they disproportionately behave in ways that give police the excuse to shoot.
attempt to escape more, run more, talk back more,... and are simply more discourteous
I was unaware that discourtesy was an excuse to shoot. A fleeing suspect is not a danger to anyone, unless known to be armed and dangerous. If mouthing off to an officer or running away is grounds to shoot, we need to change policies fast.
IANAL, but I don't think "natural monopoly" matters here. It is illegal to leverage a monopoly in one area to get an unfair advantage in another. Certain forms of anticompetitive behavior are illegal, monopoly or not. It's legal to have a monopoly, but your actions will be followed much more attentively.
Also, the x86 market includes almost all of the laptop, desktop, and server markets, and those are distinct from the tablet and phone markets (almost all ARM). An ARM tablet won't run a large amount of software that can be business-critical, for example, so it's not an acceptable substitute.
Obviously, people will still create art of some forms, but not all. Movies would be far inferior technically to what we've got now, without money from copyright coming in. Instead of polished prose in our fiction, we'd normally have to read second drafts, or however far the author gets before it stops being fun. We wouldn't have editors and proofreaders.
Tabulating machines count paper ballots, and leave them in existence as paper ballots. The tabulators can be spot-checked by hand counts, and it's always possible to recount the ballots. The important thing is that there is a hardcopy trail of the individual votes, so elections can be audited after the fact.
I studied mathematics for some time. I know what I'm talking about. Under your definition, one of the fundamental theorems of arithmetic (that each number has a unique prime factorization) is false. This has nothing to do with the Sieve, which as you point out is an algorithm. It has to do with making useful mathematical definitions.
Mathematics doesn't depend on the physical world. It's a collection of deductions from axioms and definitions, and we tailor the axioms and definitions to be useful. Defining 1 to be prime screws things up, so 1 is not prime. This is the standard definition, and has been for a long, long time. If you were to check with any of the mathematicians you wave at, that's what you'd be told.
There is no largest prime number, and primes are a subset of integers. Therefore, we can have a one-to-one correspondence with primes and the integers 1 and greater, giving the ordinal. Given a prime number, therefore, there's a prime that's the ordinal for. Since there is no largest prime number, there's no largest prime whose ordinal is also prime.
You can check whether numbers are prime, and therefore you can check whether any particular ordinal is prime. There's no quick way to do so as far as I know (primality testing isn't even known to be in NP).
The Nazis weren't honest about their intentions and power structure, and the NSDAP was not labeled as "Communist lite". You made a false statement there.
The main things the Nazis and the Communists had in common was collectivization (the individual isn't important except as part of a larger whole) and authoritarianism (which was inherent in National Socialism and how Communism has actually worked on a national scale). The Nazis were capitalists, nationalists, and their philosophy was mystical. Communists are economic socialists, international and classist, and have a materialistic philosophy.
And that was applied to "intoxicating liquors" in specific. I don't see anywhere in the Constitution that gives the Feds the authority to regulate drugs in general, only their interstate commerce (which covers a lot of the illegal drug market, but not all).
Suppose I hold the copyright to something, and you post something on YouTube. In the DMCA request, I have to hold the copyright or represent the copyright holder, and that's under pain of perjury. If I claim copyright on Frozen, for example, I'm committing perjury and that can send me to prison. I also have to claim that you've infringed on my copyright, and that's just required to be good faith, which in practice means absolutely nothing. I can legally claim copyright on this Slashdot post, which I do have copyright on, and say that your cat video on YouTube infringes. I'm completely wrong, but it isn't clear to me I've done anything illegal.
And it will leave the Earth intact as a round solid body, just jumbled a bit. Plenty good enough to wipe out humanity, but it wouldn't leave a dust cloud.
We're people. That's what we've got to work with. As Churchill said, democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried.
Fascism as a political system is authoritarian, and therefore I'm against it. Private organizations have different needs.
Hitler got into power by being appointed Chancellor by right-wing authoritarians. He got rid of the Socialist wing of the party with extreme prejudice shortly after being appointed. He courted industrialists, which is precisely what socialists don't do. He divided the world into racial and national groups, whereas socialists divide the world into socio-economic classes.
It's called "leftism", and it comes in either fascism...
Thanks for telling us up front that you're a right-winger who gets his "history" from slanted sources. There's nothing left-wing about Fascism. Fascism is authoritarian, and all the examples I know of Communist regimes headed that way, but only a propagandist thinks authoritarianism is left-wing in any way.
You seem to consider all harassment short of physical harassment or threats of same as trivial. You assume that people can shrug off insults if they like. Learning to do that took me over fifty years.
Said wife may have had uses for that $50, and taking it might inconvenience her considerably. There are situations in which not having a specific sum of cash on me could be very awkward.
Not all assets have shared ownership in a marriage. I've got some assets in my name only. (They're "transfer on death" to my wife, of course, but they're hers only over my dead body.)
Slashdot Mirror
I was unaware that discourtesy was an excuse to shoot. A fleeing suspect is not a danger to anyone, unless known to be armed and dangerous. If mouthing off to an officer or running away is grounds to shoot, we need to change policies fast.
Okay, so why isn't this a race condition, and what IS the difference between a race condition and a statistical timing condition?
