Conversely, I gather indirect taxation works better, as it is a guaranteed tax on consumption. You can't avoid buying food, etc in the same way that you can avoid "earning" money or whatever.
Firstly, just because you are using something for it's avertised purpose, doesn't mean you shouldn't be careful about using it for unadvertised and unadvised purposes. Knives are for chopping meat, but I better be careful not to slice my finger off. Guns are for "protection" but I better be careful not to shoot innocent bystanders or whatever. Similarly, laser pointers might well be for pointing at things in the sky, but you better make damn sure you're not pointing at a police helicopter.
Secondly, I think it's a bit of a liberty to say that the "pilot few into their beam". A helicopter is considerably slower to move than a beam of light.
If the intent was to cause an accident, such harsh punishments are fair. If the intent was to goof around, the punishment should reflect only the theft, nothing more.
The trouble with that is that the theft comes with the corollary of creating a dangerous situation. Surely people don't think that removing a stop sign will have no bad consequences. What could possibly go wrong, etc. You can't be convicted for being an idiot, but if you're so stupid that you don't think removing a stop sign is dangerous, then you probably need locking up for other reasons.
After all, it is allowed to think while you're driving, which includes taking care when crossing other roads, especially if the layout is such that there ought to be a stop sign (stolen or just not set up yet).
By that line of reasoning, you might as well argue that all road signs and traffic signals should be removed, because everyone is capable of discerning at every junction how they should proceed, as well as somehow determining what every other driver out there is doing. Unfortunately, there's plenty of evidence to show that even with road signs people drive like morons.
The problem of course being, that such an experiment would be pretty much forbidden under the ethical standards you're expected to comply with while conducting psychological experiments. That being said, some of the best and most insightful experiments have been ethical nightmares (Zimbardo's prison experiment, Milgram's electric shocks) so I guess you get what you pay for.
The thing I really want to know about all the Wii flippers is just how many will be declaring the profits on their tax returns. I'm guessing it'll be round about... none of them.
This sort of thing also serves as a nice illustration of how much stronger the strong and weak nuclear forces are than gravity. It takes gravity about 10s to accelerate you to 100m/s, assuming all the necessary physics land assumptions, and then it takes the nuclear forces a tiny fraction of a second to decelerate you back to 0m/s. Quite impressive really.
20 minutes? Ha! I saw an article in the paper this morning saying that films will take 14 days to download. Rubbish. It'll cost £2 a go, which is pretty cheap given that new video rentals can cost anywhere up to double that and possibly more, but I'd rather spend half an hour going to Blockbuster than waiting half a week to download the damn thing.
I've tried to find a source for this, but I can't. It was in the Metro in the UK - it's an ad funded paper they give away for free on public transport.
There are still a few old ones kicking around. I've seen one at the entrance of the car park at Bradgate Park in Leicestershire, in England. It's not very Tardis like, but it's a police box nonetheless. This page has a picture of it at the bottom of the page, along with various others around the country.
When I was little (like, 6 years old) I asked my dad about various board games that we had in the cupboard. I remember asking whether we could play Monopoly, and he said not yet, but that I could play it when I was older. I thought it must have boobs or something in it. Imagine my disappointment...
Some religions, Judaism for example, command that followers not cut at least certain bits of their hair. I don't know if the same is true for the religion of choice of the majority of Gitmo's guests, but the point is still relevant.
Slashdot Mirror
Conversely, I gather indirect taxation works better, as it is a guaranteed tax on consumption. You can't avoid buying food, etc in the same way that you can avoid "earning" money or whatever.
Wikipedia says that Finland switched off analogue TV on 1 September 2007. I guess everyone there is aware of it.
You don't actually need TV either.
Do you root behind your computer under your desk every time you use it? I know I don't.
Firstly, just because you are using something for it's avertised purpose, doesn't mean you shouldn't be careful about using it for unadvertised and unadvised purposes. Knives are for chopping meat, but I better be careful not to slice my finger off. Guns are for "protection" but I better be careful not to shoot innocent bystanders or whatever. Similarly, laser pointers might well be for pointing at things in the sky, but you better make damn sure you're not pointing at a police helicopter.
