Awesome, you rock. I tried it on the 10 last night and was unable to get anywhere. Unfortunately none of my devices are "supported" so I was unable to harvest the apk from one of them.
Well I am not anonymous, and yes it is annoying. I am not sure why you think its a good idea to split up your comment like that. Do you write the first few words of your email in the subject line too? Do you write the first few words on the envelope of the letter? Honestly I don't get the point. Perhaps you can sway my opinion.
You have a point, but I am not sure you should be making it to me. I was just trying to show how there is some truth behind the statement that there are costs for eating healthy, just as there are costs for not eating healthy. I was not trying to say they are good reasons, just that dismissing the "Eating healthy is expensive" argument out of hand is wrong.
It isnt just the cost of the food its the cost in time of preparing the food and cleaning up after. If it takes you an hour to cook and an hour to clean then you are taking a good bit of your day away for just one meal. And if you live alone then that is a good deal of time spent on food for just one person. Healthy AND fast is most certainly not cheap in many situations.
Hot pockets cost 2.50 and take 3 minutes to cook and zero clean up.
I fail to think of a single industry with any real pull in the American market place that isn't run through at least a few government regulatory entities.
Good, I can't think of a single industry that wouldn't fsck things all up if they weren't being watched.
Sure, the governments should break up the ISP monopolies that restrict access to only one or two ISPs. They should also try to reduce any barriers to entry in the market for new competitors to spring up. This would increase competition and force verizon to better their service to retain their customers.
The issue with this is that its good for consumers but bad for investors, and we all know who our esteemed congress men actually represent.
Data probably came from many places, on weather underground I see that thigh for my location was set in 1934. But how do they know that, thats unpossible!!!!!
You are wrong good sir, it is entirely possible that they got enough data from other agencies and old records to make their conclusions. You not being able to understand that does not reflect upon the study in any way shape or form. It just makes you look like you are trying to discredit a study that you do not like because it does not click with your own biased conclusions.
-1 No common sense would be the correct modifier for you.
Take ANY car, and hit a light pole going nearly 100mph sideways and see if it gets cut in half. I bet you cant find one consumer mass produced vehicle that can handle that.
Why should they be able to hold you, they have no evidence of your wrong doing. If they cant brake into the desk drawer for whatever reason they don't get to continue holding you. This goes back to the phenomenon where "on a computer" makes it a new and unique concept that needs new laws and regulations. It doesn't.
What do they do if you don't supply the desk key? They brake into the drawer. What should they do if you dont supply the encryption key? They should brake into the..
There are two letters added, its an easy mistake to make depending on screen resolution, amount of attention being paid, etc. When I first read it I too thought Australia. Possibly because I was skimming the text, and my brain assumed Australia because it appears far more often on Slashdot for these types of things
I don't know about the laws where they are but in many states non competes (especially the form kind) are essentially unenforceable. I know in my states there is a reasonableness test on time period, allowed restrictions, and geographical distances. My state also routinely nullifies entire contracts if it goes against state law, there is no crossing out of certain provisions, the entire thing gets trashed. So a non compete written with another state in mind is most likely completely worthless in my state.
If the government serves you with a search warranty for your paper files you do not go and collect them into a box and hand them over. You step out of the way and they gather them. The government issues a search warrant for your combination safe, you stand out of the way while they open it. If the government issues a search warranty for your encrypted documents, you are now expected to supply them? Um no. You stand out of the way and allow them to go get them.
So you are saying that all of those studies listed at the bottom are false? Are there other studies I should be aware of? Please do show contrary evidence, I would love to take more information into consideration. Since you don't seem forthcoming I am guessing you aren't even aware if that data exists. You tell me to go look for evidence that refutes what I posted, honestly thats your job if you want to sway my opinion.
Long-term analyses of fatalities in Canada (Burdett, Can), New Zealand (Burdett, NZ) and USA (Kunich, 2002; Rodgers, 1988) show no helmet benefit; indeed, one study (Rodgers, 1988) suggests helmeted cyclists are more likely to be killed. Although fatality rates have generally declined, cyclists have fared no better than pedestrians. In Great Britain, too, there has been no discernible improvement in fatality trends relative to pedestrians as helmets have become more common (BHRF, 1071; Hewson, 2005).
In New South Wales, Australia in the three years following the introduction of its helmet law, 80% of cyclists killed and 80% of those seriously injured wore helmets at the time (Robinson, 1996; NSW, 1994). These proportions are almost identical to wearing rates in street surveys (85% and 83% for adults in 1992 and 1993 respectively; 76% and 74% for children - Robinson, 1996; Smith and Milthorpe, 1993), suggesting that helmets had little effect on the likelihood of fatal or serious injury.
Bicycle helmets are useless against anything more serious then falling off your bike. Do you really expect the thin hollow plastic shell to do anything when your head hits a car going 50?
Slashdot Mirror
You are so seriously misinformed, go look it up there are cases of this all the time.
Awesome, you rock. I tried it on the 10 last night and was unable to get anywhere. Unfortunately none of my devices are "supported" so I was unable to harvest the apk from one of them.
I will check with my Note 10 2014 when I get home. If that works I will just copy the apk over to the S4 and see what happens.
I just checked my S4 says this device is not compatible.
