Well I don't have any formal training so I'll defer to your claimed expertise. Though that does not sound correct. The executive branch has quite a bit of discretion when executing laws. They also have to interpret the laws that are not entirely clear. If the FTB has fewer options, I imagine it is because tax law is so complicated and yet very clear on certain points.
In this specific case though the judge only invalidated the additional "in state" requirements. The rest of the law stands so the FTB's actions seem to me to just be them enforcing the rest of the law.
The FTB, unlike the court, has no discretion in crafting a remedy, and cannot (unlike the legislature) reform the statute retrospectively to avoid undesirable impacts.
Incorrect. Go back and read the article again.
Gina Rodriquez, of the California Taxpayers Association, says the board had several options open to it under previous case law.
Option 1 being from 2012 on, the exemption/deferment is no longer allowed. 2008-2011 tax filings are left as is.
Option 2 being what they're doing: retroactively collecting taxes, interest, and penalties.
Both options have been used before in similar cases. Option 1 was used in Hunt-Wesson v. Franchise Tax Board (2000). Option 2 was used in Farmer Bros. v. Franchise Tax Board (2003)
I'm increasingly seeing that Slashdot is just as horrible with the sensationalist headlines as the mainstream media. Anything to get more ad impressions.
He was not "expelled for finding sloppy coding". No matter how much you dislike schools, Quebec, Canada, authority figures, software, computers, accurate headlines, or terms of use, he still was not "expelled for finding sloppy coding."
What is so hard about swapping the text and adding a comma? Try it:
Student Finds Sloppy Coding, Expelled From Montreal College
Now it implies a correlation (which there definitely appears to be) instead of libelously explicitly stating causation.
What's your obsession with anger management classes? A bit of transference, I presume?
Just continuing with the same analogy. Didn't want to confuse you again.
Look, dude, you invited the responses you received when you made the half-assed, idiotic comment about ballots and elections, in a discussion that had nothing to do with the aforementioned topic.
Sorry I assumed you had the ability to think about what I was saying before you respond. I also assumed you were not the anger prone type to assume the worst and attack somebody that comments on your "Im sick and tired but not doing anything about it" whining. I'm also sorry you think ballots and elections have nothing to do with government and police.
If you're going to respond to people with snarky nonsense,
Work on your sense of humor. Try watching some stand-up. Maybe fukung or xkcd. There is a variety out there to choose from. But mostly try laughing at yourself. You whined, you got called on it, it hit too close to home so you jumped on me. Your problem there, not mine. Next time, instead of escalating to attacks on imagined "moronic and counter-productive" beliefs, you should reply with something humorous.
For the record, nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to say something stupid and nonsensical
There you go with the anger again. Nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to be an ass, insulting and cursing like a brat. Nothing stupid or nonsensical about my comment. Why do you deny the connection between griping about government and running for office? Most people that want to change government behavior vote or run for office.
nor did anyone force you to continue to defend your stupid and nonsensical comment
I didn't defend my statement, I just called you a prick, because you were being a prick. In fact you bitched about me not expanding on my statement, you don't remember?
via continually escalating stupidity and childishness.
Childish, yes. Stupid... well Kettle, I'm going to have to disagree there. I think my responses have been far more clever than your frothing-mouth curse-laden rants.
You chose to engage in this conversation of your own volition, and are just as guilty as you claim I am for fostering immaturity, so don't even try to pull that victimized, reversal-of-position bullshit on me.
eh? There you go again trying to put your limited thought processes on me. I did not claim innocence of immaturity. I absolutely responded in kind. One of my many faults. What I was doing was sarcastically trolling your laughably hypocritical mentioning of a "mature discussion" between insults and swearing as I currently believe you are an angry prick.
FYI, you're no more innocent for your part in this admittedly moronic debate than I am; it takes two to tango, after all.
Well I'm glad I taught you something. Assuming you now know that mature discussions require 2 as well?
Actually the Space Shuttle Challenger was a design choice to save on the cost of shipping the tanks to Florida.
Ya. So they chose "just get it done"
The alternate one piece design didn't fit through one specific tunnel along the railroad from the plant to Florida, and would have required overland transit.
