Who's paying you? I simplified the quote. It isn't incorrect. Why do you care so much? Apple didn't include reasonable checks to prevent undesired charges. They were sued and lost. Your opinion has been proven wrong in a court of law. So why do you insist on insisting that everyone who disagrees with you is wrong? Can you not accept a world where more than one opinion is held? You should seek therapy.
Yes, the more "logical" people tend to exhibit confirmation bias more than others. They have no less bias or greater impartiality, but do so in a way acceptable to themselves.
What is PAYMENT?
The [...] promise [of] the delivery of money[...]
Nope, your link agrees with me, and not you. Yes, I had to heavily edit the sentence for readability, as it had lots of inapplicable "or" statements.
Sad when all you can do is link to things you claim contradict me, but support me and prove you wrong. What, were you hoping I wouldn't follow the link? You are 100% wrong, based on the evidence you provided.
So the Nazis are a very real threat for taking over the world because it happened once before, it will always be true?
Back when women were essentially property with no vote, there were some feminists who militarized, trying to end the slavery of women. That they did once exist, does not mean they do so now.
Whenever I hear "rapidly increasing" it is synonymous with "too small to count, but wants to pretend it's bigger than it is". The number of people in public schools can never be "rapidly increasing" because there simply aren't enough people on the planet to do that. It's too big to grow fast. It can grow or shrink, but not grow fast for more than a small subset over a short period. But those 3 secular homeschoolers now 6 this year, that's 200% growth (yes, I know that's the wrong percentage, but I'm just being consistent with everyone else's errors). that 200% growth can be sustained for years, and still be a tiny percentage of the overall.
If democracy is rule by voters, what is rule by polls? We don't rule by polls. Polls are easy to manipulate. Votes take the "poll" and distill it down to an action. The polls are irrelevant, except where politicians believe they correlate with votes.
Same as today, their parents, who learned it from their parents. And when the government tries to break the cycle, they are accused of interfering with the parental right to raise their children however they see fit, even if that's malnutritioned and without proper medical care.
God Created the Heavens and the Earth. The Bible doesn't specify what's up there. So finding ET would neither support nor refute the Bible (much like everything else).
It's nice that you want 24-hour immediate access to a judge before every police action, but I want a pony. With respect, what makes you so important that your due process must be immediate, rather than speedy?
There's no demand for immediate, other than from the cops. There's no reason the cops, with PC, can't arrest you, seizing all your items for storage purposes only. Then, once they've seen a judge, they can gain access to your possessions for investigative purposes.
It's the cops that are breaking the speediness for immediate, not the GP. His argument just seemed to be that if you want immediate, then you need to make the judges immediate, not skip that step.
I wouldn't think 10 in 100 would be able to name the amendments. I don't think anyone in Congress has heard of the 9th or 10th Amendments. And nearly everyone I talked to about Amendments gets pretty fuzzy after the second, especially the 3rd is so irrelevant.
I'd say more like 1 in 100 would be able to name the first 10 amendments.
So the statutory rape laws are illegal in almost (or possibly) every state. A 16 year old girl can sleep with her neighbor or boyfriend and it's legal, but sleeping with her teacher and it's illegal. You modify the crime/punishment based on the person's job. You have to be 18 to sleep with your teacher and it not be a crime.
So I'm confused how you match that reality with your opinion about the Constitution's meaning.
Nope. When *I* pay (authorizing payment is paying legally, if the payment later fails, the transaction is considered completed - legally), I get a receipt at Target, but not Apple. Note, Target doesn't process the payment until that night, same as Apple, but gives an instant receipt for their acceptance of my "unpaid order" (to use you legally incorrect terms).
You are wrong. I don't get the receipt when *I* pay, I get it when Apple decides to process my previous payment. Why are you so adamant in arguing with me when you are the one who is wrong?
I've had the same thought. Or surgery. I've been under so they could cut me open a few times, and it doesn't hurt when you are under. So what's the "pain" if they put them under anesthesia, then remove your heart, and hand it to the parent of the person you killed while you were still alive, then unplug you? That level of retribution is what I see called for here.
I want to be notified when I make a purchase. That's not hating users. Hating users is refusing to even offer that as an option. They could have kept the "regular" way as a default, and added the ability for people who like more information to be able to get it, rather than hiding and delaying the information until it's less useful.
Target's stormtroopers don't do it. I do. The checkouts aren't full service. I have to pick them out, and once they are in the cart, I have to touch them all again before checkout. Yes, I've found things in the cart that the kids tossed in, and I could set it aside at the checkout. Why can't I do that with Apple?
The raw materials for mass-production have a static price as well. So obviously, all automation will fail. If only someone told them back in the 1800s, we'd not have wasted time with that worthless Industrial Revolution.
Slashdot Mirror
Who's paying you? I simplified the quote. It isn't incorrect. Why do you care so much? Apple didn't include reasonable checks to prevent undesired charges. They were sued and lost. Your opinion has been proven wrong in a court of law. So why do you insist on insisting that everyone who disagrees with you is wrong? Can you not accept a world where more than one opinion is held? You should seek therapy.