Well I am not anonymous, and yes it is annoying. I am not sure why you think its a good idea to split up your comment like that. Do you write the first few words of your email in the subject line too? Do you write the first few words on the envelope of the letter? Honestly I don't get the point. Perhaps you can sway my opinion.
You have a point, but I am not sure you should be making it to me. I was just trying to show how there is some truth behind the statement that there are costs for eating healthy, just as there are costs for not eating healthy. I was not trying to say they are good reasons, just that dismissing the "Eating healthy is expensive" argument out of hand is wrong.
It isnt just the cost of the food its the cost in time of preparing the food and cleaning up after. If it takes you an hour to cook and an hour to clean then you are taking a good bit of your day away for just one meal. And if you live alone then that is a good deal of time spent on food for just one person. Healthy AND fast is most certainly not cheap in many situations. Hot pockets cost 2.50 and take 3 minutes to cook and zero clean up.
I fail to think of a single industry with any real pull in the American market place that isn't run through at least a few government regulatory entities.
Good, I can't think of a single industry that wouldn't fsck things all up if they weren't being watched.
That might be. I would try one of the PC games that does make you sick, turn off the eye candy and get the frame rate up to see if it helps.
Sure, the governments should break up the ISP monopolies that restrict access to only one or two ISPs. They should also try to reduce any barriers to entry in the market for new competitors to spring up. This would increase competition and force verizon to better their service to retain their customers.
The issue with this is that its good for consumers but bad for investors, and we all know who our esteemed congress men actually represent.
Data probably came from many places, on weather underground I see that thigh for my location was set in 1934. But how do they know that, thats unpossible!!!!!
You are wrong good sir, it is entirely possible that they got enough data from other agencies and old records to make their conclusions. You not being able to understand that does not reflect upon the study in any way shape or form. It just makes you look like you are trying to discredit a study that you do not like because it does not click with your own biased conclusions.
Do you also slide your car into a light pole sideways, if so yours is the only consumer mass produced car that can handle that.
-1 No common sense would be the correct modifier for you. Take ANY car, and hit a light pole going nearly 100mph sideways and see if it gets cut in half. I bet you cant find one consumer mass produced vehicle that can handle that.
Why should they be able to hold you, they have no evidence of your wrong doing. If they cant brake into the desk drawer for whatever reason they don't get to continue holding you. This goes back to the phenomenon where "on a computer" makes it a new and unique concept that needs new laws and regulations. It doesn't.
What do they do if you don't supply the desk key? They brake into the drawer. What should they do if you dont supply the encryption key? They should brake into the..
Yes and if some people like our founding fathers had just said that to themselves we might still have monarchs on our money.
There are two letters added, its an easy mistake to make depending on screen resolution, amount of attention being paid, etc. When I first read it I too thought Australia. Possibly because I was skimming the text, and my brain assumed Australia because it appears far more often on Slashdot for these types of things
I don't know about the laws where they are but in many states non competes (especially the form kind) are essentially unenforceable. I know in my states there is a reasonableness test on time period, allowed restrictions, and geographical distances. My state also routinely nullifies entire contracts if it goes against state law, there is no crossing out of certain provisions, the entire thing gets trashed. So a non compete written with another state in mind is most likely completely worthless in my state.
I believe the petty criminal before I believe the organized criminals.
Who's to say he didn't offer to write a nice post himself and the officers laughed and said "sure!"?
What flipping universe are you from?
If the government serves you with a search warranty for your paper files you do not go and collect them into a box and hand them over. You step out of the way and they gather them. The government issues a search warrant for your combination safe, you stand out of the way while they open it. If the government issues a search warranty for your encrypted documents, you are now expected to supply them? Um no. You stand out of the way and allow them to go get them.
So you are saying that all of those studies listed at the bottom are false? Are there other studies I should be aware of? Please do show contrary evidence, I would love to take more information into consideration. Since you don't seem forthcoming I am guessing you aren't even aware if that data exists. You tell me to go look for evidence that refutes what I posted, honestly thats your job if you want to sway my opinion.
Studies have actually shown no decrease in head injuries with increases in helmet usage.
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/10... Here is a link with a large list of references to studies.
Here is a quote from the page:
Long-term analyses of fatalities in Canada (Burdett, Can), New Zealand (Burdett, NZ) and USA (Kunich, 2002; Rodgers, 1988) show no helmet benefit; indeed, one study (Rodgers, 1988) suggests helmeted cyclists are more likely to be killed. Although fatality rates have generally declined, cyclists have fared no better than pedestrians. In Great Britain, too, there has been no discernible improvement in fatality trends relative to pedestrians as helmets have become more common (BHRF, 1071; Hewson, 2005). In New South Wales, Australia in the three years following the introduction of its helmet law, 80% of cyclists killed and 80% of those seriously injured wore helmets at the time (Robinson, 1996; NSW, 1994). These proportions are almost identical to wearing rates in street surveys (85% and 83% for adults in 1992 and 1993 respectively; 76% and 74% for children - Robinson, 1996; Smith and Milthorpe, 1993), suggesting that helmets had little effect on the likelihood of fatal or serious injury.
Bicycle helmets are useless against anything more serious then falling off your bike. Do you really expect the thin hollow plastic shell to do anything when your head hits a car going 50?
I read it and the conclusion was completely wrong.