They can, and frequently do, place gag orders to benefit the victims. Many people don't want all the gory details of what they went through plastered all over the media. Here in Aust it's automatic in any case involving a minor (victim or offender).
Your claim equates to "typing an address directly into a browser is hacking* and you should only access the web by clicking on links." Tough luck if you click a malformed link and get the wrong thing back from a server, you're going to jail.
It went both ways back then too. I was interested in computers and took typing as an electve because I thought it would be useful.
I copped a lot of shit for being the only boy in the class. This was also in the (early) 80's.
In the book they had powered armoured suits. Three types were described: Grunt, Scout and Officer, with different capabilities. In the movie-of-the-same-name-that-was-nothing-like-the-book, that would have been an expensive special effect, so they just had cheap plastic armour.
It's pretty well established that it's neonicotinoid insecticides. Bees are very sensitive to them, and even amounts too small to directly kill the bees still weaken them enough for other things to kill the hives.
The implication is in landing what you mined from the asteroid. Large scale metal mining and retrieval is likely to use very large, roughly formed, vaguely aerodynamic bodies with cheap re-entry shields. Basically, form the metal into a plane shape, whack a shield on the front and drop it in a desert. Scrap it for the metal in it. Any valuable metals you put in the centre, if the wingtips burn off a bit, so what.:) The problem comes when the thing misses your couple of square miles of desert, and the BLM says they now own your multimegabucks worth of rare metals.
The licensed producer for an area can't sell outside that area. If he does, he breaks copyright law because his contract only lets him sell within that area, and copies produced for sale outside the area are unlicensed. Once he sells the copies however, the people he sells to have no such contract, and as they are not producing copies they are not subject to copyright law. The reason bookshops also obey these rules is due to the crazy sale or return system, which means that they don't effectively buy a book until they sell it. This involves them in the contract mess, and subjects them to the same rules. This whole "physical goods owner also has a licence we control" bullshit is being pushed by the IP holders, and has no basis unless you sign a contract before the sale.
Copyright is the right to control manufacture of copies, once made and sold your control of that copy is gone.
They don't particulaly want to get the oil from the M.E. The war drives up the price of oil. Do you think that when oil jumps from $40/barrel to $120/barrel, the cost of production in unrelated oilfields magically triples? Or is it more likely that they just make a sweet extra $80/barrel? When you ask "cui bono?" sometimes you have to think a little deeper.
Try feeding them the heads and shells after you cook some yabbies, you get almost a red layer in the yolk. If you do it regularly, a boiled egg looks like a target when you cut it in half.:) Doesn't seem to affect the taste much, but the eggs were much richer than battery farm crap anyway.
I don't quite understand why bureaucracy concludes that foot-dragging is somehow equivalent to ass-covering, but it inevitably does.
The bureaucrats are waiting for someone in their office to give notice, retire, or transfer out. Then a whole bunch of stuff gets done, and if shit happens, then it is all blamed on someone who is no longer there.
Excluding the production by the Fed and currency that is physically lost or destroyed the money supply is a zero-sum system. This means that there is only one possible way to produce the money to pay the interest owed to the Fed, and that is the Fed loaning sufficient money at negative interest to cancel the interest they are already owed. Not likely. You can at maximum pay back the capital. Inflation can reduce the value of what is owed, but not the numerical amount. The interest debt is unpayable within the current system.
Modern economies have been constructed so that there simply isn't enough money to pay off the debt. Individuals may be debt free, but in total, the debt can not be paid back. Eg, in the USA, the Fed creates the money, and it is immediately loaned and begins earning interest. That interest doesn't have currency in the system to cover it, hence money has to be borrowed from the Fed to pay the interest owed to the Fed. Vicious cycle ensues, borrowing money to pay the interest on the borrowed money. No way out except to default, or nationalise the Fed.
It looks that way because time and space change as well. The guy travelling at.99C sees the light move away at C, but his time and dstance measurements are different to the outside observer.
He measures the light travelling 1 light-second in one second, but the other observer sees the traveller's clock running at one second per 100 seconds. This is where it gets weird, because there isn't really a "stationary" observer. The traveller will think he's stationary, and see all the observations apply to the other guy. So they both see the other guy slowed down.
You are only No 1 on the totals. On a per capita basis AU is four times as piratey, and a clear winner over everyone. Good to see we are doing our bit to combat global warming, FSM be praised.