Yes, the more "logical" people tend to exhibit confirmation bias more than others. They have no less bias or greater impartiality, but do so in a way acceptable to themselves.
What is PAYMENT?
The [...] promise [of] the delivery of money[...]
Nope, your link agrees with me, and not you. Yes, I had to heavily edit the sentence for readability, as it had lots of inapplicable "or" statements.
Sad when all you can do is link to things you claim contradict me, but support me and prove you wrong. What, were you hoping I wouldn't follow the link? You are 100% wrong, based on the evidence you provided.
I get a vmail. It's visually in front of me at all times. That you don't understand reality will not change it.
So the Nazis are a very real threat for taking over the world because it happened once before, it will always be true?
Back when women were essentially property with no vote, there were some feminists who militarized, trying to end the slavery of women. That they did once exist, does not mean they do so now.
Whenever I hear "rapidly increasing" it is synonymous with "too small to count, but wants to pretend it's bigger than it is". The number of people in public schools can never be "rapidly increasing" because there simply aren't enough people on the planet to do that. It's too big to grow fast. It can grow or shrink, but not grow fast for more than a small subset over a short period. But those 3 secular homeschoolers now 6 this year, that's 200% growth (yes, I know that's the wrong percentage, but I'm just being consistent with everyone else's errors). that 200% growth can be sustained for years, and still be a tiny percentage of the overall.
If democracy is rule by voters, what is rule by polls? We don't rule by polls. Polls are easy to manipulate. Votes take the "poll" and distill it down to an action. The polls are irrelevant, except where politicians believe they correlate with votes.
Same as today, their parents, who learned it from their parents. And when the government tries to break the cycle, they are accused of interfering with the parental right to raise their children however they see fit, even if that's malnutritioned and without proper medical care.
God Created the Heavens and the Earth. The Bible doesn't specify what's up there. So finding ET would neither support nor refute the Bible (much like everything else).
It's nice that you want 24-hour immediate access to a judge before every police action, but I want a pony. With respect, what makes you so important that your due process must be immediate, rather than speedy?
There's no demand for immediate, other than from the cops. There's no reason the cops, with PC, can't arrest you, seizing all your items for storage purposes only. Then, once they've seen a judge, they can gain access to your possessions for investigative purposes.
It's the cops that are breaking the speediness for immediate, not the GP. His argument just seemed to be that if you want immediate, then you need to make the judges immediate, not skip that step.
I wouldn't think 10 in 100 would be able to name the amendments. I don't think anyone in Congress has heard of the 9th or 10th Amendments. And nearly everyone I talked to about Amendments gets pretty fuzzy after the second, especially the 3rd is so irrelevant.
I'd say more like 1 in 100 would be able to name the first 10 amendments.
How are the police supposed to know that a crime was committed if they don't search every bedroom and tap every phone?
So the statutory rape laws are illegal in almost (or possibly) every state. A 16 year old girl can sleep with her neighbor or boyfriend and it's legal, but sleeping with her teacher and it's illegal. You modify the crime/punishment based on the person's job. You have to be 18 to sleep with your teacher and it not be a crime.
So I'm confused how you match that reality with your opinion about the Constitution's meaning.
Nope. When *I* pay (authorizing payment is paying legally, if the payment later fails, the transaction is considered completed - legally), I get a receipt at Target, but not Apple. Note, Target doesn't process the payment until that night, same as Apple, but gives an instant receipt for their acceptance of my "unpaid order" (to use you legally incorrect terms).
Where is the option to receive an email whenever something is ordered, without regard to when payment is processed?
You should stay away from Slashdot. You understand neither sarcasm nor satire.
You are wrong. I don't get the receipt when *I* pay, I get it when Apple decides to process my previous payment. Why are you so adamant in arguing with me when you are the one who is wrong?
I don't remember that from the Constitution.
I've had the same thought. Or surgery. I've been under so they could cut me open a few times, and it doesn't hurt when you are under. So what's the "pain" if they put them under anesthesia, then remove your heart, and hand it to the parent of the person you killed while you were still alive, then unplug you? That level of retribution is what I see called for here.
Life is still cheaper than death. All the appeals and such make a death sentence more expensive than life, and both have the same result.
I want to be notified when I make a purchase. That's not hating users. Hating users is refusing to even offer that as an option. They could have kept the "regular" way as a default, and added the ability for people who like more information to be able to get it, rather than hiding and delaying the information until it's less useful.
Target's stormtroopers don't do it. I do. The checkouts aren't full service. I have to pick them out, and once they are in the cart, I have to touch them all again before checkout. Yes, I've found things in the cart that the kids tossed in, and I could set it aside at the checkout. Why can't I do that with Apple?
Sadly, I haven't seen anything good since I got one.
Having reviewed my own dashcam footage, I get perfectly readable plates in all weather.
The raw materials for mass-production have a static price as well. So obviously, all automation will fail. If only someone told them back in the 1800s, we'd not have wasted time with that worthless Industrial Revolution.