Your reading comprehension fail is interesting. I didn't say I don't care about people - I just don't give a sh*t if someone else is wasting their time instead of paying attention, whether it's by scribbling too-copious notes or playing farmville. At least since I was paying attention, I'll be able to help them when they don't understand what their notes really mean. How else are they going to learn how to learn?
I don't really give a sh*t if someone else misses it. That's their fault for spending all their time scribbling instead of learning. As long as I retain it, what do I care about aiding and abetting someone else's continued incompetence.
It's not just idealism - here it's the law. If both spouses work, there is no alimony. Both parents are supposed to contribute financially to their children, and the amount is fixed by law, and varies according to the time each parent has physical custody. If it's divided 50-50, no child support is paid - each parent is required to contribute 50% of the costs of education, clothing, day care, etc.
Both spouses keep whatever they owned before the marriage. Assets and debts acquired after the marriage are the only ones divided between them. If one spouse is not self-supporting, they are given a limited time to get a job. Staying at home with the kids is no longer an excuse because of universal cheap day-care. With costs as low as $7.55 a day (less than $4.00 for each parent), babysitting your kids is no longer considered a reason not to work.
Nope, not in no-fault divorces. The judge splits the assets and debts that were obtained while the couple were together, each one keeping whatever they originally brought to the relationship. If one party is incapable of supporting themselves, they are allotted a fixed time to get a job, after which there is no alimony payable or due. If they are already capable of supporting themselves, they don't get alimony. Child support is expected to be contributed by both parents according to a fixed chart of rates.
That's how it works here,and it solves a LOT of problems. Lawyers hate it because people don't waste $500 of lawyer's time arguing about who gets a half-empty bottle of dish soap, or who owes who what. The amounts are fixed by statute. You might do well to ask for a true no-fault regime in your area.
In no-fault divorce, the division of property is done by the judge using guidelines set by law, not by who is the worst stinker. Alimony is awarded based on how long the other partner should need to earn their own way in the world, not on how rotten a bastard you are.
If there's something I don't understand, I'll realize I don't understand it instead of being busy making notes. I'll ask the questions nobody else is asking because they're too busy scribbling notes to actually engage in the learning process.
Except that you didn't buy those bits, you swiped them from me. I may or may not have another copy of those bits, depending on what you did when you stole them.
If you read the article I linked to, you would know that published authors, not just self-published ones, have seen a huge decline in income, to the point that they would be better off working minimum wage for someone else.
Most non-electric cars really suck at floating. It's not like they built them like the VW Beetle way back when. And water ingestion will kill the engine.
[The authors group said that the court] failed to comprehend the very real potential harm to authors resulting from its decision
If I run a shoe store and somebody opens a competing shoe store next to me, that will reduce my profits and possibly even put me out of business, but that person hasn't "harmed" me. If I sell copies of data and somebody else starts offering competing copies of data, that may well reduce my profits or put me out of business, but they haven't "harmed" me. They are just competing. (Of course, under the legal system, what they are doing may be considered "harm," and it may be illegal.)
Bad analogy to start with. It's more like if you are running a shoe-store and your next-door competitor steals 30% of your stock.
Self-publishing also comes under fire, he said – but this is "even less of a way of earning money from your writing if you're any good than conventional publishing".
The average professional published author would be better off working at a McJob. The decline in income over the last 12 years should be an eye-opener.
The low time of research nowadays has lowered the barrier of entry so that anyone can write sh*t. Also, Independent (re)discovery is a good thing - it means that several sets of brains have come to the same conclusion.
Why does anyone need a round mouse?
Why does anyone need a 3D TV?
Why does anyone need a Sega Dreamcast?
Why does anyone need a Segway?
Why does anyone need a BetaMax?
Why does anyone need Vista?
Why does anyone need Wndows 10?
Why does anyone need cold fusion?
Why does anyone need Microsoft Bob?
Why does anyone need a Zune?
Why does anyone need Lenovo's Silverfish adware?
Why does anyone need Carly Fiorina?
Why does anyone need Ted Cruz?
Why does anyone need a Blackberry Playbook?
Why does anyone need DAT tapes?
Who needs an Apple Newton?
Who needs an IBM PCjr?
Who needs an internet refrigerator?
Who needs the Sony MiniDisc?
Nope. David Cameron's father was never a politician, and made his Panama investments before his son went into politics. Just one example. Jackie Chan - how is he a politician? I'm sure you can find other examples.
In my experience, spiders still squish when crushed with a flat hand. They only crunch under a shoe, probably because the sole is less resilient. Still, I can see that a really big one would crunch. But having a choice between it crawling around on me or crunching it, I'm going with the big crush.
You know what's really funny? With all the bulloxing going on, anyone can claim that they're transgender. The term no longer has meaning, it has become so diluted.
Someone who meets some of the criteria for gender dysphoria is not necessarily a transsexual, just transgendered, which is not the same thing.
Prince’s idea of a "true transvestite" was clearly distinguished from both the homosexual and the transsexual, claiming that true transvestites are "exclusively heterosexual... The transvestite values his male organs, enjoys using them and does not desire them removed.
A cross-dresser is transgendered, not transsexual. Their identity is firmly rooted in them being male, even while presenting themselves as female. Even today, crossdressers are considered part of the transgendered, but not transsexuals, and they would not be classified as transsexuals.
Slashdot Mirror
They had a follow-up article about France, where the situation is worse.
Your reading comprehension fail is interesting. I didn't say I don't care about people - I just don't give a sh*t if someone else is wasting their time instead of paying attention, whether it's by scribbling too-copious notes or playing farmville. At least since I was paying attention, I'll be able to help them when they don't understand what their notes really mean. How else are they going to learn how to learn?
