent work (Peri and Sparber, 2009, 2011) has emphasized the importance of immigration affecting the occupational choice of US natives. Our results tend to support the importance of this view.
Indeed, our estimates suggest that high-skill immigration has had a significant effect on the choices made by US workers and students.
However, the study assumes that all H1B are high-skill foreign workers. I am not so sure about that assumption...
Well which was it? Water supply would mean you'd keep it as full as possible. Flood control means the opposite. Given what's going on, i.e., worse flooding than if the dam hadn't been there, even if it doesn't fail, it's fairly clear that flood control was given almost zero priority in operating this dam.
No, you are misunderstanding. When the purpose of the dam is to supply water, they will NEVER attempt to keep it as full as possible. They just need to keep the water in at least above a certain amount (logical sense). Those who manage a dam should know how much water the dam can hold. If it goes above a certain amount, they must release the water. The water could be release by either spillway (too much water in the dam) or manual way (pump out somewhere). The determination must be related to the current season of the year as well. For example, if they expect more heavy rain to come and the dam contains too much water than it can hold after the rain, they will need to release water in order to prepare the dam for the weather.
The dam can help controlling flood in the sense of releasing water slower than a normal flood occurs. A dam is built to take water in a vast area from watershed. If there is no dam there, the water will run down freely from the hill at its natural speed which could cause a bad flood. If there is a dam, the dam will hold the water first, and release water at a controllable speed which would not flood the area nearby. Thus, it helps preventing flood.
The issue here is NOT about the purpose of the dam, but they discovered a hole in their emergency spillway. In other words, their safety system is broken and it could break the dam. As a result, for precaution, they evacuate people because they expect for the worse. If the dam fails, it could cause a sudden flood (release the water) that could drown near by towns.
This amount is supposed to go everybody, right? Because it's universal, right? If so, then let's suppose then that it's about $400 a month (even that wouldn't be enough in SF, but let's suppose it is.) The person already living there already makes more than enough to feed themselves, or else they wouldn't be living in such a high cost area. Meanwhile, they now have an additional $400 a month. Since they already have the basics, they'll spend that on whatever, including rent, everyday goods, etc.
Again, that is the only part I agree with -- increase local cost of living -- but it does not completely change or upgrade the way they are. Even with your example, $400/month compare to let's say $7,000/month, that doesn't really change the way of living that much. Thus, housing cost shouldn't go up the same way you are thinking.
Many modern vehicles turn the engine off while stopped, eliminating idling.
You miss the point. UPS is talking about their trucks, not modern vehicles... Unless you think UPS would buy new vehicles with the technology you are talking about equipped to the truck... I don't see it happen.
There's a section of the Mass Pike (I-90, Lee to Worcester) where it's safe to do 100 under clear conditions despite Speed Limit 65 signage.
Some quick questions... Does that speed (safe to do 100) apply to a long-haul or truck? And if anything at all happens that requires you to sharply reduce the speed while you are driving 100 (assuming 100 mph), what would happen? And replace your car with a long-haul or truck, what would happen?
Think about it: If you were strapped for cash, would you be more inclined to move to a more expensive house? Of course not, you'd be more inclined to either stay where you are, or find a less expensive house. Now, suppose we decide to take a billion dollars away from Bill Gates and distribute it to one thousand people in San Francisco, giving them an additional $100,000 over what they might already have in their possession. Bill Gates isn't likely to sell any of the properties he owns as a result of that, however now we have a lot more people in SF that might decide they want to upgrade their living conditions. The price of housing has now gone up because a lot more potential consumers now have more money.
I understand your concept and it is correct in general -- increase local cost of living -- but the example is actually misleading in order to support your another statement -- increase housing cost.
The reason that the housing cost wouldn't go up is because of the limit amount of UBI. The amount given should be just enough to live by with purchasing food and necessities (possibly help the accommodation cost). It should not be enough to "upgrade" or completely "change" the way of living for those who receive it, but rather, in hope, to eliminate their worries about where to find food to eat each day. As a result, again in hope, these people could have less struggle to get better (find a job or two) to finally get out of poverty. That's where your example is misleading.
