They are not bad law, they are laws you personally think are bad. This is generally a fairly common practice among individuals without legal training. Furthermore, the idea that lobbies are somehow restricted to the rich and powerful is rather absurd. You are more than welcome to donate to a number of foundations, whose exact purpose is representing your interests. If your opinion is popular enough, it will get traction. You should also watch fewer legal dramas.
A benevolent dictatorship is an established term for a dictatorship where the dictator pursues national interests rather than his own, as opposed to a dictator who pursues his own interests over those of national ones. There are a million ways to weasel about how this definition is bad—in which case you would be late, since Nietzsche has already raised this criticism of definitions in general—but it is one all development economists are very familiar with and nothing to sneer at. A go-to example is South Korea under Park Chung-hee, who is generally considered to be a benevolent dictator and has considerably contributed to the nation's development through his macroeconomic policies, versus his successor Chun Doo-hwan, who is best known for his impressive ability to receive bribes through establishment of foundations. You are wrong about the term having any relation to success of the dictator and JasterBobaMereel is equally wrong about there being any relation to his popularity.
Don't take it the wrong way, but "biased courts" in developed countries are usually synonymous with bitter losers. You can argue that the laws are biased—some of them are, but arguably justifiably so—in which case you should really be running a lobby to append them, but if you feel that the judge is the one who is not applying the law correctly, you always the have option to appeal. At a certain point, it is a question of whether the whole justice system across multiple courts consists exclusively of biased hypocrites or if it is the individual refusing to understand why a certain judgement was applied.
Coincidentally, the Industrial Revolution occurs in the same time and is entirely oligarchic in nature. You may be interested in reading some works by Robert C. Allen, in particular the very concise Global Economic History: A Very Short Introduction. There are a number of hypothesis for Europe's industrial success and subsequent increased living standards, from Braudel's coal and colonies to Black Death changing the institutional structure of Europe to be more capitalistic to Europe always being richer but having less food due to lack of rice. However, I am afraid that I am yet to hear a persuasive argument for peasants' suffrage being one of them. In fact, if we look at late comers in East Asia, you would get the very opposite impression with unelected elite bureaucrats largely detached from the political process running the country much more successfully than their democratised counterparts with democracy only coming as a latter bonus and in a form factually very different from liberté, égalité, fraternité.
I am not entirely sure where you get getting the idea that benevolent dictators have to be even remotely popular. Popularity is a function of how good a leader is at appealing to the populace, not of the importance of the interests of the state to the said dictator. South Korea's Park Chung-hee is a benevolent dictator par excellence, yet a very divisive figure even during his own time.
Furthermore, this does not work for corporations and they are not benevolent dictatorships, because CEOs are already elected by the board of directors, who are again elected by the shareholders. It is already a democratic process, except for the fact that the electorate are the shareholders rather than employees. The companies that are pursuing the whole "you own the company" culture are already giving employees suffrage by offering them stock options, thus making the employees also the shareholders and thus eligible to elect directors.
Rather all public trials. You really don't want to stream divorce trials to the whole world. Which currently non-public trials should be public though is a different question.
1. Start game on Friday, it crashes immediately with the executable still running
2. Let the computer install Windows Updates over the weekend
3. 50+ hours of gameplay and a thief status bestowed upon you by Sony's former Strategic Content Director, Shahid Kamal Ahmad
Good God the hyperbole! If these people are thieves, then Sony's former Strategic Content Director, Shahid Kamal Ahmad, is an arsonist. Better get in touch with him over Twitter and inform him of this breaking discovery.
It really isn't about exploring at all in its current implementation and blocking it while driving would do nothing to help. The most effective way to play is find a spot where three PokeStops overlap and use lure on each one of them. Where I live, these spots are usually filled with players, who just sit there for hours and keep catching Pokemon, while getting Pokeballs from the same three PokeStops. Unlike Ingress, there is absolutely no incentive to find new PokeStops, making any kind of exploration not only redundant, but inefficient.
My last phone was the Lumia 1020, the one before that was the Galaxy S i9000. The two experiences could not have been more different. When I got my i9000, there were few good applications, but progressively their number increased and it became a very nice system to use indeed. The 1020, on the other hand, came with some nifty things out-of-the-box—I really enjoyed Photobeamer and the free 30GB OneDrive option—that Microsoft killed, while third-party support continued to dwindle over time. One got better, the other got worse.
