Actually, some research suggests that police utilize discretion unjustly. When there are too many laws to enforce every case, police must use (you guessed it) discretion in deciding which cases to pursue.
That could involve "just" discretion, i.e. ignoring minor infractions that don't impose harm to anyone else. It could also involve unjust discretion, such as ignoring infractions by people of your own race and throwing the book at people of other races.
Oh, and F*ck Beta. (Why, you ask? Because just a week or so after Dice publishes their mea culpa, we're slowing things way down and we won't push this out because it's not ready yet... the default dns record of slashdot.org redirects to beta. Also, Beta ate this comment the first time I tried posting it.)
Actually, some research shows that the more laws there are to enforce, the more selective police get in enforcing them and (you guessed it), they use discretion in doing so.
Sometimes that discretion is "just" (i.e. ignoring small infractions that don't present a danger to others) and sometimes it is not (i.e. doing the above for people of your own race, and throwing the book at people of other races).
My bathroom fan already does this! If I'm standing in the bathroom talking, my wife can hear me from another room. If she talks, however, I can't hear her at all.
I guess they just built a higher resolution version of my bathroom?
for reference, Minneapolis (a much smaller city, but one that gets more severe storms) spends about $9 million a year maintaining:
"39 tandem-axle dump trucks with sander units and plows 15 tandem-axle dump trucks with plows 15 single-axle dump trucks with sander units and plows 3 motor graders 12 front-end loaders with spade-nosed buckets or plows To round out the fleet, 15 motor graders and four front-end loaders equipped with front and side plows are rented for the winter season and staffed by City operators Finally, to accomplish the alley plowing in the shortest time frame, 20 front-end loaders with operators are contracted on an as-needed basis"
Semi trucks are what blocked the roadways. A cluster of semis that can't make a grade brings all the cars behind them to a... wait for it... dead stop.
You must have missed what clogged all the roads in Atlanta: semi trucks that couldn't make slight grades. Personal vehicles were certainly having trouble too, but this doesn't all fall on "inexperienced in the snow" Atlantans. I lived in the upper midwest for several years, and I DID see pre-emptive salting.
Silly researchers. Don't they know that Time Travelers take a course on Adaptive Obfuscation in their junior year of Time Traveler School in which they are taught all the methods history has every come up with to detect time travel? All they've done is added an inset to the course textbook in the chapter on the late 20th/early 21st century.
But wait, maybe they SUSPECT this is the course of history, and the researchers have invested heavily in industries that will be involved in time travel textbook publishing!
Whereas as stockholders come behind creditors in bankruptcy proceedings. So if a loan left the with "nothing," stock would have left them with less in such an event.
I had much more fun fixing the sentence while preserving the "biggest" error. I only posted to have fun with that. I have no complaint with your point or your mild mistake. Just having a little fun with what correcting it could look like.
Paragraphs make text readable. You, giant paragraph, are completely unreadable. Please be written in such a way that people can even have an opportunity to read you.
Agreed. To fix Feinstein's quote: "He’s done this enormous service to our country, and I think the answer is no clemency."
I understand why he can't be offered clemency by the overseers of the system he has revealed. But the state is insular, the security apparatus more so. To suggest that whistleblowing within the ranks would have produced the sort of system review that's been going on is intentionally naive on her part.
Snowden did what any honest president with a backbone could have (legally) done upon learning about the overreach of the US security apparatus. Reveal the key abuses, start a public dialog about how the abuses came to be, and initiate reforms to correct the abuses. It's hard to remember, but this is the course of action you would have expected from Obama's pre-election rhetoric. He was for transparency and reigning in the constitutional abuse brought on by the war on terror.
The difference between a president and an underling doing it is that the underling is not authorized, and therefore by definition is revealing state secrets, and his mechanism is solely public pressure. Snowden has accomplished the first two objectives (reveal and start a public dialog). It's up to us to push the third.
Now let's talk about what "Congress" means. Oh, it's a decision-making body, in which, generally speaking, "it's" decisions are those reached by the majority of voting members.
And how would a majority of the members vote if the clean CR came to the floor, now or before the shutdown? And there you have your problem. The phrase "power of the purse" is not meant to solely apply to John Boehner.
Are we really going to pretend that we want a government where existing laws are subject to a super-minority approval in piecemeal fashion every year?