I believe UBI would work for some, but there will always be those who abuse/exploit the system because we are humans (similar to SSN/SSI). I can't say would UBI really help because it is somewhat a new thing (even though it is not a completely new idea). Even with the experiment they are trying to do with Kenya may not really be an answer to my doubt. Why? Because they (people in Kenya) have different culture compared to most if not all western countries. So whatever result they obtained from there may not be able to apply to western culture...
PHP was slow as molasses until recently, and cleaning up compromised servers after you get pwned isn't cheap, nor is maintaining a legacy code-rotting PHP codebase, which is what PHP encourages.
The AC is actually correct. The term good-fast-cheap is usually referred to Project management triangle which is not the same as what you are thinking. It does not really apply to maintenance part. Though, It partially applies to running speed (quality of the product).
I call Bullshit on that "part of a community" bit. Tell me the name and hobby of your next door neighbor.
And now find 5 other people who can tell that. Nobody gives a shit who's living next door in large cities. You would probably only notice that someone in your apartment megacomplex died because after a few months in Summer it starts to smell funny.
Are you sure you wanted to reply to me? If yes, please explain 'cause I'm really confused now.
Because TFA is talking about NYC, you seem to make an assumption that this is all about big city problems (keywords: large cities, megacomplex, etc.). That's why I am pointing out that it is not the case. When state legislatures pass a bill, they intend to cover the whole jurisdiction even though the law may be focused on their big cities. Though, the issue could happen anywhere.
And to counter about people don't care about their own neighbor, you should go out of NYC to a smaller town in NY and you would see that everyone knows everyone else. There are plenty of AirBnB outside of NYC as well, and they aren't listing their properties in all places like those 2 in TFA.
And I pointed out to the topic that AirBnB appears to help catching these people in TFA (and doesn't want the law), but their action doesn't seem to work, or the story wouldn't exist.
And why do you think they need to? The tokens are bought with real money -- company revenues which are recorded for tax filing. The tokens in auction house are in-game trade and could be exchanged over games. There is NO NEW revenue generated (for real money) during this type of transaction... Unless you are being sarcastic???
Law enforcement would never rely upon unproven methods to improve conviction rates.
That are good points. Law enforcement are supposed to use each of those evidence as leads. However, they tend to fixate on the what fits most to the case instead of thoroughly check out those leads. Once they have a suspect, they will try to fit as much evidence to the suspect as they can. They also eliminate the parts that don't fit (or not admit them to the court). As a result, it causes an innocent to be convicted.
I don't know why they want to close the case ASAP. Possibly, it is like a trophy for how many cases they can solve, so that they would get promoted? I have no idea...
If you really read TFA, you should know that it is a state law, not a city law [news]. Even AirBnB appears to disagree with the type of activity in TFA (though, I don't know for sure if they really care).
Airbnb offered an alternative to the legislation, saying it would crack down on hosts with multiple listings who essentially run illegal hotels and provide a registry of hosts to local regulators to make it easier for them to enforce existing housing rules. The company also emphasized that it had already removed nearly 3,000 commercial operators from the service.
If this was already against the zoning laws, why did NYC need this new law?
Because the activity is in the gray area. It is very similar to share riding companies. If there is no clear law, corporation will keep exploring it (and get individuals involved because individuals will get a piece of the pie even though they don't realize (or care) about how tiny the piece is).
No, residential areas are created to provide places to live. Period. Full Stop.
You don't get a veto over your neighbors, only who stays at YOUR house. . . ..
