people who value apple's simplicity + power and have the $$ to indulge are extremely likely to be thought leaders in their organizations...instant word-of-mouth
OK, you're (or your friend's) fundamentally confused.
1) Most of the people defaulting on loans are not, in fact, minorities.
2) All the anti-discrimination provisions of federal housing law are public. Try http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/homes/rea08.shtm for a start. None of it has anything in it about lowering standards, only prohibiting discrimination.
3) People can accuse of discrimination all they want; if they can't prove it who cares? There's no way defending those cases would be as expensive to mortgage companies as having the loans blow up.
So, sorry, but this problem cannot be blamed on the economic actors in the situation who had the LEAST control over what was happening. Aim Higher!
As a prospective entrant to the US, your rights are at quite a low ebb.
"CBP officers may, unfortunately, inconvenience law-abiding citizens...we rely heavily on the patience, understanding, and cooperation of the traveler."
Hi, I just wanted to point out that your Hiroshima/Nagasaki argument is utter crap. Because:
The fact that loads and loads of the people who WOULD have died from radionuclide exposure had INSTEAD ALREADY been killed by direct blast effects is NOT a valid argument for the safety of radionuclide exposure.
An analogous argument would be that being burnt to death with kerosene is not so bad really because plane crash victims mostly died of impact trauma and very few of them died by being burnt up with kerosene.
Y'know, coincidentally, AA are also the ones who, y'know, ADMIT they're ADDICTED to alcohol! So this might not be quite the witty rejoinder you were hoping for!
> it's funny, you read AA and they say "you can tell a drug addict by the way they > talk about drugs alot". "oh really? that's funny, i just drink for fun, you're > the dumb fucks who talk about it all the fucking time and take it so seriously."
It's pretty obvious what "chilling effect" means. A "chilling effect" is a change in behavior on the part of a group because of a new perception of potential consequences of behavior, regardless of whether or not there actually ARE new consequences, or the perception is accurate.
I'm not sure why you think the term is so vague. Possibly you have never experienced one. Think of what happens when someone gets in trouble for doing something many people have done, eg, mp3-sharing at work. Lots of people will change their behavior even if the person who was caught was being scrutinized for some very specific other reason, because they would assume a policy of general scrutiny was in place.
actually you ignored the word "fundamental". Fundamental means part of the foundation or basis. AGREE or DISAGREE: the right of due process is more fundamental than, the right of states not to be sued. But both are in the bill of rights.
Considering that major provisions involve secrecy and nondisclosure of disclosure, how does the DoJ expect people to complain of abuses? By definition the surveillance targets don't generally know anything has happened.
This ruling is solely concerned with whether the journalists are entitled to be protected from Apple's subpoena of their records. Quoting the ruling:
"The order of this court does not go beyond the questions necessary to determine this motion seeking a protective order against that single subpoena, and it cannot and should not be read or interpreted more broadly," the judge said. "The court makes no finding as to the ultimate merits of Apple's claims, or any defenses to those claims. Those issues remain for another day."
There are two things really, federal LAWS and federal RULES. LAWS are made in the legislative branch (Congress). RULES are made in the executive branch; rulemaking is why they call various oufits such as the FDA, FAA or FCC "regulatory bodies" (from latin "regula" meaning rule). Their rulemaking powers come from what's known as "enabling legislation", generally a public law that includes language authorizing the subject office/bureau/agency to make rules within various limits. For example, the FAA derives its authority to make rules from the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49 USC 106).
Many people are familiar with the public-input process for lawmaking, in which we write to representatives and senators. Fewer are aware that public input into rulemaking is actually now easier than ever. Check out one of the more useful websites in existence for US people who wish to act as public citizens. Although, given the sheer number of regulations in process at any given time, trying to keep up is quite overwhelming. Especially if, like me, you are not a lawyer!
producer consolidation takes its toll
on
Troika Games Closes
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
Andrei Codrescu wrote a really cute essay about this phenomenon in 2002; it was picked up for US National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" program.
Slashdot Mirror
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2009/29may_noaaprediction/
this article actually predicts a QUIETER sunspot cycle than the last one.
the article at telegraph is the usual sensationalist BS.
people who value apple's simplicity + power and have the $$ to indulge are extremely likely to be thought leaders in their organizations...instant word-of-mouth
"Clueless docs store patient data on wide-open PCs?"
OK, you're (or your friend's) fundamentally confused.
1) Most of the people defaulting on loans are not, in fact, minorities.
2) All the anti-discrimination provisions of federal housing law are public. Try http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/homes/rea08.shtm for a start. None of it has anything in it about lowering standards, only prohibiting discrimination.
3) People can accuse of discrimination all they want; if they can't prove it who cares? There's no way defending those cases would be as expensive to mortgage companies as having the loans blow up.
