Mind you many other countries have odd "visas". Travelling to turkey and you will need a visa that is obtained only on arrival for a fee and with no checking. (many decades old policy to get foreign currency). Travel to Peru and you need non-visa visa to take internal flights. Travel ti Israel and you had better not have certain visas in your passport. But unlike the US most only want money or lack of direct evidence of visiting certain other countries. The US wants money and lots of data. (you provide the data that identifies you and the rest is up to No fly lists, CIA, FBI, NSA and whoever else says yeh or neh (depending on wht they know about you.
Well there was the visa waiver program for friendly countries. You only needed a customs declaration and silly "I'm not a terrorist" card filled out on the plane. Then came advance passenger information which required your flight details/most things on your PNR to be disclosed before landing (and you still had to fill out the "I'm not a terrorist" card during the journey. Then came enhanced advance passenger information that required the information to be transmitted x period of time before journey start (plus more information). Then citizens of visa waiver countries were required to apply for a non-visa visa 24 hours in advance (free online). Then they started charging for the pleasure of the non-visa visa.
So what happened to the visa waiver treaties?
Oh and during that progression US Immigration started photographing everyone and taking their finger prints. My own country does not have my finger prints but the US has one of them. (which probably means my go has it now)
Not quite but the land of the free and the home of the 'I've got mine so f you' seems to carry on working when many in 'socialist' (-bad word) countries would say 'no pay no work'
Odd contradiction there. I don't know which is better if better can even be determined. Live to work or work to live perhaps. Maybe not. No philosophical insights or ways to make everthing all right.
But the kind of discussions, such as this entire story, make me chuckle. People may associate themselves with political parties around here. In the US generaly it seems like people arguing about their favorite footall teams. (Not from the US as you can probbly tell). Blues yeh!, Reds woop!
In the US may be. In most of europe people working for privte companies would say Woop its a Y2K day unless promissed overtime or something. That still would not have really effected most if it was sorted within a few days. Saleried people would still try to get to work. But the kind of fixes that needed doing could not be done in a few days (fix and test and migrate data). And some of the issues could stop people from working.
Say an ISP decided that all customers where overdue for a bill so cut them all off. Airlines getting in a tissy as thier planes are now due in 1900. Holiday makers stranded abroad. Insurance companies asserting that your claim yesterday was made in 1920 (hey some had the foresight to add an offset when dealing with 2 digit dates) and it is now to late to claim.
Not to mention embedded systems controllers that just barf when they ask for a time stamped measurements from bits of kit. Not the end of the world but very expensive and probaly most funny. well 2032 is not that far away. It seems most have learned though.
Y2K did affect many systems across all industries. No It probably would not have made power stations blow up. But it could have and in many cases would have cased shutdowns of transport, power generation, banking, water and other essential companies. If those companies were in a hissy fit as accounts and payrole were not working then there would have been a lot of problems for a lot of people. Not the end of the world zombies comming to get you kind of problems but significant problems none the less.
Thankfully most sorted out those problems well before they were likely to be an issue (and for many there was no issue) Those who would likely have an issue knew they would and sorted themselves out as there was money involved.
Why do people oppose same sex marriage? It is just a legal contract as it has always been. Who owns what and who gets it when they die. Who inherits et. al.
The religious side is something else. In many countries there is no particular benifit to marriage when both parties are still alive apart from them attesting thier commitment before what ever deity they wish and in front of thier freinds and familly. In the US though I believe you have a tax system that can benifit those who are married.
But it really breaks down to property.
So why would anyone oppose it? In many countries the only difference occurs if you have not written a will or if you seperate (which can also be covered by contract law)
History is funny like that. The George renamed the Enterprise. A whole slew of ships named after that captured ship. Some may say stolen. It was most cerainly an Enterprising appropriation:)
Unfortunately not there yet. Trucks like the RangerEV ? had a combined electric motor and diff in one (plus water cooling) so if it failed it could be very expensive. Other E vehicles do not have that same system and may be much less prone to very expensive failures. But then It is probably less expensive then a clutch or diff failing. (or even a drve shaft as I found out on me old car)
Transmission and diff every 100,000 miles? thats a bit low ball isn't it? Most of those should last 150,000 to 250,000 miles. And then they should olny need a strp down and service. Unless you are pulling up tree stumps every day. Or are F150s a bit flakey?