I agree that your neighbors shouldn't have anything to do with whatever happen INSIDE YOUR HOUSE (not AT) because it is your own space. I have no objection on that. However, when you start invading other people's space, then there must be rules or laws against that type of activities. For example, playing loud music that neighbor can clearly hear it is invading other people's space. Similarly, having strangers who short rent/lease the place to come in and out and/or use the same COMMON areas with everyone who lives in the same neighborhood is also invading other people's space. It is about neighbor safety. Of course you don't see it because you are benefiting from doing so, but that doesn't mean it is OK to others because others around your house are affected. If your house is located somewhere that nobody is living nearby (think of each house is a mile away), then I guess it would be OK. Please stop thinking about ME ME ME and start looking around for CONSEQUENCES of what you do on others. The world is not evolving around you.
P.S. This is not include visitors because they are people you personally know (or they shouldn't be "visitors").
Just correct myself. After looking at the page, it said "You do not need to have a proof-of-purchase or retain the item to participate in the settlements." It is interesting...
What do I have to do to get my payment?
File a claim online or by mail by July 1, 2017. The simple online claim form only takes 3-5 minutes for most individuals. Claims may be submitted by mail to In re ODD Products Indirect Purchaser Litigation, P.O. Box 43424, Providence, RI 02940-3424. We highly recommend that you submit the claim online to receive expedited service on July 1, 2017 or soon thereafter.
After July 1, 2017, an email will be sent to your account on file with instructions on how to electronically receive your payment via PayPal, Google Wallet, Amazon Balance, and others.
Plaintiffs have also collected direct contact information for class members and anticipate making reasonable attempts to distribute monies to class members where an address is available. This method is not guaranteed, however, and to ensure payment class members should submit a claims form.
I put a pretty high value on my time, but it just took me about a minute to potentially claim $30.
That meant you would have to have the record of purchase with specific detail (e.g. receipt + computer spec) as proof too. I doubt that there are many people who still hold on the evidence for that long because their computers would have been purchased 9~14 years ago...
And you guys accuse the Right of engaging in conspiracy theories...
To me, GP is NOT accusing but rather giving an opinion of a conspiracy theory. Accusing to me is too strong word in the sense...
If you consider yourself right or left, then you are actually a part of the problem... Why? Because some issues are best to be solved with one side's solution and some other issues are best to be solved with the other side's solution. However, both sides (especially those who are extreme) can't see it because their mind is blocked by their own bias favoring their own side's solution... How sad...
The FBI notoriously takes years to act on FOIA requests. They are literally the worst agency at it.
Well, before they got overwhelmed by email requests, so it took them forever to catch up with all requests. Now they could easily stream line those requests with a bottle neck they created (with a couple lines of fax?). Great improvement I say.:p
Nowadays (for newer pacemakers which cost a lot!!!), you no longer need to hold any device or place anything on your pacemaker in order to remotely send the data out. You just need to have a monitoring device set up inside your bedroom. When set it up, you just need to be around the machine to do the syncing. Once done, it will keep track of your heart activity while you are sleeping without having anything on or next to you (it could be placed on a table nearby you with no wire attached to you).
I'm reluctant to decry the science behind that evidence, but I'm much more reluctant to allow prosecution on the grounds, "You should have had a heart attack and you didn't"
A pacemaker is unlikely to cause a heart attack unless it is malfunction (out of sync). If, in this case, the pacemaker was functioning correctly during the event, then the ground you mentioned would be rejected quickly...
check your facts.. a simple google search refutes this absolute you give
In general, the GP is correct because what the GP did NOT spell out "absolute" at all. Of course, everything in law has exceptions. From a quick google, you can get the answer here.
Of course, as with most things in a courtroom, every rule has its exception. In the rare instance that both parties agree that the results of a polygraph exam should be admissible for some reason, the court could allow it as evidence. Polygraphs are also commonly used as part of the screening process for certain types of jobs, such as law enforcement and some high level security positions. Nevertheless, for purposes of court procedures, absent a stipulation of the parties, the results of a lie detector test are likely never admissible.
