Ratifying treaties requires a 2/3 majority vote of the Senate.
Obama broke that rule and kind of established a new precedent. Basically, he signed ACTA and had it ratified without so much as even letting the senate look at it, nevermind voting on it.
Actually the thing with iOS is that it's virtually impossible for anybody but Apple to mass audit apps for malware. There are without a doubt malware apps on Apple's app store, but nobody has found them yet. In fact, in at least a few cases, some malware apps on iOS were only discovered after somebody found it on the Android version and decided to check the iOS version on a hunch.
To be more precise, first we have to collect a lot of data, and then we have to build a mathematical model that describes how it works, and then we *might* be able to manipulate it, depending on what comes of the model.
My first thought would be communication with extremely long range that can easily pass through objects much larger than our sun. Hell, for all we know, this is how aliens do interstellar communication, and we presently lack the ability to intercept it.
My Windows 10 Mobile (it hasn't been WP for a year now) home screen only has the tiles for the things I use. The "all apps" tray hides everything else.
That's actually another annoying thing about windows phone: When you want to find an app that isn't pinned to your start screen, you have to scroll down a big list with large fonts. Android's alphabetical grid icon system makes it much easier to find less often used apps.
The smart tiles save space by making app icons work like widgets. It's far less confusing as well. I can't count the number of times I've had to explain "widgets" to Android users. They aren't a good design. Windows' "smart tiles" are far superior.
You're joking, right? They're in every way inferior. See my post here:
The interface on Android and Apple look like my grandfather's Windows 95 desktop. Tons of unrelated icons on a grid? Really? You think that's really better than the customizable tiles?
I think the Android approach is better than that found in iOS and Windows Phone: A fully interactive widget when you need it, and an icon with space when you don't. Oh and did I mention that Windows Phone's "live" tiles are neither live nor interactive? They can only be updated once every 15 minutes at best, and the only thing you can do with them is tap to open the app, and flip in an interval that you have no control over. Android widgets meanwhile can scroll, show real-time information, and have individual objects that you can manipulate (for example, tapping a particular calendar event opens that event in the calendar app, instead of just opening the app itself.) As another example, I can place the Google Play "what song is this?" widget on my homescreen and tap it when I want to tag a song, and it will show me the song name without the need to open an app.
WP has nothing on that, and is by all measures inferior, including at the API level. For example, want to create a custom VPN tunnel? Android has an API for that. WP does not (this makes it impossible to run OpenVPN on Windows Phone.) Want to open multiple documents at once in your app? Android can do that after you, the end user, explicitly grant it permission to access your user files (you can deny it too if you'd like, you just tap "deny" when it asks) however Windows Phone provides no such option and behaves with all of the same limitations of javascript.
And for some reason, I'm supposed to believe windows phone is better...
This isn't going to be based on the same tech, if it works anything like the Android variant. In other words, your phone doesn't just send your account numbers to anybody who asks, and even when you approve it to do so, it sends a one time code that is useless afterwards.
Phone based NFC payments are by far more secure than any other common payment method, to be honest, particularly if you use fingerprint authentication combined with a pin, because somebody would not only have to capture your print, but shoulder surf you as well. This essentially obsoletes any form of skimming, in addition to defeating the problem of a lost and then stolen card.
Besides that, even if this was somehow less secure, (unlikely) most banks won't make you pay a cent for fraudulent transactions.
They're probably concerned with windows phone's rather high return rate. If they only make them available to people who specifically ask for them, then they can reduce the return rate.
If Microsoft wants to solve that problem, then they should have taken their own UI design advice, which the tile interface completely ignores:
Have you ever done a chargeback? You want user hostile try doing that. First the bank will intimidate you and tell you there's a "service fee" of $25 or $50 or whatever for even TRYING to charge back, THEN they say they will "investigate" and MAYBE the charge will be reversed next week sometime.
I've done chargebacks numerous times, and haven't had this once happen to me. Who is your bank? They obviously suck and I'll make sure I never do business with them.
Anyways this is credit card theft rather than a simple chargeback. In the case of fraudulent transactions, by law the bank can only hold you liable for up to $50 in fraudulent charges. And basically every bank that doesn't suck has a zero liability policy, meaning that anything somebody put on your card without your permission doesn't cost you a cent. I've had this happen a few times as well (typically from some merchant who had their credit card database hacked) and the only negative thing that happened to me was that I had no credit card (which I buy practically everything with) until my new one came in the mail.