So, sorry, but this problem cannot be blamed on the economic actors in the situation who had the LEAST control over what was happening. Aim Higher!
As a prospective entrant to the US, your rights are at quite a low ebb. "CBP officers may, unfortunately, inconvenience law-abiding citizens...we rely heavily on the patience, understanding, and cooperation of the traveler."
yep
Hi, I just wanted to point out that your Hiroshima/Nagasaki argument is utter crap. Because:
The fact that loads and loads of the people who WOULD have died from radionuclide exposure had INSTEAD ALREADY been killed by direct blast effects is NOT a valid argument for the safety of radionuclide exposure.
An analogous argument would be that being burnt to death with kerosene is not so bad really because plane crash victims mostly died of impact trauma and very few of them died by being burnt up with kerosene.
Whatever else they bought with the Amiga name, they certainly bought the "right" to be mentioned frequently in forums such as /.
*cough* you yourself are 15-30 years too late saying only seven years, C0R1D4N. See http://www.eff.org/Net_culture/Virtual_community/p lato_history.article orm putergaminghistory/index5-3.shtml
http://www.classicgaming.com/features/articles/co
No, this is a direct result of business controlling government rather than the people.
Sadly, business does in fact also control the people.
Y'know, coincidentally, AA are also the ones who, y'know, ADMIT they're ADDICTED to alcohol! So this might not be quite the witty rejoinder you were hoping for!
> it's funny, you read AA and they say "you can tell a drug addict by the way they
> talk about drugs alot". "oh really? that's funny, i just drink for fun, you're
> the dumb fucks who talk about it all the fucking time and take it so seriously."
It's pretty obvious what "chilling effect" means. A "chilling effect" is a change in behavior on the part of a group because of a new perception of potential consequences of behavior, regardless of whether or not there actually ARE new consequences, or the perception is accurate.
I'm not sure why you think the term is so vague. Possibly you have never experienced one. Think of what happens when someone gets in trouble for doing something many people have done, eg, mp3-sharing at work. Lots of people will change their behavior even if the person who was caught was being scrutinized for some very specific other reason, because they would assume a policy of general scrutiny was in place.
other republicans make the claim for him...
answers.com/GuruNet also already presents significant amounts of Wikipedia content...
EXCEPT, there are still plenty of BBC World Service shortwave broadcasts to Africa, South America, and good chunks of Asia as well. Some people just need to quit generalizing about radio signals they've never listened to.
actually you ignored the word "fundamental". Fundamental means part of the foundation or basis. AGREE or DISAGREE: the right of due process is more fundamental than, the right of states not to be sued. But both are in the bill of rights.
Get it?
A Federal court has already granted a writ of habeas corpus for Padilla although the government promises to appeal to the Fourth US Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, VA.
HOWEVER, the government has NOT attempted to use the USA Patriot Act as a justification for Padilla's detention.
Considering that major provisions involve secrecy and nondisclosure of disclosure, how does the DoJ expect people to complain of abuses? By definition the surveillance targets don't generally know anything has happened.
This ruling is solely concerned with whether the journalists are entitled to be protected from Apple's subpoena of their records. Quoting the ruling:
"The order of this court does not go beyond the questions necessary to determine this motion seeking a protective order against that single subpoena, and it cannot and should not be read or interpreted more broadly," the judge said. "The court makes no finding as to the ultimate merits of Apple's claims, or any defenses to those claims. Those issues remain for another day."
There are two things really, federal LAWS and federal RULES. LAWS are made in the legislative branch (Congress). RULES are made in the executive branch; rulemaking is why they call various oufits such as the FDA, FAA or FCC "regulatory bodies" (from latin "regula" meaning rule). Their rulemaking powers come from what's known as "enabling legislation", generally a public law that includes language authorizing the subject office/bureau/agency to make rules within various limits. For example, the FAA derives its authority to make rules from the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49 USC 106). Many people are familiar with the public-input process for lawmaking, in which we write to representatives and senators. Fewer are aware that public input into rulemaking is actually now easier than ever. Check out one of the more useful websites in existence for US people who wish to act as public citizens. Although, given the sheer number of regulations in process at any given time, trying to keep up is quite overwhelming. Especially if, like me, you are not a lawyer!
What a shame!
It can be used to project
"TRY USING YOUR TURN SIGNAL NEXT TIME" and/or
"HA HA, BURNING RUBBER SURE GOT YOU TO THAT RED LIGHT QUICK!"
in big letters onto the windshields of nearby cars.
Although, in big cities I visit in the US there are signs that say "No Public Restroom" as well...
Andrei Codrescu wrote a really cute essay about this phenomenon in 2002; it was picked up for US National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" program.
"use" is present tense. "have used" is past perfect. see, they tried it, found out it sucked, then they stopped using it.
how very clever of you to notice that things change over time!
moving right along...