And yet you leave out that the building is still standing behind her in the picture proving that it was at least earlier than 5:20...assuming that is the building.
The GP assumed attraction = physical attraction. The parent said attraction = all attractions, including psychological attraction. The parent is in agreement with the article while the GP is not. All is based off the definition of "attraction".
That open door is on your private property. That poorly secured voicemail is on a system that is legally accessible to all of the provider's customers. "Your" voicemail is NOT your property. This is an issue between the provider, the "hacker", their contract (if there is one), and the property/contract rights enforcer (government). It should have nothing to do with the celebrity.
The only thing that should be "wrong" about spying or peeping is when the government does it or an individual violates private property rights to do it. If your phone isn't secured, it should get "hacked". If we create a law to somehow prevent this, then we will live in a society relying on morals instead of true security.
Frankly, the wireless carriers should not allow 5 consecutive PIN failures. If government steps in and punishes the spies, then we effectively get nothing done. Nothing will change. The celebrities need to blame themselves and request the above feature from their provider.
It should be perfectly legal to go through an unlocked door, provided that you have permission to be walking through the private property where that unlocked door stands.
Unless you plan to drive through DC and all the other horrific I-95 traffic, it would be wisest to take I-81, I-77, I-26, to I-95. According to Google Maps it is only 20 minutes slower. That far outweighs the risk on getting on I-95 anywhere north of DC.
Garmin has a GPS app that runs on just about any smartphone. They are also introducing a new phone (Linux-based nuvifone) themselves. Plus, standalone road units are just a small part of their portfolio. They have professional GPS systems, some for boats, and some for airplanes.
I would think Hydroeletric dams would be the best. Yes, there are MAJOR environmental issues at first, but it is nothing that earth hasn't seen before (glaciers). Once created, not only does it produce a lot of electricity, the side benefit value of the reservoir for recreation and irrigation are unmatched by other power sources. Actually, do any others have ANY value-added side effects?
I can only think of solar panels absorbing heat that the roof would have otherwise absorbed. That is usually a benefit in the summer and liability in the winter.
Are these side benefits considered in the cost analysis?
You cannot prove down to an individual person, something that was done on the Internet with only an IP address. That IP address does not point to a person. It points to a computer/router. Now if they want to say that device committed the crime and that the owner must pay the penalty, then so be it. This is like a car committing a violation by being in an illegal parking spot...the owner is fined.
However, when does the responsibility of the device/medium get removed from the owner? If my someone on my property (land, real estate) shoots someone, who is responsible? The property (and therefore the owner), the shooter, the gun (and therefore its owner), or the bullets? What about a speeding car? DUI?
In terms of a violation/fine, an object can very well be the committer. However, for a full-fledge crime, if you cannot pin it on a single person(s), then you should have no case. That includes 100% of Internet crimes, because there are no Internet violations (to my knowledge).
A "stable" medical device is far more stable than a "stable" website. It is a matter of reaching the metrics stated in the system availability requirements.
It'll backfire and all men will speed up to get to find her as quickly as possible. If they happen to find a nude woman on the highway, they'll completely stop causing massive traffic issues and accidents.
It doesn't make sense to spend on Mississippi and Louisiana because of Hurricane Katrina, because you are just subsidizing people living in a dangerous area. When you subsidize something, you get more of it...so we get more people living in dangerous areas then the "market" would allow.
The #1 spender is New Mexico, probably because of the military base that takes up an area the size of Connecticut and there is also Los Alamos Laboratory. The Dakotas are up there for who-knows-why reason.
The ones funding the US are states like New Jersey (high population density helps) and New Hampshire (they just don't like spending or taxing).
Each major department receives somewhere in the range of $50 billion. The site is quoting only the IT expenditures, which range from $0.3 billion to $3 billion.
As you have stated, when you give most people power, they will never relinquish it. What do you think will happen with the bailout mentality now? This only goes to show why George Washington was the greatest President, far-and-wide. He didn't want power. He gave it up at a time when relinquishing power was unheard of.
I was arguing how they can interpret the 4th Amendment that way. What is "unreasonable"? The way it had always been interpreted is that a search is "unreasonable" unless you are suspected of a crime. If all flyers are suspected a crime, then search all the bags. However, we are not all suspected. It is "unreasonable" for them to do so.
Just like it is "unreasonable" for them to search the girl. My argument is that it doesn't matter what they think she has. Unless they have evidence that what she has is illegal AND obtain a search warrant, they have no right to search her. Same goes for us flying.
No law can override a Constitutional right. If the government wants to circumvent it, they need to amend the Constitution.
Slashdot Mirror
And yet you leave out that the building is still standing behind her in the picture proving that it was at least earlier than 5:20...assuming that is the building.
I was more boggled by the representation of the action in 2 dimensions...like an egg isn't spherical.
The GP assumed attraction = physical attraction. The parent said attraction = all attractions, including psychological attraction. The parent is in agreement with the article while the GP is not. All is based off the definition of "attraction".