You have to wonder what the point of them is though. In the last few years Landrover has been producing sports models (BMW also) So take a capable 4x4 off road vehicle. Lower its suspension (?). change the gearing for higher road performance(?). Add low bodywork on the front sides and back so that it will barely clear a speed bump(?) . Profit?
So you end up with an overtuned high performance ex-4x4 that cannot go off road. But it is shiney and still probably better that an F150 with its teeny breaks and pathetic handling.
Someone is still stuck in the sixtites or seventies. Most cars will run until a million miles if there are no requirments for saftey, emmissions, or it just falling apart. Depending on where you are (the enviroment) some cars fall apart earlier than others.
I Europe and some US states cars have to be regularly checked for saftey and emmissions so they do not last that long before becomming untenable. Not because they no longer work but they are deemed unsafe due to corrosion.
Having a seperate frame from the body does not remove that porobelm.
Front wheel drie is a benifit in many driving situations. (especialy snow and ice)
If you think the point of the Justice system is for punishment then you must know punishment does not work when it is fatal. There is know lesson learned. Hence it is vengence. Just a dead person who may not actually have committed the crime. Look at history. In the UK at various times you would be executed for theft. Did anyone learn from it? Yep they learned not to get caught under any circumstances
In the 1900's forensic evidence first started being used. And it was used to convict and execute people. As time progressed it was shown that forensic evidence can be falible. Often later techniques would show that the earlier conclusions were incorrect. This really became apparent in the early 80's when many old cases started to be examined for DNA evidence. Oddly criminal forensic analysis started back towards a scientific approach of "This is what the evidence says but it is open to future tecniques that may prove our approach flawed".
If you take that scientific approach then you know that there is a chance the person is innocent (let alone the many other human factors involved in convicting someone).
So A) just kill them as they are guilty. (forget about it and never reexamine the case when new evidence or techniques come to light) B) make thier case go all the way to the federal court so they have a chance to show that the are not guilty (up to 20 ish years and very expensive). If not kill them. C) Put them in prison for life without parole and hope that if they are not guilty they can appeal and you can release them and compensate them for their time and life lost. Even then the prison should allow the person to try different things rather than be locked in a cell 23 hours a day (there are extremes).
As a side note Private prisons are not renowned for trying to help or even encourage their inmates. That costs money. So you end up with a prison system that is supposed to be a punishment rather than a way of keeping the inmates away from society and giving them somethin useful to do (rather than make number plates, or do laundry on the cheap)
Wow. You do have an odd system. I stand corrected. Is that true in all cases facing the death penalty? in all states where the death penalty can apply?
As you may of guessed I am not from the US. In the UK, Germany and France (when they still executed people. The jury was only to determine guilt. It was up to the prosecutor to ask for or legal precedent(the judge) to require that death penalty be applied).
That is the icky bit. Legally a corporation is another person. One that pays different taxes. It does not have voting rights but it may be very affluent compared to a single person. And due to the odd system you have in the US, Money is apparently free speech. So Incorporating creates a legal entity that can lobby (that is partially bribe) your leggislators for its own interests. If it is a multinational then its goals can be so far away from what your people think is the best way It makes a mockery of what is in the best interest of the country, state, county/city.
If a company was just a company than it would still be a group of people. Dare I say it a Union of people who have a general group idea of what they want to do. They can lobby if they agree to as there are many of them. (Oh I know that won't necessarilly work well but the current system does not either.
I fear they are not talking about ex military in the police (although that is a bit worrying). More the increasing military attitude of the police.
If your relatives were in the miilitary than ask them if soldiers make good policemen. I think not as that is not what they are trained for. It is not thier job and it should not be the way police are armed.
Can a soldier become a good police man? Well there is no reason why not and many reasons why they may be good at the job. As long as they are no longer a soldier.
Trying to make policemen into soldiers, as currently seems to be happening, is not a good idea. That is not the role they should be serving.
Slashdot Mirror
Mind you many other countries have odd "visas". Travelling to turkey and you will need a visa that is obtained only on arrival for a fee and with no checking. (many decades old policy to get foreign currency). Travel to Peru and you need non-visa visa to take internal flights. Travel ti Israel and you had better not have certain visas in your passport. But unlike the US most only want money or lack of direct evidence of visiting certain other countries. The US wants money and lots of data. (you provide the data that identifies you and the rest is up to No fly lists, CIA, FBI, NSA and whoever else says yeh or neh (depending on wht they know about you.
