By that same logic, city, county, or state prisons can legally beat and torture their prisoners, unless local law specifically prohibits it. No. Just No.
All those rights provided to citizens of the United States by the constitution and its amendments apply equally in every jurisdiction in the country, it doesn't matter if the police involved are local or federal.
Are you positive the ID request was related to the form of payment? Target has become very strict about checking ID for age restricted items, every time, for every customer.
The only time you should be asked for ID in relation to a credit card at Target is if the POS prompts the cashier, which it will only do if the authorization system sends back a message that something fishy might be going on with the card. My understanding is that this situation is perfectly acceptable - it is the credit card company's authorization system that requests the ID check, not the store. For a routine transaction at Target the cashier never even touches the card, let alone asks for ID.
You are assuming that the cheating accusation was made purely on a behavioral basis, and that is not a reasonable assumption to make. If it was determined the kid was cheating on a technical basis, the kid's autism is completely irrelevant.
It is dipping well below freezing at night in Quincy right now, but this is the coldest part of the year. Central Washington isn't exactly cool in the summer months - the average highs for Quincy in July are in the mid-80s, and the record highs are pushing 110F.
I used my iPhone and the Red Laser app to scan all the toys my kids wanted. It shows all the prices for the stores around me, as well as online.
(emphasis mine)
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that any person who has already set foot in your store is a potential sale, you'd make a terrible salesperson. Checking prices is not a guarantee that the customer is going to shop somewhere else. If your prices are even in the same ballpark, there is a decent chance they'll pick up the item *now* because they are already there, and it is convenient. If the staff was pleasant, that is another point in their favor.
The entire issue here is that some sales geek at Toys'r'us made an *assumption* that someone checking prices on their phone will definitely not make any purchases while they are in the store. By making that assumption, they probably swayed that customer away from making any purchases, and in fact, they have now generated negative word of mouth. Harassing shoppers is a pretty terrible way to move product. I work for one of those "big" B&M stores, and if I saw a sales associate harassing a customer for checking prices on their phone, they'd be in the office for a quick refresher on the benefits of friendliness.
Frankly, taking your money to another business, be it online or another retailer, is never unethical. No one has any obligation to keep a store in business just because they happened to walk in and take up their floorspace for a few minutes. The store is responsible for their own survival, and part of that is balancing operating costs against actual sales. Plenty of retailers are surviving just fine in the face of online (and mail-order before that) competition so far, the ability to check prices real-time instead of ahead of time is *not* going to push a currently profitable retailer over the edge now. Smart retailers are looking for ways to utilize their customer's smart phones, instead of waving their hands in panic that now they can get real-time pricing data.
Even if you grant that it is unethical to shop in a retail store and buy online - and that is a big stretch - any retailer who harasses their customers for shopping intelligently deserves to go out of business. Period.
Look, people shop around, they did before the internet, and they did before mobile phones. There is nothing any retailer can do to stop this.
Being grumpy at a customer for using the tools at their disposal to shop around more efficiently is simply driving that customer away. Treating your customer with respect, on the other hand, *might* make you a sale even if your prices aren't the absolute lowest.
A sales person calling over a supervisor to bother a guest in their store for price shopping is extremely disrespectful. You call over a manager for suspicious activities, or clear violations of posted store polices (non-service pets, inappropriate clothing) NOT because you are worried the customer might find out you don't have the lowest price and go shop elsewhere. They might have passed on a product at your store due to price, but now they almost certainly will because you harassed them. How is that a win for your store?
Really, the light was missing and I didn't notice?
S5.1.1.27 (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each passenger car manufactured on or after September 1, 1985, and each multipurpose passenger vehicle, truck, and bus, whose overall width is less than 80 inches, whose GVWR is 10,000 pounds or less, manufactured on or after September 1, 1993, shall be equipped with a high-mounted stop lamp
It was a light truck, not a passenger car.
The point, of course, is that I never had to retrofit a center brake light.
Even if this passes, there is no way it will prevent all accidents while reversing.
How many of those 292 deaths are caused by inadequate safety features, and how many are caused by pure carelessness? If you're reversing fast enough to KILL SOMEONE you probably need to slow down and pay attention.
It is right there in the summary... they're selling at a loss now, but they're betting on component prices coming down. Presumably as a result of volume ramping up and the tech maturing.
Just to be clear, I'm not really complaining about "synergy" here. Synergy is indeed the correct concept in this case, regardless of its overuse in the business world. I'm complaining about the awkward inversion of "creates synergy," which is a pretty classic example of a feel good corporate buzz-phrase. You wouldn't say that automating manufacturing processes "creates un-jobs" - but he chose to say "creates dis-synergy," rather than something more concise and accurate like "destroys synergy."
He was not suggesting subterranean dwellings in those locations. He was pointing out that there is still a lot of sparsely populated surface to live on before resorting to subterranean colonization.
Now as for Korean history, why would people in other countries be taught about that? You probably know nothing of British, Irish or Icelandic history either, no reason for you to know either. Even in the UK for example there is limited teaching of British history and the bad bits are hardly mentioned.