Instead of the tougher, costlier, or more time consuming "get it done right."
So, instead of expounding on your previous, exceedingly vague statement, thus giving clarity and allowing for a mature discussion,
Interesting. And what part of "WTF are you on about?" is inviting a "mature discussion"? Cursing? Putting words in my mouth and then calling my attitude "moronic and counter-productive"? Is that what you call a mature discussion in your school? Cause that is not how we adults do things in the workplace, courts, or government. You'll probably find that kind of b.s. is not recommended in anger management classes either.
And you have the nerve to say I''m a prick.
Absolutely kid. Act like a prick, get called a prick. Next time, if you want a mature discussion, try using your big boy words. Act mature. That means asking for clarification when something flies over your head instead of flying off the handle and insulting people or what you assume is their belief.
In the real world, sometimes you have to make the choice of doing things right, or actually getting them done.
Where did I hear that before... Oh yes, Deepwater Horizon. No, no... CIA interrogation methods. No wait, space shuttle Challenger! Or was it the OJ Simpson investigators? Tim Geithner's taxes? California's energy deregulation?
I don't recall seeing your name on the ballot. Perhaps you'll be more sick and tired next election.:(
WTF are you on about? What ballot? You mean the presidential election ballot, that only millionaires get on to, and only millionaires in one of the 'boys clubs' ever wins? That ballot?
So, in other words, what you're saying here is that unless a person is a bona fide candidate for U.S. President, they have no right to bitch about the fucked-up practices of the police?
What a moronic, counter productive attitude to have.
No prick, I was not saying that at all. Get your cock out of your cunt and take some anger management classes.
I, for one, am sick and tired of seeing corrupt cops literally getting away with murder (and every crime between). Time to bring the Blue Wall of Silence crashing down.
I don't recall seeing your name on the ballot. Perhaps you'll be more sick and tired next election.:(
p>Citizens like you or me who are unhappy about our infringed civil liberties are not the dangers to the cops, the abovementioned groups are. Are you suggesting that they're only dangerous and violent towards the police because they are righteously indignant?
The circle is a bit wider than that. The community distrusts the police resulting in fewer calls to deal with criminals resulting in more criminals resulting in a more dangerous area bringing more police presence which increases the likelihood of a violent confrontation between cops & criminals resulting in more agitated police resulting in incidents like Oscar Grant which causes the community as a whole to become righteously indignant and... there you go.
The number of violent, dangerous, angry, sadistic cops on the force is nothing but an embarrassment for the state. Police brutality and perjury is not just routine it is expected by almost everyone.
People become cops because they enjoy your suffering.
Those that become cops for other reasons often become psychopaths (Is that possible? Perhaps they simply demonstrate psychopathic behavior) as demonstrated in the much referenced Stanford Prison Experiment.
Im not aware of a political soapbox being a good source of Christian teaching, perhaps that explains a lot of the misconceptions floating around.
If they didn't get elected for espousing such views I might agree with you. But the fact that they are elected says many agree with their statements, and that is one why I disagree with yours. There are better examples though.
Humans like to justify naughty actions to feel better about them. For instance, people speed while driving and justify it to themselves with thoughts like "I'm a good driver normally, I'm just in a hurry *this* time so its ok." Religion provides, and is often used, to justify thoughts and actions people would not accept as "ok" if done by others, or even by themselves in different situations.
Take, for example, the Boy Scouts of America. They quite obviously have a problem with gays. Why? Their bible says so. Is there any logical or scientific evidence to justify their prejudice? No. They just believe that gays ruin the organization, kids, the country, etc. All due to their religion. But see, its ok that they hate gays because, again, the bible says gays are bad. Hence, justification for their prejudice is their religion. Likewise, no matter how wrong it feels to hate gays, no matter how logical the person is, no matter if they have the ability to recognize homophobia to be in the exact same moral boat as racism, they ignore that logic and instead say to themselves "God hates gays, so its ok for me to hate them too."
The only responsibility most religious nuts (especially Christian nuts it seems) direct inward is the responsibility to get rid of evil external influences like "the gays".
Oh, and please show me significant medical successes involving fetal stem cells.