I think this is an excellent idea. Everybody should take pictures of the resulting turds and email them to management, along with the time of production, and an estimate of the effort involved. Bonus points for cc'ing members of the board, external customers, etc.
Definitely the europeans' immune systems were stronger. It was mainly down to the europeans going through their own winnowing a few centuries earlier, combined with living in cities exposing them to more diseases. Throw in a bit of "only the reasonably healthy could make the trip", and the combo explains the disproportionate death rates.
Actually, you are mistaken. The authors of the constitution were very precise in their terminology. If they meant "citizen" they said so. If they said "people", it applies to everyone, citizen or not. Text of the fourth amendment:"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Note it says "people" NOT "citizens".
I remember seeing a program a long time ago on an experiment where they were inoculating cows in Queensland to produce antibodies to ticks. The tick would bite the cow and suck out a heap of blood and the antibodies would then weaken or kill the tick. They had some example ticks, and they looked pretty sick, but I never heard any more about it, so I don't know if it went anywhere. I'm not sure, but I think the antibody attacked chitin, which meant that there was no way the ticks could develop an immunity. If it was chitin, it probably wasn't too healthy for fleas and mozzies either.
2000 years is probably conservative. I don't think you can include the suicide figures in long term estimates. Those prone to it will eliminate themselves early. I think also, that any technology capable of greatly extending lifespan will also improve medical outcomes and quality of life, resulting in a lower death rates from both. Probably the correct way to model it would be to assign accident and suicides rates/year as a probability to each entity, and then roll the dice each year. Eventually the population will skew towards the suicide proof, accident averse individuals, and average lifespan will increase.(Interestingly, refusing the treatment can be considered a slow form of suicide in this model.) You may need to vary the probabilities over time as well, the young are generally more risk tolerant.
Slashdot Mirror
That sounds like the judge is seriously trying to push him into a plea bargain.
They can, and frequently do, place gag orders to benefit the victims. Many people don't want all the gory details of what they went through plastered all over the media.
Here in Aust it's automatic in any case involving a minor (victim or offender).
Your claim equates to "typing an address directly into a browser is hacking* and you should only access the web by clicking on links."
Tough luck if you click a malformed link and get the wrong thing back from a server, you're going to jail.
*of the cracking type
It went both ways back then too. I was interested in computers and took typing as an electve because I thought it would be useful.
I copped a lot of shit for being the only boy in the class. This was also in the (early) 80's.
In the book they had powered armoured suits. Three types were described: Grunt, Scout and Officer, with different capabilities.
In the movie-of-the-same-name-that-was-nothing-like-the-book, that would have been an expensive special effect, so they just had cheap plastic armour.
It's pretty well established that it's neonicotinoid insecticides. Bees are very sensitive to them, and even amounts too small to directly kill the bees still weaken them enough for other things to kill the hives.
Bugmenot supplies you with a userid/password combo. You will have to supply that in your list, and then become linked to every other use of that ID.
The implication is in landing what you mined from the asteroid. :)
Large scale metal mining and retrieval is likely to use very large, roughly formed, vaguely aerodynamic bodies with cheap re-entry shields. Basically, form the metal into a plane shape, whack a shield on the front and drop it in a desert. Scrap it for the metal in it. Any valuable metals you put in the centre, if the wingtips burn off a bit, so what.
The problem comes when the thing misses your couple of square miles of desert, and the BLM says they now own your multimegabucks worth of rare metals.
So you're saying a ship with the Total Perspective Drive will make the Bistromathic Drive look like an electric pram?
The licensed producer for an area can't sell outside that area. If he does, he breaks copyright law because his contract only lets him sell within that area, and copies produced for sale outside the area are unlicensed.
Once he sells the copies however, the people he sells to have no such contract, and as they are not producing copies they are not subject to copyright law.
The reason bookshops also obey these rules is due to the crazy sale or return system, which means that they don't effectively buy a book until they sell it. This involves them in the contract mess, and subjects them to the same rules.
This whole "physical goods owner also has a licence we control" bullshit is being pushed by the IP holders, and has no basis unless you sign a contract before the sale.
Copyright is the right to control manufacture of copies, once made and sold your control of that copy is gone.
They don't particulaly want to get the oil from the M.E. The war drives up the price of oil.
