With all due respect, whether or not Scotland take a share of the UKs debt is solely down to negotiations between the British government and the independent Scottish government and most certainly not some label a newly independent Scotland would gain from third parties - so its entirely possible they could become a "successor state" with regard to the EU and still take their share of debt.
You realise they were set up by British corporations to handle British merchant trader funds in East Asia during the British Empires hay day, right? Just because they have foreign placenames in their name doesn't mean they are owned by entities in that locale.
Use something like Resharper in Visual Studio and you can learn a lot about the language, as it offers loads of little "this code block can be refactored this way for this reason" hints - shows you just what can be done and why.
Precisely - why does Slashdot deserve a comment or response at all? Its a common journalistic tactic - ask for a comment, and when you don't get a response (why would every enquiry deserve a response?) then its a perfect negative thing to put in your story.
and confirms, once again, that they do not confine themselves to spying on to those accused of terrorism.
Nowhere can I find any indication that the mandates of the NSA, GCHQ, MI5, MI5, the CIA, the FBI (or any other of the organisations usually linked in these stories) are limited to anti-terrorism duties alone - it may form a large part of their activities, but its not their sole purpose.
Putting everything else aside, that part of the article is ridiculous.
Uhm, no - there are no "fundamental" human rights, the very idea is a bullshit concept.
Every right we talk about are rights we grant each other - you don't have a right to life, that's a privilege society around you grants you to have and enjoy. You don't have a right to freedom of expression, that's a privilege society around you grants you to have and enjoy. You don't have a right to carry lock picks, that's a privilege society grants to certain members.
The only thing protecting your "right" to do anything at all is society as a majority, which distinctly removes the possibility that its a fundamental right.
What freedom of expression, self governance, life and everything else are are in-fact rightful and just privileges that should be defended by society as a whole for each other.
Nope, you got it right the first time - it would have to be NVIDIA for it to work in the first place, AMD can't find their arses with both hands, a map, a team of dedicated researchers and a reality TV challenge show.
A junior doctor (anything lower than consultant) in a British NHS hospital position (non-supernumery) can easily end up doing 12 - 14 hours a day for as much as 12 days straight (which is a typical shift pattern for doctors) then have two days off and do it all again.
I know, I've seen my wife do it repeatedly in hospital rotations for the past 5 years - and often she has no breaks during that time either, having to run to the toilet when she nearly wets herself. And this is entirely normal for junior doctors, even tho EU regulations limit doctors to a working week of 48 hours.
Right, because that isn't currently prevalent on either Android or iOS...
And they haven't resorted to creating "just" those things, they've been pushing a lot of high quality stuff to both the Windows Phone and Windows App stores.
If the government banned you from talking on your phone in someone elses house, or in Walmart, people would be looking at this in an entirely different way.
If the airline banned calls, then your point would stand.
Not really, since not every country in the EU is part of the common Schengen Area, and even then you can still be deported for immigration reasons, so its still a valid point.
Its also not KLM specific at all, its airline industry wide. Just because some low cost carriers choose to eat the costs themselves (they don't actually, the costs are hidden to you) doesn't make it airline specific.
They have been trying to have claims reviewed properly through the courts recently, and at every step they have been told to bugger off and stop complaining by US courts - they have been trying to stop claims like a certain hotel chains claim for loss of income from three hotels which had closed down 6 months prior to the spill 250 miles away from the coast.
The claims being approved by the US claims fund administrators have next to no scrutiny, so some really ridiculous stuff is being approved for payouts.
Putting aside the issue of double dipping for a second, the liability for the cost of the clean-up still resides with the original insurer or chain of insurers who covered the facility (including the tank) in the first place.
The oil companies were given the authority to carry out the clean up, which also grants them the authority to submit the costs to the insurance company - this isn't a simple case of the oil company doing something and then demanding money from a third party for it, there is a chain of liability, a chain of authority and both meet at the insurance companies door.
Its very very similar to your car dumping oil all over the road, and the local authority towing your vehicle and paying for the environmental cleanup - you will definitely get a bill at the end of the day, and where I live that bill comes from the company the responsibility to do said actions is delegated to, not the local authority.
In reality, it should have been the government chasing the insurance companies to force them to do the cleanup in the first place, but they didn't.
And, as I said, the issue of double dipping is entirely not represented in this explanation - that's another issue entirely.
