because civil and religious authorities have historically been one and the same.
Congratulations, you have your answer. Now that they're separate, marriage must fall under on or the other. Since the government has a class of persons called married, who receive certain rights and privileges, it makes sense that the government should define marriage.
That the government allows religious leaders to perform the ceremony is essentially irrelevant, just like getting a document notarized at Kinko's doesn't give them any claim to authority or ownership over the document or the contract therein. In both cases, the role is essentially that of a third party independent witness certifying that the act took place. The church doesn't *marry* people; the people marry each other and the church certifies the act, but at no time is it a party to the contract.
And frankly, churches refusing to marry gays in places where such marriage is permitted by law, is as much BS as Kinko's refusing to notarize a document on the same grounds. With increased authority comes increased responsibility, and I would assert that anyone who has the authority to certify a marriage should have the *obligation* to certify any legally proper marriage requested to him. Anything short of that provides the opportunity for an abuse of position.
I am 100% for the freedom of religion, just as I am 100% in favor of freedom *from* religion. People should not have religious principles (aka principles based in faith and belief rather than fact and reason) forced upon them, whether it's priests refusing to marry people or pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for birth control. You're in or you're out. You don't sign up for the military and then plead a conscientious objection to shooting enemies that wear crosses. You do the fucking job or you get the fuck out.
A Quad 925 is about on par with a q9400 ($140 vs $190). Which is great if you want to save $50 when building a midrange system, but for high-end systems, the (on the verge of being discontinued) i7 or upper Q96xx models simply have no competition from AMD, and by the time they do, Intel will have 6-core i9s on the market.
I once transformed a 2M (yes, MILLION) line project into a single line by simply replacing all instances of CR and LF with "". I'm not sure how much resources that saved, but I assume it was at least 1 million memories.
With the release of Licence Renewed Saab Automobile took the opportunity to launch a Bond themed promotional campaign complete with an actual car outfitted like the one in the book (but using smoke instead of tear gas).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licence_Renewed#The_Silver_Beast
Maybe the story was lost in retelling.. Or maybe the old man told him a little fib.
PETA takes a pretty clear stance for pretty much any mammal. A better example would be single-cell organisms. As far as I can tell, there are zero references to the widespread abuse of bacteria on the PETA site. Also hermit crabs need to be saved from children, but lobsters and crabs don't qualify as "sea kittens" in their anti-seafood agenda. Apparently you're only worth saving if you have an endoskeleton and/or live an idyllic existence free from natural predators.
Doesn't a "virtual doctor visit" necessarily imply that there are virtual doctors? If so, please send me a check for $45 and proceed to http://www-ai.ijs.si/eliza/eliza.html
I don't know how long ago you mean by "a long time ago," but I signed up a year and a half ago and I've been quite satisfied with both the service itself and the customer service. I signed up for the full HD package + standard channels + NFL gameday (free for the 1st year) + all movie channels (free for 3 months).
I was out of town for the first week, and scheduled a game to record, only to find that it had recorded several hours of a black screen. Naturally I was irritated, but hey, it was "free". Anyway, I called up and explained my problem and the guy figured out that I only had the basic Sunday Ticket, not the (whatever they call the) HD part. I told him that I was under the impression that the HD package entitled me to all of the HD broadcasts, and that nobody had explained that HD NFL was an add-on to the add-on. He said "No problem, I already gave you a complementary upgrade," and that was that.
After the 3 months of free HBO/Showtime/etc., I did have to call to "downgrade", but that was painless as well. I actually managed to get another promotional package with all the channels + HD for less than my initial package.
I'm not saying DirecTV is perfect by any means. I'm irritated with the quality of many of their "HD" stations, but I'm hopeful that future satellite launches will increase capacity & quality. Even if it doesn't, the NFL deal is a higher priority for me than "perfect" HD quality, so I'll accept the tradeoff.
And like the guy who filed suit, I'm also irritated by the fact that I don't "own" the receiver, but unlike him, I actually read the terms of the contract instead of trying to assert that *my* negligence constitutes a bad faith effort on the part of DirecTV. I've also long since stopped taking anything a salesperson says as gospel.