I disagree with you on Football scholarships mostly because schools that give those out end up making more money per athlete on the games (which are attended by a ton of people who all buy tickets and concessions and then there are the TV rights as well, even video game rights where the students appearances are used with no compensation to them, only the school). Those kids play hard for no money while the school makes a ton off of them. Its a good deal for the schools as it is.
Just want to clear out this part. I think you misunderstood GP. I believe GP said the Football scholarships give opportunity to those who receive to later on make big money in professional league. Though, I think only very small percentage of those who could make to NFL would make big money. Also, even smaller percentage actually make fames...
Also, I think students who got Football scholarships actually have somewhat equally return even though they do not get paid in monetary. They already have their audition to the whole nation. If they are really good, then they would stand out and subsequently being drafted into NFL. If they aren't, then they would already know that they should look for other career to pursue. It is quite a good deal to have a chance to be an intern (playing football) while being in school.
Slashdot Mirror
I actually agreed with the parent logic, but the reason for Apple to do this, for me, is to save their behind in the future. The prevention is not about what's going on right now (most people are doing the right thing), but it is to save their own behind in the future from even one misused case. The breech through the Internet is a lot more difficult to stop, let alone the cost to detect. Even those who are doing the right thing could make a mistake and open a hole to those who are looking to exploit.
Anyway, I don't defend Apple of doing so, but I am trying to understand why they do it.
For decades the media has been dripping vague fears into our collective souls ...
Please clarify the word media. If you are talking about people, then I would agree. However, if you are talking about tools/contents, e.g. news, newspaper, advertisement, etc., then I have to disagree. Why? Because it is an intention of people who make/create the news that want to deliver/push their messages to viewers, not the news as a media itself. Thus, media is simply a tool and it can't push out messages by itself.
However, one could counter the fear with education+knowledge (academic is only a part of education). This education in this case is similar to doing research. Nowadays, it is easy to look for information, but one must be open minded in order to gather enough informations for more useful/accurate analysis. The sad part is that many people don't seek knowledge/education. If they do, they aren't open minded but rather seek only informations that confirm their belief... So the fear won't go away...
This study is racist and xenophobic and slashdot is also for posting it. America is a country of immigrants and Indians have just as much right to a programming job as anyone who was born here.
You are trolling. Did you even read the study? I guess not because of your comment. Stop playing a victim here.
Study Link
Overall, our results suggest that high-skill foreign workers contribute to the well-being of the typical US consumer, mainly through the assumption that these workers contribute to innovation at the same rate as US high-skill workers. Indeed, under our calibrations, accounting for foreign workers’ effect on innovation, the gains to consumers are an order of magnitude larger than gains excluding this effect. At some level, this is hardly surprising. While simple models of the impact of immigration on native welfare suggests the immigrant surplus is second order (Borjas, 1999), if the immigrants shift out the production possibility frontier, their effect will be first order.
Although our results suggest that the introduction and expansion of the H-1B program in the 1990s brought gains to both US consumers and IT sector entrepreneurs, we also found indications of losses for US computer scientists and potential computer scientists. Recent work (Peri and Sparber, 2009, 2011) has emphasized the importance of immigration affecting the occupational choice of US natives. Our results tend to support the importance of this view.
Indeed, our estimates suggest that high-skill immigration has had a significant effect on the choices made by US workers and students.
However, the study assumes that all H1B are high-skill foreign workers. I am not so sure about that assumption...
Well which was it? Water supply would mean you'd keep it as full as possible. Flood control means the opposite. Given what's going on, i.e., worse flooding than if the dam hadn't been there, even if it doesn't fail, it's fairly clear that flood control was given almost zero priority in operating this dam.
No, you are misunderstanding. When the purpose of the dam is to supply water, they will NEVER attempt to keep it as full as possible. They just need to keep the water in at least above a certain amount (logical sense). Those who manage a dam should know how much water the dam can hold. If it goes above a certain amount, they must release the water. The water could be release by either spillway (too much water in the dam) or manual way (pump out somewhere). The determination must be related to the current season of the year as well. For example, if they expect more heavy rain to come and the dam contains too much water than it can hold after the rain, they will need to release water in order to prepare the dam for the weather.
