Thanks for the insight into the French legislative process. I thought it very odd that a legislative body could vote anything directly into law without some sort of presidential/royal assent.
Especially in France, where I understand the President has unusually broad powers, thanks(?) in part to de Gaulle.
Glycemic Index is a measure of how fast/high blood sugar (dextrose) rises after a given food is consumed. IIRC, fructose is 36 on the scale that uses white-bread=100 (dextrose=131).
I'm not saying the study is wrong, but it does beg the question -- what would be different with dextrose overdosing? BTW, I don't believe that high-fructose corn-syrup is more than ~30% fructose (bal dextrose).
You ask about work prospects. There's lots of work in the US, but there are significant hurdles you have to overcome: Legal immigration is not easy; and healthcare insurance is expensive for those who cannot get it through their employer.
Both of these problems are easiest solved by marrying your significant other. You can get a temporary green card, and if she has health insurance through her employer, it will likely be expandable to cover her spouse (you). These are significant marriage benefits, and one reason GLBT people are requesting legal recognition for their marriages.
Precisely so on the international character of the Internet. Furthermore, the FCC exists to allocate electromagnetic [radio] spectrum between users. It migh very well have a say in WiFi, especially systems covering whole towns. The FCC has some say in telephony because it uses[d] microwave towers for long-distance links. Fankly, the babybells have far worse trouble from the state PUCs.
But most of the Internet is fiber or copper wired over with the FCC has no jurisdiction. Not that that will stop them from trying. Bureaucracies expand somewhat beyond their limit of competence.
I don't much like ad-lib wiretaps, but I hate them much less than shooting agitated air passengers (Miami). I can also see considerable legal support for Pres.Bush's position:
The key is these are international communications. They cross the US borders, and the US has always exerted considerable authority over everything that crosses it's borders. US Customs is empowered to search and seize any contraband, pr0n or Cuban cigars, without violating the 4thAm. Less well known are the Export Restrictions (CCL & ITAR). The US can and does forbid the export of items, usually military or security related. This includes information, and obviously requires monitoring for enforcement.
Now there is this 1978 law setting up a secret court. Maybe Bush should've used it. But he also has another law on Sept 14, 2001 giving him extremely broad anti-terrorist powers. This is an area of conflict-of-laws, and normally the latest rules, but perhaps not if it is not specific.
The only reason they're outgrowing their servers and links is that more and more people are finding them popular. Whether I agree or not with their viewpoint, I'm always happy to see people finding what makes them happy. Even moreso, because the growth is likely to be from moderates -- the real fringies were already there.
I don't know how you work with files, but I frequently poke around and do not want changes saved. This applies especially for spreadsheets. I always turn autosave off, and I'm quite conscious of the need to save and time myself accordingly.
Small wonder users are insecure when the advice they get is sooo wrong! FWIW: I run Linux and have no firewall, ani-virus or anti-spyware!
For MS-Win users, the real issue is _NOT_ presence or lack of these additional software products. The first and most important step is privilige isolation: STOP RUNNING WITH ADMIN PRIVS! Second comes understanding your sw and not using it dangerously. For MS-IE or MS-Outlook, that means not using it at all. Third, is keeping your system patched. MS-WIndows Update doesn't do a horrible job.
There's really no excuse for "experts" (drips under pressure) not to know. The NIST has some nice recommendations for MS-WinXP, easily installed as registry updates.
I deplore the misuse of the word "censorship" as much as I deplore the misuse of "piracy" for unauthroized copying. Censorship has a precise definition: it is forcing changes in a work. Banning is the act of not permitting something to be published. But it doesn't sound as bad.
In this case, the AU Seniltore wants the ISP to have filtering automatically enabled, but disableable at customer's request. It is then nothing more than a required but optional service. Of course the filtering will not work (leaky and false positives) and none of use would use it. But some people might want to protect their kids, and I see no reason in preventing them.
I am _not_ kidding. XBox is a unique thing. It runs certain titles, which are copyrighted [legal monopolies], that are not available for other consoles. Halo2 comes to mind. So it might qualify as a monopoly.
Of course, MS would argue "the relevant market" is much larger, and includes all consoles of which Xbox has a [deservedly] small share. However logical it might appear, that logic might not prevail. Antitrust law is a particularly aggressive beast.
I'd give notice, etc. as the company does. If they turf people out on short notice, I'd leave that way too.
They seem not to care very much for your skills, or they wouldn't disable you so quickly. They may be paranoid. I would think you have some transition to do, and they've rendered that difficult, so it won't be as complete.
No, no one was compelled by force to buy Xbox or it's accessories. However, BB is the best reasonable source in many areas. Furthermore, Xbox is a monopoly in some respects, and bundling non-essentials with a monopoly good is illegal under US Antitrust Law.
I have negative interest in Xboxen, 360 or otherwise. But I do understand that some people are quite taken with the system and devote much effort to it. That is their choice. I also do not suspect them of rampant consumerism. I doubt they buy many Beeny-Babies.
I'm sorry, but a simple return is not amends. It is merely rectification, and incomplete at that because of the trouble involved, including fishing out a receipt. Rather like a mail-in rebate.
People who are sorry usually promise not to repeat the offense, and also usually try to make it up. What is BB going to do? Some sort of rebate/refund?
Or are they just sorry they didn't get away with it, and don't recognize that what they did was in any way wrong?
Commercial media exists to sell eyeballs to it's customers, the advertisers. Ink, photons or electrons, it doesn't matter. Nor does It matter how these eyeballs are harvested. Some are attracted by breaking news, others by insight, and still others by flamebait. You see all three in varying portions in all media, from The Economist and NYT through to The National Enqirer and The Register.
