Well, hell, if he's -already- having to hire the lawyer, he may as well -do- something with 'im, ne? No sense wasting money; it'll take the same number of billable hours to accomplish either thing.
Seems these days that, especially in these high profile cases, the lawyers are suing everybody even connected with the alleged transgressor, whether or not (as is certainly the case here) they have liability of any sort.
Actually, this goes a bit beyond a 'shotgun' lawsuit--this is more a handgrenade lawsuit, or a roadside bomb lawsuit.
Is there perhaps some practical means to force someone filing suit to show that the person they're filing suit against is even vaguely the correct one?
Would there be any room in the paradigm that you envision for 'cyber command' for outside contractors in the security field to make a contribution to the war effort via their own network of contacts etc.?
Would such external-to-the-organization security contractors and consultants have the potential to be paid for their information and efforts?
I recently got a Nokia n800--they call it an 'internet tablet'--and this is about perfect for reading on it, if I wasn't already in the middle of the dead tree version.
It's also convenient that I don't have to deal with lightswitches.
For individual quanta, yes. My apologies for not making clear that I was not addressing single instances but more collective quantities. I was thinking on a different scale--the one used to measure the satellite's velocity--rather than the one you're referencing.
Wavelength is frequency. Amplitude--wave height--is energy.
And light does not have a 'particle state'--it can be modeled as a particle, sure, but it really isn't.
And really, it's not so much the light being 'bent' anyway, but the space that the light travels through.
It is, however, known that sufficient quantities of concentrated energy are capable of generating gravitational influence; it's hypothesized that energy was the chief source of gravitational influence during the first short bit of time after the big bang.
They're just waiting for all the execs to be declared honorary lawyers by some diploma mill or another so they can claim the whole thing as 'legal fees'.
Even if it is somewhat hypocritical in some cases, it's a nice step forward--because, after all, this will mean that the member states will have to eventually reduce or eliminate censorship in order to comply with the EU regulations.
Should not those topics be of relevance to -everybody- in this 'age of instant global communication'?
Should not those topics thus be taught in, say, high school? Say, in the required 'introduction to computers' course that everyone has to go through these days?
Looks like they learned something from Vietnam after all.
The American public is very happy to support war so long as 'war' is sort of an abstract thing happening "over there". They're more than happy to 'support the troops' and make grand speeches about the trials and tribulations and the suffering of "our boys overseas"--so long as they don't -see- it.
Once any given generation -sees- the dirty, bloody, nasty physical reality of war--the coffins coming home, the frontline reports with people getting blown up on camera, the interviews with the troops who have been worn down by months of stress--they stop supporting the 'cause' and start making ugly noises about bringing the troops home.
So they started with disguising the casualties--excluding people from photographing the coffins. No highly visible casualties? Then any losses are, for everyone outside the families--families that are, by and large, "in" the establishment itself (base housing and that sort of thing)--abstract. Just numbers.
Then quietly weed out the embedded reporters. Reasons of security, you know. Have to make sure the press stays 'safe'.
And now making sure that there's as little other information exchange between the armed services and the outside world as possible.
However, they may have business partners in this country of some sort. If there are any folks whom I could boycott (as, obviously, not having money to hide I'm already de-facto boycotting the bank in question, and they don't really care) it'd be nice to know who they'd be.
HELLO good sir i am an honest man from the UNITED STATES who has a BUSINESS proposition for you in good health and honesty for good christian man of good character such as yourself.
I am prepared to offer a BUSINESS deal to great advantage for you in monetary security terms for the storage of your FINANCIAL difficulties for very reasonable rate. Please to send to me your
name date of birth bank routing number social security number mother's name
and i will PROVIDE for YOU a small room for the storage of your MONETARY. For this service you may keep 10% of the AMOUNT GIVEN in good health as thanks for your ASSISTANCE.
With all due respect, if the only improvements are 'security' and 'bling'--then why not just lock down XP with some 3rd party software, or run a different, more secure, OS altogether?
Why go through the expense and bother of upgrading to a brand new OS, one with significant growing pains?
Slashdot Mirror
President Nixon tried that. It didn't work out too well for him.
Well, hell, if he's -already- having to hire the lawyer, he may as well -do- something with 'im, ne? No sense wasting money; it'll take the same number of billable hours to accomplish either thing.
Fairly obvious--it's about money laundering. Look 'em up on wikileaks if you're curious.
Seems these days that, especially in these high profile cases, the lawyers are suing everybody even connected with the alleged transgressor, whether or not (as is certainly the case here) they have liability of any sort.
Actually, this goes a bit beyond a 'shotgun' lawsuit--this is more a handgrenade lawsuit, or a roadside bomb lawsuit.
Is there perhaps some practical means to force someone filing suit to show that the person they're filing suit against is even vaguely the correct one?
