" However, the main argument I've been making the whole time is that the existence of capital punishment creates a situation in which sooner or later innocent people will die at the hands of the state, because evn the lengthy appeals process is not perfect by any means." So in cases where their is no doubt you feel it is okay? Take the Boston Bomber for example.
As I said I am anti death penalty myself for the very reason you give but that argument could be changed to raise the requirement for the death penalty as well. As I was trying to say arguments can be made for both sides. I never take joy in any death but I can see the need at times for such an event to happen.
"Okay, but if one is of the opinion (as I am) that murder is always wrong, then saying "well we held this trail so now this is legal" does not change the moral argument one bit." So if a someone has taken hostages and has killed a few of them an officer shooting the gunman is immoral?
I am actually anti death penalty but it is just as black and white as you make it. It can be argued that some people are to dangerous to risk ever letting out of the prison system or ever risk them escaping.
Gee I guess this is so girls don't have to face the pressure of competing with boys. We all know that girls need special help.
I just do not know that this is really needed. I know lots of very smart women in STEM that are very bit as talented as any male. The issues of fair pay and frankly pop culture need to be fixed.
"e Shopping, by promoting sites on its own Google Shopping platform over other sites, and doing so without indicating to the consumer that Google has an interest in those sites."
I googled iPhone. On the right hand side, outside of search results, I see "Shop for iPhone on Google" and it has a sponsored marker on it! Did I mention that it was in a box on the right hand side as well? Really? Just how is that not indicating to the consumer?
You did say this. "No, but Google needs to be forced to not abuse its position of dominance."
If google is not abusing it does not need to be forced to do anything. I am a big fan of antitrust but frankly It does not seem to be used with real monopolies very often.
I am questioning if Google is abusing or is in a position of dominance. A large market share is not a monopoly position. The questions on the use of Android are really silly since IOS, WP, and others are more locked down.
Wait I have a solution to this problem. 1. Run a test.. You could call it a pilot program in one school. 2. The company that wants the contract pays for the pilot or at least half of it. When it fails you do not have a missive program fail and it costs a lot less. This is brilliant. I wonder why no one thought of this before.
"I don't know, you'll have to ask the EU commission about that. TFA says that they have found "potential bias in Google’s search results,...," If you do not know what they are doing wrong then how can you say they are doing wrong? You just trust that the government is doing the right thing?
Exactly how are they abusing their dominant position? They do control default search on Android but you can put any search engine and or browser on Android unlike ios. Also Apple and Microsoft do not use Google as the default search engine so the mobile market is not dominated by Android. On the Desktop the default search engine on the default browser on the most popular OS is Bing.
It is so easy to change search engines that the end user lock in is just not a problem. Google does not offer pay for search placement. If you google search engine Bing the top result.
He is not in court or in front of a jury. And really taking the 5th when asked that question will do enough damage during the trial that the DA will not need to say a word.
Umm.. No they didn't/ You can not pay to be placed in search results on Google. You can pay to have your ads show up in the ad space to the right and at the top marked as an ad. Try it and Google iPhone. First you will see an ad and then the results. The ad will have an icon marking it as an add and then you will see results below that. Or try Art by Lori Ramatar and you will see no ads. I know the artists and she does not pay for any ads on Google. So no. You are wrong.
" When a single search engine has 90% of all traffic, whether your business shows up in its search results or not, and if it does, then how high relative to its competitors, can easily become the single biggest determinant of your success. If such placement is not fair (whatever that means), there is an issue."
So Europeans need to be forced to use Bing and Yahoo. What it comes down to is Google provided too good of a service. Simple truth is that I almost never use Google to find a product to buy. It does not have the best product search by far.
That is why he is the prosecutor and not the judge. Frankly it does not matter what he things it will matter what the Jury thinks and odds are very high that they will think he not telling the truth. What I do not understand is why he needed to change the time. A GPS receiver and a time server in the secure area should have been good enough.