That's one way to get a strategic moon base :-)
I don't really give a sh*t if someone else misses it. That's their fault for spending all their time scribbling instead of learning. As long as I retain it, what do I care about aiding and abetting someone else's continued incompetence.
Tell that to Trump. He says there are 11 million of them among us :-)
The existence of aliens would drive demands for a HUGE boost to NASA's budget. So much for conspiracies.
But let's pretend it's a UFO - "Build a dome and make them pay for it!"
It's not just idealism - here it's the law. If both spouses work, there is no alimony. Both parents are supposed to contribute financially to their children, and the amount is fixed by law, and varies according to the time each parent has physical custody. If it's divided 50-50, no child support is paid - each parent is required to contribute 50% of the costs of education, clothing, day care, etc.
Both spouses keep whatever they owned before the marriage. Assets and debts acquired after the marriage are the only ones divided between them. If one spouse is not self-supporting, they are given a limited time to get a job. Staying at home with the kids is no longer an excuse because of universal cheap day-care. With costs as low as $7.55 a day (less than $4.00 for each parent), babysitting your kids is no longer considered a reason not to work.
That's how it works here,and it solves a LOT of problems. Lawyers hate it because people don't waste $500 of lawyer's time arguing about who gets a half-empty bottle of dish soap, or who owes who what. The amounts are fixed by statute. You might do well to ask for a true no-fault regime in your area.
Same reason they carry a 10-year-old condom in their wallet. "You never know ..."
This is slashdot. It's more likely there's a power cord running to his mistress.
In no-fault divorce, the division of property is done by the judge using guidelines set by law, not by who is the worst stinker. Alimony is awarded based on how long the other partner should need to earn their own way in the world, not on how rotten a bastard you are.
Manual typewriters FTW. Lets you really build up the muscles so you don't get RSI and can do push-ups on your fingertips.
If there's something I don't understand, I'll realize I don't understand it instead of being busy making notes. I'll ask the questions nobody else is asking because they're too busy scribbling notes to actually engage in the learning process.
Except that you didn't buy those bits, you swiped them from me. I may or may not have another copy of those bits, depending on what you did when you stole them.
If you read the article I linked to, you would know that published authors, not just self-published ones, have seen a huge decline in income, to the point that they would be better off working minimum wage for someone else.
Most non-electric cars really suck at floating. It's not like they built them like the VW Beetle way back when. And water ingestion will kill the engine.
[The authors group said that the court] failed to comprehend the very real potential harm to authors resulting from its decision
If I run a shoe store and somebody opens a competing shoe store next to me, that will reduce my profits and possibly even put me out of business, but that person hasn't "harmed" me. If I sell copies of data and somebody else starts offering competing copies of data, that may well reduce my profits or put me out of business, but they haven't "harmed" me. They are just competing. (Of course, under the legal system, what they are doing may be considered "harm," and it may be illegal.)
Bad analogy to start with. It's more like if you are running a shoe-store and your next-door competitor steals 30% of your stock.
Too bad it doesn't work that way in reality
Self-publishing also comes under fire, he said – but this is "even less of a way of earning money from your writing if you're any good than conventional publishing".
The average professional published author would be better off working at a McJob. The decline in income over the last 12 years should be an eye-opener.
The low time of research nowadays has lowered the barrier of entry so that anyone can write sh*t. Also, Independent (re)discovery is a good thing - it means that several sets of brains have come to the same conclusion.
Looks like the only way to get the little guy their fair shake is to embrace the tactics of the big guys - paywalls not for money, but for access.
Why does anyone need a 3D TV?
Why does anyone need a Sega Dreamcast?
Why does anyone need a Segway?
Why does anyone need a BetaMax?
Why does anyone need Vista?
Why does anyone need Wndows 10?
Why does anyone need cold fusion?
Why does anyone need Microsoft Bob?
Why does anyone need a Zune?
Why does anyone need Lenovo's Silverfish adware?
Why does anyone need Carly Fiorina?
Why does anyone need Ted Cruz?
Why does anyone need a Blackberry Playbook?
Why does anyone need DAT tapes?
Who needs an Apple Newton?
Who needs an IBM PCjr?
Who needs an internet refrigerator?
Who needs the Sony MiniDisc?
This stupid brain controller wil join this list.
Nope. David Cameron's father was never a politician, and made his Panama investments before his son went into politics. Just one example. Jackie Chan - how is he a politician? I'm sure you can find other examples.
In my experience, spiders still squish when crushed with a flat hand. They only crunch under a shoe, probably because the sole is less resilient. Still, I can see that a really big one would crunch. But having a choice between it crawling around on me or crunching it, I'm going with the big crush.
You know what's really funny? With all the bulloxing going on, anyone can claim that they're transgender. The term no longer has meaning, it has become so diluted.
Someone who meets some of the criteria for gender dysphoria is not necessarily a transsexual, just transgendered, which is not the same thing.
Just look at Virginia Prince (Arnold Lowman), who first applied the term transgendered to non-transsexuals.
Prince’s idea of a "true transvestite" was clearly distinguished from both the homosexual and the transsexual, claiming that true transvestites are "exclusively heterosexual... The transvestite values his male organs, enjoys using them and does not desire them removed.
A cross-dresser is transgendered, not transsexual. Their identity is firmly rooted in them being male, even while presenting themselves as female. Even today, crossdressers are considered part of the transgendered, but not transsexuals, and they would not be classified as transsexuals.