previous to the information age when governments could not track your thoughts
Unless you know of some fabulous mind-reading device, the governments of today cannot know what you think. They can know what you've said, and what you've written, but that's not always the same as what you think.
Twice as many people *didn't* want them in power as *did*.
And yet they secured more votes than any other party. Maybe you are saying that voting should be mandatory (and I'd probably not disagree), or that there should only be two choices for each ballot. Even with three candidates, a close run election will see the winner walk away with a minority of the votes cast. That's democracy for you, and your claim that it's unfair assumes that democracy is fair.
The "First Past The Post" system may be logical yet less fair than PR, but it's far from "undemocratic".
The low turnout is more a problem. Remember the Le Pen victory in the first round of votes, caused by the stunningly low turn out in 2002?
You must like the fact that when you own a domain name such as burgers.com, you're basically given a monopoly on that word even though it is a basic word in one of the most popular languages in the world
Have you been to that domain? I am sure that CarlsJr has no such monopoly on the burger world. Your argument has completely fallen flat.
How many times have domain names (MikeRowesoft) been stolen from a minority and given to another minority with a little bit more power or money?
Mike Rowe gave up his domain in exchange for an X-Box and some other goodies. No stealing involved.
Because it would be confusing if you wanted to tell someone to go to that site, e.g.
You: "Go to aitch tee tee pee colon slash slash cocacola" Them: "Sorry, I fell asleep halfway through that. Hmm?"
as opposed to current usage,
You: "Go to cocacola dot com"
It's the "dot com" bit that tells everyone that you are talking about a website, because no-one I know uses the redundant "aitch tee tee pee colon slash slash" bit in normal chat. Of course you could say "visit our website, it's cocacola" but you'd have to do that everytime you refer to the cocacola website rather than the soft drink. Imagine business meetings in the soft drink industry.
Q: "Have you seen cocacola recently?" A: "What, the website or the company?"
Something needs to distinguish the brand from the domain, because until now, the context has been quite clear whether you are referring to a name, a brand, a site, or the product. Drop the "dot com" and it starts to get confusing.
But still not impossible, right? The amendment's guarantee is against unreasonable search and seizure. It's quite OK for the govt to seize and search, despite your outrage, if it has won a resaonable argument to do so.
As far as I understand, a judge can deny that right in certain cases, and with the removal of some legal checkpoints (courtesy of PATRIOT) it may come to pass that the govt may only need cite "terrorism" to have carte blanche.
It's not a rock solid right of the citizen to have privacy. That 'unreasonable' is a loophole that can, will, and has been used.
Then there's nothing to stop you from bringing your own suit, even in the face of "insufficient evidence" from those who supposedly know better than you do. Good luck with that, if you ever find yourself in that position - your choice.
In this case, it's not her choice, so she should be covered. She didn't initiate the law suit, she was dragged into it by the builder. I don't agree it was the right thing to do though, as I'll probably remember that company now as "the ones who tried to ruin a mother for speaking up".
That's what the Environment Ministry is for. You collect the evidence, provide it to the authorities, who determine whether it's worth pursuing, and if there is enough evidence then the government sues the wrong-doer.
"Loser pays" should not enter into that sort of case; If the builder is breaking the law, it shouldn't be individuals who sue.
However, if the builder wants to bring a case against an individual, then "loser pays" should kick in.
The only thing that would change by having a standard world time is the "time" people do their normal activities
Which would be fine if was a minor thing.
Imagine yourself working in a country where the sun rises at 8pm in this New World Order Of Time, and you start work at 9pm. In fact, the majority of your country works from 9pm to 5am. Now go to fill in your timesheet - Sunday, 3hours, Monday 5 hours. Messy.
"Offer ends 31/Dec!" Now would that be at midnight (y'know, when the sun is high in the sky), which is in the middle of the day? What if the person in front of you gets the offer, and you do not because you're too late by a few seconds? That doesn't happen in the current method, as stores generally close for the night. The alternative would be to advertise the offer as "ends 11am 31/Dec!", which is kinda kooky when you're looking for a more simple way of describing time.
Midnight GMT is 3pm in Los Angeles. Would you have 3pm in Hollywood being the point at which Friday becomes Saturday?
99% of time use is made locally - so cater for the locals and leave it alone.
It's a funny thing, but with television, radio, imusic, internet, etc. etc. etc. you see people with less time they actually devote to thinking for themselves.
If you want to be more painfully pedantic, tell your room mate that the internet is not slow, merely that your access to it is slower than normal due to the reasons you just gave.
I fully expect this posting to be pedantically picked apart. This is slashdot, after all.
It's a good reminder, and thus newsworthy. Never write something into an email that you wouldn't say to the face of whoever you're talking about.
Never commit to permanent record (such as email, blog, forum, possibly phone conversation) anything that you wouldn't want to have to explain to a judge in open court, have reported in the news media and have your mother watch/read.
Welcome to the real world. It sucks, and it's only paranoia if they aren't out to get you.
Slashdot Mirror
eh? You just *think* that that is his right leg...
Proof that Superman is left handed?
previous to the information age when governments could not track your thoughts
Unless you know of some fabulous mind-reading device, the governments of today cannot know what you think. They can know what you've said, and what you've written, but that's not always the same as what you think.
Twice as many people *didn't* want them in power as *did*.
And yet they secured more votes than any other party. Maybe you are saying that voting should be mandatory (and I'd probably not disagree), or that there should only be two choices for each ballot. Even with three candidates, a close run election will see the winner walk away with a minority of the votes cast. That's democracy for you, and your claim that it's unfair assumes that democracy is fair.
The "First Past The Post" system may be logical yet less fair than PR, but it's far from "undemocratic".