The truth is, almost ALL the successes have been with adult or auxilliary stem cells.
Fetal stem cells have only "been around" for 10-15 years. Adult cells have been worked on since the late 60s. Additionally as your quote says, fetal cells have been "cock-blocked" by the religious nuts claiming piles of cells are babies. Expecting comparable results with only 1/5 the time, 1/10 the support, and 1/50 of the funding is just insane.
They are largley a way to shift personal responsibility to the Big Sky Man.
Spoken in true ignorance.
Aside from the plethora of religions with NO deity, Christianity (one of the biggest religions) see the problem as being oneself-- that is, the responsibility is being shifted nowhere but inward.
Neat. I'll remember that next time I hear a family values GOP candidate tell me my liberal views are destroying America.
The cop who signed off on this ticket is obviously not doing his job. This should at least be fraud, if not something more serious. Of course, there's no chance of the thug with a badge getting any sort of charges laid against him. There is no justice in the US.
Not fraud. Perjury. The cop is basically swearing that he witnessed the accused committing the act of speeding, and it is quite obvious that he did not. He lied to the court, in a round about way.
The article didn't actually state that the officer's signature constituted swearing under penalty of perjury. Every document I've ever seen that is such, also requires you print your name to remove the problem in this case "Duur, we don't know who's signature that is".
The thing about it is that my understanding is that for most "loud" commercials, they are not technically louder than the TV show. It is just that the entire commercial is as loud as the the loudest part of the TV show while the loud point in the TV show is only for a moment or two before the volume returns to much lower normal volumes. I am sure there are exceptions, but I remember seeing a study which made this claim back right around the time this law was passed.
Seems about right. They measure internet speeds the same way. My connection is advertised at 25 mpbs because from 2:01:34 A.M. to 2:01:38 A.M. I actually get 25 mbps.
Umm...Apple already charges developers for merely listing their apps - $99 a year. That's HUGE and more than covers all the stuff you talked about - hosting, bandwidth etc.
They don't need to do this. They're just being greedy dicks.
So what are Apple's hosting and bandwidth costs? Where did you get that information? What are their other operating costs, such as app screeners, support staff, sales, marketing, testers, etc? What % of those costs are covered by other charges, what % of those costs are covered by the $99/year fee, how much of the $99/year fee is profit?
Do you have that information? Or is what you're saying pure emotional conjecture?
Any kind of entrance barrier (Whether it is Google's $25 one-time fee, or Apple's $99/year fee), whether it be for pure profit or to cover costs, comes with an effect on who signs up and how many sign up. Most of the time a barrier means fewer participants. With something like an app store, no doubt the thinking is it weeds out the trash, which is what I'm guessing is Apple's motive.
You're comparing a large, established, successful app store with hundreds of thousands of apps to a fledgling MS store with 20,000 apps. Apples to Oranges. Come back when the stores are comparable. Nothing yet indicates MS' model is even successful, much less better than Apple's. Companies that get a late start often try to attract business by offering their services at a loss or under some other unsustainable system with a plan to alter said system in the future.
For example, this wouldn't happen on Windows Store.
The correct quote would be "hasn't happened yet". Windows store is just starting. Give it time and their shenanigans will too.
Sorry, but Apple apologists like you need to come up with a better defense of Apple than trying to muddy up things by saying "everyone else is doing it". They're simply not.
Effectively he was just saying "you don't know what you're talking about" concerning app store business models. Your post does nothing to refute that.
Most companies require a second signature on checks with a high enough dollar amount, so why not a similar system for servers?
Simply list secured directories/files and secured output devices (printers, usb, etc). If you try to move/copy/edit anything from a secured directory or to a secured device, your command gets put in a queue and waits for a second user to ok it.
Is there anything like this available already?
Slashdot Mirror
But you go right ahead and keep calling people shills who haven't had the same experience as you....
..A conservatives definition of Truth is VERY different from a liberal's definition of truth".. like day and night...
cute combination.
"computer intrusion" certainly sounds like a sex crime, from a computer's point of view...
You're thinking of "penetration testing".
In some states, penetrating back doors is illegal even when it is consensual.