Look, if you approach transactions assuming that the other party has your best interests at heart, you're going to have a very painful existence. RTFCs, ask questions, and get confirmation in writing. If you're too lazy, hurried, or stupid to do that, then you'll end up paying the price. This isn't a case of fraud, it's case of the buyer's assumptions not matching reality.
I certainly agree that the best course of action for DirecTV would have been to release this moron from the contract, if only because they're being penny wise and pound foolish. If they win the suit, they may end up extracting the subsidized portion of the receiver out of him, but they're alienating current and potential customers in the process. Nonetheless, not all instances of bad business practices are instances of fraud.
The same way it's known to the State of California that having a clip capacity over 10 bullets will result in gang violence and mayhem, that actors make the best governors, and that gay marriage is an abomination.
Contracts are performance based as of 2007. This means that a) the lowest bidder doesn't always win, and b) there no more incentive for contractors to "fill seats" by hiring more people than they need. (Although to be fair, in many cases the government dictated the number of "required" hires under the old system).
But here's why they use contractors: Aside from doctors and pilots, officers do not generally do "work." They're managers. People with college degrees don't usually go enlisted, therefore they end up as managers whether they like it or not, and even if they went enlisted, there is no such job (MOS/AFSC/NEC) as "programmer" for any branch of the military, that I'm aware of.
But for the sake of argument, if there were such a job, enlisted personnel need only pass the ASVAB and then their training, and it's in the instructor's best interest to make sure they pass the training. Passing such a course would mean taking multiple choice tests that you'd have to be not merely incompetent, but truly stupid to fail. In other words, you're not going to weed out incompetence in military training.
Essentially, the *only* option right now is outsourcing. That could change in the future, but currently the government is not in the business of developing products, including software.
All of that said, there are incompetent programmers in just about every organization I've ever seen or been a part of. Now I wouldn't call myself a *great* programmer. I make less than ideal design choices all the time, sometimes even *bad* ones, and I always look at my old code and wonder what the @#$% I was thinking. Even so, I understand the relevant concepts, I learn from my mistakes, and I get the job done. I regularly encounter people who can't even do that. I could only speculate as to the reasons they're not fired, but regardless, they're out there.
People file claims for destroying their own vehicles every day.
Intentional damage is another thing altogether, and, of course, missiles and falling objects are probably explicitly excluded from your coverage. Seriously.
Eh.. there's really no new ideas in the YouTube clip. If anything, it's a remake of every other urban destruction movie, but the quality is at least on par with big-budget TV effects. Of course, I'm not sure what Hollywood is expecting from him... there's a big difference between producing your own digital video, and herding a bunch of catty actors while trying to supervise the CGI artists, camera men, editors, etc. and still effectively conveying the story. Someone else's story no less, according to TFA.
Microsoft would have a hard time proving in court that it was seriously effecting their bottom line
You don't have to prove damages to get an injunction, only to get compensation. The whole point of an injunction is the idea that money cannot fix everything.
The issue here is not whether or not Apple makes hardware, it is whether Apple holds a copyright on the material, whether the license for said material was valid, and whether Psystar was in violation of that license. The court answered yes on all counts. I don't like Apple's policy, but it's their policy to make.
There isn't much difference between Israelis complaining about Palestinian violence and early pioneers complaining about Native American violence. If you take someone's land and property with force, they will probably do whatever they can to retaliate.
What a strawman.. they shot the laptop, not the owner. AND they compensated her. Get over it.
It's one thing to expect them to provide a service as set forth in the contract. It's another thing altogether to expect them to work miracles to provide perfect service.
There are a multitude of reasons for dropped calls, only one of which is an overloaded tower, and even that may not be within the control of the provider. Interference, atmospheric ducting, zoning regulations, broadcast power and directionality of the cellular device, etc. All of these tend to be overlooked when considering "poor service," and the provider is arbitrarily blamed for variables outside of its control.