The dam can help controlling flood in the sense of releasing water slower than a normal flood occurs. A dam is built to take water in a vast area from watershed. If there is no dam there, the water will run down freely from the hill at its natural speed which could cause a bad flood. If there is a dam, the dam will hold the water first, and release water at a controllable speed which would not flood the area nearby. Thus, it helps preventing flood.
The issue here is NOT about the purpose of the dam, but they discovered a hole in their emergency spillway. In other words, their safety system is broken and it could break the dam. As a result, for precaution, they evacuate people because they expect for the worse. If the dam fails, it could cause a sudden flood (release the water) that could drown near by towns.
This amount is supposed to go everybody, right? Because it's universal, right? If so, then let's suppose then that it's about $400 a month (even that wouldn't be enough in SF, but let's suppose it is.) The person already living there already makes more than enough to feed themselves, or else they wouldn't be living in such a high cost area. Meanwhile, they now have an additional $400 a month. Since they already have the basics, they'll spend that on whatever, including rent, everyday goods, etc.
Again, that is the only part I agree with -- increase local cost of living -- but it does not completely change or upgrade the way they are. Even with your example, $400/month compare to let's say $7,000/month, that doesn't really change the way of living that much. Thus, housing cost shouldn't go up the same way you are thinking.
Many modern vehicles turn the engine off while stopped, eliminating idling.
You miss the point. UPS is talking about their trucks, not modern vehicles... Unless you think UPS would buy new vehicles with the technology you are talking about equipped to the truck... I don't see it happen.
There's a section of the Mass Pike (I-90, Lee to Worcester) where it's safe to do 100 under clear conditions despite Speed Limit 65 signage.
Some quick questions... Does that speed (safe to do 100) apply to a long-haul or truck? And if anything at all happens that requires you to sharply reduce the speed while you are driving 100 (assuming 100 mph), what would happen? And replace your car with a long-haul or truck, what would happen?
Think about it: If you were strapped for cash, would you be more inclined to move to a more expensive house? Of course not, you'd be more inclined to either stay where you are, or find a less expensive house. Now, suppose we decide to take a billion dollars away from Bill Gates and distribute it to one thousand people in San Francisco, giving them an additional $100,000 over what they might already have in their possession. Bill Gates isn't likely to sell any of the properties he owns as a result of that, however now we have a lot more people in SF that might decide they want to upgrade their living conditions. The price of housing has now gone up because a lot more potential consumers now have more money.
I understand your concept and it is correct in general -- increase local cost of living -- but the example is actually misleading in order to support your another statement -- increase housing cost.
The reason that the housing cost wouldn't go up is because of the limit amount of UBI. The amount given should be just enough to live by with purchasing food and necessities (possibly help the accommodation cost). It should not be enough to "upgrade" or completely "change" the way of living for those who receive it, but rather, in hope, to eliminate their worries about where to find food to eat each day. As a result, again in hope, these people could have less struggle to get better (find a job or two) to finally get out of poverty. That's where your example is misleading.
I believe UBI would work for some, but there will always be those who abuse/exploit the system because we are humans (similar to SSN/SSI). I can't say would UBI really help because it is somewhat a new thing (even though it is not a completely new idea). Even with the experiment they are trying to do with Kenya may not really be an answer to my doubt. Why? Because they (people in Kenya) have different culture compared to most if not all western countries. So whatever result they obtained from there may not be able to apply to western culture...
PHP was slow as molasses until recently, and cleaning up compromised servers after you get pwned isn't cheap, nor is maintaining a legacy code-rotting PHP codebase, which is what PHP encourages.
The AC is actually correct. The term good-fast-cheap is usually referred to Project management triangle which is not the same as what you are thinking. It does not really apply to maintenance part. Though, It partially applies to running speed (quality of the product).