They have a few nice ideas in Windows Phone 10, but none of them makeup for the certain doom the OS has been heading towards the past couple of years. It's a mediocre experience at best and doesn't offer anything worthwhile that iOS and Android cannot do better.
Sounds like a bad excuse by someone who would rather neglect their health and engage in strictly sedentary activities all day along, a la "I should really go and get some cardio, but I am being too productive engaging in highly intellectual posting on Slashdot."
Do you really expect more from an outlet that runs articles titled "Does Donald Trump Have A Soul"? Even the video they link to isn't their own; it's from WSJ.
By that logic, you may as well sell rat poison labeled as milk, as long as you put enough warning labels on the back. As for Darwin Awards, stay classy.
On the contrary, it does not matter at all how you or I interpret the meaning of "autopilot" to be. Until Tesla limits their sales to licensed aviation specialists, the only thing that matters is what a legal reasonable man thinks as determined by the courts. I am curious as to where this is going to go, but I have some considerations about Tesla convincing anyone of this interpretation of "autopilot" being a common one.
If you weren't intentionally attempting to sabotage your corporation's relations, you might have already been assigned that secretary--or at least an intern--who would type up those business cards for you. Christ, if you do anything that requires work with corporate clients, regardless how minor, you should have had one already. This is precisely the sort of representative that would get his company blacklisted five minutes into the first meeting by anyone who is not complete desperate and has nowhere else to go, i.e. people you probably don't want to be doing business with to begin with.
Who knows? On one hand, one immediately thinks about all those people who are close to dying in the heat without knowing about it, because they've reached the stage when they no longer feel hot. Yet then again, if this is more like the heat regulation that dogs do with their tongues, it's not such a bad thing. I'm certain that at least the EU will make sure that thing doesn't accidentally kill people if it were to be launched on our markets.
Well, no, he doesn't. If you read his post, which is most likely trolling to begin with, he specifically refers to the "evildoers" from SR as discussed in this post and not to all who break any kind of laws, a la highly moral, romanticised tax evasion through Robert of Locksley. If you do not think that the individuals trafficking drugs are harming the society for personal benefit and are thus what most people would consider to be "doing evil", that is your personal opinion. Claiming that any dissenting view is a result of brainwashing only hints at your own dogmatic attitude regarding the matter.
Surely it would be even less embarrassing for him if he actually did something productive. What kind of homeless person walks around with a laptop and a smartphone anyway?
See, I've never had an issue with CCTV. Essentially it's little more than just replacing some guard standing on a wall and watching his surroundings with a different guard who has a few additional pairs of eyes sitting in a room a bit further away. He's always vigilant outside and doesn't enter my room, like a policeman that doesn't enter my room unless I specifically call for help. We had an attempted kidnapping with the intent to rape at my university a year or so ago and eventually the guy got arrested by being caught on CCTV, having his photograph posted all over Facebook and eventually being identified by no one other than his own girlfriend. It's little more than having increased police presence and I've never had any issues with the police in my country, so that's that. Of course other people and people in countries with the police being a bit less friendly would have a different attitude towards the whole issue.
Having the photographs you send specifically to your friends scanned for your facial features, your emails checked for keywords, your call history recorded and the information that you've specifically sent privately to a person or anonymously to the modern variant of reader's column recorded and traced back to you is none of that. It's more like having the same guard standing over you and watching whatever you do, regardless of where you are, which is essentially little different from the level of surveillance you have in a prison.
You seem knowledgeable on the subject. Could you point me to some article that discusses specific what advantages BB10 has over the latest Android variants from the end user's perspective? I would be interested in giving it a shot, but as it stands, I am so satisfied with Android--in particular with the fact that I can run ROMs of the latest versions of the OS on a three-year-old phone--that I am somewhat weary of giving the competition a shot. It's not a rhetorical question. I would genuinely like to know.
To be fair, if you represent an unpopular opinion and even if you're civil about it, this sort of system isn't really going to work. Slashdot is still a very technology focused site, although you can slowly see technology unrelated political topics seeping through (e.g. Bradley Manning deciding to have a sex change), but this is far from being the case everywhere else.
Slashdot Mirror
They are not bad law, they are laws you personally think are bad. This is generally a fairly common practice among individuals without legal training. Furthermore, the idea that lobbies are somehow restricted to the rich and powerful is rather absurd. You are more than welcome to donate to a number of foundations, whose exact purpose is representing your interests. If your opinion is popular enough, it will get traction. You should also watch fewer legal dramas.