I think you misunderstand the motivation of today's newspapers. Basically, news content has such high supply and not enough demand that they're all doing whatever they can to get your attention and have you as a regular reader. There are two schools of thought for doing that:
1. Sensationalist titles (or their extreme, called clickbait) 2. Original content just for the sake of original content
This story is the later. Basically, the author of this piece needed to write about something -- anything -- and so he wrote it. It didn't necessarily have to make sense, or even be news; the only requirement is that it had to be something that nobody else has written about.
The nature of insurance just changes, from covering individual drivers to insuring manufacturers and fleet operators for product liability. The biggest impact will be on the legal profession: a whole army of bottom feeders will disappear, to be replaced with smaller additions to corporate lawyer ranks. A whole genre of late-night TV advertising will be replaced by ads for body mods, escort services and medical tourism services.
Most people with law degrees, and indeed those who have passed their local bar exam, don't ever work as lawyers. The reason for this is a combination of some people getting stars in their eyes about the thought of having what they perceive as such a prestigious profession akin to being a doctor (which has its own set of different problems), student loans that are handed out like candy, and universities that have really big law schools that feed on the uneducated.
By uneducated, I mean this: There's an economic demand for 7,000 new lawyers per year, meanwhile US universities pump out 40,000 new ones every year. Naturally, it's pretty easy to see why most of those who choose to remain in that field are either underemployed or unemployed. This fact is readily available to anybody who does their research about the profession they intend on going into, if only they'd raise their head and look beyond the crowd of their peers.
Try making the argument that income is not revenue when (as an employee) filling out your taxes. Try deducting all your driving expenses, needed to get to work. Deducting your housing, needed to live so you can work. Deducting your childcare, clothing, food and all those other expenses required to go to work. I'm self-employed and I get to write off all kinds of things that I couldn't if I was an employee even though I'd have most of the same expenses.
That's dead simple, actually: The government has specific rules about what is a valid expense from your income and what isn't. In general, deductible expenses are those only directly relating to the job itself. For example, your house isn't required to exist as part of your job function, and neither does your car. Buying tools required to perform your work function does however. The gas you spend in order to travel to a work site gets trickier, but it's actually still easy to draw a distinction: Pretend you lived next to the office that you work at: No car is required. If you choose to live further away from your work, that's your choice, but the increased cost for doing so is not relevant to your job function. But driving from your work place to a remote location to do other work? That is relevant.
Possibly, but I kind of doubt it. I think it's more a result of the complexities of our cells breaking down at some point, and is an inevitable part of cellular reproduction. When you think about it, your cells reproduce quickly and often, and very rarely become cancerous. It's a amazing that things don't go wrong more often.
Eh I dunno, I think it's probably best to just look at a political candidate for what they can do rather than what they say they'll do. For example, he can't abolish either the NSA or the IRS; the former is within the domain of the senate, and the later is within the domain of congress. He can pardon Edward Snowden however, which is basically the only sane thing I've heard out of any of the major candidates for this election year.
If on the one hand we have a giant douche, and on the other we have a turd sandwich, I think a third party candidate could succeed if he's a tic-tac.
You and GP are both wrong. Cancer cells don't try to kill the host. What's happening is that they're doing what cells normally do -- dividing -- but the problem is they divide too quickly and aren't as functional as normal cells. This inadvertantly kills you because whatever organ they're attached to loses its function and even fails.
Take for example, if your heart has a big lump in a major chamber; it's going to have a hard time doing its job.
Every living multicellular organism on this planet gets cancer, including plants. It's never fatal for plants though, because cancer can't metastasize without blood, and they don't have any major organs that can fail.
Nope, insofar as the term applies, I'm upset that you're denying that there is, and has been, a long-standing practice of unity under Christendom.
No, that's not what you're upset about, you're just trying to divert from your idiotic argument. You specifically lamented the fact that my not mentioning their existence was, and I quote, "almost as if the prior divisions were unimportant" (your own words.)
That isn't a discount, nor is it special in any way. You're taxed on revenue, not income. Income is your revenue minus your expenses. If he had a $150,000 expense by the IRS rules, then that doesn't count towards his income, and likewise he's not taxed on it. This is a very simple concept unless you just flat out never learned even basic accounting in high school.
How the fuck did you even pass 9th grade? Umm...nevermind, you probably didn't. Even in shit poor communist countries they understand the difference between income and revenue.
No. Your argument only works if you're a doctrinaire libertarian, and consider governments simply sophisticated thieves. The government charges a certain percentage of income as tax. They then allow deductions to the tax for certain things you have spent money on.
No, he's correct. Either you're borderline retarded or you simply dropped out of high school, because this is really basic accounting and you have a very poor understanding of it.