Its not their mess, its tanks owned by third parties:
Often built for gas stations during the 1950s and '60s highway construction boom, the tanks corroded over time, spilling gas and diesel with potentially cancer-causing chemicals under properties and into aquifers.
The oil companies are paid to clean up the pollution caused by these tanks constructed for, operated and owned by third parties. The oil companies are chosen because they already have extensive inhouse expertise on the subject, so they are ideal for doing it wholesale.
Chances are, most of these tanks have been abandoned and their original owners do not exist, which is why local government step in.
Airlines have a pretty good reason to charge almost the same for singles as they do for returns on international flights - having a return ticket is a big part of determining whether a traveller is not intending to immigrate illegally, so if you travel internationally on a single ticket then that triggers a lot more in the background than it would if you travel on a return.
The airline is responsible (via international treaty) for the cost of removing you from the country if you are found to be in immigration violation at your destination, so they have to have that covered or they are out of pocket.
The cost of the single doesn't quite cover both trips, but it is more expensive than what the single would actually cost if the above didn't have to be taken into consideration, but that also means that the return ticket cost is often subsidised by the higher single prices.
US tax payers aren't on the hook for most of the loans that students have. It's not just government loans that are "protected". "Smart" students would get as many of those credit cards offered like candy they can, advance or buy stuff to sell (gift cards, iTunes cards), and declare bankruptcy the moment they graduate.
There's nothing stopping you from borrowing for other reasons, using the cash to pay off loans, then bankrupting youself out of the new debt. That would be the appropriate civil disobediance for the non-dischargeable loans.
Uhm, everything you had just described is an open and shut case of fraud, pure and simple.
You are assuming everyone considers those four points to all have an equal value. - for example, is the GPLs "gives the author freedom" actually equal to the BSDLs "give the author freedom"? Not really, but yet you equate them....
Slashdot Mirror
With all due respect, whether or not Scotland take a share of the UKs debt is solely down to negotiations between the British government and the independent Scottish government and most certainly not some label a newly independent Scotland would gain from third parties - so its entirely possible they could become a "successor state" with regard to the EU and still take their share of debt.
You realise they were set up by British corporations to handle British merchant trader funds in East Asia during the British Empires hay day, right? Just because they have foreign placenames in their name doesn't mean they are owned by entities in that locale.
Science Fiction came to life when the DC-X Delta Clipper which did everything the Grasshopper did, just 21 years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...
Use something like Resharper in Visual Studio and you can learn a lot about the language, as it offers loads of little "this code block can be refactored this way for this reason" hints - shows you just what can be done and why.
Precisely - why does Slashdot deserve a comment or response at all? Its a common journalistic tactic - ask for a comment, and when you don't get a response (why would every enquiry deserve a response?) then its a perfect negative thing to put in your story.
This part of the summary made me pause:
Nowhere can I find any indication that the mandates of the NSA, GCHQ, MI5, MI5, the CIA, the FBI (or any other of the organisations usually linked in these stories) are limited to anti-terrorism duties alone - it may form a large part of their activities, but its not their sole purpose.
Putting everything else aside, that part of the article is ridiculous.
Uhm, no - there are no "fundamental" human rights, the very idea is a bullshit concept.
Every right we talk about are rights we grant each other - you don't have a right to life, that's a privilege society around you grants you to have and enjoy. You don't have a right to freedom of expression, that's a privilege society around you grants you to have and enjoy. You don't have a right to carry lock picks, that's a privilege society grants to certain members.
The only thing protecting your "right" to do anything at all is society as a majority, which distinctly removes the possibility that its a fundamental right.
What freedom of expression, self governance, life and everything else are are in-fact rightful and just privileges that should be defended by society as a whole for each other.
Nope, you got it right the first time - it would have to be NVIDIA for it to work in the first place, AMD can't find their arses with both hands, a map, a team of dedicated researchers and a reality TV challenge show.
Perhaps, *gasp*, political reasons weren't behind the licence choice or indeed the release...
A junior doctor (anything lower than consultant) in a British NHS hospital position (non-supernumery) can easily end up doing 12 - 14 hours a day for as much as 12 days straight (which is a typical shift pattern for doctors) then have two days off and do it all again.
I know, I've seen my wife do it repeatedly in hospital rotations for the past 5 years - and often she has no breaks during that time either, having to run to the toilet when she nearly wets herself. And this is entirely normal for junior doctors, even tho EU regulations limit doctors to a working week of 48 hours.
