This victory is important, and handily demonstrates the impartiality of the circuit court judges involved, and Eugene Volkoh's intestinal fortitude. Why? Chrystal Cox is, to be frank, a horrible person. A nutjob. A known extortionist.
And this case upholds your right to say such things about her without positively demonstrating them to be correct.
How can anyone be entitled more free speech than others??? everyone is entitled the same free speech, journalist, blogger or bum.
Indeed. But most powerful people don't like free speech. They'd like to clamp down on it entirely, but many traditional journalists also had powerful backing. So the compromise was reached that free speech would be restricted but there'd be exceptions for bona fide (anointed by the powerful) journalists.
The Google search engine was a byproduct of their want to serve advertisements to web browsing users (customers), and to provide better metrics to their clients (advertisers) so they could command higher rates.
...parent. Cars are for independence, the world of helicopter parenting doesn't allow for that.
Re:Output of things that get notoriety, awards etc
on
What Makes a Genius?
·
· Score: 2
Hmm. Spend your life in an average job which allows you the time to waste at work on leisure activities like 4chan, or burn yourself out working for a money man in some sort of Faustian arrangement. Perhaps the failed prodigies ARE the real geniuses...
Did you forget that not only men are reading your site? - A great woman
Perhaps Pritchett's generalization was intended to apply specifically to men, and this was a trap women were less likely to fall into. I don't know, I haven't read the essay. You also might also be interested in some work by two men working out of Cornell, Mr. Dunning and Mr. Kruger.
It should be abundantly clear by now that if you don't want data misused, the absolute best way to do is to not collect it in the first place, with a poor second being to reliably destroy it some short period after the collection. Certainly once you've transmitted it beyond the collection point to a third party, it can be assumed to be available forever.
If you want useful legislation, require that the data not be recorded or transmitted. But of course we already have legislation and regulation (OBD-III) requiring the opposite.
A lot of people don't recognize that working to help those who are in poverty is useful and might constructively reduce suffering
Might. But probably won't, if history is any guide. Probably just trying (and failing) to shame those of us who aren't is actually less harmful. The New Testament got this much right: the poor will always be with us.
(This message brought to you by the Institute For Fatalism. Believe us or not, it's not like we can change your mind)
If we're to execute people for violent crime, why not a violent (but quick) death? A bullet, a rope (no short drops), even a guillotine. There's no need for an execution to be so clinical.
I just bought a 60 burner phones, mailed all but one to various locations around the country, and texted "Meet me in Linithicum with 1kg U-235 at 9am April 1, 2014". Have a nice day.
It appears this might be all about a Samsung lawsuit they've been involved in for some time. The other companies don't make the allegedly infringing devices, but they do import them, so BU decided to put some pressure on Samsung by suing the customers.
Doctrine of Equivalents does not apply to prior art. Prior art has to be exact. If they were as persnickety about finding infringement as they were about finding prior art, the problem would be much less. If they were as expansive about ruling something non-novel or non-obvious based on prior art as they are about finding infringement, the problem would be much, much less.
But instead it's novel and non-obvious if no one has described the exact same thing using the exact same words. But contrariwise, something infringes if it's "close enough".
And "on the internet" patents are "exhausted combination" patents, which the Supreme Court has ruled against but the patent office and lower courts keep accepting, because the system isn't working.
Don't confuse the questions of "should I wear a helmet" with "should helmets be compulsory".
In today's world, saying that something is a good idea is tantamount to saying it should be compulsory. And if you object and tell them it's none of your business, they'll point to healthcare costs and say it is.
Surabhi's design has been around for a few years now, and has been recently been integrated into an actual product: the Abus Kranium AKS 1.
Looks like it has a fatal flaw or two.
It's no great trick to make a helmet which will absorb impact. The trick is to do it without too much weight and, unless you only ride in cold weather, without overheating your head. In general, the more you pay for a helmet, the less helmet and more hole you get. That thing is covered with a solid shell. No venting. It's a portable oven. It's also 535g -- about 1.2 pounds. It's a brick (and probably will contribute to neck injuries as a result).
