150 miles over the hills of Wales and across the Severn into England?
Only if they were stupid.
The Preseli Quarry is only 5 miles from the coast of the Irish Sea (all downhill). From there, they could be moved by barge up the Bristol Channel. Then across 40 miles of flat ground to the Salisbury Plain.
Disclaimer: I use miles instead of kilometers because Britain wasn't metric yet in 3000 BC.
It is better to start investigating whether mental health services could help that person live a better life
In America, we call these mental health facilities "prisons", and they are currently benefiting over 2 million citizens. But only 60% have serious mental health issues. But we are working to increase that percentage, and the corresponding profits.
A fix for this would be a punishment if you are convicted but lied about being innocent.
America already punishes people for exercising their constitutional right to a fair trial.
That is exactly what plea deals are. Plead guilty, get a lighter sentence. Demand the right to challenge the evidence against you, get a harsher sentence.
Ergo, the "right" to a fair trial no longer exists in practice.
And yet they are still allowed a trial and legal council provided by the state.
Most defendants are coerced out of going to trial. An American defendant who can afford a private attorney is twice as likely to avoid incarceration as a defendant relying on a public defender. "Rights for the Rich" is hardly a fair system. China's courts have many defects, but being poor is much less of a disadvantage there.
Believe it or not you have guaranteed rights in China too.
True, but the rights are different. China's judiciary is not independent. A judge can be ordered by party leaders to find someone guilty. A prosecution like that of Bo Xilai would not happen in America.
It's just that like the US, in practice they are abused anyway.
Indeed.
America's system is better for rich people, powerful people, and guilty people.
China's system is better for innocent people.
In America, expensive lawyers can get you off, and you can exclude evidence on technicalities.
For innocent people, America is one of the worst countries. We have one of the world's highest false conviction rates, largely because of the plea bargain system and the high cost of an effective defense. The Innocence Project estimates that 20% of American prison inmates didn't commit the crimes.
Since America has 4 times China's per capital prison population, China would need an 80% false conviction rate for a Chinese citizen to be as likely as an American to be wrongly imprisoned.
The whole point of rights is to protect the innocent from oppression. By that measure, America's system is worse than China's.
I feel like the bottom line is that in this country we have guaranteed rights.
Rights that are guaranteed in theory but ignored in practice don't mean much.
Americans have a "right" to a speedy jury trial, and a fair hearing of the evidence. In practice, they are presented with a choice between copping a plea, or facing trumped up charges and a ruinously expensive prosecution that will bankrupt them even if innocent.
they're a hell of a lot better than what a Chinese person has.
Yet the American is four times more likely to end up in prison.
There's more to criticize about the US' prison system!?
The bottom line is that an American is four times more likely to be incarcerated than a Chinese citizen.
If you are rotting in prison, the fact that America's system is transparently unjust, so everyone knows about the high false conviction rate, and the defects of our plea bargain based courts, doesn't really mean much, so long as people don't care about the injustice.
So who doesn't care? Apparently you, since you would prefer to point to the other side of the world than address bigger problems here at home that we have the collective power to fix.
There are well over 1 million ethnic Uighurs being detained for no actual crime in China.
Most estimates are that there are less than a million detained in the Xinjiang camps.
America incarcerates over 2 million people, roughly four times as many as China per capita. Many are in pre-trial confinement, having been convicted of nothing. Many others are in prison based on plea bargains rather than evidence. America has one of the world's highest false conviction rates.
There is plenty to criticize about China's prison system. There is much more to criticize about America's.
So when you call a mobile phone service provider, or a bank, in China and ask them to help you log in to online service portal or otherwise make some change, how do they authenticate you?
They authenticate with a mobile phone and WeChat or AliPay PIN. Identity theft is essentially nonexistent in China.
If this is willfully ignored, then the jail time option needs to become available.
It was not willfully ignored. The CTO was a music major. All the evidence points to oblivious incompetence. There was no decision to be evil and greedy by trading security for profit, because they were too dumb to realize such a tradeoff even existed.
If we are going to incarcerate people for incompetence, we are going to need a lot more prisons.
because the rich and powerful won't need us to buy their stuff anymore when they've got robots to make anything they want.
Why do you think that only "the rich" will have robots? The robots that exist so far are not particularly expensive.
It was once predicted that only "the rich" would own cars, computers, washing machines, etc. Cell phones were once seen as something only the rich and drug dealers could afford.