The low turnout is more a problem. Remember the Le Pen victory in the first round of votes, caused by the stunningly low turn out in 2002?
Applause.
Funniest comment I've read for weeks. Well done!
Why only earthquakes below the tower?
Because earthquakes at 30,000ft tend to go unnoticed.
If you like risk, and have 4-5 hours to play, try diplomacy.
There's everything you need to know about Diplomacy here, including how to join an online game, and how to improve your gameplay.
Remember the tron lightcycles? It wouldn't have to be realtime like the original, maybe just turn based with the goal of trapping your opponents in.
The real life version has been done
www.cocacola ?
If you're going down that route, then web.cocacola is much better.
You must like the fact that when you own a domain name such as burgers.com, you're basically given a monopoly on that word even though it is a basic word in one of the most popular languages in the world
Have you been to that domain? I am sure that CarlsJr has no such monopoly on the burger world. Your argument has completely fallen flat.
How many times have domain names (MikeRowesoft) been stolen from a minority and given to another minority with a little bit more power or money?
Mike Rowe gave up his domain in exchange for an X-Box and some other goodies. No stealing involved.
Why not go to http://cocacola/ and be done with it?
Because it would be confusing if you wanted to tell someone to go to that site, e.g.
You: "Go to aitch tee tee pee colon slash slash cocacola"
Them: "Sorry, I fell asleep halfway through that. Hmm?"
as opposed to current usage,
You: "Go to cocacola dot com"
It's the "dot com" bit that tells everyone that you are talking about a website, because no-one I know uses the redundant "aitch tee tee pee colon slash slash" bit in normal chat. Of course you could say "visit our website, it's cocacola" but you'd have to do that everytime you refer to the cocacola website rather than the soft drink. Imagine business meetings in the soft drink industry.
Q: "Have you seen cocacola recently?"
A: "What, the website or the company?"
Something needs to distinguish the brand from the domain, because until now, the context has been quite clear whether you are referring to a name, a brand, a site, or the product. Drop the "dot com" and it starts to get confusing.
Doesn't seem to have helped.
How can you tell?
MOD PARENT UP
Damn you previous comments that thwart my modding powers!
Your ex is a high-maintenance weirdo.
Sarcasm is just being snarky.
Says you.
But still not impossible, right? The amendment's guarantee is against unreasonable search and seizure. It's quite OK for the govt to seize and search, despite your outrage, if it has won a resaonable argument to do so.
As far as I understand, a judge can deny that right in certain cases, and with the removal of some legal checkpoints (courtesy of PATRIOT) it may come to pass that the govt may only need cite "terrorism" to have carte blanche.
It's not a rock solid right of the citizen to have privacy. That 'unreasonable' is a loophole that can, will, and has been used.
2. The US is over twice the size of Europe ...
Not according to wikipedia it isn't:
Europe = 10,600,000 km^2, population 700m.
US = 9,631,418 km^2, population 297m.
So your point is that you currently pay $2/gal and $1 of that is tax.
Then there's nothing to stop you from bringing your own suit, even in the face of "insufficient evidence" from those who supposedly know better than you do. Good luck with that, if you ever find yourself in that position - your choice.
In this case, it's not her choice, so she should be covered. She didn't initiate the law suit, she was dragged into it by the builder. I don't agree it was the right thing to do though, as I'll probably remember that company now as "the ones who tried to ruin a mother for speaking up".
That's what the Environment Ministry is for. You collect the evidence, provide it to the authorities, who determine whether it's worth pursuing, and if there is enough evidence then the government sues the wrong-doer.
"Loser pays" should not enter into that sort of case; If the builder is breaking the law, it shouldn't be individuals who sue.
However, if the builder wants to bring a case against an individual, then "loser pays" should kick in.
So if someone asks you to google for Guns and Roses, it means you're a Guns and Roses fan?
The only thing that would change by having a standard world time is the "time" people do their normal activities
Which would be fine if was a minor thing.
Imagine yourself working in a country where the sun rises at 8pm in this New World Order Of Time, and you start work at 9pm. In fact, the majority of your country works from 9pm to 5am. Now go to fill in your timesheet - Sunday, 3hours, Monday 5 hours. Messy.
"Offer ends 31/Dec!" Now would that be at midnight (y'know, when the sun is high in the sky), which is in the middle of the day? What if the person in front of you gets the offer, and you do not because you're too late by a few seconds? That doesn't happen in the current method, as stores generally close for the night. The alternative would be to advertise the offer as "ends 11am 31/Dec!", which is kinda kooky when you're looking for a more simple way of describing time.
Midnight GMT is 3pm in Los Angeles. Would you have 3pm in Hollywood being the point at which Friday becomes Saturday?
99% of time use is made locally - so cater for the locals and leave it alone.
do they outnumber the men in mass or in numbers?
The clue is in the question, I think.
It's a funny thing, but with television, radio, imusic, internet, etc. etc. etc. you see people with less time they actually devote to thinking for themselves.
What he said.
If you want to be more painfully pedantic, tell your room mate that the internet is not slow, merely that your access to it is slower than normal due to the reasons you just gave.
I fully expect this posting to be pedantically picked apart. This is slashdot, after all.
It's a good reminder, and thus newsworthy. Never write something into an email that you wouldn't say to the face of whoever you're talking about.
Never commit to permanent record (such as email, blog, forum, possibly phone conversation) anything that you wouldn't want to have to explain to a judge in open court, have reported in the news media and have your mother watch/read.
Welcome to the real world. It sucks, and it's only paranoia if they aren't out to get you.
Would YOU trust an organization whose name is an anagram for "fib"?
Only if you'd also entrust your shipped goods to a company called 'whoops!'