IANAL, but I don't think "natural monopoly" matters here. It is illegal to leverage a monopoly in one area to get an unfair advantage in another. Certain forms of anticompetitive behavior are illegal, monopoly or not. It's legal to have a monopoly, but your actions will be followed much more attentively.
Also, the x86 market includes almost all of the laptop, desktop, and server markets, and those are distinct from the tablet and phone markets (almost all ARM). An ARM tablet won't run a large amount of software that can be business-critical, for example, so it's not an acceptable substitute.
Obviously, people will still create art of some forms, but not all. Movies would be far inferior technically to what we've got now, without money from copyright coming in. Instead of polished prose in our fiction, we'd normally have to read second drafts, or however far the author gets before it stops being fun. We wouldn't have editors and proofreaders.
Tabulating machines count paper ballots, and leave them in existence as paper ballots. The tabulators can be spot-checked by hand counts, and it's always possible to recount the ballots. The important thing is that there is a hardcopy trail of the individual votes, so elections can be audited after the fact.
I studied mathematics for some time. I know what I'm talking about. Under your definition, one of the fundamental theorems of arithmetic (that each number has a unique prime factorization) is false. This has nothing to do with the Sieve, which as you point out is an algorithm. It has to do with making useful mathematical definitions.
Mathematics doesn't depend on the physical world. It's a collection of deductions from axioms and definitions, and we tailor the axioms and definitions to be useful. Defining 1 to be prime screws things up, so 1 is not prime. This is the standard definition, and has been for a long, long time. If you were to check with any of the mathematicians you wave at, that's what you'd be told.
There is no largest prime number, and primes are a subset of integers. Therefore, we can have a one-to-one correspondence with primes and the integers 1 and greater, giving the ordinal. Given a prime number, therefore, there's a prime that's the ordinal for. Since there is no largest prime number, there's no largest prime whose ordinal is also prime.
You can check whether numbers are prime, and therefore you can check whether any particular ordinal is prime. There's no quick way to do so as far as I know (primality testing isn't even known to be in NP).
There was, but I fail to see what any of the others have to do with the Electoral College. If you think others had influence, please post.
The Nazis weren't honest about their intentions and power structure, and the NSDAP was not labeled as "Communist lite". You made a false statement there.
The main things the Nazis and the Communists had in common was collectivization (the individual isn't important except as part of a larger whole) and authoritarianism (which was inherent in National Socialism and how Communism has actually worked on a national scale). The Nazis were capitalists, nationalists, and their philosophy was mystical. Communists are economic socialists, international and classist, and have a materialistic philosophy.
And that was applied to "intoxicating liquors" in specific. I don't see anywhere in the Constitution that gives the Feds the authority to regulate drugs in general, only their interstate commerce (which covers a lot of the illegal drug market, but not all).
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Ignorance of the facts can be. I can legally express an opinion which is completely wrong.
Suppose I hold the copyright to something, and you post something on YouTube. In the DMCA request, I have to hold the copyright or represent the copyright holder, and that's under pain of perjury. If I claim copyright on Frozen, for example, I'm committing perjury and that can send me to prison. I also have to claim that you've infringed on my copyright, and that's just required to be good faith, which in practice means absolutely nothing. I can legally claim copyright on this Slashdot post, which I do have copyright on, and say that your cat video on YouTube infringes. I'm completely wrong, but it isn't clear to me I've done anything illegal.
Only if you think that marijuana and heroin are "intoxicating liquors", which is what the Eighteenth and Twenty-First addressed.
And it will leave the Earth intact as a round solid body, just jumbled a bit. Plenty good enough to wipe out humanity, but it wouldn't leave a dust cloud.
We're people. That's what we've got to work with. As Churchill said, democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried.
Fascism as a political system is authoritarian, and therefore I'm against it. Private organizations have different needs.
Hitler got into power by being appointed Chancellor by right-wing authoritarians. He got rid of the Socialist wing of the party with extreme prejudice shortly after being appointed. He courted industrialists, which is precisely what socialists don't do. He divided the world into racial and national groups, whereas socialists divide the world into socio-economic classes.
No, Communism is not Fascism. They're both heavily authoritarian. I've actually studied some of this stuff.
Thanks for telling us up front that you're a right-winger who gets his "history" from slanted sources. There's nothing left-wing about Fascism. Fascism is authoritarian, and all the examples I know of Communist regimes headed that way, but only a propagandist thinks authoritarianism is left-wing in any way.
It can't be solved with education when there's too many people that are anti-education.
Hitler would have considered letters with umlauts and that beta-looking thing that means lowercase double s as basic text.
You seem to consider all harassment short of physical harassment or threats of same as trivial. You assume that people can shrug off insults if they like. Learning to do that took me over fifty years.
Got a case to look at?
Said wife may have had uses for that $50, and taking it might inconvenience her considerably. There are situations in which not having a specific sum of cash on me could be very awkward.
Speaking as a leftist...you don't know what you're talking about. Go out and meet some of us sometime, in person.
Not all assets have shared ownership in a marriage. I've got some assets in my name only. (They're "transfer on death" to my wife, of course, but they're hers only over my dead body.)
The American People chose Clinton over Trump. The Electoral College made some votes worth less, and so we got Trump.