Well there was the visa waiver program for friendly countries. You only needed a customs declaration and silly "I'm not a terrorist" card filled out on the plane. Then came advance passenger information which required your flight details/most things on your PNR to be disclosed before landing (and you still had to fill out the "I'm not a terrorist" card during the journey.
Then came enhanced advance passenger information that required the information to be transmitted x period of time before journey start (plus more information).
Then citizens of visa waiver countries were required to apply for a non-visa visa 24 hours in advance (free online).
Then they started charging for the pleasure of the non-visa visa.
So what happened to the visa waiver treaties?
Oh and during that progression US Immigration started photographing everyone and taking their finger prints. My own country does not have my finger prints but the US has one of them. (which probably means my go has it now)
Not quite but the land of the free and the home of the 'I've got mine so f you' seems to carry on working when many in 'socialist' (-bad word) countries would say 'no pay no work'
Odd contradiction there. I don't know which is better if better can even be determined. Live to work or work to live perhaps. Maybe not. No philosophical insights or ways to make everthing all right.
But the kind of discussions, such as this entire story, make me chuckle. People may associate themselves with political parties around here. In the US generaly it seems like people arguing about their favorite footall teams. (Not from the US as you can probbly tell). Blues yeh!, Reds woop!
In the US may be. In most of europe people working for privte companies would say Woop its a Y2K day unless promissed overtime or something. That still would not have really effected most if it was sorted within a few days. Saleried people would still try to get to work. But the kind of fixes that needed doing could not be done in a few days (fix and test and migrate data). And some of the issues could stop people from working.
Say an ISP decided that all customers where overdue for a bill so cut them all off. Airlines getting in a tissy as thier planes are now due in 1900. Holiday makers stranded abroad. Insurance companies asserting that your claim yesterday was made in 1920 (hey some had the foresight to add an offset when dealing with 2 digit dates) and it is now to late to claim.
Not to mention embedded systems controllers that just barf when they ask for a time stamped measurements from bits of kit. Not the end of the world but very expensive and probaly most funny.
well 2032 is not that far away. It seems most have learned though.
Y2K did affect many systems across all industries. No It probably would not have made power stations blow up. But it could have and in many cases would have cased shutdowns of transport, power generation, banking, water and other essential companies. If those companies were in a hissy fit as accounts and payrole were not working then there would have been a lot of problems for a lot of people. Not the end of the world zombies comming to get you kind of problems but significant problems none the less.
Thankfully most sorted out those problems well before they were likely to be an issue (and for many there was no issue) Those who would likely have an issue knew they would and sorted themselves out as there was money involved.
Why do people oppose same sex marriage? It is just a legal contract as it has always been. Who owns what and who gets it when they die. Who inherits et. al.
The religious side is something else. In many countries there is no particular benifit to marriage when both parties are still alive apart from them attesting thier commitment before what ever deity they wish and in front of thier freinds and familly. In the US though I believe you have a tax system that can benifit those who are married.
But it really breaks down to property.
So why would anyone oppose it? In many countries the only difference occurs if you have not written a will or if you seperate (which can also be covered by contract law)
How did you buy insurance from the companies before the web site started/failed?
Not the US as military personnel can not be extradited.
No matter what the crime is they can not be extradited.
Yep they are evil. Who does not want the entrails from something left as a gift.
Cats do not do that. Oddly they do not understand property laws. They do understand their own laws.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22567526
History is funny like that. The George renamed the Enterprise. A whole slew of ships named after that captured ship. Some may say stolen. It was most cerainly an Enterprising appropriation :)
Unfortunately not there yet. Trucks like the RangerEV ? had a combined electric motor and diff in one (plus water cooling) so if it failed it could be very expensive. Other E vehicles do not have that same system and may be much less prone to very expensive failures. But then It is probably less expensive then a clutch or diff failing. (or even a drve shaft as I found out on me old car)
Transmission and diff every 100,000 miles? thats a bit low ball isn't it? Most of those should last 150,000 to 250,000 miles. And then they should olny need a strp down and service.
Unless you are pulling up tree stumps every day. Or are F150s a bit flakey?
Sorry not landrover (they still make the defender). RangeRover bt it was always a yuppies vehicle.