In this specific case though the judge only invalidated the additional "in state" requirements. The rest of the law stands so the FTB's actions seem to me to just be them enforcing the rest of the law.
The FTB, unlike the court, has no discretion in crafting a remedy, and cannot (unlike the legislature) reform the statute retrospectively to avoid undesirable impacts.
Incorrect. Go back and read the article again.
Gina Rodriquez, of the California Taxpayers Association, says the board had several options open to it under previous case law.
Option 1 being from 2012 on, the exemption/deferment is no longer allowed. 2008-2011 tax filings are left as is.
Option 2 being what they're doing: retroactively collecting taxes, interest, and penalties.
Both options have been used before in similar cases. Option 1 was used in Hunt-Wesson v. Franchise Tax Board (2000). Option 2 was used in Farmer Bros. v. Franchise Tax Board (2003)
He was not "expelled for finding sloppy coding". No matter how much you dislike schools, Quebec, Canada, authority figures, software, computers, accurate headlines, or terms of use, he still was not "expelled for finding sloppy coding."
What is so hard about swapping the text and adding a comma?
Try it:
Student Finds Sloppy Coding, Expelled From Montreal College
Now it implies a correlation (which there definitely appears to be) instead of libelously explicitly stating causation.
What's your obsession with anger management classes? A bit of transference, I presume?
Just continuing with the same analogy. Didn't want to confuse you again.
Look, dude, you invited the responses you received when you made the half-assed, idiotic comment about ballots and elections, in a discussion that had nothing to do with the aforementioned topic.
Sorry I assumed you had the ability to think about what I was saying before you respond. I also assumed you were not the anger prone type to assume the worst and attack somebody that comments on your "Im sick and tired but not doing anything about it" whining. I'm also sorry you think ballots and elections have nothing to do with government and police.
If you're going to respond to people with snarky nonsense,
Work on your sense of humor. Try watching some stand-up. Maybe fukung or xkcd. There is a variety out there to choose from. But mostly try laughing at yourself. You whined, you got called on it, it hit too close to home so you jumped on me. Your problem there, not mine. Next time, instead of escalating to attacks on imagined "moronic and counter-productive" beliefs, you should reply with something humorous.
For the record, nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to say something stupid and nonsensical
There you go with the anger again. Nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to be an ass, insulting and cursing like a brat. Nothing stupid or nonsensical about my comment. Why do you deny the connection between griping about government and running for office? Most people that want to change government behavior vote or run for office.
nor did anyone force you to continue to defend your stupid and nonsensical comment
I didn't defend my statement, I just called you a prick, because you were being a prick. In fact you bitched about me not expanding on my statement, you don't remember?
via continually escalating stupidity and childishness.
Childish, yes. Stupid... well Kettle, I'm going to have to disagree there. I think my responses have been far more clever than your frothing-mouth curse-laden rants.
You chose to engage in this conversation of your own volition, and are just as guilty as you claim I am for fostering immaturity, so don't even try to pull that victimized, reversal-of-position bullshit on me.
eh? There you go again trying to put your limited thought processes on me. I did not claim innocence of immaturity. I absolutely responded in kind. One of my many faults. What I was doing was sarcastically trolling your laughably hypocritical mentioning of a "mature discussion" between insults and swearing as I currently believe you are an angry prick.
FYI, you're no more innocent for your part in this admittedly moronic debate than I am; it takes two to tango, after all.
Well I'm glad I taught you something. Assuming you now know that mature discussions require 2 as well?
Actually the Space Shuttle Challenger was a design choice to save on the cost of shipping the tanks to Florida.
Ya. So they chose "just get it done"
The alternate one piece design didn't fit through one specific tunnel along the railroad from the plant to Florida, and would have required overland transit.
Instead of the tougher, costlier, or more time consuming "get it done right."
And then dealt with the consequences.
So, instead of expounding on your previous, exceedingly vague statement, thus giving clarity and allowing for a mature discussion,
Interesting. And what part of "WTF are you on about?" is inviting a "mature discussion"? Cursing? Putting words in my mouth and then calling my attitude "moronic and counter-productive"? Is that what you call a mature discussion in your school? Cause that is not how we adults do things in the workplace, courts, or government. You'll probably find that kind of b.s. is not recommended in anger management classes either.
