But in Mississippi, this is the penalty-phase. The traffic camera vendor ran a scam on the citizens of Mississippi to deprive them of their money. Mississippi is effectively banning them from making any more money in the state, which is the best they can do. Just adjusting the law to something reasonable still rewards the traffic camera vendor or their unethical business practice.
The burden of proof in a libel case is on the plaintiff. Showing that the statement is true is sufficient to defend against a libel suit, but not necessary.
In general, to win a libel suit, you have to show that the statement was not true, that the other party should have known it wasn't true, and that the statement caused damage to the plaintiff's reputation.
Suing eBay because they told a bunch of people that you, where you is a account name on eBay, are a criminal, is not likely to survive summary judgment.
The goal is to get people to stop shooting missiles at you. They way to get people to stop shooting missiles at you is NOT motivate 10 people to start shooting missiles at you for every one missile-shooting guy you kill because you not only killed the missile-shooter, but everybody within 300 feet of him.
Another way to get people to stop shooting missiles at you is stop starving them.
There really is no denying the evidence: If killing Palestinians brought security, Israel would have been secure 30 years ago.
Well, if your country had to endure more than 6000 (!) rocket attacks over several years, with the attackers' elected government calling for your "eradication" from this planet, you'd probably ignore that. Am I right?
6,000 rockets that killed a total of 15 people in 8 years?
Yes, that's exactly what we'd do. What we certainly wouldn't do is respond with missile strikes into apartment buildings and other densely populated areas that killed thousands over the same period.
Look at Britain and the IRA. Spain and Basques. US and gangs or drug cartels. None indiscriminately use military-level power on the civilians the way the Israelis do. It's disproportionate and ineffective.
When you know where a terrorist is, you arrest them, you don't send a missile into their apartment building.
I've been party to both positive and negative foreign worker experiences.
I've had the privilege of working with a lot of extremely qualified, foreign-born engineers. Some from Europe, some from Asia. They're no different than American workers - you have to interview effectively to make sure you hire the best people. If you don't hire the best people, you're going to get bad people. Of all the foreign workers I've worked with, only one has not been worth his salary.
So if the foreign workers your company hires are a waste of money, shame on your company for having a poor interview and review process. But that has nothing to do with immigration - a nice talking kid from US engineering college could do just as much exaggeration and get hired at the same company.
On the strongly negative front, we outsourced part of a project once. Needed it done ASAP. Contracted a company in India to do it. Waste of money. Got zero value out of it. Just couldn't do effective management/quality control over half the globe and 12 time zones.
Anyway, if your company is hiring unqualified employees, that's a hiring problem, not an immigration problem.
I think a lot of Americans don't realize why America became the superpower it is.
For thousands and thousands of years, the way to increase your nation's power was to go and invade the other nation, subjugate them, and take their stuff.
The problem is that's a pretty expensive way of going about things. The answer?
Immigration!
Why fight through the world subjugating people when you can just open up the gates of immigration and the best, brightest and hardest working of the other nation's populace will voluntarily and at their own expense subjugate themselves?
The fact of the matter is that intelligent foreigners exist. They can work here, or they can work there. The question, then, is it better if they work here or there?
The answer is obvious - we want them here.
As for 'room' for American citizens, if you can't compete with a guy who was born in India, with all your American-born advantages, he's either just plain smarter than you, or just plain works harder than you. Either way, he deserves your job, and the American company hiring him shouldn't be saddled with your either less-intelligent or less-driven self just because the more qualified candidate was born in the wrong spot.
Not only critics say that, anyone who has ever run a business will tell you that ALL costs are passed on to the customers in one way or another.
Well, I run a business, and I won't tell you that.
I charge what people will pay. If my costs of providing the product go up, and the amount of money people are willing to pay does not, the costs come out of profits.
Generally, if you raise prices as a result of increased costs, you'll either make even less money than if you had left your prices the same, or you were not maximizing your profit in the first place.
The airlines just learned this, for example - they were forced to raise their prices as a result of cost increases, then realized they should have been charging more all along...
Thanks for proving the point. MOST people manage to figure out talking to the opposite gender in high school.
I was also doing quite fine with the ladies in my early 20's. That doesn't change the fact that I was doing quite NOT fine prior to then. Nor does my later success change the fact that while, in my early 20's, I had managed to snap out of my creepiness and relate quite well to the opposite gender *AND* take engineering classes, 95% of my peers in those engineering classes had not and were still incredibly creepy.
In fact, it was a running joke amongst my non-engineering friends... "Wow, engineering, that must suck, with only a few girls per class!", to which the standard reply was "Not when I'm the only guy in class who can talk to girls!"