I don't know, I recall covering some European history when I was in (American) high school. Primarily French and English history and how it relates to the formation of modern politics in the US.
Zero coverage of Korean history though, that much is true.
Landing and takeoff is the ONLY place you could hit a commercial airliner with a shoulder launched weapon. Typical cruising altitudes are well above the range of the stinger, for example.
I'm not sure I can think of anything less stealthy than a commercial airliner, really. They're huge, noisy, and covered in running lights. The only use I can think of for this app for a hypothetical terrorist is to identify a particular aircraft, but we are talking about terrorists here. They typically aren't known for their choosiness in civilian targets. The point is to scare a population by killing a large chunk of largely random people, after all. Binoculars would suffice to target a particular aircraft type or airline, if they're already in range for a shoulder launched SAM, anyway.
Except he didn't say *anything* about extrapolating from that data. In fact, he specifically acknowledged that, "The pattern is unpredictable."
The only assertion GP made was that the global climate today is warmer than it was 100 years ago. "Sample size" is as irrelevant to that claim as the price of lollipops in Turkmenistan.
What? Which DLC are you calling the "final dungeon" exactly? The fight with the primary antagonist (the Archdemon) was included in the regular edition of the game.
Having an in-game ad for the Warden's Keep add-on was pretty cheesy, but it is not even close to withholding the final dungeon and selling it later.
The difference between medical experimentation on corpses and taking the babies of mine that weren't as likely to make it and doing stuff to them, is, these guys deserve better.
Did you seriously just say that fertilized but unneeded eggs are deserving of better treatment than the bodies of adults? Get a grip, man.
Some really brief research shows that the engine from a 2010 Avalon would be an upgrade from the 1980 Ferrari 308's stock engine, but not a huge one. The Avalon's V6 is around 270hp, while the Ferrari was somewhere between 200 and 250, depending on the specific model. It is worth noting that the Avalon's V6 is in fact, a higher displacement engine than the 308's V8, 3.5L for the Avalon, 3.0L for the 308.
More impressive is comparing the 308's 3.0L V8 to something like the engine in Subaru's Impreza STi.. ~250HP from a 3.0L V8, vs ~300 HP from a 2.5L H4.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, what?
By that same logic, city, county, or state prisons can legally beat and torture their prisoners, unless local law specifically prohibits it. No. Just No.
All those rights provided to citizens of the United States by the constitution and its amendments apply equally in every jurisdiction in the country, it doesn't matter if the police involved are local or federal.
Are you positive the ID request was related to the form of payment? Target has become very strict about checking ID for age restricted items, every time, for every customer.
The only time you should be asked for ID in relation to a credit card at Target is if the POS prompts the cashier, which it will only do if the authorization system sends back a message that something fishy might be going on with the card. My understanding is that this situation is perfectly acceptable - it is the credit card company's authorization system that requests the ID check, not the store. For a routine transaction at Target the cashier never even touches the card, let alone asks for ID.
You can't call a line infinite if you've found one end of it.
Sure you can, we even have a proper name for it in geometry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_(mathematics)#Ray
You are assuming that the cheating accusation was made purely on a behavioral basis, and that is not a reasonable assumption to make. If it was determined the kid was cheating on a technical basis, the kid's autism is completely irrelevant.
It is dipping well below freezing at night in Quincy right now, but this is the coldest part of the year. Central Washington isn't exactly cool in the summer months - the average highs for Quincy in July are in the mid-80s, and the record highs are pushing 110F.
Lets look at that quote again shall we?
I used my iPhone and the Red Laser app to scan all the toys my kids wanted. It shows all the prices for the stores around me, as well as online.
(emphasis mine)
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that any person who has already set foot in your store is a potential sale, you'd make a terrible salesperson. Checking prices is not a guarantee that the customer is going to shop somewhere else. If your prices are even in the same ballpark, there is a decent chance they'll pick up the item *now* because they are already there, and it is convenient. If the staff was pleasant, that is another point in their favor.
The entire issue here is that some sales geek at Toys'r'us made an *assumption* that someone checking prices on their phone will definitely not make any purchases while they are in the store. By making that assumption, they probably swayed that customer away from making any purchases, and in fact, they have now generated negative word of mouth. Harassing shoppers is a pretty terrible way to move product. I work for one of those "big" B&M stores, and if I saw a sales associate harassing a customer for checking prices on their phone, they'd be in the office for a quick refresher on the benefits of friendliness.
Frankly, taking your money to another business, be it online or another retailer, is never unethical. No one has any obligation to keep a store in business just because they happened to walk in and take up their floorspace for a few minutes. The store is responsible for their own survival, and part of that is balancing operating costs against actual sales. Plenty of retailers are surviving just fine in the face of online (and mail-order before that) competition so far, the ability to check prices real-time instead of ahead of time is *not* going to push a currently profitable retailer over the edge now. Smart retailers are looking for ways to utilize their customer's smart phones, instead of waving their hands in panic that now they can get real-time pricing data.
Even if you grant that it is unethical to shop in a retail store and buy online - and that is a big stretch - any retailer who harasses their customers for shopping intelligently deserves to go out of business. Period.
