#1 - We don't stratify. In other words, we uniformly put the slowest idiots in with everyone else, rather than putting the brightest in one class and on down the line.
That's certainly not universal for the US. My district stratifies. Not sure how to go about looking up how many do or don't though.
What about both? Yes he should be after the school non-stop to take care of this, but what if that takes a month? Three months? Or more? What should he do until then?
4. If you need to know where she is, just ask the RIIA
Which, given the RIAA's investigative tactics, will yield 2 of her best friends, a teacher she had two years ago, and a random gas station attendant, but not the missing child.
In my experience, untreated ADD/ADHD means that while you can *sometimes* do that, it's not something you really have control over. IE it's not just interest (or lack thereof) in something, there is some other quality that determines whether you can do the hyper-focus thing on it.
From experience and observation, the hyper-focus tends to come into play more frequently for things the individual in question considers fun, with an especial frequency for video games.
While it's not controlled, the things it usually snaps into place for have a tendency to become the preferred leisure activities.
Yeah... not sure where the funny mod came from, there was no joke in there. I've got a daughter who was diagnosed as ADHD by a neurologist, so I've both observed and read up on it a bit. Plus I can tell the she definitely inherited it from me, though I'm not quite there (only 4 of the 12 symptoms or something like that).
That doesn't sound like ADD, it's just the results of stress. My wife was diagnosed with stress and those are the *exact* symptoms.. she'd be in the middle of a conversation and forget how it started. She really hated the effect when raiding... she couldn't hold enough information to be able to remember tactics.
The major difference being the the ADD/ADHD folks can focus fantastically well on something that interests them (like raiding for example).
I don't believe the contention here is about whether or not she deserves protection, but rather whether or not posting via craigslist instead of some other site had any effect on her odds of being assaulted.
I do, however, not trust him to take sufficient care of the characters I enjoy the most - he's proven he has no qualms about killing them off (or leaving them out entirely from a book), then resurrecting them and making them evil.
I however trust him to kill off major characters or have them react very badly to the overwhelming hardships they've suffered. Part of the charm of that is there are no scenes where you feel absolutely certain the character you're reading about is going to survive. Keeps it genuinely suspenseful.
You're far too stupid for me to explain this to you properly since you can't understand even simple words. If you think Red Hat is giving Linux away for free you're an idiot.
========
Actually, I agree with you, I just thought you've already been waiting 6 hours for a nasty reply from Dave and that I'd just step in and supply a Dave-esque response. Was I convincing?
Should someone who committed a crime be let go because some did not follow procedures
The problem with allowing the conviction to stand is that it encourages sloppy police work, in a "kill em all and let god sort em out" kind of way. You end up with police violating everyone's rights but then only charging the guy who actually did it. You also end up with police who bust into the homes of people they just don't like in hopes of finding some kind of evidence of a crime.
As odd as it sounds, the purpose of overturning this conviction is more to protect you and me than it is to protect the burglar in this case.
No company exists that can make a profit without charging someone for something. If that was the point you were trying to make at the beginning, then... okay, point conceded.
But as for this question:
Please demonstrate a successful business model that relies on giving away the product for free.
You've already been answered by multiple posters. Broadcast TV/Radio. Regardless of whatever else they do to make money, they still produce a product and then give that product away to people for free. Same applies to the myriad phone book companies and software producers like Redhat or MySQL.
If you're trying to point out that no one makes money by giving EVERYTHING away for free, then by golly you're right, and are also keeping in theme with the subject line I used when I started this whole thread.
Public figures already fall into a different category for things like this. You'd be fine there. What bothers me is that this singles out electronic harassment. Do existing laws on the subject of harassment specify that communications must be non-electronic? Why do we need a new law?
It was fun to watch this little game of telephone unfold:
eldavojohn: "Republican conservatives" tcopeland: "conservatives" (dropped the 'Republican' part) JeanPaulBob: "Bush" (converted 'conservatives' to 'Bush'. To be fair, Bush probably qualifies as a genuine conservative on this topic). Gospodin: "prevented" (stuck with 'Bush', but changed gears from stuff that wasn't liked to stuff that was prevented).
Communication can be tricky sometimes.
But if I understand what you guys are saying, it was US policy for an army of bush elephants to trample anyone who spoke any 2 of the words "embryonic stem cell research" within five minutes of each other.
Slashdot Mirror
And Boston made it to both lists.
I like to call that Apatheism.
"Who Declared H1N1's Spread Officially a Pandemic." is a liberal media myth.
So there.
"The liberal news media is a conservative myth is a liberal media myth" is a conservative myth.
Fun! Who's got the next one?
#1 - We don't stratify. In other words, we uniformly put the slowest idiots in with everyone else, rather than putting the brightest in one class and on down the line.