Secondly, I think it's a bit of a liberty to say that the "pilot few into their beam". A helicopter is considerably slower to move than a beam of light.
If the intent was to cause an accident, such harsh punishments are fair. If the intent was to goof around, the punishment should reflect only the theft, nothing more.
The trouble with that is that the theft comes with the corollary of creating a dangerous situation. Surely people don't think that removing a stop sign will have no bad consequences. What could possibly go wrong, etc. You can't be convicted for being an idiot, but if you're so stupid that you don't think removing a stop sign is dangerous, then you probably need locking up for other reasons.
After all, it is allowed to think while you're driving, which includes taking care when crossing other roads, especially if the layout is such that there ought to be a stop sign (stolen or just not set up yet).
By that line of reasoning, you might as well argue that all road signs and traffic signals should be removed, because everyone is capable of discerning at every junction how they should proceed, as well as somehow determining what every other driver out there is doing. Unfortunately, there's plenty of evidence to show that even with road signs people drive like morons.
A beer can? You got off easy! In the UK, the ambulating pondlife throw much tougher stuff at passing cars.
Install Firefox for regular use and keep an install of portablefirefox around as well for other purposes.
Yeah, that's totally what my friend said he does.
Some of us have even got fed up with WP and moved on to Serendipity.
What, Windows doesn't have a package manager? Surely you're joking...
The problem of course being, that such an experiment would be pretty much forbidden under the ethical standards you're expected to comply with while conducting psychological experiments. That being said, some of the best and most insightful experiments have been ethical nightmares (Zimbardo's prison experiment, Milgram's electric shocks) so I guess you get what you pay for.
Is this the comic you have in mind?
I make that to be 4 words, assuming a word length of 32 bits.
The thing I really want to know about all the Wii flippers is just how many will be declaring the profits on their tax returns. I'm guessing it'll be round about... none of them.
Would you say the same thing if someone were hoarding all the bread and demanding that you pay $10 a loaf?
Yes, I realise that the analogy breaks down because a Wii is considerably less essential than bread, but even so...
Only if they collect, otherwise you're probably going to have to send it.
Ah, sue me, I was hurrying to post at the end of my lunchbreak and physics isn't really at the front of my brain!
This sort of thing also serves as a nice illustration of how much stronger the strong and weak nuclear forces are than gravity. It takes gravity about 10s to accelerate you to 100m/s, assuming all the necessary physics land assumptions, and then it takes the nuclear forces a tiny fraction of a second to decelerate you back to 0m/s. Quite impressive really.
If I may borrow from Douglas Adams...
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
20 minutes? Ha! I saw an article in the paper this morning saying that films will take 14 days to download. Rubbish. It'll cost £2 a go, which is pretty cheap given that new video rentals can cost anywhere up to double that and possibly more, but I'd rather spend half an hour going to Blockbuster than waiting half a week to download the damn thing.
I've tried to find a source for this, but I can't. It was in the Metro in the UK - it's an ad funded paper they give away for free on public transport.
There are still a few old ones kicking around. I've seen one at the entrance of the car park at Bradgate Park in Leicestershire, in England. It's not very Tardis like, but it's a police box nonetheless. This page has a picture of it at the bottom of the page, along with various others around the country.
When I was little (like, 6 years old) I asked my dad about various board games that we had in the cupboard. I remember asking whether we could play Monopoly, and he said not yet, but that I could play it when I was older. I thought it must have boobs or something in it. Imagine my disappointment...
Some religions, Judaism for example, command that followers not cut at least certain bits of their hair. I don't know if the same is true for the religion of choice of the majority of Gitmo's guests, but the point is still relevant.
Point the first: You apparently can't count.
Point the second: You know that's not really the solution anyone is looking for.
Because it's not very funny, perhaps?