Namely, you seriously misunderstand what income means. Income is NOT revenue. Income is your net gain minus your operating expenses. For example, if you're a business and you make $1,000,000 in one year and spend $500,000 that year on employee salaries, and $300,000 on operating expenses (such as leasing an office, paying the utility bills, etc) then that's only $200,000 of income. Likewise, you get a deduction on the $800,000 from your business's income taxes. Otherwise you'd be taxed on the whole million, and because of government taxes your business would only be losing money.
The money not taxed from that $800,000 was never at any point the government's money, so when you make a deduction off of it you aren't at any point taking "government funds", it's just money that the government never should have taken from you to begin with.
Why not just have a per-site identity? In other words, tracking cookies become worthless because they can't follow you from site to site. And then within each site, allow multiple identities if desired (think private browsing, only data is retained if you desire it.)
Given that you're supposed to not spend dole benefits on drugs, it at least makes some sense. I mean think about it, wouldn't it piss you off if you were giving them money for food and they just spent it on dope? With how expensive street drugs are, you'd have to wonder how they can afford both food AND drugs.
What this woman suggests is akin to saying that they should drug test me in order to make me eligible to pay taxes, because you know, the money I'm giving to the government may be dirty money. Which by the way, I'm ok with it if that's how they want to do it because my taxes amount to just over $2,000 a month, and I'd start using street drugs if that were the case.
You should go back all the way, enough to get a complete and true picture. That's why I noted that you only named post-Lutheran sects, almost as if the prior divisions were unimportant, let alone their points of theological debate.
Please be aware of context. I specifically mentioned those because they still feature prominently, even if people no longer specifically identify by them. In reality, there are hundreds, perhaps even a thousand who have existed all throughout time, and I'm not about to list all of them. It would be really silly to do so, and you're kind of an idiot for being upset that I didn't.
Slashdot Mirror
No immigrant is actually trying to install it in an EU country. Why would they? They are much better off with our laws.
That doesn't mean they like European laws.
http://www.gatestoneinstitute....
shoot up malls This is the EU, not the US. You can not buy a firearm in the next shop.
http://crimeresearch.org/2015/...
Ratifying treaties requires a 2/3 majority vote of the Senate.
Obama broke that rule and kind of established a new precedent. Basically, he signed ACTA and had it ratified without so much as even letting the senate look at it, nevermind voting on it.
Actually the thing with iOS is that it's virtually impossible for anybody but Apple to mass audit apps for malware. There are without a doubt malware apps on Apple's app store, but nobody has found them yet. In fact, in at least a few cases, some malware apps on iOS were only discovered after somebody found it on the Android version and decided to check the iOS version on a hunch.
To be more precise, first we have to collect a lot of data, and then we have to build a mathematical model that describes how it works, and then we *might* be able to manipulate it, depending on what comes of the model.
My first thought would be communication with extremely long range that can easily pass through objects much larger than our sun. Hell, for all we know, this is how aliens do interstellar communication, and we presently lack the ability to intercept it.
My Windows 10 Mobile (it hasn't been WP for a year now) home screen only has the tiles for the things I use. The "all apps" tray hides everything else.
That's actually another annoying thing about windows phone: When you want to find an app that isn't pinned to your start screen, you have to scroll down a big list with large fonts. Android's alphabetical grid icon system makes it much easier to find less often used apps.
The smart tiles save space by making app icons work like widgets. It's far less confusing as well. I can't count the number of times I've had to explain "widgets" to Android users. They aren't a good design. Windows' "smart tiles" are far superior.
You're joking, right? They're in every way inferior. See my post here:
https://slashdot.org/comments....
The interface on Android and Apple look like my grandfather's Windows 95 desktop. Tons of unrelated icons on a grid? Really? You think that's really better than the customizable tiles?
I think the Android approach is better than that found in iOS and Windows Phone: A fully interactive widget when you need it, and an icon with space when you don't. Oh and did I mention that Windows Phone's "live" tiles are neither live nor interactive? They can only be updated once every 15 minutes at best, and the only thing you can do with them is tap to open the app, and flip in an interval that you have no control over. Android widgets meanwhile can scroll, show real-time information, and have individual objects that you can manipulate (for example, tapping a particular calendar event opens that event in the calendar app, instead of just opening the app itself.) As another example, I can place the Google Play "what song is this?" widget on my homescreen and tap it when I want to tag a song, and it will show me the song name without the need to open an app.