A benevolent dictatorship is an established term for a dictatorship where the dictator pursues national interests rather than his own, as opposed to a dictator who pursues his own interests over those of national ones. There are a million ways to weasel about how this definition is bad—in which case you would be late, since Nietzsche has already raised this criticism of definitions in general—but it is one all development economists are very familiar with and nothing to sneer at. A go-to example is South Korea under Park Chung-hee, who is generally considered to be a benevolent dictator and has considerably contributed to the nation's development through his macroeconomic policies, versus his successor Chun Doo-hwan, who is best known for his impressive ability to receive bribes through establishment of foundations. You are wrong about the term having any relation to success of the dictator and JasterBobaMereel is equally wrong about there being any relation to his popularity.
Don't take it the wrong way, but "biased courts" in developed countries are usually synonymous with bitter losers. You can argue that the laws are biased—some of them are, but arguably justifiably so—in which case you should really be running a lobby to append them, but if you feel that the judge is the one who is not applying the law correctly, you always the have option to appeal. At a certain point, it is a question of whether the whole justice system across multiple courts consists exclusively of biased hypocrites or if it is the individual refusing to understand why a certain judgement was applied.
Coincidentally, the Industrial Revolution occurs in the same time and is entirely oligarchic in nature. You may be interested in reading some works by Robert C. Allen, in particular the very concise Global Economic History: A Very Short Introduction. There are a number of hypothesis for Europe's industrial success and subsequent increased living standards, from Braudel's coal and colonies to Black Death changing the institutional structure of Europe to be more capitalistic to Europe always being richer but having less food due to lack of rice. However, I am afraid that I am yet to hear a persuasive argument for peasants' suffrage being one of them. In fact, if we look at late comers in East Asia, you would get the very opposite impression with unelected elite bureaucrats largely detached from the political process running the country much more successfully than their democratised counterparts with democracy only coming as a latter bonus and in a form factually very different from liberté, égalité, fraternité.
I am not entirely sure where you get getting the idea that benevolent dictators have to be even remotely popular. Popularity is a function of how good a leader is at appealing to the populace, not of the importance of the interests of the state to the said dictator. South Korea's Park Chung-hee is a benevolent dictator par excellence, yet a very divisive figure even during his own time.
Furthermore, this does not work for corporations and they are not benevolent dictatorships, because CEOs are already elected by the board of directors, who are again elected by the shareholders. It is already a democratic process, except for the fact that the electorate are the shareholders rather than employees. The companies that are pursuing the whole "you own the company" culture are already giving employees suffrage by offering them stock options, thus making the employees also the shareholders and thus eligible to elect directors.
Rather all public trials. You really don't want to stream divorce trials to the whole world. Which currently non-public trials should be public though is a different question.
In Sony's defence, he is a former Strategic Content Director.
1. Start game on Friday, it crashes immediately with the executable still running 2. Let the computer install Windows Updates over the weekend 3. 50+ hours of gameplay and a thief status bestowed upon you by Sony's former Strategic Content Director, Shahid Kamal Ahmad
Good God the hyperbole! If these people are thieves, then Sony's former Strategic Content Director, Shahid Kamal Ahmad, is an arsonist. Better get in touch with him over Twitter and inform him of this breaking discovery.
It really isn't about exploring at all in its current implementation and blocking it while driving would do nothing to help. The most effective way to play is find a spot where three PokeStops overlap and use lure on each one of them. Where I live, these spots are usually filled with players, who just sit there for hours and keep catching Pokemon, while getting Pokeballs from the same three PokeStops. Unlike Ingress, there is absolutely no incentive to find new PokeStops, making any kind of exploration not only redundant, but inefficient.
Microsoft has basically killed Windows Phone at this point with such extreme prejudice, I almost find it hard to believe they did so unintentionally. Not only is the staff skeletal at best now, with 7,800 fired last year even before the release of Windows Phone 10, another 1,850 this May and another 2,850 at the end of last month, they have discontinued the few pre-installed services that were interesting and split the already very weak ecosystem into two.
My last phone was the Lumia 1020, the one before that was the Galaxy S i9000. The two experiences could not have been more different. When I got my i9000, there were few good applications, but progressively their number increased and it became a very nice system to use indeed. The 1020, on the other hand, came with some nifty things out-of-the-box—I really enjoyed Photobeamer and the free 30GB OneDrive option—that Microsoft killed, while third-party support continued to dwindle over time. One got better, the other got worse.