"It's something some of us Apple fans have long figured out is that individual specs sometimes are completely meaningless." No they are not. If you are transcoding video then a fast video card if using OpenCL or Cuda will really speed things up. If you are not then an I7 will really help. I love OS/X and I really like my macbook pro but the new iMac, Mac Book Pros, and Mac Pro are not as flexible as I want or need. SSDs are advancing too fast for me to not want the option of installing a new one. Apple charges too much for memory as well so yes I want to plug it in. The issue btw is not that the new MacBook Pro, iMac, and Mac Pro lack those features. The issue is that none of the Apple line are really expandable. BTW Thunderbolt does not count. It is too slow for serious CUDA or OpenCL work. It just can not match the speed of a 16x slot. Right now I am running Xeon Ivy Bridge-e machine with 32 gigs of ram and two SSDs in a raid and it still takes a while to do some compiles.
No it was the Apple III. It had a few issues because the design was really pushing board design. PDP? DEC Would never allow that. Frankly picking up and dropping most PDP 11s could cause death or a minor earthquake.
Never said it was a good thing but the chances are that the extinction event should be lower than the earlier one. Overall your comments play well but show a real lack of any understanding of evolution, science, and so on. For example most people that died at Hiroshima died of burns and or the blast effect and not the radiation. It was an air burst so the fallout was limited.
BTW yes I know that you were comments where an attempt to shame and try to show ignorance and I am sure that many found it funny but it was those that are not all that knowledgeable. I never said that it was a good thing just that life in the sea today should have a higher tolerance to a change on PH than those that died eons ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Sharepoint and Wordpress are languages?
" However, the main argument I've been making the whole time is that the existence of capital punishment creates a situation in which sooner or later innocent people will die at the hands of the state, because evn the lengthy appeals process is not perfect by any means."
So in cases where their is no doubt you feel it is okay?
Take the Boston Bomber for example.
As I said I am anti death penalty myself for the very reason you give but that argument could be changed to raise the requirement for the death penalty as well. As I was trying to say arguments can be made for both sides.
I never take joy in any death but I can see the need at times for such an event to happen.
In this case it would be to the north.
Because that would drive up food prices which would impact the poorest people the most.
Southern California has a long history of stealing water from other places...
Time to just jack up the water rates so people move out.
"Okay, but if one is of the opinion (as I am) that murder is always wrong, then saying "well we held this trail so now this is legal" does not change the moral argument one bit."
So if a someone has taken hostages and has killed a few of them an officer shooting the gunman is immoral?
I am actually anti death penalty but it is just as black and white as you make it.
It can be argued that some people are to dangerous to risk ever letting out of the prison system or ever risk them escaping.
Gee I guess this is so girls don't have to face the pressure of competing with boys. We all know that girls need special help.
I just do not know that this is really needed. I know lots of very smart women in STEM that are very bit as talented as any male. The issues of fair pay and frankly pop culture need to be fixed.
Potentially as replacements for text books.
"e Shopping, by promoting sites on its own Google Shopping platform over other sites, and doing so without indicating to the consumer that Google has an interest in those sites."
I googled iPhone.
On the right hand side, outside of search results, I see "Shop for iPhone on Google" and it has a sponsored marker on it! Did I mention that it was in a box on the right hand side as well?
Really? Just how is that not indicating to the consumer?
You did say this.
"No, but Google needs to be forced to not abuse its position of dominance."
If google is not abusing it does not need to be forced to do anything.
I am a big fan of antitrust but frankly It does not seem to be used with real monopolies very often.
I am questioning if Google is abusing or is in a position of dominance. A large market share is not a monopoly position.
The questions on the use of Android are really silly since IOS, WP, and others are more locked down.
Wait I have a solution to this problem.
1. Run a test.. You could call it a pilot program in one school.
2. The company that wants the contract pays for the pilot or at least half of it.
When it fails you do not have a missive program fail and it costs a lot less.
This is brilliant. I wonder why no one thought of this before.
