You are a fucking idiot, this is a new feature so of course there is no history. There is however HUGE case history in teaching and all other legally obligated professional roles dealing with children requiring reporting and often confinement of kids deemed dangerous to themselves or others. It's one of those things adults have to do, so you wouldn't understand. It is also about liability for Apple in cases where threats ARE made.
No, it is basic sociology. Making threats easier to make increases the number of threats, whereas valid uses of guns require more context than a picture.
That is the context in which this actual ban has been created, and the overall trend is only limiting the role of the US in genetic technology developments.
The problem is more from restrictions on federal research funds, and the rules against related research in labs receiving any federal funds. See here for an example.
Those are a lot of disconnected assumptions, none proven. Ethical implications only arise in human experimentation. Hitler's atrocities are slightly related.
That is still theory, because it ignores all market reactions and the entire legal regulatory framework. Investors expecting gains requires faith that the company can succeed, where Tesla has done nothing to deserve it and Musk sure as hell doesn't when based exclusively on sci-fi failures.
You need to learn how to read better. This isn't a debate, and I don't care about your "position". My interest is making you grow the fuck up and not defend deviant behavior out of stupidity and paranoia, and to instead recognize the reality of sex crime reporting and prosecution as victim blaming even with the laws and regulations you are so afraid of having used against you. The answer is again fo you to grow the fuck up and talk to women rather than drug them or pounce on weakness and vulnerability. You are an idiot now but you can grow up to be better.
Those are exactly the assumptions arising from fear, and in practice apply to few cases because the burden in reporting is STILL on the victim; they must submit to numerous invasive medical procedures, and be subjected to daily inquisition. There is never a true case where police are not involved, because it IS a crime, and deserves severe punishment. My dear friend was forced to withdraw rather than graduate and still has only partial credit which must be completed as an extra burden, on top of agonizing slow police investigation and back-and-forth on the final prosecution based on DA case preferences rather than justice. Take your paranoia and victim-blaming and shove it up your ass you ignorant and predator-excusing idiot!
You're very wrong. My motivation comes from personally observing the difficulty of reporting sexual violence. Despite the limited protections offered there is by nature of the crime an imbalance of power which predators maximize when selecting victims. This justifies the harshest treatment as both deterrent and punishment to predators. The matter of interacting with a woman and escalating to sexual encounter is a simple one founded on the basis of consent, iot serves as the only required permission for activity between adults. Faults in skill at that require address as faults in interaction and communication, and must not be used as wedge to weaken the punishment of predators. Libertarians are idiots with social problems so n/a, the times piece is opinion n/a, and Wapo one is simply commentary on policy changes at a single university without much context and by author without much legal background.
I understand your claims and find them negligible. There is in effect no difference and the purpose is exactly the same, and the outcomes are the same. My point is that you must examine your own motivation for claiming the tools which enable victims to report crimes are the problem, when the only actual problem is the high and impermissible incidence of sexual violence. Your fear of accusation is based on your awareness of your inadequate communication skills, but the proper response is not to blame the tool for equity (that is what laws and courts are, on every level), but to motivate change in yourself as required to improve both personality and social success which eliminates the issues you fear. That is what being an adult is all about - changing in response to society.
Again that is more your fantasy of how things occur than any reality. You are using rumors and group-reinforced stereotypes to justify you fear. Maturity requires you to face your childish fears and adapt your behavior to overcome them. You must grow up sometime.
The legal environment and protections are justified, and act to neuter the predators and their accomplices. They deserve the treatment.
That has more to do with you misinterpreting rulings than anything else. The college men found guilty of rape are predators and deserved punishment. The atmosphere that permitted ignoring consent was and is immoral and illegal. Learn to understand both women and men.
Leave out the nuttery of Kaczynski (Ancient Alien Astronauts quality, full of misrepresentation) and you might have a corollary worth investigating in humans.
Actually no it doesn't - FBI and other agencies have investigated (past tense) and found nothing that meets requirements for prosecution. Law is complicated but also requires intent to cause harm. Trumps call for foreign intervention in electoral process, however is clear intent.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it's just liability as there is established legal precedent for damages from failing to report threats, and Apple is avoiding the backlash. Idiot.
Apple's lawyers, you godamn partisan idiot.
You are a fucking idiot, this is a new feature so of course there is no history. There is however HUGE case history in teaching and all other legally obligated professional roles dealing with children requiring reporting and often confinement of kids deemed dangerous to themselves or others. It's one of those things adults have to do, so you wouldn't understand. It is also about liability for Apple in cases where threats ARE made.
