How have I entered into a contractual obligation by using Google? What contractual obligation am I under or even is Google under by me entering a search term in a search box?
Wow. I didn't realize linguists were actually embracing this. OK, cool. But it just seems shorthand for removing the word "of" or "of a" which accomplishes the same thing.
I was late to work because hangover = I was late to work because of a hangover.
that Uber is really opening itself up to legal risk by doing this. This is essentially organized fraud. It's one thing to intend to purchase a lift and then cancel it at the last second, but by actually organizing mass cancellations when you really have no intention of purchasing a ride, you are really going down a path of massive fraud. I
None of this is relevant. You are forgetting that there are victims of crimes, and those victims have a right to justice, and part of justice involves incarcerating people for certain crimes.
Perp A breaks into my house because he is looking for jewelry, which he then pawns for money to fuel his "victimless" meth habit. Incarcerating that person has two effects: It removes him from the street, where he can get access to drugs that harm himself and society, and removes him from the street where he can no longer burglarize homes. The idea that society must work to rehabilitate this person is nice insofar that at some point he will be released, but that is secondary from physically stopping this person from committing certain crimes by incarcerating him.
Of course, the flaw in this is obvious. Actually there are quite a few. ***** Government: "Pay me a $1000 fine."
Offender: "No."
Government: “Offender’s Bank: Give us $1000 from Offender’s account (by seizing every penny deposited for the next 10 years immediately in priority over EVERY other debit if necessary) plus an extra penalty for non-compliance.
Offender's Bank: "No". ***
Or better yet, ***** Government: "Pay me a $1000 fine."
Offender: "No."
Government: “Offender’s Bank: Give us $1000 from Offender’s account (by seizing every penny deposited for the next 10 years immediately in priority over EVERY other debit if necessary) plus an extra penalty for non-compliance.”
Offender: OK. I take out my money and won't use a bank. ***
Or even:
**** Government: "Pay me a $1000 fine."
Offender: "No."
Government: "Offender's employer: We're garnishing offender's wages. Give us the next $1000 you were going to pay offender, even if that means he doesn't see a penny for a paycheck for the next two months."
Offender's employer: No. ***
At some point the threat of jail time for people responsible for certain actions is a necessity.
I don't undesrtand. Did you mean to imply the hack at xkcd is a former NASA engineer, or the talent at xkcd is a former NASA hack? Or a former hack engineer? Or the talent behind hacking? I'm so confused.
I disagree it is a trolling comment. I understand you believe it is, but it isn't. When I said misandry isn't a word, I meant it isn't a real thing that exists in any demonstrable way. There is no large amount of women who hate men, which is what is meant by people who accuse women of misandry. I should have phrased it better, true.
Free speech is that protected or regulated by government...not that of an individual company to moderate what sort of speech goes on its website.
Surely you realize this?
And it's not about what people are saying...these are gif meant to evoke a visceral reaction in people. Looking a rape gif is not "reading" a comment. These are people who are actively trying to shut down the comments section of a website. They ought to be sued for harassment.
Actually, the latest events on Jezebel proves the point of many of Jezebel's authors, which is that much of the internet is openly hostile to women. Jezebel is an awesome blog and has fantastic stories about the crap that women have to put up with in this country and around the world every single day. They call out misogyny on the internet, and are promptly spammed with rape gifs. They aren't the problem at all; it's the jerks who posted the gifs who are the problem, so yes, their example is a perfect example.
As for "militant", I don't think that word means what you think it means.
""They belong on personal blogs, or on Twitter or Tumblr or Reddit, where individuals build a full, searchable body of work and can be judged accordingly.""
he misunderstands what comments are for. They are for a discussion. People like to have a discussion after they read a news article on some relevant topic. And just like in real life, some people try to hijack that discussion.
And as in real life, the only way to deal with those people is to physically remove them from the conversation. That is, have a moderator whose job it is to delete the posts and evict the poster, even if it is a throwaway account.
to monetize the comments. There have long been multiple types of comment systems that handled comments from spammers very well. Ones that require authentication, ones that allow people to downvote a comment into oblivion, ones that get hidden because no one reads them. The Kinja system they used was horrible, and their moderators were too slow to deal with complaints of the types of comments they were having.
If your web business relies upon comments for page views and for actual income, then you should actually have multiple full-time people whose job it is to delete unwanted comments. It's that simple. If you can't afford to do it, then don't have the comments.
Part of this is that in London you need to pass tests about how complicated your streets are, because they were designed haphazardly going back, well, at least a thousand years?
Here in places like Phoenix or New York, for example, we have things like numbered "streets" and "avenues" that make it convenient for someone with a bare amount of this "knowledge" you speak of to drive a person from point A to B.
Slashdot Mirror
How have I entered into a contractual obligation by using Google? What contractual obligation am I under or even is Google under by me entering a search term in a search box?
Nerds. Nerds everywhere.
Wow. I didn't realize linguists were actually embracing this. OK, cool. But it just seems shorthand for removing the word "of" or "of a" which accomplishes the same thing.
I was late to work because hangover = I was late to work because of a hangover.