Yes, all you have to do is move the water 10 meters down to the top
That open door is on your private property. That poorly secured voicemail is on a system that is legally accessible to all of the provider's customers. "Your" voicemail is NOT your property. This is an issue between the provider, the "hacker", their contract (if there is one), and the property/contract rights enforcer (government). It should have nothing to do with the celebrity.
There are 10,000 4 digit PINs.
The only thing that should be "wrong" about spying or peeping is when the government does it or an individual violates private property rights to do it. If your phone isn't secured, it should get "hacked". If we create a law to somehow prevent this, then we will live in a society relying on morals instead of true security.
Frankly, the wireless carriers should not allow 5 consecutive PIN failures. If government steps in and punishes the spies, then we effectively get nothing done. Nothing will change. The celebrities need to blame themselves and request the above feature from their provider.
It should be perfectly legal to go through an unlocked door, provided that you have permission to be walking through the private property where that unlocked door stands.
It is worthless unless you can see that they spent $18 million on the site itself
That's more like 560 million bits more that a CD!
FTFY
Unless you plan to drive through DC and all the other horrific I-95 traffic, it would be wisest to take I-81, I-77, I-26, to I-95. According to Google Maps it is only 20 minutes slower. That far outweighs the risk on getting on I-95 anywhere north of DC.
Garmin has a GPS app that runs on just about any smartphone. They are also introducing a new phone (Linux-based nuvifone) themselves. Plus, standalone road units are just a small part of their portfolio. They have professional GPS systems, some for boats, and some for airplanes.
I would think Hydroeletric dams would be the best. Yes, there are MAJOR environmental issues at first, but it is nothing that earth hasn't seen before (glaciers). Once created, not only does it produce a lot of electricity, the side benefit value of the reservoir for recreation and irrigation are unmatched by other power sources. Actually, do any others have ANY value-added side effects?
I can only think of solar panels absorbing heat that the roof would have otherwise absorbed. That is usually a benefit in the summer and liability in the winter.
Are these side benefits considered in the cost analysis?
What about the case where they sue each other?
if(individual.sues(evilCorporation) && evilCorporation.sues(individual)) {
return throw new NYCLException("Can't find a way to RichLitigationObject to win; Mistrial");
}
...
What does that matter?
You cannot prove down to an individual person, something that was done on the Internet with only an IP address. That IP address does not point to a person. It points to a computer/router. Now if they want to say that device committed the crime and that the owner must pay the penalty, then so be it. This is like a car committing a violation by being in an illegal parking spot...the owner is fined.
However, when does the responsibility of the device/medium get removed from the owner? If my someone on my property (land, real estate) shoots someone, who is responsible? The property (and therefore the owner), the shooter, the gun (and therefore its owner), or the bullets? What about a speeding car? DUI?
In terms of a violation/fine, an object can very well be the committer. However, for a full-fledge crime, if you cannot pin it on a single person(s), then you should have no case. That includes 100% of Internet crimes, because there are no Internet violations (to my knowledge).
A "stable" medical device is far more stable than a "stable" website. It is a matter of reaching the metrics stated in the system availability requirements.
It'll backfire and all men will speed up to get to find her as quickly as possible. If they happen to find a nude woman on the highway, they'll completely stop causing massive traffic issues and accidents.
Is slowing down to 5 mph to look at that semi considered safe these days?
Why 1,500 hours. Why not 1,5 hours? Who would go to the thousandths decimal place when publishing hours. That is what minutes are for.
My guess is the two extra 0's were to just throw off us Americans.
No. 84% of time statistics are made up.
I didn't see that second site. I was following the link provided from the original story.
It doesn't make sense to spend on Mississippi and Louisiana because of Hurricane Katrina, because you are just subsidizing people living in a dangerous area. When you subsidize something, you get more of it...so we get more people living in dangerous areas then the "market" would allow.
The #1 spender is New Mexico, probably because of the military base that takes up an area the size of Connecticut and there is also Los Alamos Laboratory. The Dakotas are up there for who-knows-why reason.
The ones funding the US are states like New Jersey (high population density helps) and New Hampshire (they just don't like spending or taxing).
Each major department receives somewhere in the range of $50 billion. The site is quoting only the IT expenditures, which range from $0.3 billion to $3 billion.
As you have stated, when you give most people power, they will never relinquish it. What do you think will happen with the bailout mentality now? This only goes to show why George Washington was the greatest President, far-and-wide. He didn't want power. He gave it up at a time when relinquishing power was unheard of.
What site brings real news? (except Slashdot, of course)
Doesn't that still leave out the "warrant" part of the amendment?
I was arguing how they can interpret the 4th Amendment that way. What is "unreasonable"? The way it had always been interpreted is that a search is "unreasonable" unless you are suspected of a crime. If all flyers are suspected a crime, then search all the bags. However, we are not all suspected. It is "unreasonable" for them to do so.
Just like it is "unreasonable" for them to search the girl. My argument is that it doesn't matter what they think she has. Unless they have evidence that what she has is illegal AND obtain a search warrant, they have no right to search her. Same goes for us flying.
No law can override a Constitutional right. If the government wants to circumvent it, they need to amend the Constitution.