Do you think that when oil jumps from $40/barrel to $120/barrel, the cost of production in unrelated oilfields magically triples? Or is it more likely that they just make a sweet extra $80/barrel?
When you ask "cui bono?" sometimes you have to think a little deeper.
Try feeding them the heads and shells after you cook some yabbies, you get almost a red layer in the yolk. If you do it regularly, a boiled egg looks like a target when you cut it in half. :)
Doesn't seem to affect the taste much, but the eggs were much richer than battery farm crap anyway.
They have. It is "Biodynamic". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodynamic_agriculture/
I don't quite understand why bureaucracy concludes that foot-dragging is somehow equivalent to ass-covering, but it inevitably does.
The bureaucrats are waiting for someone in their office to give notice, retire, or transfer out. Then a whole bunch of stuff gets done, and if shit happens, then it is all blamed on someone who is no longer there.
It's costing $10/Gal now. It's just that most of it is hidden in your tax bill, or racked up as US debt.
Excluding the production by the Fed and currency that is physically lost or destroyed the money supply is a zero-sum system. This means that there is only one possible way to produce the money to pay the interest owed to the Fed, and that is the Fed loaning sufficient money at negative interest to cancel the interest they are already owed. Not likely.
You can at maximum pay back the capital. Inflation can reduce the value of what is owed, but not the numerical amount. The interest debt is unpayable within the current system.
Modern economies have been constructed so that there simply isn't enough money to pay off the debt. Individuals may be debt free, but in total, the debt can not be paid back.
Eg, in the USA, the Fed creates the money, and it is immediately loaned and begins earning interest. That interest doesn't have currency in the system to cover it, hence money has to be borrowed from the Fed to pay the interest owed to the Fed. Vicious cycle ensues, borrowing money to pay the interest on the borrowed money.
No way out except to default, or nationalise the Fed.
It looks that way because time and space change as well. The guy travelling at .99C sees the light move away at C, but his time and dstance measurements are different to the outside observer.
He measures the light travelling 1 light-second in one second, but the other observer sees the traveller's clock running at one second per 100 seconds.
This is where it gets weird, because there isn't really a "stationary" observer. The traveller will think he's stationary, and see all the observations apply to the other guy. So they both see the other guy slowed down.
You are only No 1 on the totals. On a per capita basis AU is four times as piratey, and a clear winner over everyone.
Good to see we are doing our bit to combat global warming, FSM be praised.
I think this is an excellent idea. Everybody should take pictures of the resulting turds and email them to management, along with the time of production, and an estimate of the effort involved.
Bonus points for cc'ing members of the board, external customers, etc.
Definitely the europeans' immune systems were stronger. It was mainly down to the europeans going through their own winnowing a few centuries earlier, combined with living in cities exposing them to more diseases. Throw in a bit of "only the reasonably healthy could make the trip", and the combo explains the disproportionate death rates.
Are you fucking kidding? That's TWELVE orders of magnitude!!
Actually, you are mistaken. The authors of the constitution were very precise in their terminology. If they meant "citizen" they said so. If they said "people", it applies to everyone, citizen or not.
Text of the fourth amendment:"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Note it says "people" NOT "citizens".
I remember seeing a program a long time ago on an experiment where they were inoculating cows in Queensland to produce antibodies to ticks. The tick would bite the cow and suck out a heap of blood and the antibodies would then weaken or kill the tick.
They had some example ticks, and they looked pretty sick, but I never heard any more about it, so I don't know if it went anywhere.
I'm not sure, but I think the antibody attacked chitin, which meant that there was no way the ticks could develop an immunity. If it was chitin, it probably wasn't too healthy for fleas and mozzies either.
2000 years is probably conservative. I don't think you can include the suicide figures in long term estimates. Those prone to it will eliminate themselves early.
I think also, that any technology capable of greatly extending lifespan will also improve medical outcomes and quality of life, resulting in a lower death rates from both.
Probably the correct way to model it would be to assign accident and suicides rates/year as a probability to each entity, and then roll the dice each year. Eventually the population will skew towards the suicide proof, accident averse individuals, and average lifespan will increase.(Interestingly, refusing the treatment can be considered a slow form of suicide in this model.)
You may need to vary the probabilities over time as well, the young are generally more risk tolerant.