Who polices the police? The police police police the police. Who polices the police police? The police police police police the police police.
Wash rinse repeat.
One of my favourite examples of this was when Rolling Stone (I think) reviewed Jewel Kilcher's poetry book. It was a full book review, concentrating exclusively on the typography, paper quality, etc without one mention of the poetry.
It seems to me that the main criterion should be, if there is an intent to deceive the viewer. Editing to deceive is different than editing to enhance or beautify.
How is editing to make something look more beautiful than it is not deceptive?
I wonder if something like the concept of double jeopardy applies here. Can he still be punished in the US for an act which was already punished in Germany?
That's a square 46.5cm on a side, or around 18.3 inches on a side.
Not too bad, but not something I would carry with me unless I was severely limited in terms of power sources.
Add a fold in each direction and now you're down to the size of your laptop.
The traditional convention in American English is for commas and periods to be included inside the quotation marks, regardless of whether they are part of the quoted sentence, while the British style places them in or outside of the quotation marks according to whether or not the punctuation is part of the quoted phrase. The American rule is derived from typesetting while the British rule is grammatical (see below for more explanation). Although the terms American style and British style are used, it is not as clear cut as that because at least one major British newspaper prefers typesetters' quotation (punctuation inside) and BBC News uses both styles, while scientific and technical publications, even in the U.S., almost universally use logical quotation (punctuation outside unless part of the source material), due to its precision.
Since I'm not American, and Slashdot is (loosely) a scientific or technical publication, I think I'm justified in putting my comma outside the quotation marks.
Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a
charm.
Lisa: That's spacious reasoning, Dad. Homer: Thank you, dear.
Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away. Homer: Oh, how does it work?
Lisa: It doesn't work. Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: It's just a stupid rock. Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you? Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.
somehow natural gas has stayed underground for millions of years.
Actually, the natural tendency is for it to percolate out of the ground. We only find natural gas (and oil) in lens-shaped non-porous rock formations which trap the rising gas before it reaches the surface. This is called an anticline. Luckily, the most economical use for the CO2 produced is to pump it back down into the trap, where it will presumably remain for another million years.
I've heard that too. In the crowded and dirty middle ages in Europe, beer was often the safest drinking water available. If you couldn't handle the alcohol, you probably died of disease. Not so in the sparsely populated Americas. Asia must have come up with a different solution to supply clean drinking water.
And I don't need him to the file patent. I own the work considering it was developed while under my employ. The Patent Office isn't going to spend any time tracking him down to garner his opinions on the existence of prior art.
I do think you need him to file the patent if he is the inventor, as you need his signature on the assignment. You may be able to force him to sign the assignment, but you still need the paperwork. While the patent office doesn't spend a lot of time looking for invalid patents (which it would surely be if you fraudulently named the inventor or forged an assignment), your competitors and potential licensees will. But, obviously, I'm not a lawyer.
Nowhere did I advocate discourtesy or unwarranted disrespect. The GP said "if you are polite and show them respect, and don't automatically take a defensive position, they tend to be absolutely fine." This implies that if you don't, things tend *not* to turn out fine. I'll rephrase what I said before: showing signs of respect only because of a threat (real or imagined) isn't respect, it's subservience and shouldn't be part of dealing with public servants.
We do not grant the police the considerable powers we do so that they can use them to enforce courtesy (to themselves). A McDonald's employee may spit in your food if you are discourteous to him/her, but professional law enforcement officers are expected to behave professionally, even if you don't "happen to be white, male, and above the age of 30".
I find that if you are polite and show them respect, and don't automatically take a defensive position, they tend to be absolutely fine.
People earn respect. I'm not saying no police deserve respect, but if the only reason you pretend to respect a public servant is so that they will continue to not violently abuse you, something is wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Tell that to De Beers.
I agree, what are they teaching our childs these days?
Yeah, I have some code that runs faster in VMWare than it does natively. I didn't want to look very hard at it in case it stopped working.
Who polices the police? The police police police the police. Who polices the police police? The police police police police the police police. Wash rinse repeat.
I thought the moon was made of BBQ spareribs. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6zC1_gkP-c
One of my favourite examples of this was when Rolling Stone (I think) reviewed Jewel Kilcher's poetry book. It was a full book review, concentrating exclusively on the typography, paper quality, etc without one mention of the poetry.
How is editing to make something look more beautiful than it is not deceptive?
Wow, I've seen "they're" and "their" mixed up, but I've never seen "they are" and "their". I think "Bob the Angry Flower" needs an update.
I wonder if something like the concept of double jeopardy applies here. Can he still be punished in the US for an act which was already punished in Germany?
Add a fold in each direction and now you're down to the size of your laptop.
That doesn't work for me. Try
According to wikipedia:
Since I'm not American, and Slashdot is (loosely) a scientific or technical publication, I think I'm justified in putting my comma outside the quotation marks.
It's "it's", not "its".
They also have a significant promotional infrastructure in place.
The wave-particle duality of vehicles is well established. Here's an example.
Yes, but not very far apart on the keyboard.
Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a
charm.
Lisa: That's spacious reasoning, Dad.
Homer: Thank you, dear.
Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.
Homer: Oh, how does it work?
Lisa: It doesn't work.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: It's just a stupid rock.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?
Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.
You're right. I said "presumably", but I probably meant "hopefully".
Actually, the natural tendency is for it to percolate out of the ground. We only find natural gas (and oil) in lens-shaped non-porous rock formations which trap the rising gas before it reaches the surface. This is called an anticline. Luckily, the most economical use for the CO2 produced is to pump it back down into the trap, where it will presumably remain for another million years.
You don't cut titanium rings off, you crush them with pliers.
I've heard that too. In the crowded and dirty middle ages in Europe, beer was often the safest drinking water available. If you couldn't handle the alcohol, you probably died of disease. Not so in the sparsely populated Americas. Asia must have come up with a different solution to supply clean drinking water.
I do think you need him to file the patent if he is the inventor, as you need his signature on the assignment. You may be able to force him to sign the assignment, but you still need the paperwork. While the patent office doesn't spend a lot of time looking for invalid patents (which it would surely be if you fraudulently named the inventor or forged an assignment), your competitors and potential licensees will. But, obviously, I'm not a lawyer.
Nowhere did I advocate discourtesy or unwarranted disrespect. The GP said "if you are polite and show them respect, and don't automatically take a defensive position, they tend to be absolutely fine." This implies that if you don't, things tend *not* to turn out fine. I'll rephrase what I said before: showing signs of respect only because of a threat (real or imagined) isn't respect, it's subservience and shouldn't be part of dealing with public servants.
We do not grant the police the considerable powers we do so that they can use them to enforce courtesy (to themselves). A McDonald's employee may spit in your food if you are discourteous to him/her, but professional law enforcement officers are expected to behave professionally, even if you don't "happen to be white, male, and above the age of 30".
People earn respect. I'm not saying no police deserve respect, but if the only reason you pretend to respect a public servant is so that they will continue to not violently abuse you, something is wrong.
The guard guards guard the guards. Who guards the guard guards? The guard guard guards guard the guard guards. Who guards the guard guard guards?