Giro's cheapest MTB helmet has some vents and is 410g. Move up to a helmet you might actually wear in the heat, you've got almost as much vent as helmet and you're down to 316g. Go to one which costs as much as this one -- 80 pounds sterling -- and you're under 300g and have more holes than helmet.
If it was just unventilated it might still have its niche, but it's just too heavy.
I have been working in electrical engineering for 16 years. (I know, not CS but chip design is a tech field with commonalities.) It is a majority male field with approximately 15%-20% women. However, NONE of them that I see were raised in America. Most of the women I work with completed undergraduate degrees in China or India and got a graduate degree in the US. There must be some reason why American women are repelled from engineering. Or is it that Chinese and Indian women are just fundamentally better at tech than American women?
Or is there something (like money and the chance to move OUT of China and/or India) which drives Chinese and Indian women into tech when they would normally be repelled?
What they want are sexual hiring quotas in the tech sector. That is where this going.
It's worse than that. They want to eliminate geek culture (presumably replacing it with mainstream culture, or perhaps their idealized completely sanitized neuter culture) because most women don't feel comfortable with male geeks. The idea is not just to bring women in but to drive male geeks out.
The "outright lies" being that there'd be huge cost overruns which NJ would be responsible for. Said "lies" being considered "lies" because the Office of Management and Budget swore up and down there woudn't be such overruns... yeah, pull the other one, it's got bells on. The ARC tunnel was destined to go way over schedule and way over budget... like every other major government project.
Christie certainly wanted the Fort Lee mayor published for not supporting him; that's just the way machine politics works (which is why Christie and Obama get along; they understand each other). I find it hard to believe he'd be stupid enough to do it by messing with the GWB, though. Aside from hurting a lot more than Fort Lee, messing with interstate transportation invites Federal scrutiny, as former US Attorney Christie would know.
Plausible deniability is part of the game too, so Christie probably let it be known the mayor was to be punished, and his staff cooked up a plan to do it without giving him the details.
You needed to earn around $350k/year in 2009 to be in the top 1% (http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/top-1-percent-earn.aspx). It is probably higher now. The vast majority of Googlers joined after the millionaire creating IPO and earn much less than $350k.
That's household income. There's a lot of top-company tech workers who are married to other top-company tech workers, and if you believe Glassdoor, most of them will be in the top 1% for household income. Top 1% for individual income is probably within reach for many such workers.
Because they have made themselves responsible through their Acceptable Use Policy agreement. For example, EasyDNS includes these conditions upon the registree
That's not how an acceptable use policy works. Having an Acceptable Use Policy does not make EasyDNS responsible to third parties to enforce that Acceptable Use Policy.
Slashdot Mirror
And this case upholds your right to say such things about her without positively demonstrating them to be correct.
Indeed. But most powerful people don't like free speech. They'd like to clamp down on it entirely, but many traditional journalists also had powerful backing. So the compromise was reached that free speech would be restricted but there'd be exceptions for bona fide (anointed by the powerful) journalists.
ante hoc ergo non propter hoc.
...parent. Cars are for independence, the world of helicopter parenting doesn't allow for that.
Hmm. Spend your life in an average job which allows you the time to waste at work on leisure activities like 4chan, or burn yourself out working for a money man in some sort of Faustian arrangement. Perhaps the failed prodigies ARE the real geniuses...
Perhaps Pritchett's generalization was intended to apply specifically to men, and this was a trap women were less likely to fall into. I don't know, I haven't read the essay. You also might also be interested in some work by two men working out of Cornell, Mr. Dunning and Mr. Kruger.
No, some people are just dumb.
It should be abundantly clear by now that if you don't want data misused, the absolute best way to do is to not collect it in the first place, with a poor second being to reliably destroy it some short period after the collection. Certainly once you've transmitted it beyond the collection point to a third party, it can be assumed to be available forever.
If you want useful legislation, require that the data not be recorded or transmitted. But of course we already have legislation and regulation (OBD-III) requiring the opposite.
Might. But probably won't, if history is any guide. Probably just trying (and failing) to shame those of us who aren't is actually less harmful. The New Testament got this much right: the poor will always be with us.
