What "legitimate certificate previously?" There is absolutely no reason that I'm aware of not to think the certificate authorities weren't compromised from the very beginning.
Yeah it did (or at least, it could act that way)... it even got hacked so that enemies could view the footage in something like three different episodes.
Instead of changing materials once, abruptly, creating a brittle failure plane, couldn't you change materials a whole bunch of times little-by-little (changing the alloy mixture) so that you get a gradient of material properties?
How much CO2 gets released as part of the fertilizer production? How fast can the anchovies (and the bass, and the tuna) swim away from your 100 square mile chunk of ocean? How do you know the jellyfish wouldn't just eat all the anchovies before the bass and tuna had a chance?
You're trying to make tricky arguments based on imprecise definitions. Just like with the "which is 'more free,' GPL or BSD?" debate, the essential question to ask is "for whom?" So: "private ownership is a restriction of such individual power and freedoms..." for whom? In this case, private ownership restricts people other than the owner, but inversely, de-restricts the owner himself.
At any rate, private ownership (whether its considered a restriction or not) is more-or-less irrelevant. The underlying problem is that true private ownership is impossible by definition (because if it were possible, it would no longer be a commons). For example, you can't fix air pollution by private ownership because you can't wall off the sky.
The problem here is that you're using a non-standard definition of "each." Everybody else understood you to mean "each, considered separately" (i.e., temporarily disregarding the action's effect on other individuals) but what you think you mean is "each, considered along with each other." However, your usage of "each" means the same thing as "all," and "all individuals" are the same as "the group," which means your claim is just a tautology.
Your "record" (if the Feds even bother to check your ID or file it in a database) won't indicate you were protesting at all... anyone reading it will just think some cop busted you for sitting down on the sidewalk to rest your legs.
That's part of the problem! Protesting is respectable -- you were doing what you were doing for a good reason, and therefore have an excuse for the arrest. I would want that listed on the background check!* Otherwise, the employer would think you're just some random low-life vagrant.
(*Obviously, it makes it more important that your politics jive with the potential employer's, of course -- but then again, if you're getting arrested for protesting you probably wear your politics on your sleeve anyway.)
It doesn't matter how nice the police are; future employers will still ask "have you ever been arrested?" on the application and then round-file it if you answer truthfully or fail you on the background check if you lie.
Sitting in a cell for a day (or a week, or even a month) or even having the shit beat of you by police is the least of your worries.
Just because a regular Wii has the ability to connect to the Internet, doesn't mean you have to use that ability.
It's also about $50 cheaper than the full size Wii which is the price of a Mario game.
I have a very hard time believing that the wi-fi chip is so expensive that by removing it Nintendo can charge $50 less and maintain a similar profit margin. They might as well have just left it in and priced it at $109 or something.
It's barely smaller than the regular Wii (it can't be, since it has to be big enough to fit a DVD), it does less, and costs pretty much the same. Why not just keep selling the regular Wii?
That would be quite an achievement... it would mean that Mangalyaan would be traveling an order of magnitude faster than the Voyager probes, by accident!
Slashdot Mirror
Well, at least he became plural for a while!
I don't know!
(He's on third.)
What "legitimate certificate previously?" There is absolutely no reason that I'm aware of not to think the certificate authorities weren't compromised from the very beginning.
Yeah it did (or at least, it could act that way)... it even got hacked so that enemies could view the footage in something like three different episodes.
http://savannah.nongnu.org/ ?
Maybe it's finally time for ad-blockers to start blocking text ads too...
They are required to award contracts to the lowest qualified bidder. It's the qualification process that's the problem...
Instead of changing materials once, abruptly, creating a brittle failure plane, couldn't you change materials a whole bunch of times little-by-little (changing the alloy mixture) so that you get a gradient of material properties?
Hey look everybody, this dumbass troll AC thinks asking questions is equivalent to rejecting the idea.
How much CO2 gets released as part of the fertilizer production? How fast can the anchovies (and the bass, and the tuna) swim away from your 100 square mile chunk of ocean? How do you know the jellyfish wouldn't just eat all the anchovies before the bass and tuna had a chance?
Nope.
Look at the post's title.
It's not correct though, since not all "pick twos" are valid (e.g. "Secure Online")...
If that's capitalism working as it is intended, then the goal of every capitalist is to destroy capitalism.
Redbox red, you mean.
You're trying to make tricky arguments based on imprecise definitions. Just like with the "which is 'more free,' GPL or BSD?" debate, the essential question to ask is "for whom?" So: "private ownership is a restriction of such individual power and freedoms..." for whom? In this case, private ownership restricts people other than the owner, but inversely, de-restricts the owner himself.
At any rate, private ownership (whether its considered a restriction or not) is more-or-less irrelevant. The underlying problem is that true private ownership is impossible by definition (because if it were possible, it would no longer be a commons). For example, you can't fix air pollution by private ownership because you can't wall off the sky.
The problem here is that you're using a non-standard definition of "each." Everybody else understood you to mean "each, considered separately" (i.e., temporarily disregarding the action's effect on other individuals) but what you think you mean is "each, considered along with each other." However, your usage of "each" means the same thing as "all," and "all individuals" are the same as "the group," which means your claim is just a tautology.
That is, almost verbatim, exactly the fallacy that The Tragedy of the Commons was written to disprove.
That's part of the problem! Protesting is respectable -- you were doing what you were doing for a good reason, and therefore have an excuse for the arrest. I would want that listed on the background check!* Otherwise, the employer would think you're just some random low-life vagrant.
(*Obviously, it makes it more important that your politics jive with the potential employer's, of course -- but then again, if you're getting arrested for protesting you probably wear your politics on your sleeve anyway.)
It doesn't matter how nice the police are; future employers will still ask "have you ever been arrested?" on the application and then round-file it if you answer truthfully or fail you on the background check if you lie.
Sitting in a cell for a day (or a week, or even a month) or even having the shit beat of you by police is the least of your worries.
Just because a regular Wii has the ability to connect to the Internet, doesn't mean you have to use that ability.
I have a very hard time believing that the wi-fi chip is so expensive that by removing it Nintendo can charge $50 less and maintain a similar profit margin. They might as well have just left it in and priced it at $109 or something.
It's barely smaller than the regular Wii (it can't be, since it has to be big enough to fit a DVD), it does less, and costs pretty much the same. Why not just keep selling the regular Wii?
Because it has a non-uniform thickness and therefore bends the light in addition to reflecting it.
That's true; immigration fraud is not the same thing as stealing.
That would be quite an achievement... it would mean that Mangalyaan would be traveling an order of magnitude faster than the Voyager probes, by accident!
He's mixing metaphors. "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander" is one, and "eating crow" is another.