Look, people shop around, they did before the internet, and they did before mobile phones. There is nothing any retailer can do to stop this.
Being grumpy at a customer for using the tools at their disposal to shop around more efficiently is simply driving that customer away. Treating your customer with respect, on the other hand, *might* make you a sale even if your prices aren't the absolute lowest.
A sales person calling over a supervisor to bother a guest in their store for price shopping is extremely disrespectful. You call over a manager for suspicious activities, or clear violations of posted store polices (non-service pets, inappropriate clothing) NOT because you are worried the customer might find out you don't have the lowest price and go shop elsewhere. They might have passed on a product at your store due to price, but now they almost certainly will because you harassed them. How is that a win for your store?
Really, the light was missing and I didn't notice?
S5.1.1.27 (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each passenger car manufactured on or after September 1, 1985, and each multipurpose passenger vehicle, truck, and bus, whose overall width is less than 80 inches, whose GVWR is 10,000 pounds or less, manufactured on or after September 1, 1993, shall be equipped with a high-mounted stop lamp
It was a light truck, not a passenger car.
The point, of course, is that I never had to retrofit a center brake light.
Even if this passes, there is no way it will prevent all accidents while reversing.
How many of those 292 deaths are caused by inadequate safety features, and how many are caused by pure carelessness? If you're reversing fast enough to KILL SOMEONE you probably need to slow down and pay attention.
Must have been a state law, I was driving an 87' pickup with no center brake light until just a few years ago. This was in WA.
It is right there in the summary... they're selling at a loss now, but they're betting on component prices coming down. Presumably as a result of volume ramping up and the tech maturing.
Just to be clear, I'm not really complaining about "synergy" here. Synergy is indeed the correct concept in this case, regardless of its overuse in the business world. I'm complaining about the awkward inversion of "creates synergy," which is a pretty classic example of a feel good corporate buzz-phrase. You wouldn't say that automating manufacturing processes "creates un-jobs" - but he chose to say "creates dis-synergy," rather than something more concise and accurate like "destroys synergy."
He was not suggesting subterranean dwellings in those locations. He was pointing out that there is still a lot of sparsely populated surface to live on before resorting to subterranean colonization.
Dis-synergy? Wow, corporate buzzwords are bad enough without mangling them into new usage.
I'm sorry, but your definition of planets has gaping hole. Unless you believe that gas giants shouldn't be classified as planets?
Now as for Korean history, why would people in other countries be taught about that? You probably know nothing of British, Irish or Icelandic history either, no reason for you to know either. Even in the UK for example there is limited teaching of British history and the bad bits are hardly mentioned.
I don't know, I recall covering some European history when I was in (American) high school. Primarily French and English history and how it relates to the formation of modern politics in the US.
Zero coverage of Korean history though, that much is true.
Do they use the roads? Do they have children who go to school?
It is very difficult to completely avoid benefiting from government services, and you really would have to make a conscious effort to do so.
Ordinary people can identify what is commercial traffic and what is military traffic with a book of silhouettes and a pair of binoculars.
Landing and takeoff is the ONLY place you could hit a commercial airliner with a shoulder launched weapon. Typical cruising altitudes are well above the range of the stinger, for example.
I'm not sure I can think of anything less stealthy than a commercial airliner, really. They're huge, noisy, and covered in running lights. The only use I can think of for this app for a hypothetical terrorist is to identify a particular aircraft, but we are talking about terrorists here. They typically aren't known for their choosiness in civilian targets. The point is to scare a population by killing a large chunk of largely random people, after all. Binoculars would suffice to target a particular aircraft type or airline, if they're already in range for a shoulder launched SAM, anyway.
Except he didn't say *anything* about extrapolating from that data. In fact, he specifically acknowledged that, "The pattern is unpredictable."
The only assertion GP made was that the global climate today is warmer than it was 100 years ago. "Sample size" is as irrelevant to that claim as the price of lollipops in Turkmenistan.
What? Which DLC are you calling the "final dungeon" exactly? The fight with the primary antagonist (the Archdemon) was included in the regular edition of the game.
Having an in-game ad for the Warden's Keep add-on was pretty cheesy, but it is not even close to withholding the final dungeon and selling it later.
The difference between medical experimentation on corpses and taking the babies of mine that weren't as likely to make it and doing stuff to them, is, these guys deserve better.
Did you seriously just say that fertilized but unneeded eggs are deserving of better treatment than the bodies of adults? Get a grip, man.
Some really brief research shows that the engine from a 2010 Avalon would be an upgrade from the 1980 Ferrari 308's stock engine, but not a huge one. The Avalon's V6 is around 270hp, while the Ferrari was somewhere between 200 and 250, depending on the specific model. It is worth noting that the Avalon's V6 is in fact, a higher displacement engine than the 308's V8, 3.5L for the Avalon, 3.0L for the 308. More impressive is comparing the 308's 3.0L V8 to something like the engine in Subaru's Impreza STi.. ~250HP from a 3.0L V8, vs ~300 HP from a 2.5L H4.