The Senate caving to accept a process of selectively funding EXISTING LAWS through the strainer of super-minority disapproval is not a precedent either party will enjoy in the long run.
For the record, I worry that the ACA does nothing to curb costs in healthcare (in fact, its primary feature is to make demand for healthcare less elastic by requiring its consumption -- this puts providers in a position to raise rates without market consequence of less quantity demanded). That said, it's a law, and the process through which we change it should not be the hostage-taking of all other government functions through procedural loopholes.
At it's foundation, when a majority speaks in a democracy the government should move with the majority (with minority rights protected. and no, black-balling something you don't like isn't a minority right.)
But what I really wonder is how you managed, to write what essentially could be the longest story on this page, and post it with the same timestamp as the original story? How does that work?
It's a conspiracy. He's conducting a false flag attack on the shutdown. Any and all evidence will only confirm this fact.
If Slashdot would take less than 30 seconds to load up on my iPad 3 that would be just great. This new design, unfortunately, looks more like the mobile version -- and it seems to load slower on my desktop browser.
Hey Slashdot, don't copy crap and paste over good stuff! Or to borrow a headline style from Slate magazine: "You're Doing it Wrong: Web Design"
Yes, but one hopes that debate carries some sort of rhetorical value. When the debate takes the form of "I believe in X and here are blatant falsehoods to support my view and you can't talk me out of claiming they are true," I can understand why Popular Science doesn't want to associate its brand with that.
I'd say that Popular Science isn't trying to silence dissent as much as it is trying to not be party to this type of discussion, which is an affront to the scientific method. It is too bad that the quoted rationale centers around "established facts in science" rather than not wanting to legitimize non-scientific discussion of the sort that crops up in their comments section.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, some research suggests that police utilize discretion unjustly. When there are too many laws to enforce every case, police must use (you guessed it) discretion in deciding which cases to pursue.
That could involve "just" discretion, i.e. ignoring minor infractions that don't impose harm to anyone else. It could also involve unjust discretion, such as ignoring infractions by people of your own race and throwing the book at people of other races.
See for example: http://scholarship.law.duke.ed...
Oh, and F*ck Beta. (Why, you ask? Because just a week or so after Dice publishes their mea culpa, we're slowing things way down and we won't push this out because it's not ready yet... the default dns record of slashdot.org redirects to beta. Also, Beta ate this comment the first time I tried posting it.)
Actually, some research shows that the more laws there are to enforce, the more selective police get in enforcing them and (you guessed it), they use discretion in doing so.
Sometimes that discretion is "just" (i.e. ignoring small infractions that don't present a danger to others) and sometimes it is not (i.e. doing the above for people of your own race, and throwing the book at people of other races).
See for example: http://scholarship.law.duke.ed...
My bathroom fan already does this! If I'm standing in the bathroom talking, my wife can hear me from another room. If she talks, however, I can't hear her at all.
I guess they just built a higher resolution version of my bathroom?
for reference, Minneapolis (a much smaller city, but one that gets more severe storms) spends about $9 million a year maintaining:
"39 tandem-axle dump trucks with sander units and plows
15 tandem-axle dump trucks with plows
15 single-axle dump trucks with sander units and plows
3 motor graders
12 front-end loaders with spade-nosed buckets or plows
To round out the fleet, 15 motor graders and four front-end loaders equipped with front and side plows are rented for the winter season and staffed by City operators
Finally, to accomplish the alley plowing in the shortest time frame, 20 front-end loaders with operators are contracted on an as-needed basis"
From http://www.minneapolismn.gov/s...
Semi trucks are what blocked the roadways. A cluster of semis that can't make a grade brings all the cars behind them to a... wait for it... dead stop.
You must have missed what clogged all the roads in Atlanta: semi trucks that couldn't make slight grades. Personal vehicles were certainly having trouble too, but this doesn't all fall on "inexperienced in the snow" Atlantans. I lived in the upper midwest for several years, and I DID see pre-emptive salting.
I think you get that as an added benefit to the Soylent diet -- it's a 2 for 1.
(That's a pun, because you're eating a liquid based diet without much refuse, so you exchange 2... for 1...)
That's because Google is in on it too.
(removes tongue from cheek).
It was probably just that lady trying to get her money back for the cookie recipe.
Silly researchers. Don't they know that Time Travelers take a course on Adaptive Obfuscation in their junior year of Time Traveler School in which they are taught all the methods history has every come up with to detect time travel? All they've done is added an inset to the course textbook in the chapter on the late 20th/early 21st century.