By its very nature, a cellular network cannot provide 100% reliable communications in all locations. There is a compromise between quality and convenience. If you can't accept dropped calls, use a hard line.
I'm not trying to defend bad business practices, just the reality of wireless communications. At some point "put up a new tower" is simply impossible or impractical. One could possibly argue that providers shouldn't oversubscribe their service, but due to the mobile element, you never know where people may be congregating at any given time. To prevent oversubscription entirely, you'd have to limit your customers to n per tower, and tell them they can only get service at that single tower, which is something that probably wouldn't play too well.
Not really. It costs X to make a battery, and X+Y to make a bigger battery, where X is the cost of tooling, labor, and overhead, and Y is the cost of the additional materials to produce a larger battery. X is likely the largest factor in the equation, so it doesn't cost much more to make a bigger battery.
Now I have little doubt that cellphone and laptop batteries are overpriced, but batteries are products, not services. You're buying "a battery" not "n watt hours of power," and it's unreasonable to expect the price to be based on the latter.
In all seriousness, differences in activity level would play a larger role than height. Assuming similar levels of activity and BMIs, the differences in caloric requirements are minimal. If your activity levels are the same, but your consumption patterns are significantly different, then it's more likely the case that you like to eat, and she likes to watch her weight.
That saying about how our system causes us to get the government we deserve probably has some truth to it.
Yes, people always get the government they deserve, because governments cannot exist without consent of the governed. Tyranny would seem to be an obvious exception, but it's really not. If the people don't overthrow tyranny, then they are implicitly accepting it. A government may put down insurrections, even successfully, but if that fails to incite *even more* insurrection, then again, the people are complicit in their own oppression.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately for him, infinity modified by any value, other than itself, is still infinity.
because civil and religious authorities have historically been one and the same.
Congratulations, you have your answer. Now that they're separate, marriage must fall under on or the other. Since the government has a class of persons called married, who receive certain rights and privileges, it makes sense that the government should define marriage.
That the government allows religious leaders to perform the ceremony is essentially irrelevant, just like getting a document notarized at Kinko's doesn't give them any claim to authority or ownership over the document or the contract therein. In both cases, the role is essentially that of a third party independent witness certifying that the act took place. The church doesn't *marry* people; the people marry each other and the church certifies the act, but at no time is it a party to the contract.
And frankly, churches refusing to marry gays in places where such marriage is permitted by law, is as much BS as Kinko's refusing to notarize a document on the same grounds. With increased authority comes increased responsibility, and I would assert that anyone who has the authority to certify a marriage should have the *obligation* to certify any legally proper marriage requested to him. Anything short of that provides the opportunity for an abuse of position.
I am 100% for the freedom of religion, just as I am 100% in favor of freedom *from* religion. People should not have religious principles (aka principles based in faith and belief rather than fact and reason) forced upon them, whether it's priests refusing to marry people or pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for birth control. You're in or you're out. You don't sign up for the military and then plead a conscientious objection to shooting enemies that wear crosses. You do the fucking job or you get the fuck out.
A Quad 925 is about on par with a q9400 ($140 vs $190). Which is great if you want to save $50 when building a midrange system, but for high-end systems, the (on the verge of being discontinued) i7 or upper Q96xx models simply have no competition from AMD, and by the time they do, Intel will have 6-core i9s on the market.
I once transformed a 2M (yes, MILLION) line project into a single line by simply replacing all instances of CR and LF with "". I'm not sure how much resources that saved, but I assume it was at least 1 million memories.
With the release of Licence Renewed Saab Automobile took the opportunity to launch a Bond themed promotional campaign complete with an actual car outfitted like the one in the book (but using smoke instead of tear gas). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licence_Renewed#The_Silver_Beast
Maybe the story was lost in retelling.. Or maybe the old man told him a little fib.
PETA takes a pretty clear stance for pretty much any mammal. A better example would be single-cell organisms. As far as I can tell, there are zero references to the widespread abuse of bacteria on the PETA site. Also hermit crabs need to be saved from children, but lobsters and crabs don't qualify as "sea kittens" in their anti-seafood agenda. Apparently you're only worth saving if you have an endoskeleton and/or live an idyllic existence free from natural predators.