That's certainly not universal for the US. My district stratifies. Not sure how to go about looking up how many do or don't though.
So you're confirming that we'll have to pay for hulu, even if we don't use it?
What about both? Yes he should be after the school non-stop to take care of this, but what if that takes a month? Three months? Or more? What should he do until then?
4. If you need to know where she is, just ask the RIIA
Which, given the RIAA's investigative tactics, will yield 2 of her best friends, a teacher she had two years ago, and a random gas station attendant, but not the missing child.
In my experience, untreated ADD/ADHD means that while you can *sometimes* do that, it's not something you really have control over. IE it's not just interest (or lack thereof) in something, there is some other quality that determines whether you can do the hyper-focus thing on it.
From experience and observation, the hyper-focus tends to come into play more frequently for things the individual in question considers fun, with an especial frequency for video games.
While it's not controlled, the things it usually snaps into place for have a tendency to become the preferred leisure activities.
Yeah... not sure where the funny mod came from, there was no joke in there. I've got a daughter who was diagnosed as ADHD by a neurologist, so I've both observed and read up on it a bit. Plus I can tell the she definitely inherited it from me, though I'm not quite there (only 4 of the 12 symptoms or something like that).
That doesn't sound like ADD, it's just the results of stress. My wife was diagnosed with stress and those are the *exact* symptoms.. she'd be in the middle of a conversation and forget how it started. She really hated the effect when raiding... she couldn't hold enough information to be able to remember tactics.
The major difference being the the ADD/ADHD folks can focus fantastically well on something that interests them (like raiding for example).
Being able to turn the gore off is mainly for Puritans
... or those with weaker graphics cards.
I don't believe the contention here is about whether or not she deserves protection, but rather whether or not posting via craigslist instead of some other site had any effect on her odds of being assaulted.
I do, however, not trust him to take sufficient care of the characters I enjoy the most - he's proven he has no qualms about killing them off (or leaving them out entirely from a book), then resurrecting them and making them evil.
I however trust him to kill off major characters or have them react very badly to the overwhelming hardships they've suffered. Part of the charm of that is there are no scenes where you feel absolutely certain the character you're reading about is going to survive. Keeps it genuinely suspenseful.
You're far too stupid for me to explain this to you properly since you can't understand even simple words. If you think Red Hat is giving Linux away for free you're an idiot.
========
Actually, I agree with you, I just thought you've already been waiting 6 hours for a nasty reply from Dave and that I'd just step in and supply a Dave-esque response. Was I convincing?
Should someone who committed a crime be let go because some did not follow procedures
The problem with allowing the conviction to stand is that it encourages sloppy police work, in a "kill em all and let god sort em out" kind of way. You end up with police violating everyone's rights but then only charging the guy who actually did it. You also end up with police who bust into the homes of people they just don't like in hopes of finding some kind of evidence of a crime.
As odd as it sounds, the purpose of overturning this conviction is more to protect you and me than it is to protect the burglar in this case.
All this time I've been wondering if anyone even noticed. Thanks for showing the love.
No company exists that can make a profit without charging someone for something. If that was the point you were trying to make at the beginning, then... okay, point conceded.
But as for this question:
Please demonstrate a successful business model that relies on giving away the product for free.
You've already been answered by multiple posters. Broadcast TV/Radio. Regardless of whatever else they do to make money, they still produce a product and then give that product away to people for free. Same applies to the myriad phone book companies and software producers like Redhat or MySQL.
If you're trying to point out that no one makes money by giving EVERYTHING away for free, then by golly you're right, and are also keeping in theme with the subject line I used when I started this whole thread.
free often can't work without a good business model
Last I checked proprietary suffers from the exact same problem.
Public figures already fall into a different category for things like this. You'd be fine there. What bothers me is that this singles out electronic harassment. Do existing laws on the subject of harassment specify that communications must be non-electronic? Why do we need a new law?
It was fun to watch this little game of telephone unfold:
eldavojohn: "Republican conservatives"
tcopeland: "conservatives" (dropped the 'Republican' part)
JeanPaulBob: "Bush" (converted 'conservatives' to 'Bush'. To be fair, Bush probably qualifies as a genuine conservative on this topic).
Gospodin: "prevented" (stuck with 'Bush', but changed gears from stuff that wasn't liked to stuff that was prevented).
Communication can be tricky sometimes.
But if I understand what you guys are saying, it was US policy for an army of bush elephants to trample anyone who spoke any 2 of the words "embryonic stem cell research" within five minutes of each other.
You're a disciple of AOL.
It's also non level if the gov is exempt from various taxes that the private ISP has to pay.
Toomey would certainly have ousted Specter in a Republican primary, but in a statewide election? He's too conservative to win in PA.
Ag doesn't have R&D costs, or at least nothing like the R&D costs that pharma has.