And you have the nerve to say I''m a prick.
Absolutely kid. Act like a prick, get called a prick. Next time, if you want a mature discussion, try using your big boy words. Act mature. That means asking for clarification when something flies over your head instead of flying off the handle and insulting people or what you assume is their belief.
In the real world, sometimes you have to make the choice of doing things right, or actually getting them done.
Where did I hear that before... Oh yes, Deepwater Horizon. No, no... CIA interrogation methods. No wait, space shuttle Challenger! Or was it the OJ Simpson investigators? Tim Geithner's taxes? California's energy deregulation?
Not knocking the idea... just laughing.
I don't recall seeing your name on the ballot. Perhaps you'll be more sick and tired next election. :(
WTF are you on about? What ballot? You mean the presidential election ballot, that only millionaires get on to, and only millionaires in one of the 'boys clubs' ever wins? That ballot? So, in other words, what you're saying here is that unless a person is a bona fide candidate for U.S. President, they have no right to bitch about the fucked-up practices of the police? What a moronic, counter productive attitude to have.
No prick, I was not saying that at all. Get your cock out of your cunt and take some anger management classes.
I, for one, am sick and tired of seeing corrupt cops literally getting away with murder (and every crime between). Time to bring the Blue Wall of Silence crashing down.
I don't recall seeing your name on the ballot. Perhaps you'll be more sick and tired next election. :(
p>Citizens like you or me who are unhappy about our infringed civil liberties are not the dangers to the cops, the abovementioned groups are. Are you suggesting that they're only dangerous and violent towards the police because they are righteously indignant?
The circle is a bit wider than that. The community distrusts the police resulting in fewer calls to deal with criminals resulting in more criminals resulting in a more dangerous area bringing more police presence which increases the likelihood of a violent confrontation between cops & criminals resulting in more agitated police resulting in incidents like Oscar Grant which causes the community as a whole to become righteously indignant and ... there you go.
The number of violent, dangerous, angry, sadistic cops on the force is nothing but an embarrassment for the state. Police brutality and perjury is not just routine it is expected by almost everyone.
They're not angry. They're simply psychopaths.
People become cops because they enjoy your suffering.
Those that become cops for other reasons often become psychopaths (Is that possible? Perhaps they simply demonstrate psychopathic behavior) as demonstrated in the much referenced Stanford Prison Experiment.
Im not aware of a political soapbox being a good source of Christian teaching, perhaps that explains a lot of the misconceptions floating around.
If they didn't get elected for espousing such views I might agree with you. But the fact that they are elected says many agree with their statements, and that is one why I disagree with yours. There are better examples though.
Humans like to justify naughty actions to feel better about them. For instance, people speed while driving and justify it to themselves with thoughts like "I'm a good driver normally, I'm just in a hurry *this* time so its ok." Religion provides, and is often used, to justify thoughts and actions people would not accept as "ok" if done by others, or even by themselves in different situations.
Take, for example, the Boy Scouts of America. They quite obviously have a problem with gays. Why? Their bible says so. Is there any logical or scientific evidence to justify their prejudice? No. They just believe that gays ruin the organization, kids, the country, etc. All due to their religion. But see, its ok that they hate gays because, again, the bible says gays are bad. Hence, justification for their prejudice is their religion. Likewise, no matter how wrong it feels to hate gays, no matter how logical the person is, no matter if they have the ability to recognize homophobia to be in the exact same moral boat as racism, they ignore that logic and instead say to themselves "God hates gays, so its ok for me to hate them too."
The only responsibility most religious nuts (especially Christian nuts it seems) direct inward is the responsibility to get rid of evil external influences like "the gays".
Mod +1: Case closed.
Expecting comparable results with only 1/5 the time, 1/10 the support, and 1/50 of the funding is just insane.
But then as a programmer... I'm fairly used to those expectations. I shouldn't be surprised they infect other industries as well.
Oh, and please show me significant medical successes involving fetal stem cells.
The truth is, almost ALL the successes have been with adult or auxilliary stem cells.