You have to wonder what the point of them is though. In the last few years Landrover has been producing sports models (BMW also) So take a capable 4x4 off road vehicle. Lower its suspension (?). change the gearing for higher road performance(?). Add low bodywork on the front sides and back so that it will barely clear a speed bump(?) . Profit?
So you end up with an overtuned high performance ex-4x4 that cannot go off road. But it is shiney and still probably better that an F150 with its teeny breaks and pathetic handling.
Someone is still stuck in the sixtites or seventies.
Most cars will run until a million miles if there are no requirments for saftey, emmissions, or it just falling apart.
Depending on where you are (the enviroment) some cars fall apart earlier than others.
I Europe and some US states cars have to be regularly checked for saftey and emmissions so they do not last that long before becomming untenable. Not because they no longer work but they are deemed unsafe due to corrosion.
Having a seperate frame from the body does not remove that porobelm.
Front wheel drie is a benifit in many driving situations. (especialy snow and ice)
Pretty much any country with an unstable local currency will accept US dollars, GB pounds, Euros, Yen.
Andrew Reid Lackey killed an 80 year old man in 2005. He asked that his appeals process be terminated and that an execution date be set.
You missed that many of those are just arrested. Not convicted. Do you wish to kill all people arrested for a murder without being convicted too?
When are you lot going to ask for a tax rebate for the period of time your government was mostly non functional?
If you think the point of the Justice system is for punishment then you must know punishment does not work when it is fatal. There is know lesson learned. Hence it is vengence. Just a dead person who may not actually have committed the crime. Look at history. In the UK at various times you would be executed for theft. Did anyone learn from it? Yep they learned not to get caught under any circumstances
In the 1900's forensic evidence first started being used. And it was used to convict and execute people. As time progressed it was shown that forensic evidence can be falible. Often later techniques would show that the earlier conclusions were incorrect. This really became apparent in the early 80's when many old cases started to be examined for DNA evidence. Oddly criminal forensic analysis started back towards a scientific approach of "This is what the evidence says but it is open to future tecniques that may prove our approach flawed".
If you take that scientific approach then you know that there is a chance the person is innocent (let alone the many other human factors involved in convicting someone).
So
A) just kill them as they are guilty. (forget about it and never reexamine the case when new evidence or techniques come to light)
B) make thier case go all the way to the federal court so they have a chance to show that the are not guilty (up to 20 ish years and very expensive). If not kill them.
C) Put them in prison for life without parole and hope that if they are not guilty they can appeal and you can release them and compensate them for their time and life lost. Even then the prison should allow the person to try different things rather than be locked in a cell 23 hours a day (there are extremes).
As a side note Private prisons are not renowned for trying to help or even encourage their inmates. That costs money. So you end up with a prison system that is supposed to be a punishment rather than a way of keeping the inmates away from society and giving them somethin useful to do (rather than make number plates, or do laundry on the cheap)
Wow. You do have an odd system. I stand corrected. Is that true in all cases facing the death penalty? in all states where the death penalty can apply?
As you may of guessed I am not from the US. In the UK, Germany and France (when they still executed people. The jury was only to determine guilt. It was up to the prosecutor to ask for or legal precedent(the judge) to require that death penalty be applied).
That is the icky bit. Legally a corporation is another person. One that pays different taxes. It does not have voting rights but it may be very affluent compared to a single person. And due to the odd system you have in the US, Money is apparently free speech.
So Incorporating creates a legal entity that can lobby (that is partially bribe) your leggislators for its own interests. If it is a multinational then its goals can be so far away from what your people think is the best way It makes a mockery of what is in the best interest of the country, state, county/city.
If a company was just a company than it would still be a group of people. Dare I say it a Union of people who have a general group idea of what they want to do. They can lobby if they agree to as there are many of them. (Oh I know that won't necessarilly work well but the current system does not either.
I fear they are not talking about ex military in the police (although that is a bit worrying). More the increasing military attitude of the police.
If your relatives were in the miilitary than ask them if soldiers make good policemen. I think not as that is not what they are trained for. It is not thier job and it should not be the way police are armed.
Can a soldier become a good police man? Well there is no reason why not and many reasons why they may be good at the job. As long as they are no longer a soldier.
Trying to make policemen into soldiers, as currently seems to be happening, is not a good idea. That is not the role they should be serving.
Yep.The sixth was there in case it went horribly wrong.