Doesn't a "virtual doctor visit" necessarily imply that there are virtual doctors? If so, please send me a check for $45 and proceed to http://www-ai.ijs.si/eliza/eliza.html
Thanks.
How do we know they're not some sort of superior race? Great Danes, if you will.
I don't know how long ago you mean by "a long time ago," but I signed up a year and a half ago and I've been quite satisfied with both the service itself and the customer service. I signed up for the full HD package + standard channels + NFL gameday (free for the 1st year) + all movie channels (free for 3 months).
I was out of town for the first week, and scheduled a game to record, only to find that it had recorded several hours of a black screen. Naturally I was irritated, but hey, it was "free". Anyway, I called up and explained my problem and the guy figured out that I only had the basic Sunday Ticket, not the (whatever they call the) HD part. I told him that I was under the impression that the HD package entitled me to all of the HD broadcasts, and that nobody had explained that HD NFL was an add-on to the add-on. He said "No problem, I already gave you a complementary upgrade," and that was that.
After the 3 months of free HBO/Showtime/etc., I did have to call to "downgrade", but that was painless as well. I actually managed to get another promotional package with all the channels + HD for less than my initial package.
I'm not saying DirecTV is perfect by any means. I'm irritated with the quality of many of their "HD" stations, but I'm hopeful that future satellite launches will increase capacity & quality. Even if it doesn't, the NFL deal is a higher priority for me than "perfect" HD quality, so I'll accept the tradeoff.
And like the guy who filed suit, I'm also irritated by the fact that I don't "own" the receiver, but unlike him, I actually read the terms of the contract instead of trying to assert that *my* negligence constitutes a bad faith effort on the part of DirecTV. I've also long since stopped taking anything a salesperson says as gospel.
Look, if you approach transactions assuming that the other party has your best interests at heart, you're going to have a very painful existence. RTFCs, ask questions, and get confirmation in writing. If you're too lazy, hurried, or stupid to do that, then you'll end up paying the price. This isn't a case of fraud, it's case of the buyer's assumptions not matching reality.
I certainly agree that the best course of action for DirecTV would have been to release this moron from the contract, if only because they're being penny wise and pound foolish. If they win the suit, they may end up extracting the subsidized portion of the receiver out of him, but they're alienating current and potential customers in the process. Nonetheless, not all instances of bad business practices are instances of fraud.
The same way it's known to the State of California that having a clip capacity over 10 bullets will result in gang violence and mayhem, that actors make the best governors, and that gay marriage is an abomination.
Contracts are performance based as of 2007. This means that a) the lowest bidder doesn't always win, and b) there no more incentive for contractors to "fill seats" by hiring more people than they need. (Although to be fair, in many cases the government dictated the number of "required" hires under the old system).
But here's why they use contractors: Aside from doctors and pilots, officers do not generally do "work." They're managers. People with college degrees don't usually go enlisted, therefore they end up as managers whether they like it or not, and even if they went enlisted, there is no such job (MOS/AFSC/NEC) as "programmer" for any branch of the military, that I'm aware of.
But for the sake of argument, if there were such a job, enlisted personnel need only pass the ASVAB and then their training, and it's in the instructor's best interest to make sure they pass the training. Passing such a course would mean taking multiple choice tests that you'd have to be not merely incompetent, but truly stupid to fail. In other words, you're not going to weed out incompetence in military training.
Essentially, the *only* option right now is outsourcing. That could change in the future, but currently the government is not in the business of developing products, including software.
All of that said, there are incompetent programmers in just about every organization I've ever seen or been a part of. Now I wouldn't call myself a *great* programmer. I make less than ideal design choices all the time, sometimes even *bad* ones, and I always look at my old code and wonder what the @#$% I was thinking. Even so, I understand the relevant concepts, I learn from my mistakes, and I get the job done. I regularly encounter people who can't even do that. I could only speculate as to the reasons they're not fired, but regardless, they're out there.
