By definition, your subject was already dead before you started. Just because you didn't revive him/her, you didn't make anything worse than they already were.
Sorry to get pedantic here, but a good EMT friend of mine described it this way:
You only perform CPR on someone if they're not breathing and they have no heartbeat. So technically, they're already dead. You might not be successful, but you can't make things worse by trying.
Would you be quick to snap up someone whose only professional credit was "Worked on a game for 12 years that never came out"? I say that half-jokingly--but, in all seriousness, that had to have hurt some of those guys professionally.
Frankly, I wouldn't. Staying with that project would be demerits against them for lack of judgment.
They overcommitted, likely based on prior resources expended, and that same decision process might come into play at their new position.
No way. Passing an awareness test when you are focused at the task on hand is completely disconnected to real world behavior. You can't give 100% focus 100% of the time.
Heart rate monitors are a great tool for managing your exercise and health. Personally, I'd be happy they're TEACHING my kids how to be healthy, instead of just making them submit to 50 minutes of "PE".
Yeah, and I think the submitter needs to peel a layer or too off the hat.
...But not all 334 deaths were taser-caused
on
A Tour of Taser HQ
·
· Score: 1
Also, you didn't represent all the numbers from the Amnesty article: "The stun gun was deemed to have caused or contributed to at least 50 of those deaths". So there is some ambiguity there.
Personally, I think that 1.4% is likely higher than truth or we'd hear more about taser deaths.
But even if it is, that's significantly better than firearms, no?
Finally, although I agree that more discretion should be used before tasering, I'm absolutely fine with our law enforcement using tasers (even with risk of death) if it lowers the risk of their personal harm. I'll back the rights of the guys who protect us over the guys who resist arrest any day.
(Obligatory acknowledgement that it's not an exact science, and yeah, while there are 'bad' cops, most are good.)
Mod parent up. Learning in the home, or learning in school starts with the parents. Too many parents either use school as baby-sitters, or are "too busy" to take an active role in their kids development.
And then they expect their children to learn how to be inquisitive and want to learn, and blame "the system" when their kids don't.
Personally, I'll take the best of both worlds. Kids learn more than just scholastics at school. Social skills and conflict resolution are just a few that they aren't going to get if they're surrounded by their parents all the time.
A letter than we can send our congressperson explaining why electronic voting without oversight and a paper trail is a dangerous thing?
I'm not inherently lazy, but I suspect something very concise and precise exists, better than I would create myself by trolling this thread. Thank you.
You just don't see obese 80 year olds, and very few 70 year olds. Period. I want to be around that long at minimum. That alone is enough to make me do whatever I can to stay fit.
I'm amazed such a simple observation, noticeable by anyone, isn't highlighted more in the war on obesity.
In an earlier life, (Back before the internet, and patent/trademark searches involved a trip to the USPTO library in Sunnyvale, CA and rummaging through their volumes), I learned a lot on the subject of patents and trying to present your ideas for manufacturing.
The truth is, large companies, be they software companies, or manufacturers of tangible goods (think 3m, Black and Decker, etc) have large R&D departments, and introducing new ideas from the outside opens the door to disputable claims of ownership.
What if a presented idea is already in progress?
What if two or more people present the same idea?
So, while I agree with the general premise that many large companies want to avoid paying royalties, there are other forces molding the compensation decisions.
FTA, "Conference organizers notified local law enforcement who hauled away the machine on Thursday or Friday".... Wouldn't they have been better served monitoring the device to see who came and picked it up?
Sorry, I'm no expert here. Is there a way to monitor if the device was broadcasting wirelessly, preventing the need of a physical retrieval?
FTA: The lady tweeted "Who said sleeping in a moldy apartment was bad for you? Horizon realty thinks it's okay." In this case, she (likely) misrepresented her landlord's response.
Had she said "I'm angry as hell because my landlord won't respond to my mold complaints!", THAT's free speech.
Posters below have expounded on the definition of libel, slander, intent, etc, so I won't take credit for reposting here.
Here's the rub: The problem is, EVERY house has some amount of mold, and every person has different tolerances to it (as well as other allergens.) At what point is the combination of mold amount + tenant sensitivity become landlord liability?
Sure, 1 inch think black-mold on every wall is a pretty clear issue. But what about some mildew in the bathroom because the tenant never cleans it?
I'm not siding with the landlord here, just noting that mold issues are wide ranging.
"As holder of the first, they are suing all other lien holders, including the holder of the second". I interpret this is as there are likely multiple lienholders, and it's improper to selectively choose who to sue.
Slashdot Mirror
By definition, your subject was already dead before you started. Just because you didn't revive him/her, you didn't make anything worse than they already were.
Sorry to get pedantic here, but a good EMT friend of mine described it this way:
You only perform CPR on someone if they're not breathing and they have no heartbeat. So technically, they're already dead. You might not be successful, but you can't make things worse by trying.
But I agree with the point of your post.
Would you be quick to snap up someone whose only professional credit was "Worked on a game for 12 years that never came out"? I say that half-jokingly--but, in all seriousness, that had to have hurt some of those guys professionally.
Frankly, I wouldn't. Staying with that project would be demerits against them for lack of judgment. They overcommitted, likely based on prior resources expended, and that same decision process might come into play at their new position.