Look at it this way. Think of a fairly female-hostile environment. Let's say, maybe, the army. Lots of testosterone, general mistrust of women's abilities, yadda yadda. Now, take all of that, and on top of it add CREEPY guys. That's geekdom - the most hostile environment for your average female, as not only does she have to put up with a male dominated environment, she has to put up with a male-dominated environment dominated by CREEPY males.
Now that I'm 30, I realize why, as a young geek, I was, at least for a little while, mistreated.
Because I was CREEPY.
And, let's face it, people don't like creepy people.
This is doubly-true for members of the opposite gender. It's not that girls don't talk to nerds because they have something against people who are smart. They don't talk to nerds because nerds act creepy all the time!
I eventually learned how to not be creepy, and girls stopped treating me like a creep. Didn't get any dumber, didn't act any dumber, and in fact, my intelligence became a great asset - once I stopped acting like a creep.
Now, don't feel bad, I didn't become consciously aware of the problem until about a month ago, and I'm 30. But here are some signs that the real reason girls don't interact with you is because you are a creep:
- Do you regularly find yourself staring at girls you don't ever muster up the balls to talk to? Creepy! - When you do eventually try to escalate a social relationship with a girl, to you find yourself asking someone who you've said a few sentences to in the course of the past week "Would you like to go out some time?" - Do you arrange your movements to constantly "accidentally" run into a girl where you know where she'll be? - Do you think every girl you happen to work with (class work, real work) who isn't mean to you must really like you?
So to bring this back on-topic, why is it that there are not more women in geek fields?
Because geek fields are the refuge of the socially inept, and the socially inept are creepy!
The only thing that needs to be done to get more women in geek fields is just teach geeks how to talk to the opposite sex without being total creeps about it.
Legislation (or threat of legislation) had nothing to do with it. The legislators are already all bought and paid for.
The problem is that selling replacement chargers only works from a profit perspective when the profit from the replacement chargers you're selling offsets the cost of the free chargers you're including with the phone. That worked for a little while, but then generic manufacturers got involved, and the money made selling replacement chargers stopped beating the money spent including free chargers.
So the phone companies are switching over to the printer+USB cable/HD TV+HDMI cable model. With standardized chargers, they don't need to include a charger with the phone anymore, saving them money. And then the retailers can sell you a phone, and then also sell you a $2 charger for $80. $120 if it's gold plated. $180 if it's gold plated and made by Monster.
The Guild may actually have the more "just" position. Authors, with the exception of that rare 1 percent of best sellers, are not particularly well compensated. They do it because they love the profession and have some uncomfortable compulsion that makes them write, despite a average hourly salary measure in pennies.
Probably the same compulsion that drives lots of people to participate in various creative fields who just plain suck at it. LA is full of bad "actresses". Bars across the country are full of bad musicians - hell, some of them even charge cover to let bad singers sing! And don't forget bad artists....
People like to be creative. It's fun. But you don't get paid for doing something creative - you get paid for doing something creative that other people are willing to pay for.
And if nobody wants to pay for it, well, that doesn't mean you're poorly compensated. It just means you're producing crap.
...you don't need to bathe, or cut your fingernails, or brush your teeth, or see the doctor, or take prescription medication....
If flossing your teeth was important, you'd have been born with twine between your fingers!
On evolution alone, our life expectancy is about 35. And a lot of things we evolved over a couple million years are no longer useful after the past couple thousand years of rapid changes.
Somebody has to make medical choices for babies, and in cases where outcome is controversial (is it better to remove the foreskin or leave it?) that judgment rightfully lies with the parents.
Note, however, that male circumcision (no significant long-term loss of function) is not in the same world as female "circumcision", which causes a permanent loss of function.
So you kinda got it right, it's just that your example of male circumcision doesn't really meet the threshold of harm significant enough to override parental choice.
Slashdot Mirror
That's probably not a bad long-term solution.
But in Mississippi, this is the penalty-phase. The traffic camera vendor ran a scam on the citizens of Mississippi to deprive them of their money. Mississippi is effectively banning them from making any more money in the state, which is the best they can do. Just adjusting the law to something reasonable still rewards the traffic camera vendor or their unethical business practice.
IANAL either, but you're mistaken.
The burden of proof in a libel case is on the plaintiff. Showing that the statement is true is sufficient to defend against a libel suit, but not necessary.
In general, to win a libel suit, you have to show that the statement was not true, that the other party should have known it wasn't true, and that the statement caused damage to the plaintiff's reputation.
Suing eBay because they told a bunch of people that you, where you is a account name on eBay, are a criminal, is not likely to survive summary judgment.
Once someone starts committing a crime it's time to stop them.