People file claims for destroying their own vehicles every day.
Intentional damage is another thing altogether, and, of course, missiles and falling objects are probably explicitly excluded from your coverage. Seriously.
If they've switched from MPEG-2 to MPEG-4, then yes, you can get equal or better quality at a lower bitrate.
How did you know my password?!
Eh.. there's really no new ideas in the YouTube clip. If anything, it's a remake of every other urban destruction movie, but the quality is at least on par with big-budget TV effects. Of course, I'm not sure what Hollywood is expecting from him... there's a big difference between producing your own digital video, and herding a bunch of catty actors while trying to supervise the CGI artists, camera men, editors, etc. and still effectively conveying the story. Someone else's story no less, according to TFA.
Since there's no link in the summary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dadPWhEhVk
Nice camera work and pretty impressive effects.
Microsoft would have a hard time proving in court that it was seriously effecting their bottom line
You don't have to prove damages to get an injunction, only to get compensation. The whole point of an injunction is the idea that money cannot fix everything.
The issue here is not whether or not Apple makes hardware, it is whether Apple holds a copyright on the material, whether the license for said material was valid, and whether Psystar was in violation of that license. The court answered yes on all counts. I don't like Apple's policy, but it's their policy to make.
There isn't much difference between Israelis complaining about Palestinian violence and early pioneers complaining about Native American violence. If you take someone's land and property with force, they will probably do whatever they can to retaliate.
What a strawman.. they shot the laptop, not the owner. AND they compensated her. Get over it.
It's one thing to expect them to provide a service as set forth in the contract. It's another thing altogether to expect them to work miracles to provide perfect service.
There are a multitude of reasons for dropped calls, only one of which is an overloaded tower, and even that may not be within the control of the provider. Interference, atmospheric ducting, zoning regulations, broadcast power and directionality of the cellular device, etc. All of these tend to be overlooked when considering "poor service," and the provider is arbitrarily blamed for variables outside of its control.
By its very nature, a cellular network cannot provide 100% reliable communications in all locations. There is a compromise between quality and convenience. If you can't accept dropped calls, use a hard line.
I'm not trying to defend bad business practices, just the reality of wireless communications. At some point "put up a new tower" is simply impossible or impractical. One could possibly argue that providers shouldn't oversubscribe their service, but due to the mobile element, you never know where people may be congregating at any given time. To prevent oversubscription entirely, you'd have to limit your customers to n per tower, and tell them they can only get service at that single tower, which is something that probably wouldn't play too well.
Well it's a cutthroat business... Most of them end up going to pieces.
Not really. It costs X to make a battery, and X+Y to make a bigger battery, where X is the cost of tooling, labor, and overhead, and Y is the cost of the additional materials to produce a larger battery. X is likely the largest factor in the equation, so it doesn't cost much more to make a bigger battery.
Now I have little doubt that cellphone and laptop batteries are overpriced, but batteries are products, not services. You're buying "a battery" not "n watt hours of power," and it's unreasonable to expect the price to be based on the latter.
I am 6ft tall. My fiance is 4ft 9
A spinner, eh?
In all seriousness, differences in activity level would play a larger role than height. Assuming similar levels of activity and BMIs, the differences in caloric requirements are minimal. If your activity levels are the same, but your consumption patterns are significantly different, then it's more likely the case that you like to eat, and she likes to watch her weight.
That saying about how our system causes us to get the government we deserve probably has some truth to it.
Yes, people always get the government they deserve, because governments cannot exist without consent of the governed. Tyranny would seem to be an obvious exception, but it's really not. If the people don't overthrow tyranny, then they are implicitly accepting it. A government may put down insurrections, even successfully, but if that fails to incite *even more* insurrection, then again, the people are complicit in their own oppression.
RDRR.
Hmm. I'm not sure that destroying something really qualifies as fixing it...
Aw whatever, it's all semitic or antisemantics or something. Yee haw!! *pow pow*