I'm a bit surprised the skule did this. Either there's lots we're not being told (warning, etc) or the skule is getting some very bad legal advice. Yes, they can. Like everything (including the blogging), all actions have consequences.
In this case, there's probably some Federal/State anti-discrimination law, either tied to some of the grant money the institution undoubtedly receives, or simply from it's status as an educational institution. Blogger sues sex, income or any potential discrimination. Skule is on defensive and has to prove that it really was the insulting blogs, and that it does the same for all. If he finds one counter-example of tolerated insolence, they're sunk.
Number and severity of symptomes is the absolute key to diagnosis under the DSM. It _has_ to be debilitating. Otherwise, there's nothing in there that isn't desireable in moderation.
I do not mean to cricise the decision, merely point out that as projects become more popular and mature, the entrance criteria can and should be tightened. The value of an individual contribution is a much lower fraction of the total.
The real question is how to manage this tightening. To quick shuts off valuable contribution, too slowly risks splintering chaos.
This is why "ad-hominem" arguments are so unfair. They're irrefutible by the target who is often dismissed as arguing from self-interest. The proper action is for others to speak up in defense.
I'm sorry, but I find the RIAA's actions utterly insupportable and I cannot in good conscience support them (or their members) in any manner. I just don't buy CDs. I do support the artists, and will go to concerts.
Sometimes my kids want a CD. I won't control their choices, but they have to listen to a lecture from me about the evil they would support: RIAA harassing customers, exploiting artists, milking their back catalog and not spending nearly enough money finding/deveoping talent.
The MPAA hasn't [yet][ gotten so bad, so I still spend north of $1000/yr on DVDs.
Sheesh! Why does everything have to be negative? A vast conspiracy against "the little guy"? I pity those who live in such fear. It's unpleasant to encounter paranoia, but they have to live with it 24/7.
In this case, TFA is just talking about QoS and high-bandwidth RT feeds like streaming video. I'd fully expect a large ISP to peer with such folk. Helps everybody if there's enough traffic to justify the direct, dedicated connection.
Slashdot Mirror
Especially in France, where I understand the President has unusually broad powers, thanks(?) in part to de Gaulle.
I'm not saying the study is wrong, but it does beg the question -- what would be different with dextrose overdosing? BTW, I don't believe that high-fructose corn-syrup is more than ~30% fructose (bal dextrose).
Both of these problems are easiest solved by marrying your significant other. You can get a temporary green card, and if she has health insurance through her employer, it will likely be expandable to cover her spouse (you). These are significant marriage benefits, and one reason GLBT people are requesting legal recognition for their marriages.
But most of the Internet is fiber or copper wired over with the FCC has no jurisdiction. Not that that will stop them from trying. Bureaucracies expand somewhat beyond their limit of competence.
The key is these are international communications. They cross the US borders, and the US has always exerted considerable authority over everything that crosses it's borders. US Customs is empowered to search and seize any contraband, pr0n or Cuban cigars, without violating the 4thAm. Less well known are the Export Restrictions (CCL & ITAR). The US can and does forbid the export of items, usually military or security related. This includes information, and obviously requires monitoring for enforcement.
Now there is this 1978 law setting up a secret court. Maybe Bush should've used it. But he also has another law on Sept 14, 2001 giving him extremely broad anti-terrorist powers. This is an area of conflict-of-laws, and normally the latest rules, but perhaps not if it is not specific.
For MS-Win users, the real issue is _NOT_ presence or lack of these additional software products. The first and most important step is privilige isolation: STOP RUNNING WITH ADMIN PRIVS! Second comes understanding your sw and not using it dangerously. For MS-IE or MS-Outlook, that means not using it at all. Third, is keeping your system patched. MS-WIndows Update doesn't do a horrible job.
There's really no excuse for "experts" (drips under pressure) not to know. The NIST has some nice recommendations for MS-WinXP, easily installed as registry updates.
In this case, the AU Seniltore wants the ISP to have filtering automatically enabled, but disableable at customer's request. It is then nothing more than a required but optional service. Of course the filtering will not work (leaky and false positives) and none of use would use it. But some people might want to protect their kids, and I see no reason in preventing them.
Of course, MS would argue "the relevant market" is much larger, and includes all consoles of which Xbox has a [deservedly] small share. However logical it might appear, that logic might not prevail. Antitrust law is a particularly aggressive beast.
They seem not to care very much for your skills, or they wouldn't disable you so quickly. They may be paranoid. I would think you have some transition to do, and they've rendered that difficult, so it won't be as complete.
Or are they just sorry they didn't get away with it, and don't recognize that what they did was in any way wrong?
In this case, there's probably some Federal/State anti-discrimination law, either tied to some of the grant money the institution undoubtedly receives, or simply from it's status as an educational institution. Blogger sues sex, income or any potential discrimination. Skule is on defensive and has to prove that it really was the insulting blogs, and that it does the same for all. If he finds one counter-example of tolerated insolence, they're sunk.
The real question is how to manage this tightening. To quick shuts off valuable contribution, too slowly risks splintering chaos.
This is why "ad-hominem" arguments are so unfair. They're irrefutible by the target who is often dismissed as arguing from self-interest. The proper action is for others to speak up in defense.
Sometimes my kids want a CD. I won't control their choices, but they have to listen to a lecture from me about the evil they would support: RIAA harassing customers, exploiting artists, milking their back catalog and not spending nearly enough money finding/deveoping talent.
The MPAA hasn't [yet][ gotten so bad, so I still spend north of $1000/yr on DVDs.
In this case, TFA is just talking about QoS and high-bandwidth RT feeds like streaming video. I'd fully expect a large ISP to peer with such folk. Helps everybody if there's enough traffic to justify the direct, dedicated connection.