If you are not shooting at the person, you are spraying bullets somewhere else. And weren't 2 kids there, also? So just fire off some shots in some direction so you can clip a neighbor, someone walking by, a passing car, have a ricochete and hit someone in the house. OK, it you are in the middle of the a forest, ocean or desert, feel free to put a shot into the ground, otherwise you are being reckless and a danger to others. And don't give me any bull about "putting a shot somewhere safe." The only safe place safe to discharge a weapon with other people around is a controlled firing range, and then only once you have passed a safety course.
Showing the speed freak your knife won't get someone else killed. Showing your gun to someone won't get someone else killed. Wildly firing off shots can get someone killed.
Dan: What’s the problem? Mallory: During your broadcast on September 5th, you sang Happy Birthday to your partner, Casey McCall. Dan: Yeah, but I can explain that. Wait, it was his birthday. Why do I have to explain that? Mallory: You sang Happy Birthday on the air.
Mallory: Listen, I think it’s sweet that you and your partner sing to each other on television. Others may think that it’s vaguely gay, but I disagree. Dan: Thank you. Mallory: Nonetheless, you can’t do it anymore. Dan: Why not? Mallory: It’s against the law? Dan: It’s against the law to be vaguely gay? Mallory: It’s against the law to sing Happy Birthday on television. Dan: Why? Mallory: It's owned by the representatives of Mildred and Patty Hill. Dan: It took two people to write that song?
The Supreme Court has already ruled on this issue. They said reporting on something, even if it was obtained illegally, is fine. It was in the Wall Street Journal's Saturday edition, back in the editorial section. The write cited the various applicable cases.
If you had 5 students, you could test each of them closely to see their skills. 50 students, you can still look into individuals' skills. At 500, you may be able to have some customization. 5000, I doubt it. 50000, no way. And that's assuming you think it's fair to make personalized tests. If Bob is good at math and Beth is good at English, do you cater or counter-cater to their strengths? Like you said, assessment is hard beyond a single individual.
I think you don't understand how this works. The great students get access to advanced classes. They don't need extra teachers or tutoring, i.e. "extra help." The underachieving students get extra teachers and tutors. At least that's how it is supposed to work, and how it works in my area. I'm not in NY, so I can't gauge the reality of it there.
I wouldn't say the costs are much different, but rather the resources behind the accuser and defendant are vastly different. RIAA vs. Grandma comes to mind, though I think there was MPAA vs. Dead Guy at some point. There are plenty of other deficiencies, of course, but not having access to a public defense attorney for civil actions is an automatic kick to the groin to the average person vs. a corporation/trade group/etc. Not that I'm advocating civil public defense attorneys.
I've had various level of success. If it was personal, like when my uncle was having no luck getting Social Security disability for his cancer treatment (it was bad enough he couldn't work at all, but he still had a chance of recovery), I got personalized messages back from the offices. I don't know which one pushed it through, but suddenly he got his aid the next month. Now if it's an email about some political issue, yep, form email.
What if I sent 500 valid emails a day? "Where is X button?" "Where is Y button?" "How do I send an email?" "How do I search for fish?" "How do I search for monkeys?" "How do I search for [X]?"...
Every single question is valid, and I could tie up a person for 10X as long as it took to write that email. What am I going to be charged with, being stupid? As a private citizen with no ties to any competitors, good luck trying to prove intent to damage.
Slashdot Mirror
You feel better now?
Wow, you 'turfed so hard I have rug burn!
If you are not shooting at the person, you are spraying bullets somewhere else. And weren't 2 kids there, also? So just fire off some shots in some direction so you can clip a neighbor, someone walking by, a passing car, have a ricochete and hit someone in the house. OK, it you are in the middle of the a forest, ocean or desert, feel free to put a shot into the ground, otherwise you are being reckless and a danger to others. And don't give me any bull about "putting a shot somewhere safe." The only safe place safe to discharge a weapon with other people around is a controlled firing range, and then only once you have passed a safety course.
This isn't a movie, kid.
Showing the speed freak your knife won't get someone else killed. Showing your gun to someone won't get someone else killed. Wildly firing off shots can get someone killed.
