I... never said 1? Come on, you're (hypothetically) run Saudi fucking Arabia, they censor every book that comes through their borders too. They have many people on hand who fit this job title pretty well.
Yes, but, if you run a country you can do that pretty easily. Just make [local government owned ISP] forward you every DNS request, have some low-paid overzealous "moral assesor" check it out if it hasn't been yet, and ban away.
You're assuming that anyone cares about the false positives. No company gives a shit when their developers can't get at information on a library they're using because it's on "forums." They'd much rather have people who can't do their jobs as well than face the risk of anyone "slacking off" on company time.
I think you're reaching. It's not like this kind of software is hard to make. A simple relational database storing classifications, a bit of code to do DNS lookups to make sure people don't just enter IP addresses, and a means of entering the data, and an IP filter packet inspection at any juncture on the way to servers. You could knock out a simple version in a week or two.
Well... I'd be cautious in using that argument regarding extremes, not because I imagine it to be untrue, but because new extremes are a statistical inevitability. Getting an unexpectedly large number of them over and over, that tells you something, but the mere presence do not.
The phrasing in the 8th amendment is "cruel and unusual" FYI, and I'm pretty sure a court will find a stay of executions necessary until a new method is devised.
Not really. The correlations, core theory, and lack of other matching explanations totally invalidate every such point raised, and have been done to a sufficient degree that these people are basically tremendous liars, pretending to be moderate, while exposing a fundamentally indistinct point.
Notably, you call a refutation of your own point "off topic" because, of course you would.
Slashdot Mirror
I... never said 1? Come on, you're (hypothetically) run Saudi fucking Arabia, they censor every book that comes through their borders too. They have many people on hand who fit this job title pretty well.
Yes, but, if you run a country you can do that pretty easily. Just make [local government owned ISP] forward you every DNS request, have some low-paid overzealous "moral assesor" check it out if it hasn't been yet, and ban away.
Because it could be seen as tantamount to a confession to previous crimes, possibly justifying extradition?
You're assuming that anyone cares about the false positives. No company gives a shit when their developers can't get at information on a library they're using because it's on "forums." They'd much rather have people who can't do their jobs as well than face the risk of anyone "slacking off" on company time.
I think you're reaching. It's not like this kind of software is hard to make. A simple relational database storing classifications, a bit of code to do DNS lookups to make sure people don't just enter IP addresses, and a means of entering the data, and an IP filter packet inspection at any juncture on the way to servers. You could knock out a simple version in a week or two.
Besides him being stoned off his ass and unable to make sane decisions?
And I'm challenging that assertion as arbitrary.
If you want the simple answer, they picked the single hottest year in all of history as their starting date.
I'm sorry, I wasn't aware courtrooms decided who counts as a person.
Which particular paper of this journal are you referring to? I have my doubts that you've read any of them.
Well... I'd be cautious in using that argument regarding extremes, not because I imagine it to be untrue, but because new extremes are a statistical inevitability. Getting an unexpectedly large number of them over and over, that tells you something, but the mere presence do not.
Oh well, guess you can always kill yourself. That solves both problems, right?
Come on, if there are 2 parsings of a sentence, and one is complete nonsense, what's wrong with expecting people to take the other?
Yeah, everyone who abuses a position of authority is equally prosecutable.
Simple, humans are creatures capable of reasoning, memory, language and pain.
And you're an animal for saying so, and should also die.
See how easy that is?
The latter, naturally. The former wouldn't make much sense, would it?
Yep, not a human being. Nope, a dog, because you say so.
So, you can be punished for short-selling stocks like I can?
I forgot how important it is to get a second wrong to match with the first one. It's like Go Fish, if you get related pairs, they both go away, right?
The phrasing in the 8th amendment is "cruel and unusual" FYI, and I'm pretty sure a court will find a stay of executions necessary until a new method is devised.
How about we save executions for only people who break laws and participated in enforcing or making laws.
I know, right?
But see, that's also a demonstrated falsehood, and you yourself said "nuh uh, it's not getting warmer" in this post.
So... everyone, PRman is a liar. Saying exactly what he said no one was saying.
Not really. The correlations, core theory, and lack of other matching explanations totally invalidate every such point raised, and have been done to a sufficient degree that these people are basically tremendous liars, pretending to be moderate, while exposing a fundamentally indistinct point.
Notably, you call a refutation of your own point "off topic" because, of course you would.