BTW the issues seems to be the shop google links to the right of the search results...
In other words a tempest in a teapot.
"I don't know, you'll have to ask the EU commission about that. TFA says that they have found "potential bias in Google’s search results, ...,"
If you do not know what they are doing wrong then how can you say they are doing wrong?
You just trust that the government is doing the right thing?
Exactly how are they abusing their dominant position?
They do control default search on Android but you can put any search engine and or browser on Android unlike ios.
Also Apple and Microsoft do not use Google as the default search engine so the mobile market is not dominated by Android.
On the Desktop the default search engine on the default browser on the most popular OS is Bing.
It is so easy to change search engines that the end user lock in is just not a problem.
Google does not offer pay for search placement. If you google search engine Bing the top result.
"I doubt Lenovo even has a license to buy Xeon chips. "
What is wrong with you! Are you smoking the the crack?
Really?
http://shop.lenovo.com/us/en/s...
Says you are wrong.
He is not in court or in front of a jury.
And really taking the 5th when asked that question will do enough damage during the trial that the DA will not need to say a word.
Umm.. No they didn't/
You can not pay to be placed in search results on Google. You can pay to have your ads show up in the ad space to the right and at the top marked as an ad.
Try it and Google iPhone.
First you will see an ad and then the results. The ad will have an icon marking it as an add and then you will see results below that.
Or try Art by Lori Ramatar and you will see no ads.
I know the artists and she does not pay for any ads on Google.
So no. You are wrong.
" When a single search engine has 90% of all traffic, whether your business shows up in its search results or not, and if it does, then how high relative to its competitors, can easily become the single biggest determinant of your success. If such placement is not fair (whatever that means), there is an issue."
So Europeans need to be forced to use Bing and Yahoo.
What it comes down to is Google provided too good of a service.
Simple truth is that I almost never use Google to find a product to buy. It does not have the best product search by far.
That is why he is the prosecutor and not the judge.
Frankly it does not matter what he things it will matter what the Jury thinks and odds are very high that they will think he not telling the truth.
What I do not understand is why he needed to change the time. A GPS receiver and a time server in the secure area should have been good enough.
"It's something some of us Apple fans have long figured out is that individual specs sometimes are completely meaningless."
No they are not.
If you are transcoding video then a fast video card if using OpenCL or Cuda will really speed things up.
If you are not then an I7 will really help.
I love OS/X and I really like my macbook pro but the new iMac, Mac Book Pros, and Mac Pro are not as flexible as I want or need.
SSDs are advancing too fast for me to not want the option of installing a new one. Apple charges too much for memory as well so yes I want to plug it in.
The issue btw is not that the new MacBook Pro, iMac, and Mac Pro lack those features. The issue is that none of the Apple line are really expandable.
BTW Thunderbolt does not count. It is too slow for serious CUDA or OpenCL work. It just can not match the speed of a 16x slot.
Right now I am running Xeon Ivy Bridge-e machine with 32 gigs of ram and two SSDs in a raid and it still takes a while to do some compiles.
No it was the Apple III. It had a few issues because the design was really pushing board design.
PDP?
DEC Would never allow that. Frankly picking up and dropping most PDP 11s could cause death or a minor earthquake.
You mean like Lenovo?
You idiot. How dare you point out that they title is pure flamebait!
What will you do next? Logical discourse?
What is the world coming too.
Actually no it does not. That is called trespassing.
Never said it was a good thing but the chances are that the extinction event should be lower than the earlier one.
Overall your comments play well but show a real lack of any understanding of evolution, science, and so on.
For example most people that died at Hiroshima died of burns and or the blast effect and not the radiation. It was an air burst so the fallout was limited.
BTW yes I know that you were comments where an attempt to shame and try to show ignorance and I am sure that many found it funny but it was those that are not all that knowledgeable.
I never said that it was a good thing just that life in the sea today should have a higher tolerance to a change on PH than those that died eons ago.