I call Bullshit on that "part of a community" bit. Tell me the name and hobby of your next door neighbor.
And now find 5 other people who can tell that. Nobody gives a shit who's living next door in large cities. You would probably only notice that someone in your apartment megacomplex died because after a few months in Summer it starts to smell funny.
Are you sure you wanted to reply to me? If yes, please explain 'cause I'm really confused now.
Because TFA is talking about NYC, you seem to make an assumption that this is all about big city problems (keywords: large cities, megacomplex, etc.). That's why I am pointing out that it is not the case. When state legislatures pass a bill, they intend to cover the whole jurisdiction even though the law may be focused on their big cities. Though, the issue could happen anywhere.
And to counter about people don't care about their own neighbor, you should go out of NYC to a smaller town in NY and you would see that everyone knows everyone else. There are plenty of AirBnB outside of NYC as well, and they aren't listing their properties in all places like those 2 in TFA.
And I pointed out to the topic that AirBnB appears to help catching these people in TFA (and doesn't want the law), but their action doesn't seem to work, or the story wouldn't exist.
How has the IRS never taken an interest?
And why do you think they need to? The tokens are bought with real money -- company revenues which are recorded for tax filing. The tokens in auction house are in-game trade and could be exchanged over games. There is NO NEW revenue generated (for real money) during this type of transaction... Unless you are being sarcastic???
Law enforcement would never rely upon unproven methods to improve conviction rates.
That are good points. Law enforcement are supposed to use each of those evidence as leads. However, they tend to fixate on the what fits most to the case instead of thoroughly check out those leads. Once they have a suspect, they will try to fit as much evidence to the suspect as they can. They also eliminate the parts that don't fit (or not admit them to the court). As a result, it causes an innocent to be convicted.
I don't know why they want to close the case ASAP. Possibly, it is like a trophy for how many cases they can solve, so that they would get promoted? I have no idea...
If you really read TFA, you should know that it is a state law, not a city law [news]. Even AirBnB appears to disagree with the type of activity in TFA (though, I don't know for sure if they really care).
Airbnb offered an alternative to the legislation, saying it would crack down on hosts with multiple listings who essentially run illegal hotels and provide a registry of hosts to local regulators to make it easier for them to enforce existing housing rules. The company also emphasized that it had already removed nearly 3,000 commercial operators from the service.
If this was already against the zoning laws, why did NYC need this new law?
Because the activity is in the gray area. It is very similar to share riding companies. If there is no clear law, corporation will keep exploring it (and get individuals involved because individuals will get a piece of the pie even though they don't realize (or care) about how tiny the piece is).
No, residential areas are created to provide places to live. Period. Full Stop.
You don't get a veto over your neighbors, only who stays at YOUR house. . . . .
I agree that your neighbors shouldn't have anything to do with whatever happen INSIDE YOUR HOUSE (not AT) because it is your own space. I have no objection on that. However, when you start invading other people's space, then there must be rules or laws against that type of activities. For example, playing loud music that neighbor can clearly hear it is invading other people's space. Similarly, having strangers who short rent/lease the place to come in and out and/or use the same COMMON areas with everyone who lives in the same neighborhood is also invading other people's space. It is about neighbor safety. Of course you don't see it because you are benefiting from doing so, but that doesn't mean it is OK to others because others around your house are affected. If your house is located somewhere that nobody is living nearby (think of each house is a mile away), then I guess it would be OK. Please stop thinking about ME ME ME and start looking around for CONSEQUENCES of what you do on others. The world is not evolving around you.
P.S. This is not include visitors because they are people you personally know (or they shouldn't be "visitors").
What do I have to do to get my payment?
File a claim online or by mail by July 1, 2017. The simple online claim form only takes 3-5 minutes for most individuals. Claims may be submitted by mail to In re ODD Products Indirect Purchaser Litigation, P.O. Box 43424, Providence, RI 02940-3424. We highly recommend that you submit the claim online to receive expedited service on July 1, 2017 or soon thereafter.