What utter bullshit, and the usual pro-Assange smears when this shit comes up.
Right, because that isn't currently prevalent on either Android or iOS...
And they haven't resorted to creating "just" those things, they've been pushing a lot of high quality stuff to both the Windows Phone and Windows App stores.
Its amazing just how little actual knowledge people have of the stuff they hate - you can write Windows Phone and WinRT apps in C# and .Net.
If the government banned you from talking on your phone in someone elses house, or in Walmart, people would be looking at this in an entirely different way.
If the airline banned calls, then your point would stand.
The KN-08 missiles on show were training rounds - you don't want live ordnance, even made safe, in a parade.
And there are many liquid fuelled missiles which dont need fuelling at the last moment.
Doing it with the intent to never repay it is fraud, cut and dried, open and shut.
Intention is key, and intention is what commonly governs the difference between an accidental action and a criminal one.
Not really, since not every country in the EU is part of the common Schengen Area, and even then you can still be deported for immigration reasons, so its still a valid point.
Its also not KLM specific at all, its airline industry wide. Just because some low cost carriers choose to eat the costs themselves (they don't actually, the costs are hidden to you) doesn't make it airline specific.
They have been trying to have claims reviewed properly through the courts recently, and at every step they have been told to bugger off and stop complaining by US courts - they have been trying to stop claims like a certain hotel chains claim for loss of income from three hotels which had closed down 6 months prior to the spill 250 miles away from the coast.
The claims being approved by the US claims fund administrators have next to no scrutiny, so some really ridiculous stuff is being approved for payouts.
Putting aside the issue of double dipping for a second, the liability for the cost of the clean-up still resides with the original insurer or chain of insurers who covered the facility (including the tank) in the first place.
The oil companies were given the authority to carry out the clean up, which also grants them the authority to submit the costs to the insurance company - this isn't a simple case of the oil company doing something and then demanding money from a third party for it, there is a chain of liability, a chain of authority and both meet at the insurance companies door.
Its very very similar to your car dumping oil all over the road, and the local authority towing your vehicle and paying for the environmental cleanup - you will definitely get a bill at the end of the day, and where I live that bill comes from the company the responsibility to do said actions is delegated to, not the local authority.
In reality, it should have been the government chasing the insurance companies to force them to do the cleanup in the first place, but they didn't.
And, as I said, the issue of double dipping is entirely not represented in this explanation - that's another issue entirely.
Never said it did, as that was not what was asked.
Its not their mess, its tanks owned by third parties:
The oil companies are paid to clean up the pollution caused by these tanks constructed for, operated and owned by third parties. The oil companies are chosen because they already have extensive inhouse expertise on the subject, so they are ideal for doing it wholesale.
Chances are, most of these tanks have been abandoned and their original owners do not exist, which is why local government step in.
Airlines have a pretty good reason to charge almost the same for singles as they do for returns on international flights - having a return ticket is a big part of determining whether a traveller is not intending to immigrate illegally, so if you travel internationally on a single ticket then that triggers a lot more in the background than it would if you travel on a return.
The airline is responsible (via international treaty) for the cost of removing you from the country if you are found to be in immigration violation at your destination, so they have to have that covered or they are out of pocket.
The cost of the single doesn't quite cover both trips, but it is more expensive than what the single would actually cost if the above didn't have to be taken into consideration, but that also means that the return ticket cost is often subsidised by the higher single prices.
US tax payers aren't on the hook for most of the loans that students have. It's not just government loans that are "protected". "Smart" students would get as many of those credit cards offered like candy they can, advance or buy stuff to sell (gift cards, iTunes cards), and declare bankruptcy the moment they graduate.
There's nothing stopping you from borrowing for other reasons, using the cash to pay off loans, then bankrupting youself out of the new debt. That would be the appropriate civil disobediance for the non-dischargeable loans.
Uhm, everything you had just described is an open and shut case of fraud, pure and simple.
Civil disobedience? Hope you like jail time...
That goes for purchased items as well, in most jurisdictions...
You are assuming everyone considers those four points to all have an equal value. - for example, is the GPLs "gives the author freedom" actually equal to the BSDLs "give the author freedom"? Not really, but yet you equate them....
So much wrong with your "simple math".