Perhaps that could be said about football (futbol) which tends to be more heavily dependant on raw athletic ability and individual play, but american football is heavily based on strategy, and skill.
How do you figure? Association football has lots of specific skill (shooting, slide tackles, dribbling, all of which are rather unnatural actions) while American football is based, yes on strategy, but things like raw speed (outrunning a defender) and brute force (blocking a defender or getting past a blocker) are more important than specific skills, unless you're at a specific position (say quarterback or kicker).
You are aware that the OP (the person who was in the situation requiring the letter) was in an apartment, right? (He mentioned requiring a notarized letter from his landlord.)
By that standard, an admin would have a mitigating circumstance to own packet sniffing tools. Packet sniffers, at worst, would end up in a quasi-legal situation. Since distribution would be unstoppable, you could only be convicted of owning something like that for nefarious purposes if you indeed did get caught possessing it--kind of like how if you're a suspected car burglar and the police find a slim jim in your house, you're in trouble, but if you just keep a slim jim in your house without anyone ever being the wiser, Bob's your uncle.
There's a point where more training will make a soldier more effective, depending on your intended use for the soldier. Marines, as an example, are taught (and held to) better marksmanship than most soldiers, because Marines are supposed to be shock troops. It's possible that some parts of the Army do the same thing. It's not the clear distinction between "spray and pray" and "1,000 yard sniper" that SAW-man makes it out to be.
Recent stories about Linux (recent is defined as "on the front page of the Linux section right now") includes a story about how "Red Hat Linux Gets Top Govt. Security Rating," where the discussion goes on to be pretty much everyone saying "ZOMG TAKE THAT M$." Another one is "Ubuntu Linux Validates As Genuine Windows," about how someone tricked the WGA check so it would validate on WINE. The discussion was pretty much "ZOMG TAKE THAT M$."
Wow! What are you going to do next, deconstruct those of us who are fans of a particular football team?
Not only is this view wrong (for reasons that others have adequately pointed out), it's dangerous, because a quickly-moving justice system would rule without deliberation or thought, based primarily on whim, and with none of the stability afforded by the system as it is now. The only thing that's accomplished by weakening the judiciary is tyranny of the majority, or of a minority who momentary got majority support during the right month of the year. Not that there aren't judicial reforms to be sought out, but this view leads directly to tyranny.
If you're going for one shot one kill, however, your going to need the money for a decent 338 or 50cal rifle with at worst a 0.5MOA (I personally wouldn't go with less than.25) and a whole lot of sniper training, which would definitely cost upwards of $20k.
Yeah, if you're going at 1,000 yards or something. As a SAW gunner in the Army you may have never been trained to do this, but I (a civilian with extensive rifle practice) would have no trouble making a single lethal shot anywhere within 100 yards, and beyond that (I'd say up to 200-300 yards) is possible too. Hell, talk to any deer hunter. Just because the Army can afford bullets easier than it can afford training doesn't mean spray and pray is the most effective method.
Kind of like locksmithing tools, old credit cards, stethoscopes, Slim Jims, crowbars, and coat hangers are all criminal tools which are highly regulated?
Yeah, and Einstein's theory sufficiently models the measurements and observations we've made of the natural world, so the axioms can be treated as fact so long as we're willing to accept other scientific knowledge as "facts". This gets us into lots of thorny issues with philosophy of science, of course.
They knew the world was round (it always casts a round shadow on the Moon, which is the only shape capable of always casting a round shadow no matter what angle light hits it at.)
Yeah, but they would only observe the Earth's shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse--the phases of the moon are not caused by the Earth's shadow, but rather by the angle at which we view the half-illuminated moon.
Only one level of recursion in this case--your final adjusted grade, if you took the opportunity to guess, was the function of your final unadjusted grade and your guess. An infinitely recursive version of this would be rather clever for a CS final, though...
My state's constitution (Washington) has this provision, so it's not unknown. However, it needs to be rigorously defined--a few tax-reform initiatives were struck down over the years for violating this provision.
And I particularly dislike how the interiors have shrunk. The modern vehicle LOOKS like it should be, if anything, *bigger* on the inside than were the old styles, but in fact there's less legroom, less headroom, and no way to really stretch out the way we could in the old-style cars. It's pretty clear none of them are designed with long-distance driving in mind.
Moreover, Einstein claimed the speed of light is a constant, and as IBM's experiments earlier this year have proven, the speed of light is actually a variable.
sigh No, they did not prove that c is a variable. c is still a constant as far as we can tell--the fact that light doesn't always travel at c in specific circumstances is useful information that in no way disproves Einstein's theories. Like a Star Trek writer, you're substituting enthusiasm for knowledge. Enthusiasm does not change reality.
By scientific consensus, we believed the Earth was flat, until we were told it wasn't. We attacked the naysayers and tried to have them killed...
The ones behing killing people were upholding a religious consensus--even the ancient Greeks knew the world was round.