So if your neighbor kills somebody, it's OK to drop a 500 lb bomb on his house that levels your house too?
Or might it be a better idea to just arrest him?
And that plan is stupid.
The goal is to get people to stop shooting missiles at you. They way to get people to stop shooting missiles at you is NOT motivate 10 people to start shooting missiles at you for every one missile-shooting guy you kill because you not only killed the missile-shooter, but everybody within 300 feet of him.
Another way to get people to stop shooting missiles at you is stop starving them.
There really is no denying the evidence: If killing Palestinians brought security, Israel would have been secure 30 years ago.
I dare you to claim that a SINGLE volley of rockets fired from Mexico to the United States wouldn't warrant a full military response.
A single volley of rockets fired from Mexico to the United States wouldn't warrant a full military response.
That was pretty easy.
We're Americans. We reserve full military action for oil.
Well, if your country had to endure more than 6000 (!) rocket attacks over several years, with the attackers' elected government calling for your "eradication" from this planet, you'd probably ignore that. Am I right?
6,000 rockets that killed a total of 15 people in 8 years?
Yes, that's exactly what we'd do. What we certainly wouldn't do is respond with missile strikes into apartment buildings and other densely populated areas that killed thousands over the same period.
Look at Britain and the IRA. Spain and Basques. US and gangs or drug cartels. None indiscriminately use military-level power on the civilians the way the Israelis do. It's disproportionate and ineffective.
When you know where a terrorist is, you arrest them, you don't send a missile into their apartment building.
By pure chance, I happened to find one in a torn up box, that was shoved in the wrong place.
I halfway felt bad for him, but if he really wanted it, he could've stowed it somewhere.
Like a torn-up box shoved in the wrong place?
If I post a solicitation to pay for sex on myspace, is myspace liable?
If MySpace creates a specific section entitled "Sex for Money" and you post there, then yes, MySpace may be liable.
I've been party to both positive and negative foreign worker experiences.
I've had the privilege of working with a lot of extremely qualified, foreign-born engineers. Some from Europe, some from Asia. They're no different than American workers - you have to interview effectively to make sure you hire the best people. If you don't hire the best people, you're going to get bad people. Of all the foreign workers I've worked with, only one has not been worth his salary.
So if the foreign workers your company hires are a waste of money, shame on your company for having a poor interview and review process. But that has nothing to do with immigration - a nice talking kid from US engineering college could do just as much exaggeration and get hired at the same company.
On the strongly negative front, we outsourced part of a project once. Needed it done ASAP. Contracted a company in India to do it. Waste of money. Got zero value out of it. Just couldn't do effective management/quality control over half the globe and 12 time zones.
Anyway, if your company is hiring unqualified employees, that's a hiring problem, not an immigration problem.
I think a lot of Americans don't realize why America became the superpower it is.
For thousands and thousands of years, the way to increase your nation's power was to go and invade the other nation, subjugate them, and take their stuff.
The problem is that's a pretty expensive way of going about things. The answer?
Immigration!
Why fight through the world subjugating people when you can just open up the gates of immigration and the best, brightest and hardest working of the other nation's populace will voluntarily and at their own expense subjugate themselves?
Much cheaper and more effective than invasion!
The fact of the matter is that intelligent foreigners exist. They can work here, or they can work there. The question, then, is it better if they work here or there?
The answer is obvious - we want them here.
As for 'room' for American citizens, if you can't compete with a guy who was born in India, with all your American-born advantages, he's either just plain smarter than you, or just plain works harder than you. Either way, he deserves your job, and the American company hiring him shouldn't be saddled with your either less-intelligent or less-driven self just because the more qualified candidate was born in the wrong spot.
The moment they started working on it they were Finnish...ed.
I'll be here all week.
Not only critics say that, anyone who has ever run a business will tell you that ALL costs are passed on to the customers in one way or another.
Well, I run a business, and I won't tell you that.
I charge what people will pay. If my costs of providing the product go up, and the amount of money people are willing to pay does not, the costs come out of profits.
Generally, if you raise prices as a result of increased costs, you'll either make even less money than if you had left your prices the same, or you were not maximizing your profit in the first place.
The airlines just learned this, for example - they were forced to raise their prices as a result of cost increases, then realized they should have been charging more all along...
I have been around a LOT of geeks. And as far as interaction with the general female population goes, the vast majority are creepy.
A minority of geeks are not creepy, and there are also mathematically/scientifically inclined people who just are not geeks at all.
Thanks for proving the point. MOST people manage to figure out talking to the opposite gender in high school.
I was also doing quite fine with the ladies in my early 20's. That doesn't change the fact that I was doing quite NOT fine prior to then. Nor does my later success change the fact that while, in my early 20's, I had managed to snap out of my creepiness and relate quite well to the opposite gender *AND* take engineering classes, 95% of my peers in those engineering classes had not and were still incredibly creepy.
