You seem to have started your whole analysis from the fallacious viewpoint of false dichotomy. People aren't either "a psychopath" or "not a psychopath". Shades of grey.
In other words, if you saved up college money for your kid, but had a heart attack, the state takes your money and pays for something else, and your own loved one that you worked for doesn't get the fruit of your efforts because apparently you should have been writing your kid checks every 2 weeks so that the money is "his", and thusly get stuck with a student loan or a blue collar job. Great.
You could make similar comments about speed limits, laws against murder, drug prohibition, gun laws -- but we still try and succeed enforce every one of these in the average case, which is an improvement.
Quit with the learned helplessness. You've given up. Don't drag us down to your level.
No, but I think there is a line somewhere between that and "the phone book is my explanation for what numbers you push to call this person". There should be some type of transformative property I guess. IANAL...
I have already invested $100s in X10 home automation modules around my house. Back in the day, you could control them with a computer -- but the controller was serial-port based, and some asshole decided to stop putting serial ports into computers. (This also killed my IRMan infrared receiver that I used with Girder to use a remote control to operate my computer. Said $150 aftermarket remote now gathering dust.)
So like... Would this do those?:)
I believe it's in the 14th amendment, and various SCOTUS rulings. There's nothing in the constitution that says white employers have to accept black employees, but that doesn't stop it from being under govt purview
It's not a whoosh, it's that I fundamentally disagree, so I do not evaluate my statement the same as you.
People should be able to express whatever they want on public property. If you only respect the rights of people when they use them in a way you agree with, then you don't actually respect those rights. "Freedom of speech unless I disagree with you" is not freedom, but an illusion of freedom.
I found E.T. orders of magnitude more immersive than Adventure.. And a better game, with more fun, skill, and strategy to boot. Guess we can't all agree.
It is actually progressive policy in many jurisdictions that you disengage a police chase when it becomes a danger to the public, as this chase was. The police actually acted as an accelerant to the harm here. The criminal activity that originally started this might have just been them smoking a joint. In this case, the major harm to society was caused by the police. This is also why it's against police policy to shoot at a fleeing vehicle. "OMG do you condone letting someone dangerous get away, just because the police might shoot an innocent bystander?!?!"
"Fatal officer-involved shooting" means a cop shot one of them.
It's pretty easy to track people via helicopter, or all the damn cameras everywhere. It's really hard to hide. Especially if they were to commit a real crime with a real victim at some point in the future.
Slashdot Mirror
You seem to have started your whole analysis from the fallacious viewpoint of false dichotomy. People aren't either "a psychopath" or "not a psychopath". Shades of grey.
In other words, if you saved up college money for your kid, but had a heart attack, the state takes your money and pays for something else, and your own loved one that you worked for doesn't get the fruit of your efforts because apparently you should have been writing your kid checks every 2 weeks so that the money is "his", and thusly get stuck with a student loan or a blue collar job. Great.
Quit with the learned helplessness. You've given up. Don't drag us down to your level.
Cyber-hipsters. Cyber-hipsters everywhere.
You can't get what facebook offers at other sites. Facebook offers the audience of every single person I know (except 2). No other service does.
Your automation killed the Taiwanese jobs! Muahahhaha!
No, but I think there is a line somewhere between that and "the phone book is my explanation for what numbers you push to call this person". There should be some type of transformative property I guess. IANAL...
Didn't realise M*A*S*H was a documentary...
I could see that, but really, in the end, I don't know that people should really feel ownership over them explaining someone else's stuff.
So now you own the cheat codes created by IDSoftware's developers? Sounds like you're also a douche. Facts aren't copyrightable.
I like my women like I like my bourbon ....
Twelve years old and mixed up in coke.
It means those people drive shitty when not on the phone as well.
I have already invested $100s in X10 home automation modules around my house. Back in the day, you could control them with a computer -- but the controller was serial-port based, and some asshole decided to stop putting serial ports into computers. (This also killed my IRMan infrared receiver that I used with Girder to use a remote control to operate my computer. Said $150 aftermarket remote now gathering dust.) So like... Would this do those? :)
whatchu talking about? there's a lawsuit in nevada this week about third amendment violations. Google it, and lose all remaining faith! ):
I believe it's in the 14th amendment, and various SCOTUS rulings. There's nothing in the constitution that says white employers have to accept black employees, but that doesn't stop it from being under govt purview
You mean like when EA revoked their DRM in response to petitions?
what the fuck is wrong with you?
....Because of course all of mankind would agree unanimously.
People should be able to express whatever they want on public property. If you only respect the rights of people when they use them in a way you agree with, then you don't actually respect those rights. "Freedom of speech unless I disagree with you" is not freedom, but an illusion of freedom.
I found E.T. orders of magnitude more immersive than Adventure.. And a better game, with more fun, skill, and strategy to boot. Guess we can't all agree.
For once? Ha
compilation error
)))))))))))))
Progressing from knee-jerk to reason.
No, it doesn't.
"Fatal officer-involved shooting" means a cop shot one of them.
It's pretty easy to track people via helicopter, or all the damn cameras everywhere. It's really hard to hide. Especially if they were to commit a real crime with a real victim at some point in the future.