On the bright side, in their full "The Twitter Rules" article, there is a separate bullet for "Violent threats (direct or indirect): You may not make threats of violence or promote violence, including threatening or promoting terrorism." Seems to subsume the "hateful conduct..." bullet, but I'm not a lawyer, merely a reasonably logical person.
On the dark side, they don't define "targeted abuse or harassment". Of course this will be misused to abuse and harass people.
"we got a constitution with a wonderful clause that stops those with wealth using it to block laws they don't like"
Which clause would that be? Section 1, the "this constitution can be overridden if you really mean it", or section 33, the other "this constitution can be overridden if you really mean it", or section15, the other "this constitution can be overridden if it benefits nonwhite nonmen"?
"Canada's path to independence worked out far better... for a considerable time Canada wanted and needed British protection"
"Estimates for how quickly sea levels could rise vary widely, from up to 4 feet by 2100 to almost 30 feet anywhere between the next two centuries and 2,000 years from now."
So in the next 90 years, during which time we'll probably build and retire two generations of nuke plants, we might have a whole four feet of sea level rise.
Please excuse me if I don't take the title seriously.
It is always so precious to hear people state categorically "what terrorists want", when they are not spokespeople of the terrorists. It is always so sad when the words and actions of actual terrorists have made their goals crystal clear, and they turn out to be different from what the precious nonspokespeople opined.
"Personally, I think the US has a problem, and a big one at that."
It has several problems.
"Maybe it makes me a statist, or they have me well trained,"
No, that does not make you a statist. Embracing state control of your life, lying to yourself about whether confiscation is occurring or not, lying to yourself about whether responsibility and regulation are so intimately tied -- that makes you a statist.
"I am not a supporter of free for all gun ownership."
Fine, at least that is an arguable position (though literally "free for all" is a straw man position).
"Whether or not you think those laws are justified or not, what the government didn't do was confiscate the weapons. [...] If you decided to not operate in the framework they bought your gun off you."
I mean really, of course that is confiscation.
"And if you are a responsible owner of a firearm, then responsible laws around them should have no impact on you at all."
That's a True Tautological Scotsman of regulation. If you agree to the "responsible" regulations, you will be free to enjoy living free of further impact of regulations. (Until they're changed again.) And if you disagree with the regulations, you weren't "responsible" in the first place.
"Clang is also portable code, which gcc absolutely is not."... Er, gcc has been portable to cpu architectures and os platforms you probably haven't even heard of, in decades you perhaps weren't even born yet. It's probably one of the most portable pieces of software. (It pays for that in many ways.)
... not in the sense that they are close, only that they're getting less far. Current retail price for TBish HDDs is on the order of $0.06/GB; TFA for SSD is $0.39/GB, about six times as much.
With investment in other asset classes being unproductive, Purdue turns a portion of its foundation money into a bank to loan to its own customers. It's like the car makers' financing arms, just more speculative contracts.
It's the slashdot poster's erroneous paraphrasing that made this "problem" seem worse:
"ABI Research, [...] found that turning the Nest Cam "off" using the associated mobile application only turns off the LED power indicator light on the front of the device"... which exaggerates what the report said. They didn't say the power-off ONLY turned the LED off.
Indeed unbelievable. What you're reading about is not what the man said, it's what hacks think he might have meant by not saying something PC, woo woo!
Not just that... it's weird that the pilot flying didn't monitor carefully enough the rotation angle. Sure, if she rotates early (due to wrong v1/power), there may not be an immediate lift-off -- so dip the nose down and use a bit of the remaining runway. (By this time they're past V1 so are committed to flying instead of stopping.)
Slashdot Mirror
On the bright side, in their full "The Twitter Rules" article, there is a separate bullet for "Violent threats (direct or indirect): You may not make threats of violence or promote violence, including threatening or promoting terrorism." Seems to subsume the "hateful conduct ..." bullet, but I'm not a lawyer, merely a reasonably logical person.
On the dark side, they don't define "targeted abuse or harassment". Of course this will be misused to abuse and harass people.
mod parent up, or a kitten gets it!
"which was, in fact, my entire point"
Right, sure it was.
And now, Canada is a de facto protectorate of the US, with its defense spending making up for our half-NATO-minimum 1%-of-GDP.
So now we're dependent on the country that, according to you, threatened our independence so much that we had to depend on the Queen.
Not much to gloat about really. And neither is the constitution.