But he has a point, which you chose to ignore.
So this is a threat, and if you could be tracked down, you'd be arrested and sent to prison.
I do not believe that "bork" is a legal term with any validity.
that Uber is really opening itself up to legal risk by doing this. This is essentially organized fraud. It's one thing to intend to purchase a lift and then cancel it at the last second, but by actually organizing mass cancellations when you really have no intention of purchasing a ride, you are really going down a path of massive fraud. I
" If they continue to do so anyhow, the government will shut them down by force."
Thanks for validating my argument. At the end of the day, the government must ultimately be able to respond to white collar crime with force.
None of this is relevant. You are forgetting that there are victims of crimes, and those victims have a right to justice, and part of justice involves incarcerating people for certain crimes.
Perp A breaks into my house because he is looking for jewelry, which he then pawns for money to fuel his "victimless" meth habit. Incarcerating that person has two effects: It removes him from the street, where he can get access to drugs that harm himself and society, and removes him from the street where he can no longer burglarize homes. The idea that society must work to rehabilitate this person is nice insofar that at some point he will be released, but that is secondary from physically stopping this person from committing certain crimes by incarcerating him.
Of course, the flaw in this is obvious. Actually there are quite a few.
*****
Government: "Pay me a $1000 fine."
Offender: "No."
Government: “Offender’s Bank: Give us $1000 from Offender’s account (by seizing every penny deposited for the next 10 years immediately in priority over EVERY other debit if necessary) plus an extra penalty for non-compliance.
Offender's Bank: "No".
***
Or better yet,
*****
Government: "Pay me a $1000 fine."
Offender: "No."
Government: “Offender’s Bank: Give us $1000 from Offender’s account (by seizing every penny deposited for the next 10 years immediately in priority over EVERY other debit if necessary) plus an extra penalty for non-compliance.”
Offender: OK. I take out my money and won't use a bank.
***
Or even:
****
Government: "Pay me a $1000 fine."
Offender: "No."
Government: "Offender's employer: We're garnishing offender's wages. Give us the next $1000 you were going to pay offender, even if that means he doesn't see a penny for a paycheck for the next two months."
Offender's employer: No.
***
At some point the threat of jail time for people responsible for certain actions is a necessity.
I'm sure the Russians would be pretty irritated at first but would manage to take over the German Wikipedia after a while.
A-ha!
Chicago is not the US.
I don't undesrtand. Did you mean to imply the hack at xkcd is a former NASA engineer, or the talent at xkcd is a former NASA hack? Or a former hack engineer? Or the talent behind hacking? I'm so confused.
I disagree it is a trolling comment. I understand you believe it is, but it isn't. When I said misandry isn't a word, I meant it isn't a real thing that exists in any demonstrable way. There is no large amount of women who hate men, which is what is meant by people who accuse women of misandry. I should have phrased it better, true.
Misandry isn't a word.
It is possible to disagree with someone without being a troll.
You are wrong. And I am not a troll.
Free speech is that protected or regulated by government...not that of an individual company to moderate what sort of speech goes on its website.
Surely you realize this?
And it's not about what people are saying...these are gif meant to evoke a visceral reaction in people. Looking a rape gif is not "reading" a comment. These are people who are actively trying to shut down the comments section of a website. They ought to be sued for harassment.
Actually, the latest events on Jezebel proves the point of many of Jezebel's authors, which is that much of the internet is openly hostile to women. Jezebel is an awesome blog and has fantastic stories about the crap that women have to put up with in this country and around the world every single day. They call out misogyny on the internet, and are promptly spammed with rape gifs. They aren't the problem at all; it's the jerks who posted the gifs who are the problem, so yes, their example is a perfect example.
As for "militant", I don't think that word means what you think it means.
""They belong on personal blogs, or on Twitter or Tumblr or Reddit, where individuals build a full, searchable body of work and can be judged accordingly.""
he misunderstands what comments are for. They are for a discussion. People like to have a discussion after they read a news article on some relevant topic. And just like in real life, some people try to hijack that discussion.
And as in real life, the only way to deal with those people is to physically remove them from the conversation. That is, have a moderator whose job it is to delete the posts and evict the poster, even if it is a throwaway account.
to monetize the comments. There have long been multiple types of comment systems that handled comments from spammers very well. Ones that require authentication, ones that allow people to downvote a comment into oblivion, ones that get hidden because no one reads them. The Kinja system they used was horrible, and their moderators were too slow to deal with complaints of the types of comments they were having.
If your web business relies upon comments for page views and for actual income, then you should actually have multiple full-time people whose job it is to delete unwanted comments. It's that simple. If you can't afford to do it, then don't have the comments.
But generally don't.
You didn't do it right.
Part of this is that in London you need to pass tests about how complicated your streets are, because they were designed haphazardly going back, well, at least a thousand years?
Here in places like Phoenix or New York, for example, we have things like numbered "streets" and "avenues" that make it convenient for someone with a bare amount of this "knowledge" you speak of to drive a person from point A to B.
Most people don't buy snake oil at all; it's rather difficult to find. Snakes don't produce much anyways.