After July 1, 2017, an email will be sent to your account on file with instructions on how to electronically receive your payment via PayPal, Google Wallet, Amazon Balance, and others.
Plaintiffs have also collected direct contact information for class members and anticipate making reasonable attempts to distribute monies to class members where an address is available. This method is not guaranteed, however, and to ensure payment class members should submit a claims form.
I put a pretty high value on my time, but it just took me about a minute to potentially claim $30.
That meant you would have to have the record of purchase with specific detail (e.g. receipt + computer spec) as proof too. I doubt that there are many people who still hold on the evidence for that long because their computers would have been purchased 9~14 years ago...
And you guys accuse the Right of engaging in conspiracy theories...
To me, GP is NOT accusing but rather giving an opinion of a conspiracy theory. Accusing to me is too strong word in the sense...
If you consider yourself right or left, then you are actually a part of the problem... Why? Because some issues are best to be solved with one side's solution and some other issues are best to be solved with the other side's solution. However, both sides (especially those who are extreme) can't see it because their mind is blocked by their own bias favoring their own side's solution... How sad...
The FBI notoriously takes years to act on FOIA requests. They are literally the worst agency at it.
Well, before they got overwhelmed by email requests, so it took them forever to catch up with all requests. Now they could easily stream line those requests with a bottle neck they created (with a couple lines of fax?). Great improvement I say. :p
Nowadays (for newer pacemakers which cost a lot!!!), you no longer need to hold any device or place anything on your pacemaker in order to remotely send the data out. You just need to have a monitoring device set up inside your bedroom. When set it up, you just need to be around the machine to do the syncing. Once done, it will keep track of your heart activity while you are sleeping without having anything on or next to you (it could be placed on a table nearby you with no wire attached to you).
I'm reluctant to decry the science behind that evidence, but I'm much more reluctant to allow prosecution on the grounds, "You should have had a heart attack and you didn't"
A pacemaker is unlikely to cause a heart attack unless it is malfunction (out of sync). If, in this case, the pacemaker was functioning correctly during the event, then the ground you mentioned would be rejected quickly...
check your facts.. a simple google search refutes this absolute you give
In general, the GP is correct because what the GP did NOT spell out "absolute" at all. Of course, everything in law has exceptions. From a quick google, you can get the answer here.
Of course, as with most things in a courtroom, every rule has its exception. In the rare instance that both parties agree that the results of a polygraph exam should be admissible for some reason, the court could allow it as evidence. Polygraphs are also commonly used as part of the screening process for certain types of jobs, such as law enforcement and some high level security positions. Nevertheless, for purposes of court procedures, absent a stipulation of the parties, the results of a lie detector test are likely never admissible.
I disagree with you on Football scholarships mostly because schools that give those out end up making more money per athlete on the games (which are attended by a ton of people who all buy tickets and concessions and then there are the TV rights as well, even video game rights where the students appearances are used with no compensation to them, only the school). Those kids play hard for no money while the school makes a ton off of them. Its a good deal for the schools as it is.
Just want to clear out this part. I think you misunderstood GP. I believe GP said the Football scholarships give opportunity to those who receive to later on make big money in professional league. Though, I think only very small percentage of those who could make to NFL would make big money. Also, even smaller percentage actually make fames...
Also, I think students who got Football scholarships actually have somewhat equally return even though they do not get paid in monetary. They already have their audition to the whole nation. If they are really good, then they would stand out and subsequently being drafted into NFL. If they aren't, then they would already know that they should look for other career to pursue. It is quite a good deal to have a chance to be an intern (playing football) while being in school.
Corrected what I said... There was a convention in Japan last year.
Wait, there's VR porn?
Yes, there is. If you don't know, there was a convention in Japan earlier this year. You may take a look at here and here