(This message brought to you by the Institute For Fatalism. Believe us or not, it's not like we can change your mind)
If we're to execute people for violent crime, why not a violent (but quick) death? A bullet, a rope (no short drops), even a guillotine. There's no need for an execution to be so clinical.
I just bought a 60 burner phones, mailed all but one to various locations around the country, and texted "Meet me in Linithicum with 1kg U-235 at 9am April 1, 2014". Have a nice day.
Ah, Comrade Putin, he is bringing back another practice of the USSR: defection.
It appears this might be all about a Samsung lawsuit they've been involved in for some time. The other companies don't make the allegedly infringing devices, but they do import them, so BU decided to put some pressure on Samsung by suing the customers.
Oil from juvenile seals, expressed by antemortem percussion, works just as well as whale oil.
Now how about repealing the OTHER mistakes of the Bush Administration?
Doctrine of Equivalents does not apply to prior art. Prior art has to be exact. If they were as persnickety about finding infringement as they were about finding prior art, the problem would be much less. If they were as expansive about ruling something non-novel or non-obvious based on prior art as they are about finding infringement, the problem would be much, much less.
But instead it's novel and non-obvious if no one has described the exact same thing using the exact same words. But contrariwise, something infringes if it's "close enough".
And "on the internet" patents are "exhausted combination" patents, which the Supreme Court has ruled against but the patent office and lower courts keep accepting, because the system isn't working.
Because it's required by the rules of the sport. Where the rules allow the helmets to be removed (e.g. an alpine ascent), the cyclists remove them.
In today's world, saying that something is a good idea is tantamount to saying it should be compulsory. And if you object and tell them it's none of your business, they'll point to healthcare costs and say it is.
Looks like it has a fatal flaw or two.
It's no great trick to make a helmet which will absorb impact. The trick is to do it without too much weight and, unless you only ride in cold weather, without overheating your head. In general, the more you pay for a helmet, the less helmet and more hole you get. That thing is covered with a solid shell. No venting. It's a portable oven. It's also 535g -- about 1.2 pounds. It's a brick (and probably will contribute to neck injuries as a result).
Giro's cheapest MTB helmet has some vents and is 410g. Move up to a helmet you might actually wear in the heat, you've got almost as much vent as helmet and you're down to 316g. Go to one which costs as much as this one -- 80 pounds sterling -- and you're under 300g and have more holes than helmet.
If it was just unventilated it might still have its niche, but it's just too heavy.
Or is there something (like money and the chance to move OUT of China and/or India) which drives Chinese and Indian women into tech when they would normally be repelled?
It's worse than that. They want to eliminate geek culture (presumably replacing it with mainstream culture, or perhaps their idealized completely sanitized neuter culture) because most women don't feel comfortable with male geeks. The idea is not just to bring women in but to drive male geeks out.
If you were American, you'd probably have an idea what the issue is in Utah immediately. (and this time it really is societal pressure)
The "outright lies" being that there'd be huge cost overruns which NJ would be responsible for. Said "lies" being considered "lies" because the Office of Management and Budget swore up and down there woudn't be such overruns... yeah, pull the other one, it's got bells on. The ARC tunnel was destined to go way over schedule and way over budget... like every other major government project.
Christie certainly wanted the Fort Lee mayor published for not supporting him; that's just the way machine politics works (which is why Christie and Obama get along; they understand each other). I find it hard to believe he'd be stupid enough to do it by messing with the GWB, though. Aside from hurting a lot more than Fort Lee, messing with interstate transportation invites Federal scrutiny, as former US Attorney Christie would know.
Plausible deniability is part of the game too, so Christie probably let it be known the mayor was to be punished, and his staff cooked up a plan to do it without giving him the details.
That's household income. There's a lot of top-company tech workers who are married to other top-company tech workers, and if you believe Glassdoor, most of them will be in the top 1% for household income. Top 1% for individual income is probably within reach for many such workers.
That's not how an acceptable use policy works. Having an Acceptable Use Policy does not make EasyDNS responsible to third parties to enforce that Acceptable Use Policy.