Well, there are those kiddie cellphones--the one with one big button that allows 'em to call mom in an emergency?
They could stick him somewhere with one of those I guess.
The challenge is that he's a disabled juvenile, for which there are likely very few facilities available for the internment thereof.
Would there be any room in the paradigm that you envision for 'cyber command' for outside contractors in the security field to make a contribution to the war effort via their own network of contacts etc.?
Would such external-to-the-organization security contractors and consultants have the potential to be paid for their information and efforts?
Isn't their philosophy to try to take ownership of anything that threatens their business?
That's what things like the 'Kindle' are for.
I recently got a Nokia n800--they call it an 'internet tablet'--and this is about perfect for reading on it, if I wasn't already in the middle of the dead tree version.
It's also convenient that I don't have to deal with lightswitches.
It'd be well worth your time to go take a quick scan through the basics of Norse mythology. You'll understand much much more of the book that way.
I laughed my ass off when Wednesday introduced himself as Wednesday, as I was already suspecting him to be at least related to who he was.
For individual quanta, yes. My apologies for not making clear that I was not addressing single instances but more collective quantities. I was thinking on a different scale--the one used to measure the satellite's velocity--rather than the one you're referencing.
I'll come back when I've finished my coffee.
Wavelength is frequency. Amplitude--wave height--is energy.
And light does not have a 'particle state'--it can be modeled as a particle, sure, but it really isn't.
And really, it's not so much the light being 'bent' anyway, but the space that the light travels through.
It is, however, known that sufficient quantities of concentrated energy are capable of generating gravitational influence; it's hypothesized that energy was the chief source of gravitational influence during the first short bit of time after the big bang.
Or "Wait, that can't be right..."
I think it's the Power of the Ellipsis. That whole trailing off into three dots thing...
Yes, because gravity acts on energy as well as mass.
That is, after all, the principle behind things like gravitational lensing.
Sir, you've violated the copyright of Three Dog Night with your dissemination of their song "One is the Loneliest Number".
We're here to take your first born to our Vinyl Mines.
They're just waiting for all the execs to be declared honorary lawyers by some diploma mill or another so they can claim the whole thing as 'legal fees'.
Nope, just pointing out that one does not necessarily lead to the other.
A nice hope, but unfortunately many people prefer echo chambers to debating tables.
This is why there are many vibrant communities for the support of racism, discrimination, xenophobia, and suspicion of conspiracies by Other People.
Even if it is somewhat hypocritical in some cases, it's a nice step forward--because, after all, this will mean that the member states will have to eventually reduce or eliminate censorship in order to comply with the EU regulations.
Should not those topics be of relevance to -everybody- in this 'age of instant global communication'?
Should not those topics thus be taught in, say, high school? Say, in the required 'introduction to computers' course that everyone has to go through these days?
Looks like they learned something from Vietnam after all.
The American public is very happy to support war so long as 'war' is sort of an abstract thing happening "over there". They're more than happy to 'support the troops' and make grand speeches about the trials and tribulations and the suffering of "our boys overseas"--so long as they don't -see- it.
Once any given generation -sees- the dirty, bloody, nasty physical reality of war--the coffins coming home, the frontline reports with people getting blown up on camera, the interviews with the troops who have been worn down by months of stress--they stop supporting the 'cause' and start making ugly noises about bringing the troops home.
So they started with disguising the casualties--excluding people from photographing the coffins. No highly visible casualties? Then any losses are, for everyone outside the families--families that are, by and large, "in" the establishment itself (base housing and that sort of thing)--abstract. Just numbers.
Then quietly weed out the embedded reporters. Reasons of security, you know. Have to make sure the press stays 'safe'.
And now making sure that there's as little other information exchange between the armed services and the outside world as possible.
It's all to be expected, really.
As clients, yes.
However, they may have business partners in this country of some sort. If there are any folks whom I could boycott (as, obviously, not having money to hide I'm already de-facto boycotting the bank in question, and they don't really care) it'd be nice to know who they'd be.
HELLO good sir i am an honest man from the UNITED STATES who has a BUSINESS proposition for you in good health and honesty for good christian man of good character such as yourself.
I am prepared to offer a BUSINESS deal to great advantage for you in monetary security terms for the storage of your FINANCIAL difficulties for very reasonable rate. Please to send to me your
name
date of birth
bank routing number
social security number
mother's name
and i will PROVIDE for YOU a small room for the storage of your MONETARY. For this service you may keep 10% of the AMOUNT GIVEN in good health as thanks for your ASSISTANCE.
In good health and honesty,
Fow Ern Ineteen, Esq.
Are there any US institutions that are associated with this bank that I should be considering boycotting?
With all due respect, if the only improvements are 'security' and 'bling'--then why not just lock down XP with some 3rd party software, or run a different, more secure, OS altogether?
Why go through the expense and bother of upgrading to a brand new OS, one with significant growing pains?