WP has nothing on that, and is by all measures inferior, including at the API level. For example, want to create a custom VPN tunnel? Android has an API for that. WP does not (this makes it impossible to run OpenVPN on Windows Phone.) Want to open multiple documents at once in your app? Android can do that after you, the end user, explicitly grant it permission to access your user files (you can deny it too if you'd like, you just tap "deny" when it asks) however Windows Phone provides no such option and behaves with all of the same limitations of javascript.
And for some reason, I'm supposed to believe windows phone is better...
Only if you like giving all of your search queries and links clicked to Microsoft, in addition to having a crap selection of addons and a fugly UI.
And while chrome has the same spying capabilities of edge, chromium does not.
This isn't going to be based on the same tech, if it works anything like the Android variant. In other words, your phone doesn't just send your account numbers to anybody who asks, and even when you approve it to do so, it sends a one time code that is useless afterwards.
Phone based NFC payments are by far more secure than any other common payment method, to be honest, particularly if you use fingerprint authentication combined with a pin, because somebody would not only have to capture your print, but shoulder surf you as well. This essentially obsoletes any form of skimming, in addition to defeating the problem of a lost and then stolen card.
Besides that, even if this was somehow less secure, (unlikely) most banks won't make you pay a cent for fraudulent transactions.
They're probably concerned with windows phone's rather high return rate. If they only make them available to people who specifically ask for them, then they can reduce the return rate.
If Microsoft wants to solve that problem, then they should have taken their own UI design advice, which the tile interface completely ignores:
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.c...
Have you ever done a chargeback? You want user hostile try doing that. First the bank will intimidate you and tell you there's a "service fee" of $25 or $50 or whatever for even TRYING to charge back, THEN they say they will "investigate" and MAYBE the charge will be reversed next week sometime.
I've done chargebacks numerous times, and haven't had this once happen to me. Who is your bank? They obviously suck and I'll make sure I never do business with them.
Anyways this is credit card theft rather than a simple chargeback. In the case of fraudulent transactions, by law the bank can only hold you liable for up to $50 in fraudulent charges. And basically every bank that doesn't suck has a zero liability policy, meaning that anything somebody put on your card without your permission doesn't cost you a cent. I've had this happen a few times as well (typically from some merchant who had their credit card database hacked) and the only negative thing that happened to me was that I had no credit card (which I buy practically everything with) until my new one came in the mail.
I think you misunderstand the motivation of today's newspapers. Basically, news content has such high supply and not enough demand that they're all doing whatever they can to get your attention and have you as a regular reader. There are two schools of thought for doing that:
1. Sensationalist titles (or their extreme, called clickbait)
2. Original content just for the sake of original content
This story is the later. Basically, the author of this piece needed to write about something -- anything -- and so he wrote it. It didn't necessarily have to make sense, or even be news; the only requirement is that it had to be something that nobody else has written about.
The nature of insurance just changes, from covering individual drivers to insuring manufacturers and fleet operators for product liability. The biggest impact will be on the legal profession: a whole army of bottom feeders will disappear, to be replaced with smaller additions to corporate lawyer ranks. A whole genre of late-night TV advertising will be replaced by ads for body mods, escort services and medical tourism services.
Most people with law degrees, and indeed those who have passed their local bar exam, don't ever work as lawyers. The reason for this is a combination of some people getting stars in their eyes about the thought of having what they perceive as such a prestigious profession akin to being a doctor (which has its own set of different problems), student loans that are handed out like candy, and universities that have really big law schools that feed on the uneducated.
By uneducated, I mean this: There's an economic demand for 7,000 new lawyers per year, meanwhile US universities pump out 40,000 new ones every year. Naturally, it's pretty easy to see why most of those who choose to remain in that field are either underemployed or unemployed. This fact is readily available to anybody who does their research about the profession they intend on going into, if only they'd raise their head and look beyond the crowd of their peers.
Which two credible witnesses would that be?
Honestly I don't care if people drag Bill Gate's name through the mud, but I hate when people spread big lies about shit even more.
Try making the argument that income is not revenue when (as an employee) filling out your taxes. Try deducting all your driving expenses, needed to get to work. Deducting your housing, needed to live so you can work. Deducting your childcare, clothing, food and all those other expenses required to go to work.
I'm self-employed and I get to write off all kinds of things that I couldn't if I was an employee even though I'd have most of the same expenses.