No, it is basic sociology. Making threats easier to make increases the number of threats, whereas valid uses of guns require more context than a picture.
Du bist ein unwissender Übersetzer, du sollst lernen, Deutsch zu sprechen!
You are very mistaken, try to at least finish off your undergrad before you try me again - idiot.
You're wrong. Federal research money and its restrictions apply to every university lab. That is, all of the ones not being run by businesses.
You need to research something called behavioral economics - it is the real way the stock prices and markets operate.
Jawohl, mein Führer!
That is the context in which this actual ban has been created, and the overall trend is only limiting the role of the US in genetic technology developments.
The problem is more from restrictions on federal research funds, and the rules against related research in labs receiving any federal funds. See here for an example.
The Industrial Revolution didn't happen overnight either.
Those are a lot of disconnected assumptions, none proven. Ethical implications only arise in human experimentation. Hitler's atrocities are slightly related.
China's rise to #1 status will be through the next genetic technology revolution.
That is still theory, because it ignores all market reactions and the entire legal regulatory framework. Investors expecting gains requires faith that the company can succeed, where Tesla has done nothing to deserve it and Musk sure as hell doesn't when based exclusively on sci-fi failures.
Exactly, Tesla's business model is that marginal losses magically turn into profits when you have enough of them....
You need to learn how to read better. This isn't a debate, and I don't care about your "position". My interest is making you grow the fuck up and not defend deviant behavior out of stupidity and paranoia, and to instead recognize the reality of sex crime reporting and prosecution as victim blaming even with the laws and regulations you are so afraid of having used against you. The answer is again fo you to grow the fuck up and talk to women rather than drug them or pounce on weakness and vulnerability. You are an idiot now but you can grow up to be better.
Those are exactly the assumptions arising from fear, and in practice apply to few cases because the burden in reporting is STILL on the victim; they must submit to numerous invasive medical procedures, and be subjected to daily inquisition. There is never a true case where police are not involved, because it IS a crime, and deserves severe punishment. My dear friend was forced to withdraw rather than graduate and still has only partial credit which must be completed as an extra burden, on top of agonizing slow police investigation and back-and-forth on the final prosecution based on DA case preferences rather than justice. Take your paranoia and victim-blaming and shove it up your ass you ignorant and predator-excusing idiot!
You're very wrong. My motivation comes from personally observing the difficulty of reporting sexual violence. Despite the limited protections offered there is by nature of the crime an imbalance of power which predators maximize when selecting victims. This justifies the harshest treatment as both deterrent and punishment to predators. The matter of interacting with a woman and escalating to sexual encounter is a simple one founded on the basis of consent, iot serves as the only required permission for activity between adults. Faults in skill at that require address as faults in interaction and communication, and must not be used as wedge to weaken the punishment of predators. Libertarians are idiots with social problems so n/a, the times piece is opinion n/a, and Wapo one is simply commentary on policy changes at a single university without much context and by author without much legal background.
I understand your claims and find them negligible. There is in effect no difference and the purpose is exactly the same, and the outcomes are the same. My point is that you must examine your own motivation for claiming the tools which enable victims to report crimes are the problem, when the only actual problem is the high and impermissible incidence of sexual violence. Your fear of accusation is based on your awareness of your inadequate communication skills, but the proper response is not to blame the tool for equity (that is what laws and courts are, on every level), but to motivate change in yourself as required to improve both personality and social success which eliminates the issues you fear. That is what being an adult is all about - changing in response to society.
Again that is more your fantasy of how things occur than any reality. You are using rumors and group-reinforced stereotypes to justify you fear. Maturity requires you to face your childish fears and adapt your behavior to overcome them. You must grow up sometime. The legal environment and protections are justified, and act to neuter the predators and their accomplices. They deserve the treatment.
That has more to do with you misinterpreting rulings than anything else. The college men found guilty of rape are predators and deserved punishment. The atmosphere that permitted ignoring consent was and is immoral and illegal. Learn to understand both women and men.
You sound like a virgin with no social skills, afraid to have sex because it requires actual communication with a woman.
Leave out the nuttery of Kaczynski (Ancient Alien Astronauts quality, full of misrepresentation) and you might have a corollary worth investigating in humans.
Actually no it doesn't - FBI and other agencies have investigated (past tense) and found nothing that meets requirements for prosecution. Law is complicated but also requires intent to cause harm. Trumps call for foreign intervention in electoral process, however is clear intent.