Look at some of the big consulting companies that work with the military. MITRE, CACI, Booz Allen, CSC, GE, Lockheed Martin, etc., like to hire ex-military. Here is a good list:
http://www.businessinsider.com/top-25-us-defense-companies-2012-2?op=1
The AC in general has outlived it's purpose and usefulness. If you're not going to even put your handle on it, I'm not bothering with you.
Yes, I wonder why no one has thought of having a massive, central power source. Oh, because that is stupid.
Dan: What’s the problem?
Mallory: During your broadcast on September 5th, you sang Happy Birthday to your partner, Casey McCall.
Dan: Yeah, but I can explain that. Wait, it was his birthday. Why do I have to explain that?
Mallory: You sang Happy Birthday on the air.
Mallory: Listen, I think it’s sweet that you and your partner sing to each other on television. Others may think that it’s vaguely gay, but I disagree.
Dan: Thank you.
Mallory: Nonetheless, you can’t do it anymore.
Dan: Why not?
Mallory: It’s against the law?
Dan: It’s against the law to be vaguely gay?
Mallory: It’s against the law to sing Happy Birthday on television.
Dan: Why?
Mallory: It's owned by the representatives of Mildred and Patty Hill.
Dan: It took two people to write that song?
The snakes ate them.
FTFA- He's Australian. I don't think the FBI has jurisdiction.
You're no different, just coming from the other side. At least the other guy didn't act like a total prick.
The Supreme Court has already ruled on this issue. They said reporting on something, even if it was obtained illegally, is fine. It was in the Wall Street Journal's Saturday edition, back in the editorial section. The write cited the various applicable cases.
If you're trying to be a "professional" on iOS, you're doing it wrong.
Oh, shush you! If you don't have to search for trivial information on how to use your OS every 30 minutes, you're not using a REAL OS. /sarcasm
Get back to me when all the MS specific software is ported to linux.
Enable Boot Camp. Freaking newbies.
Premium hydrogen and oxygen ain't cheap!
Not networked, networked, not, networked, on and on. Each cycle begets a new cycle. Now it's just called "the cloud."
It goes back to a 1964 Supreme Court case, NY Times vs. Sullivan, with some followup cases. It takes a lot to overturn a bunch of SC case law.
nblender- I'm happy for you and your family.
If you had 5 students, you could test each of them closely to see their skills. 50 students, you can still look into individuals' skills. At 500, you may be able to have some customization. 5000, I doubt it. 50000, no way.
And that's assuming you think it's fair to make personalized tests. If Bob is good at math and Beth is good at English, do you cater or counter-cater to their strengths? Like you said, assessment is hard beyond a single individual.
I think you don't understand how this works. The great students get access to advanced classes. They don't need extra teachers or tutoring, i.e. "extra help." The underachieving students get extra teachers and tutors. At least that's how it is supposed to work, and how it works in my area. I'm not in NY, so I can't gauge the reality of it there.
I wouldn't say the costs are much different, but rather the resources behind the accuser and defendant are vastly different. RIAA vs. Grandma comes to mind, though I think there was MPAA vs. Dead Guy at some point.
There are plenty of other deficiencies, of course, but not having access to a public defense attorney for civil actions is an automatic kick to the groin to the average person vs. a corporation/trade group/etc. Not that I'm advocating civil public defense attorneys.
I've had various level of success. If it was personal, like when my uncle was having no luck getting Social Security disability for his cancer treatment (it was bad enough he couldn't work at all, but he still had a chance of recovery), I got personalized messages back from the offices. I don't know which one pushed it through, but suddenly he got his aid the next month. Now if it's an email about some political issue, yep, form email.
What if I sent 500 valid emails a day? ...
"Where is X button?"
"Where is Y button?"
"How do I send an email?"
"How do I search for fish?"
"How do I search for monkeys?"
"How do I search for [X]?"
Every single question is valid, and I could tie up a person for 10X as long as it took to write that email. What am I going to be charged with, being stupid? As a private citizen with no ties to any competitors, good luck trying to prove intent to damage.