But wait, maybe they SUSPECT this is the course of history, and the researchers have invested heavily in industries that will be involved in time travel textbook publishing!
Whereas as stockholders come behind creditors in bankruptcy proceedings. So if a loan left the with "nothing," stock would have left them with less in such an event.
Like I said, "woosh" :)
I had much more fun fixing the sentence while preserving the "biggest" error. I only posted to have fun with that. I have no complaint with your point or your mild mistake. Just having a little fun with what correcting it could look like.
Umm, woosh?
I hate to be a grammar Nazi, but...
Paragraphs make text readable. You, giant paragraph, are completely unreadable. Please be written in such a way that people can even have an opportunity to read you.
There, FTFY.
Such equanimity, to smile and respond graciously to a hideous ass-freshly-pulled-talking-head!
He'd be kept quiet one way or another.
Agreed. To fix Feinstein's quote: "He’s done this enormous service to our country, and I think the answer is no clemency."
I understand why he can't be offered clemency by the overseers of the system he has revealed. But the state is insular, the security apparatus more so. To suggest that whistleblowing within the ranks would have produced the sort of system review that's been going on is intentionally naive on her part.
Snowden did what any honest president with a backbone could have (legally) done upon learning about the overreach of the US security apparatus. Reveal the key abuses, start a public dialog about how the abuses came to be, and initiate reforms to correct the abuses. It's hard to remember, but this is the course of action you would have expected from Obama's pre-election rhetoric. He was for transparency and reigning in the constitutional abuse brought on by the war on terror.
The difference between a president and an underling doing it is that the underling is not authorized, and therefore by definition is revealing state secrets, and his mechanism is solely public pressure. Snowden has accomplished the first two objectives (reveal and start a public dialog). It's up to us to push the third.
And by iMail I assume you mean the program called "Mail" that ships with Mac OS X?
My dad used to joke about studies done in the 1970s about the viability of capturing methane from cows. I guess those cows showed him...?
Hey Esther -- Bundling and Price Discrimination. Read up on it, and watch all your questions about such fees melt away.
Now let's talk about what "Congress" means. Oh, it's a decision-making body, in which, generally speaking, "it's" decisions are those reached by the majority of voting members.
And how would a majority of the members vote if the clean CR came to the floor, now or before the shutdown? And there you have your problem. The phrase "power of the purse" is not meant to solely apply to John Boehner.
Are we really going to pretend that we want a government where existing laws are subject to a super-minority approval in piecemeal fashion every year?
The Senate caving to accept a process of selectively funding EXISTING LAWS through the strainer of super-minority disapproval is not a precedent either party will enjoy in the long run.
For the record, I worry that the ACA does nothing to curb costs in healthcare (in fact, its primary feature is to make demand for healthcare less elastic by requiring its consumption -- this puts providers in a position to raise rates without market consequence of less quantity demanded). That said, it's a law, and the process through which we change it should not be the hostage-taking of all other government functions through procedural loopholes.
At it's foundation, when a majority speaks in a democracy the government should move with the majority (with minority rights protected. and no, black-balling something you don't like isn't a minority right.)
But what I really wonder is how you managed, to write what essentially could be the longest story on this page, and post it with the same timestamp as the original story? How does that work?
It's a conspiracy. He's conducting a false flag attack on the shutdown. Any and all evidence will only confirm this fact.
I'm pretty sure it's science that ruins lots of comments on web pages.
If Slashdot would take less than 30 seconds to load up on my iPad 3 that would be just great. This new design, unfortunately, looks more like the mobile version -- and it seems to load slower on my desktop browser.
Hey Slashdot, don't copy crap and paste over good stuff! Or to borrow a headline style from Slate magazine: "You're Doing it Wrong: Web Design"
Yes, but one hopes that debate carries some sort of rhetorical value. When the debate takes the form of "I believe in X and here are blatant falsehoods to support my view and you can't talk me out of claiming they are true," I can understand why Popular Science doesn't want to associate its brand with that.
I'd say that Popular Science isn't trying to silence dissent as much as it is trying to not be party to this type of discussion, which is an affront to the scientific method. It is too bad that the quoted rationale centers around "established facts in science" rather than not wanting to legitimize non-scientific discussion of the sort that crops up in their comments section.