As long as there are people saying that we can't do something, there will always be people telling them to shut the hell up, who will defy the odds and fly like an eagle or reach out into the stars. Don't let typical human apathy take hold of that which is grand.
And the people who do these things are the hard-headed types who accept reality and deal with it honestly. Sheer enthusiasm makes you that guy jumping off your roof with a 5-winged human-powered flying machine.
Yeah, but that would lead you to the wrong answer, since the right answer (the Fugitive Slave Act) doesn't have the word "compromise" in it (although it is part of the 1850 Compromise).
Slashdot Mirror
I think you mean renter's insurance.
War? Ha! What is it good for? Absolutely nothing!
How do you figure? Association football has lots of specific skill (shooting, slide tackles, dribbling, all of which are rather unnatural actions) while American football is based, yes on strategy, but things like raw speed (outrunning a defender) and brute force (blocking a defender or getting past a blocker) are more important than specific skills, unless you're at a specific position (say quarterback or kicker).
People do rent houses.
By that standard, an admin would have a mitigating circumstance to own packet sniffing tools. Packet sniffers, at worst, would end up in a quasi-legal situation. Since distribution would be unstoppable, you could only be convicted of owning something like that for nefarious purposes if you indeed did get caught possessing it--kind of like how if you're a suspected car burglar and the police find a slim jim in your house, you're in trouble, but if you just keep a slim jim in your house without anyone ever being the wiser, Bob's your uncle.
There's a point where more training will make a soldier more effective, depending on your intended use for the soldier. Marines, as an example, are taught (and held to) better marksmanship than most soldiers, because Marines are supposed to be shock troops. It's possible that some parts of the Army do the same thing. It's not the clear distinction between "spray and pray" and "1,000 yard sniper" that SAW-man makes it out to be.
Wow! What are you going to do next, deconstruct those of us who are fans of a particular football team?
Nice theory--but I've seen banner ads for Windows Server on Slashdot, so there goes your theory that Microsoft isn't targeting us.
Not only is this view wrong (for reasons that others have adequately pointed out), it's dangerous, because a quickly-moving justice system would rule without deliberation or thought, based primarily on whim, and with none of the stability afforded by the system as it is now. The only thing that's accomplished by weakening the judiciary is tyranny of the majority, or of a minority who momentary got majority support during the right month of the year. Not that there aren't judicial reforms to be sought out, but this view leads directly to tyranny.
Yeah, if you're going at 1,000 yards or something. As a SAW gunner in the Army you may have never been trained to do this, but I (a civilian with extensive rifle practice) would have no trouble making a single lethal shot anywhere within 100 yards, and beyond that (I'd say up to 200-300 yards) is possible too. Hell, talk to any deer hunter. Just because the Army can afford bullets easier than it can afford training doesn't mean spray and pray is the most effective method.
Kind of like locksmithing tools, old credit cards, stethoscopes, Slim Jims, crowbars, and coat hangers are all criminal tools which are highly regulated?
Manhattan still doesn't have fast enough broadband to rival a Swedish village. You tell me if it's a fair comparison.
This wasn't an ethics survey.
Yeah, and Einstein's theory sufficiently models the measurements and observations we've made of the natural world, so the axioms can be treated as fact so long as we're willing to accept other scientific knowledge as "facts". This gets us into lots of thorny issues with philosophy of science, of course.
Yeah, but they would only observe the Earth's shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse--the phases of the moon are not caused by the Earth's shadow, but rather by the angle at which we view the half-illuminated moon.
*I* wasn't the one making that mistake, I simply conceded it for the sake of argument.
Only one level of recursion in this case--your final adjusted grade, if you took the opportunity to guess, was the function of your final unadjusted grade and your guess. An infinitely recursive version of this would be rather clever for a CS final, though...
You might be right--I was pretty much stipulating the assertions of my parent post, which were perhaps even more questionable than I had thought.
My state's constitution (Washington) has this provision, so it's not unknown. However, it needs to be rigorously defined--a few tax-reform initiatives were struck down over the years for violating this provision.
Yes, that is the theory behind outspending them to oblivion.
This is why SUV's are popular.
Actually, due to the lack of effective lubricants in that day, it was far more common for the thighs to be used for that purpose.
sigh No, they did not prove that c is a variable. c is still a constant as far as we can tell--the fact that light doesn't always travel at c in specific circumstances is useful information that in no way disproves Einstein's theories. Like a Star Trek writer, you're substituting enthusiasm for knowledge. Enthusiasm does not change reality.
The ones behing killing people were upholding a religious consensus--even the ancient Greeks knew the world was round.
And the people who do these things are the hard-headed types who accept reality and deal with it honestly. Sheer enthusiasm makes you that guy jumping off your roof with a 5-winged human-powered flying machine.
Yeah, but that would lead you to the wrong answer, since the right answer (the Fugitive Slave Act) doesn't have the word "compromise" in it (although it is part of the 1850 Compromise).
Yeah, the fact that we have a difficult time interpreting it at all is a good reason to rephrase it.