They have a few nice ideas in Windows Phone 10, but none of them makeup for the certain doom the OS has been heading towards the past couple of years. It's a mediocre experience at best and doesn't offer anything worthwhile that iOS and Android cannot do better.
Sounds like a bad excuse by someone who would rather neglect their health and engage in strictly sedentary activities all day along, a la "I should really go and get some cardio, but I am being too productive engaging in highly intellectual posting on Slashdot."
Do you really expect more from an outlet that runs articles titled "Does Donald Trump Have A Soul"? Even the video they link to isn't their own; it's from WSJ.
By that logic, you may as well sell rat poison labeled as milk, as long as you put enough warning labels on the back. As for Darwin Awards, stay classy.
On the contrary, it does not matter at all how you or I interpret the meaning of "autopilot" to be. Until Tesla limits their sales to licensed aviation specialists, the only thing that matters is what a legal reasonable man thinks as determined by the courts. I am curious as to where this is going to go, but I have some considerations about Tesla convincing anyone of this interpretation of "autopilot" being a common one.
You shouldn't really be holding a phone to your face in a restaurant either. It's very bad manners.
If you weren't intentionally attempting to sabotage your corporation's relations, you might have already been assigned that secretary--or at least an intern--who would type up those business cards for you. Christ, if you do anything that requires work with corporate clients, regardless how minor, you should have had one already. This is precisely the sort of representative that would get his company blacklisted five minutes into the first meeting by anyone who is not complete desperate and has nowhere else to go, i.e. people you probably don't want to be doing business with to begin with.
Who knows? On one hand, one immediately thinks about all those people who are close to dying in the heat without knowing about it, because they've reached the stage when they no longer feel hot. Yet then again, if this is more like the heat regulation that dogs do with their tongues, it's not such a bad thing. I'm certain that at least the EU will make sure that thing doesn't accidentally kill people if it were to be launched on our markets.
Candidates are not allowed to have TV or radio advertising, or even put videos on the internet etc.
To be fair, they do have those minivans with megaphones and terribly cheerful female announcers driving around everywhere.
Well, no, he doesn't. If you read his post, which is most likely trolling to begin with, he specifically refers to the "evildoers" from SR as discussed in this post and not to all who break any kind of laws, a la highly moral, romanticised tax evasion through Robert of Locksley. If you do not think that the individuals trafficking drugs are harming the society for personal benefit and are thus what most people would consider to be "doing evil", that is your personal opinion. Claiming that any dissenting view is a result of brainwashing only hints at your own dogmatic attitude regarding the matter.
Just because you disagree with him on the legality of drug trafficing doesn't mean that he is brainwashed.
Surely it would be even less embarrassing for him if he actually did something productive. What kind of homeless person walks around with a laptop and a smartphone anyway?
See, I've never had an issue with CCTV. Essentially it's little more than just replacing some guard standing on a wall and watching his surroundings with a different guard who has a few additional pairs of eyes sitting in a room a bit further away. He's always vigilant outside and doesn't enter my room, like a policeman that doesn't enter my room unless I specifically call for help. We had an attempted kidnapping with the intent to rape at my university a year or so ago and eventually the guy got arrested by being caught on CCTV, having his photograph posted all over Facebook and eventually being identified by no one other than his own girlfriend. It's little more than having increased police presence and I've never had any issues with the police in my country, so that's that. Of course other people and people in countries with the police being a bit less friendly would have a different attitude towards the whole issue.
Having the photographs you send specifically to your friends scanned for your facial features, your emails checked for keywords, your call history recorded and the information that you've specifically sent privately to a person or anonymously to the modern variant of reader's column recorded and traced back to you is none of that. It's more like having the same guard standing over you and watching whatever you do, regardless of where you are, which is essentially little different from the level of surveillance you have in a prison.
You seem knowledgeable on the subject. Could you point me to some article that discusses specific what advantages BB10 has over the latest Android variants from the end user's perspective? I would be interested in giving it a shot, but as it stands, I am so satisfied with Android--in particular with the fact that I can run ROMs of the latest versions of the OS on a three-year-old phone--that I am somewhat weary of giving the competition a shot. It's not a rhetorical question. I would genuinely like to know.
To be fair, if you represent an unpopular opinion and even if you're civil about it, this sort of system isn't really going to work. Slashdot is still a very technology focused site, although you can slowly see technology unrelated political topics seeping through (e.g. Bradley Manning deciding to have a sex change), but this is far from being the case everywhere else.