... if the bad-code offset is a penalty after-the-fact for putting out bad code.
And no, I'm not going to RTFA. This is a horrible idea.
Drink up folks, the end of the world is near!
No way. Passing an awareness test when you are focused at the task on hand is completely disconnected to real world behavior. You can't give 100% focus 100% of the time.
That's because your tube, while carbon, is still nano.
Heart rate monitors are a great tool for managing your exercise and health. Personally, I'd be happy they're TEACHING my kids how to be healthy, instead of just making them submit to 50 minutes of "PE".
Yeah, and I think the submitter needs to peel a layer or too off the hat.
Also, you didn't represent all the numbers from the Amnesty article: "The stun gun was deemed to have caused or contributed to at least 50 of those deaths". So there is some ambiguity there.
334 deaths is irrelevant if you don't know the number of instances used.
I found one reference that claims the taser mortality rate is 1.4%, and the gun-mortality rate is 50%
Personally, I think that 1.4% is likely higher than truth or we'd hear more about taser deaths.
But even if it is, that's significantly better than firearms, no?
Finally, although I agree that more discretion should be used before tasering, I'm absolutely fine with our law enforcement using tasers (even with risk of death) if it lowers the risk of their personal harm. I'll back the rights of the guys who protect us over the guys who resist arrest any day.
(Obligatory acknowledgement that it's not an exact science, and yeah, while there are 'bad' cops, most are good.)
Mod parent up. Learning in the home, or learning in school starts with the parents. Too many parents either use school as baby-sitters, or are "too busy" to take an active role in their kids development.
And then they expect their children to learn how to be inquisitive and want to learn, and blame "the system" when their kids don't.
Personally, I'll take the best of both worlds. Kids learn more than just scholastics at school. Social skills and conflict resolution are just a few that they aren't going to get if they're surrounded by their parents all the time.
A letter than we can send our congressperson explaining why electronic voting without oversight and a paper trail is a dangerous thing?
I'm not inherently lazy, but I suspect something very concise and precise exists, better than I would create myself by trolling this thread. Thank you.
Dude, turn in your ./ card. You meant: "Get Uranus to mars!"
I don't like boxing because it's too brutal. Our brains just weren't meant to be pummeled like that
Not to get pedantic, but I don't think our brains were designed to be pummeled UFC-style either.
So after seceding, they receded? So now they want to re-secede? Christ Jiminy I'm glad I don't live in Texas.
You just don't see obese 80 year olds, and very few 70 year olds. Period. I want to be around that long at minimum. That alone is enough to make me do whatever I can to stay fit.
I'm amazed such a simple observation, noticeable by anyone, isn't highlighted more in the war on obesity.
1 gallon of Gas
Unfortunately, that in itself doesn't allow us to calculate us the C02/Mile equation, but it's a start.
What species of baby does god kill?
In an earlier life, (Back before the internet, and patent/trademark searches involved a trip to the USPTO library in Sunnyvale, CA and rummaging through their volumes), I learned a lot on the subject of patents and trying to present your ideas for manufacturing.
The truth is, large companies, be they software companies, or manufacturers of tangible goods (think 3m, Black and Decker, etc) have large R&D departments, and introducing new ideas from the outside opens the door to disputable claims of ownership.
What if a presented idea is already in progress?
What if two or more people present the same idea?
So, while I agree with the general premise that many large companies want to avoid paying royalties, there are other forces molding the compensation decisions.
FTA, "Conference organizers notified local law enforcement who hauled away the machine on Thursday or Friday".... Wouldn't they have been better served monitoring the device to see who came and picked it up?
Sorry, I'm no expert here. Is there a way to monitor if the device was broadcasting wirelessly, preventing the need of a physical retrieval?
FTA: The lady tweeted "Who said sleeping in a moldy apartment was bad for you? Horizon realty thinks it's okay." In this case, she (likely) misrepresented her landlord's response.
Had she said "I'm angry as hell because my landlord won't respond to my mold complaints!", THAT's free speech.
Posters below have expounded on the definition of libel, slander, intent, etc, so I won't take credit for reposting here.
Here's the rub: The problem is, EVERY house has some amount of mold, and every person has different tolerances to it (as well as other allergens.) At what point is the combination of mold amount + tenant sensitivity become landlord liability?
Sure, 1 inch think black-mold on every wall is a pretty clear issue. But what about some mildew in the bathroom because the tenant never cleans it?
I'm not siding with the landlord here, just noting that mold issues are wide ranging.
Seems to me a mount-on camera is going to be prone to calibration issues with the cell phone camera lense.
Wouldn't it be better to develop an all-in-one microscope camera and push image fiels to an SD or CF card that then goes into a camera?
Bonus, They already exist (although this is USB insead of memory card.)
IANA (insert whatever competency needed to have a valid opinion here)
It may be only 97 seconds long, but it does star one of the most recognizable SF actors. out there.
Seriously. It doesn't get much better than that.
"As holder of the first, they are suing all other lien holders, including the holder of the second". I interpret this is as there are likely multiple lienholders, and it's improper to selectively choose who to sue.
IANAL, so someone feel free to chime in here...