Fetal stem cells have only "been around" for 10-15 years. Adult cells have been worked on since the late 60s. Additionally as your quote says, fetal cells have been "cock-blocked" by the religious nuts claiming piles of cells are babies. Expecting comparable results with only 1/5 the time, 1/10 the support, and 1/50 of the funding is just insane.
They are largley a way to shift personal responsibility to the Big Sky Man.
Spoken in true ignorance.
Aside from the plethora of religions with NO deity, Christianity (one of the biggest religions) see the problem as being oneself-- that is, the responsibility is being shifted nowhere but inward.
Neat. I'll remember that next time I hear a family values GOP candidate tell me my liberal views are destroying America.
Seems to work in other situations.
First post modded redundant? nice.
lol THAT was now modded redundant? cute. :)
Seems to work in other situations.
First post modded redundant? nice.
The cop who signed off on this ticket is obviously not doing his job. This should at least be fraud, if not something more serious. Of course, there's no chance of the thug with a badge getting any sort of charges laid against him. There is no justice in the US.
Not fraud. Perjury. The cop is basically swearing that he witnessed the accused committing the act of speeding, and it is quite obvious that he did not. He lied to the court, in a round about way.
The article didn't actually state that the officer's signature constituted swearing under penalty of perjury. Every document I've ever seen that is such, also requires you print your name to remove the problem in this case "Duur, we don't know who's signature that is".
Of course the State of Maryland has numerous other problems concerning these cameras. First and foremost is that you don't have the legal right to force cities and counties to obey state law. Oh, and that includes when the officer's signature was forged. The fact that the city says forging an officer's signature is not contestable suggests to me that it is not actually perjury.
IANAL.
The thing about it is that my understanding is that for most "loud" commercials, they are not technically louder than the TV show. It is just that the entire commercial is as loud as the the loudest part of the TV show while the loud point in the TV show is only for a moment or two before the volume returns to much lower normal volumes. I am sure there are exceptions, but I remember seeing a study which made this claim back right around the time this law was passed.
Seems about right. They measure internet speeds the same way. My connection is advertised at 25 mpbs because from 2:01:34 A.M. to 2:01:38 A.M. I actually get 25 mbps.
Umm...Apple already charges developers for merely listing their apps - $99 a year. That's HUGE and more than covers all the stuff you talked about - hosting, bandwidth etc.
They don't need to do this. They're just being greedy dicks.
So what are Apple's hosting and bandwidth costs? Where did you get that information? What are their other operating costs, such as app screeners, support staff, sales, marketing, testers, etc? What % of those costs are covered by other charges, what % of those costs are covered by the $99/year fee, how much of the $99/year fee is profit?
Do you have that information? Or is what you're saying pure emotional conjecture?
Any kind of entrance barrier (Whether it is Google's $25 one-time fee, or Apple's $99/year fee), whether it be for pure profit or to cover costs, comes with an effect on who signs up and how many sign up. Most of the time a barrier means fewer participants. With something like an app store, no doubt the thinking is it weeds out the trash, which is what I'm guessing is Apple's motive.
Wrong again.
From http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windowsstore/archive/2012/07/20/making-money-with-your-apps-through-the-windows-store.aspx [msdn.com]
You're comparing a large, established, successful app store with hundreds of thousands of apps to a fledgling MS store with 20,000 apps. Apples to Oranges. Come back when the stores are comparable. Nothing yet indicates MS' model is even successful, much less better than Apple's. Companies that get a late start often try to attract business by offering their services at a loss or under some other unsustainable system with a plan to alter said system in the future.
For example, this wouldn't happen on Windows Store.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fasterforward/2011/02/apple_bans_sony_e-reader_app_a.html
The correct quote would be "hasn't happened yet". Windows store is just starting. Give it time and their shenanigans will too.
Sorry, but Apple apologists like you need to come up with a better defense of Apple than trying to muddy up things by saying "everyone else is doing it". They're simply not.
Effectively he was just saying "you don't know what you're talking about" concerning app store business models. Your post does nothing to refute that.
Simply list secured directories/files and secured output devices (printers, usb, etc). If you try to move/copy/edit anything from a secured directory or to a secured device, your command gets put in a queue and waits for a second user to ok it.
Is there anything like this available already?