"we got a constitution with a wonderful clause that stops those with wealth using it to block laws they don't like"
Which clause would that be? Section 1, the "this constitution can be overridden if you really mean it", or section 33, the other "this constitution can be overridden if you really mean it", or section15, the other "this constitution can be overridden if it benefits nonwhite nonmen"?
"Canada's path to independence worked out far better ... for a considerable time Canada wanted and needed British protection"
That is a very dependent sort of independence.
"Estimates for how quickly sea levels could rise vary widely, from up to 4 feet by 2100 to almost 30 feet anywhere between the next two centuries and 2,000 years from now."
So in the next 90 years, during which time we'll probably build and retire two generations of nuke plants, we might have a whole four feet of sea level rise.
Please excuse me if I don't take the title seriously.
"its quite simple."
That's a wonderful, imaginative story! Would be nice to show though that this particular tactic is a terrorist goal.
It is always so precious to hear people state categorically "what terrorists want", when they are not spokespeople of the terrorists. It is always so sad when the words and actions of actual terrorists have made their goals crystal clear, and they turn out to be different from what the precious nonspokespeople opined.
"Personally, I think the US has a problem, and a big one at that."
It has several problems.
"Maybe it makes me a statist, or they have me well trained,"
No, that does not make you a statist. Embracing state control of your life, lying to yourself about whether confiscation is occurring or not, lying to yourself about whether responsibility and regulation are so intimately tied -- that makes you a statist.
"I am not a supporter of free for all gun ownership."
Fine, at least that is an arguable position (though literally "free for all" is a straw man position).
"Whether or not you think those laws are justified or not, what the government didn't do was confiscate the weapons. [...] If you decided to not operate in the framework they bought your gun off you."
I mean really, of course that is confiscation.
"And if you are a responsible owner of a firearm, then responsible laws around them should have no impact on you at all."
That's a True Tautological Scotsman of regulation. If you agree to the "responsible" regulations, you will be free to enjoy living free of further impact of regulations. (Until they're changed again.) And if you disagree with the regulations, you weren't "responsible" in the first place.
The statists have you trained well.
"It isn't the first step in taking them away from legal owners."
Didn't you say that you had to hand one of your "new restricted category" rifles in? Stockholm Syndrome much?
Mandatory "buy-back". It's entirely different from confiscation. All together. "It's entirely different from confiscation."
"Clang is also portable code, which gcc absolutely is not." ... Er, gcc has been portable to cpu architectures and os platforms you probably haven't even heard of, in decades you perhaps weren't even born yet. It's probably one of the most portable pieces of software. (It pays for that in many ways.)
... not in the sense that they are close, only that they're getting less far. Current retail price for TBish HDDs is on the order of $0.06/GB; TFA for SSD is $0.39/GB, about six times as much.
The same thing happened in this crash, that's the point.
Yes. There are photographs in the official accident report.
http://kemhubri.dephub.go.id/k...
Is that question you are begging before me?
"non-profit" does not mean charity or unbelievably high quality or even moral fibre. It just means a different financial structure.
With investment in other asset classes being unproductive, Purdue turns a portion of its foundation money into a bank to loan to its own customers. It's like the car makers' financing arms, just more speculative contracts.
It's the slashdot poster's erroneous paraphrasing that made this "problem" seem worse:
"ABI Research, [...] found that turning the Nest Cam "off" using the associated mobile application only turns off the LED power indicator light on the front of the device" ... which exaggerates what the report said. They didn't say the power-off ONLY turned the LED off.
"There is video of him saying it dude."
Which "it" exactly?
Indeed unbelievable. What you're reading about is not what the man said, it's what hacks think he might have meant by not saying something PC, woo woo!
Another way ... nationalize the industry and pay them slave wages.
Not just that ... it's weird that the pilot flying didn't monitor carefully enough the rotation angle. Sure, if she rotates early (due to wrong v1/power), there may not be an immediate lift-off -- so dip the nose down and use a bit of the remaining runway. (By this time they're past V1 so are committed to flying instead of stopping.)
Janet!
"Canada [...] don't allow you to carry a concealed revolver around with you"
Some members of the political elite are given carry permits.
"there is no right to shoot muggers or burglars in "self defence""
Of course there is - you can defend your life against muggers (those committing robbery) with any means at your disposal.
"there are serious restrictions on rifles, it's only really hunters who have guns."
Maybe in France. In Canada, there are many target-shooters and collectors too.