Historically, technology has been a social leveler.
. . . and then the customer says: That's what I asked for . . . but not what I need!"
This is why you should not write code based on rigid BDUF specs. Instead, the customer needs to be involved in the process, providing regular feedback.
If you use Agile, you should have a customer rep at the bi-weekly sprint meetings. Both to review what was accomplished in the last sprint, and to set the priorities for the next sprint.
Boomers lived the high life and are enjoying old age. You'll get none of that AND then old age. Enjoy living your good years in poverty, kid.
Exactly. "Push all the costs onto the next generation" only works once. We won. Millennials lost. We just need to make sure they earn enough to pay for our social security checks.
Slashdot Mirror
150 miles over the hills of Wales and across the Severn into England?
Only if they were stupid.
The Preseli Quarry is only 5 miles from the coast of the Irish Sea (all downhill). From there, they could be moved by barge up the Bristol Channel. Then across 40 miles of flat ground to the Salisbury Plain.
Disclaimer: I use miles instead of kilometers because Britain wasn't metric yet in 3000 BC.
It is better to start investigating whether mental health services could help that person live a better life
In America, we call these mental health facilities "prisons", and they are currently benefiting over 2 million citizens. But only 60% have serious mental health issues. But we are working to increase that percentage, and the corresponding profits.
The logic that it is okay to jail only a million people without trial because 'Murrica bad! is just ludicrous.
I never said any such thing.
The fact that innocent people in China are unjustly imprisoned is wrong.
The fact that innocent people in America are unjustly imprisoned is also wrong.
By pointing out that America is proportionally worse, I am not in any way justifying China's behavior.
Innocent people don't regularly accept Plea Bargains.
Yes they do:
Plea bargaining and the innocent
Innocent people are pleading guilty
Innocence is irrelevant
Why innocent people plead guilty
How to convince an innocent client to plead guilty
A fix for this would be a punishment if you are convicted but lied about being innocent.
America already punishes people for exercising their constitutional right to a fair trial.
That is exactly what plea deals are. Plead guilty, get a lighter sentence. Demand the right to challenge the evidence against you, get a harsher sentence.
Ergo, the "right" to a fair trial no longer exists in practice.
At the top you have the politically appointed Supreme Court
The Supremes are appointed, but once on the court, they are completely independent, and nobody can order them to do anything.
and further down judges and prosecutors are elected and thus subject to the influence of both voters and money.
Elected judges are a bad idea. No argument from me about that.
You've had multiple people point out the Uigher situation in China to you and yet you're claiming China's legal system is better for innocent people!?
You are making the fallacious argument that "China is bad, therefore China is worse". That is not a logical conclusion.
Americans, and especially innocent Americans, are more likely to be unjustly imprisoned even when accounting for the Xinjiang camps.
China's justice system is bad. No question about it.
America's justice system is worse.
And yet they are still allowed a trial and legal council provided by the state.
Most defendants are coerced out of going to trial. An American defendant who can afford a private attorney is twice as likely to avoid incarceration as a defendant relying on a public defender. "Rights for the Rich" is hardly a fair system. China's courts have many defects, but being poor is much less of a disadvantage there.
Believe it or not you have guaranteed rights in China too.
True, but the rights are different. China's judiciary is not independent. A judge can be ordered by party leaders to find someone guilty. A prosecution like that of Bo Xilai would not happen in America.
It's just that like the US, in practice they are abused anyway.
Indeed.
America's system is better for rich people, powerful people, and guilty people.
China's system is better for innocent people.
In America, expensive lawyers can get you off, and you can exclude evidence on technicalities.
For innocent people, America is one of the worst countries. We have one of the world's highest false conviction rates, largely because of the plea bargain system and the high cost of an effective defense. The Innocence Project estimates that 20% of American prison inmates didn't commit the crimes.
Since America has 4 times China's per capital prison population, China would need an 80% false conviction rate for a Chinese citizen to be as likely as an American to be wrongly imprisoned.
The whole point of rights is to protect the innocent from oppression. By that measure, America's system is worse than China's.
I feel like the bottom line is that in this country we have guaranteed rights.
Rights that are guaranteed in theory but ignored in practice don't mean much.
Americans have a "right" to a speedy jury trial, and a fair hearing of the evidence. In practice, they are presented with a choice between copping a plea, or facing trumped up charges and a ruinously expensive prosecution that will bankrupt them even if innocent.
they're a hell of a lot better than what a Chinese person has.