In fact, it was a running joke amongst my non-engineering friends... "Wow, engineering, that must suck, with only a few girls per class!", to which the standard reply was "Not when I'm the only guy in class who can talk to girls!"
Look at it this way. Think of a fairly female-hostile environment. Let's say, maybe, the army. Lots of testosterone, general mistrust of women's abilities, yadda yadda. Now, take all of that, and on top of it add CREEPY guys. That's geekdom - the most hostile environment for your average female, as not only does she have to put up with a male dominated environment, she has to put up with a male-dominated environment dominated by CREEPY males.
Now that I'm 30, I realize why, as a young geek, I was, at least for a little while, mistreated.
Because I was CREEPY.
And, let's face it, people don't like creepy people.
This is doubly-true for members of the opposite gender. It's not that girls don't talk to nerds because they have something against people who are smart. They don't talk to nerds because nerds act creepy all the time!
I eventually learned how to not be creepy, and girls stopped treating me like a creep. Didn't get any dumber, didn't act any dumber, and in fact, my intelligence became a great asset - once I stopped acting like a creep.
Now, don't feel bad, I didn't become consciously aware of the problem until about a month ago, and I'm 30. But here are some signs that the real reason girls don't interact with you is because you are a creep:
- Do you regularly find yourself staring at girls you don't ever muster up the balls to talk to? Creepy!
- When you do eventually try to escalate a social relationship with a girl, to you find yourself asking someone who you've said a few sentences to in the course of the past week "Would you like to go out some time?"
- Do you arrange your movements to constantly "accidentally" run into a girl where you know where she'll be?
- Do you think every girl you happen to work with (class work, real work) who isn't mean to you must really like you?
So to bring this back on-topic, why is it that there are not more women in geek fields?
Because geek fields are the refuge of the socially inept, and the socially inept are creepy!
The only thing that needs to be done to get more women in geek fields is just teach geeks how to talk to the opposite sex without being total creeps about it.
Legislation (or threat of legislation) had nothing to do with it. The legislators are already all bought and paid for.
The problem is that selling replacement chargers only works from a profit perspective when the profit from the replacement chargers you're selling offsets the cost of the free chargers you're including with the phone. That worked for a little while, but then generic manufacturers got involved, and the money made selling replacement chargers stopped beating the money spent including free chargers.
So the phone companies are switching over to the printer+USB cable/HD TV+HDMI cable model. With standardized chargers, they don't need to include a charger with the phone anymore, saving them money. And then the retailers can sell you a phone, and then also sell you a $2 charger for $80. $120 if it's gold plated. $180 if it's gold plated and made by Monster.
..a wall charger with a micro-USB connector on the end of it?
Just because the connector is micro-USB doesn't mean the other end has to plug into a computer USB port.
Senators will just become beholden to the party platform of whichever party controls the state's legislature.
The Guild may actually have the more "just" position. Authors, with the exception of that rare 1 percent of best sellers, are not particularly well compensated. They do it because they love the profession and have some uncomfortable compulsion that makes them write, despite a average hourly salary measure in pennies.
Probably the same compulsion that drives lots of people to participate in various creative fields who just plain suck at it. LA is full of bad "actresses". Bars across the country are full of bad musicians - hell, some of them even charge cover to let bad singers sing! And don't forget bad artists....
People like to be creative. It's fun. But you don't get paid for doing something creative - you get paid for doing something creative that other people are willing to pay for.
And if nobody wants to pay for it, well, that doesn't mean you're poorly compensated. It just means you're producing crap.
The quickest way to ruin a good forum is to tell other people where it is.
...you don't need to bathe, or cut your fingernails, or brush your teeth, or see the doctor, or take prescription medication....
If flossing your teeth was important, you'd have been born with twine between your fingers!
On evolution alone, our life expectancy is about 35. And a lot of things we evolved over a couple million years are no longer useful after the past couple thousand years of rapid changes.
First server was nobody, followed by righty, lefty, and fleshlight.
Next up is fido.
What? I just need an echomail gateway.
Parenting freedom.
Somebody has to make medical choices for babies, and in cases where outcome is controversial (is it better to remove the foreskin or leave it?) that judgment rightfully lies with the parents.
Note, however, that male circumcision (no significant long-term loss of function) is not in the same world as female "circumcision", which causes a permanent loss of function.
So you kinda got it right, it's just that your example of male circumcision doesn't really meet the threshold of harm significant enough to override parental choice.
Guess nobody here runs Java or Flash.
They don't even show up in the add-ons list.