That's dead simple, actually: The government has specific rules about what is a valid expense from your income and what isn't. In general, deductible expenses are those only directly relating to the job itself. For example, your house isn't required to exist as part of your job function, and neither does your car. Buying tools required to perform your work function does however. The gas you spend in order to travel to a work site gets trickier, but it's actually still easy to draw a distinction: Pretend you lived next to the office that you work at: No car is required. If you choose to live further away from your work, that's your choice, but the increased cost for doing so is not relevant to your job function. But driving from your work place to a remote location to do other work? That is relevant.
Possibly, but I kind of doubt it. I think it's more a result of the complexities of our cells breaking down at some point, and is an inevitable part of cellular reproduction. When you think about it, your cells reproduce quickly and often, and very rarely become cancerous. It's a amazing that things don't go wrong more often.
https://science.slashdot.org/s...
Eh I dunno, I think it's probably best to just look at a political candidate for what they can do rather than what they say they'll do. For example, he can't abolish either the NSA or the IRS; the former is within the domain of the senate, and the later is within the domain of congress. He can pardon Edward Snowden however, which is basically the only sane thing I've heard out of any of the major candidates for this election year.
If on the one hand we have a giant douche, and on the other we have a turd sandwich, I think a third party candidate could succeed if he's a tic-tac.
You and GP are both wrong. Cancer cells don't try to kill the host. What's happening is that they're doing what cells normally do -- dividing -- but the problem is they divide too quickly and aren't as functional as normal cells. This inadvertantly kills you because whatever organ they're attached to loses its function and even fails.
Take for example, if your heart has a big lump in a major chamber; it's going to have a hard time doing its job.
Every living multicellular organism on this planet gets cancer, including plants. It's never fatal for plants though, because cancer can't metastasize without blood, and they don't have any major organs that can fail.
It tends to be that the more dangerous cancers are more fully functional. For example, being telomerase positive.
Nope, insofar as the term applies, I'm upset that you're denying that there is, and has been, a long-standing practice of unity under Christendom.
No, that's not what you're upset about, you're just trying to divert from your idiotic argument. You specifically lamented the fact that my not mentioning their existence was, and I quote, "almost as if the prior divisions were unimportant" (your own words.)
That isn't a discount, nor is it special in any way. You're taxed on revenue, not income. Income is your revenue minus your expenses. If he had a $150,000 expense by the IRS rules, then that doesn't count towards his income, and likewise he's not taxed on it. This is a very simple concept unless you just flat out never learned even basic accounting in high school.
How the fuck did you even pass 9th grade? Umm...nevermind, you probably didn't. Even in shit poor communist countries they understand the difference between income and revenue.
No. Your argument only works if you're a doctrinaire libertarian, and consider governments simply sophisticated thieves. The government charges a certain percentage of income as tax. They then allow deductions to the tax for certain things you have spent money on.
No, he's correct. Either you're borderline retarded or you simply dropped out of high school, because this is really basic accounting and you have a very poor understanding of it.
Namely, you seriously misunderstand what income means. Income is NOT revenue. Income is your net gain minus your operating expenses. For example, if you're a business and you make $1,000,000 in one year and spend $500,000 that year on employee salaries, and $300,000 on operating expenses (such as leasing an office, paying the utility bills, etc) then that's only $200,000 of income. Likewise, you get a deduction on the $800,000 from your business's income taxes. Otherwise you'd be taxed on the whole million, and because of government taxes your business would only be losing money.
The money not taxed from that $800,000 was never at any point the government's money, so when you make a deduction off of it you aren't at any point taking "government funds", it's just money that the government never should have taken from you to begin with.
Why not just have a per-site identity? In other words, tracking cookies become worthless because they can't follow you from site to site. And then within each site, allow multiple identities if desired (think private browsing, only data is retained if you desire it.)
Given that you're supposed to not spend dole benefits on drugs, it at least makes some sense. I mean think about it, wouldn't it piss you off if you were giving them money for food and they just spent it on dope? With how expensive street drugs are, you'd have to wonder how they can afford both food AND drugs.
What this woman suggests is akin to saying that they should drug test me in order to make me eligible to pay taxes, because you know, the money I'm giving to the government may be dirty money. Which by the way, I'm ok with it if that's how they want to do it because my taxes amount to just over $2,000 a month, and I'd start using street drugs if that were the case.
You should go back all the way, enough to get a complete and true picture. That's why I noted that you only named post-Lutheran sects, almost as if the prior divisions were unimportant, let alone their points of theological debate.
Please be aware of context. I specifically mentioned those because they still feature prominently, even if people no longer specifically identify by them. In reality, there are hundreds, perhaps even a thousand who have existed all throughout time, and I'm not about to list all of them. It would be really silly to do so, and you're kind of an idiot for being upset that I didn't.