Yet the American is four times more likely to end up in prison.
There's more to criticize about the US' prison system!?
The bottom line is that an American is four times more likely to be incarcerated than a Chinese citizen.
If you are rotting in prison, the fact that America's system is transparently unjust, so everyone knows about the high false conviction rate, and the defects of our plea bargain based courts, doesn't really mean much, so long as people don't care about the injustice.
So who doesn't care? Apparently you, since you would prefer to point to the other side of the world than address bigger problems here at home that we have the collective power to fix.
There are well over 1 million ethnic Uighurs being detained for no actual crime in China.
Most estimates are that there are less than a million detained in the Xinjiang camps.
America incarcerates over 2 million people, roughly four times as many as China per capita. Many are in pre-trial confinement, having been convicted of nothing. Many others are in prison based on plea bargains rather than evidence. America has one of the world's highest false conviction rates.
There is plenty to criticize about China's prison system. There is much more to criticize about America's.
True, but it's more than at home.
There are room-sized irradiation machines used to sterilize food.
It should not be too hard to set up a test rig here on earth.
Do SSDs use depleted boron-11 as a dopant? That is a cheap and obvious first step to making them rad-hard.
So when you call a mobile phone service provider, or a bank, in China and ask them to help you log in to online service portal or otherwise make some change, how do they authenticate you?
They authenticate with a mobile phone and WeChat or AliPay PIN. Identity theft is essentially nonexistent in China.
Does that freedom include being able to genitally mutilate your daughter
No. But it does include the freedom to talk, write, and read about the subject.
like, theres 3rd world countries where identity theft is harder to commit than in usa.
Umm ... all of them. All the other first world countries too. Identity theft is mostly an America-only issue.
Only in America do we base our financial security on a number that is expected to be both secret and widely shared.
The solution is not "throw more people in prison". Instead, we should ban the use of SSNs for authentication.
But they won't do that. Because he's rich. Filthy rich.
They also won't do it because there is no evidence that he did anything wrong.
The breach occurred in March 2017.
He became CEO in April 2018.
If this is willfully ignored, then the jail time option needs to become available.
It was not willfully ignored. The CTO was a music major. All the evidence points to oblivious incompetence. There was no decision to be evil and greedy by trading security for profit, because they were too dumb to realize such a tradeoff even existed.
If we are going to incarcerate people for incompetence, we are going to need a lot more prisons.
because the rich and powerful won't need us to buy their stuff anymore when they've got robots to make anything they want.
Why do you think that only "the rich" will have robots? The robots that exist so far are not particularly expensive.
It was once predicted that only "the rich" would own cars, computers, washing machines, etc. Cell phones were once seen as something only the rich and drug dealers could afford.
Historically, technology has been a social leveler.
Shielding your kids from it is largely pointless. You're better off just explaining it to them to the limits of their understanding.
That depends on the age of the kid. There is not much a 13 year-old needs to be sheltered from. But there is plenty a 5 year-old should not see.
YouTube kids to targeted at 3 to 8 year olds. The "shielding" is its raison d'etre.
. . . and then the customer says: That's what I asked for . . . but not what I need!"
This is why you should not write code based on rigid BDUF specs. Instead, the customer needs to be involved in the process, providing regular feedback.
If you use Agile, you should have a customer rep at the bi-weekly sprint meetings. Both to review what was accomplished in the last sprint, and to set the priorities for the next sprint.
They make it sound like that's the easy part.
Indeed.
Question: What do you call specified parameters of what you want to build?
Answer: Source code.
Commitstrip.com
If I wrote code that way I would have for sure been fired LONG ago...
Fired for code reuse? Programmers get paid for solving problems, not for reinventing wheels.
Professors want to see original work. Employers prefer plagiarism.
"Founded in April 2018, Dry.io has not raised any money" - Shouldn't that be kind of a red flag or something?
No, it is not a red flag. Most companies should not need to "raise" (borrow) money to stay in business.
When a company funds growth from their own revenue stream, that is good, not bad.
Boomers lived the high life and are enjoying old age. You'll get none of that AND then old age. Enjoy living your good years in poverty, kid.
Exactly. "Push all the costs onto the next generation" only works once. We won. Millennials lost. We just need to make sure they earn enough to pay for our social security checks.