Well, crossing the street would be an individual choice, at least you won't put another person in danger.
Writing documents with or without LaTeX is a different matter, because you always have to think about the health of your partner to whom you'll send your documents too. Of course, all this becomes moot if you only exchange documents with a single person (you'd only sent back viruses to where they came from in the first place), but after a while it'd be rather boring.
Even on what feels like a perfectly smooth track, there's still a lot of humping and bumping going on.
And even in what feels like a car that stands still (such as parked in a lonely forest parking lot), there's still a lot of humping and bumping going on...
simple, where would you rather work? Company A where your marriage is legal, you get benefits and tax breaks for that... or Company B where you and your husband/wife are legally "just good friends".
But how would California treat marriages concluded in other States? Aren't States supposed to recognize each other's administrative acts? So, couldn't you just fly over to Nevada, get married there, and come back?
I don't think any breaks should be given to anyone just for being married or having kids.
Those kids will pay our pensions when we'll be wry and old. And don't start waffling about your pensions being backed by funds. Because even those funds won't be worth anything if there's nobody around to perform any work.
So there is actually a good case to be made to encourage people (who are biologically able to...) to have kids.
So, no...I don't think tax breaks should be there for anyone as a 'couple', straight or gay.
I agree here. But if they've got kids, they should get a tax break IMHO. Oh, and please allow gay couples to adopt.
And what about states that automatically deem a couple to be in common-law marriage without them consciously having entered into that contract?
South Africa has such a law, apparently. If you live together for 6 months, you're legally married. So I wonder how they'd handle the case of two men living together for such period.
O, hehe, and whether it'll apply too if they lived together in the same house abroad, but then came back to the country...
Gays need to drop the gay-marriage campaign, and go for civil-unions which are identical, yet more palatable to the general(voting) public.
Or even better: drop straight marriage too. The state should only do civil unions for everybody, nothing more. Marriage should only be a religious affair, without any state involvment.
Btw, what would happen if somebody founded a religion forbidding marriage between people of different skin color, and lobbied the state to make such marriages illegal as it would violate their religious belief? Think about it.
But it might harm the goat, hehe. And how do you make sure the goat is consenting?
What, you're afraid your little snowflake will see two people of the same sex kissing each other and think , "Hmmmmm, I'll kiss my buddy Rod!" Again, so what? In many cultures, heterosexual MEN kiss each other.
And in today's world, people don't wait until they're married before kissing each other. So, forbidding gay marriage does stop exactly what?
If that's your beef, then the state should get out of the marriage business altogether. It should be "civil unions" for everybody (whether gay or straight), and marriage should become a purely religious thing without any state involvment, and no need for a prior "marriage license".
As a result, we now have that strange ritual where guys wearing funny-looking caps point funny-looking cones at oncoming cars. And if their funny-looking cone device shows a number that is too high, they'll sign the driver of the "offending" car to stop. And then he has to pay, lose points off his license (or if the number on the cone dingbat was sufficiently high, the license is gone in one time), and that's definitely less funny.
In this analogy, the cars causing high numbers to come up are the botnet computers, and the guys in funny hats with their funny cones are the researchers trying to shut it down.
But, you see, occasionally, SNAFU happens. Sometimes, one of the car drivers is on a really important mission. Such as driving to the intervention center to pick up an ambulance to rescue a patient. Who will die if the driver loses his license. So now, we have a case where it's not speeding that kills, but speeding checks that kill...
That's the analogy for accidentally fouling up a hospital computer.
But for some weird reason this weird cap-and-cone ritual is still done. If we're so concerned about collateral damage, shouldn't we stop that silly ritual first?
This affects the people who are not criminals but who want to clean up the mess made by the criminals.
They should not care either. If a law is stoopid, it deserves to be ignored. The only imperative should be "don't get caught".
But in this case the solution is incredibly easy: the researchers shouldn't execute the bot-nixing code themselves, but just publish it. From there on, more brave people can take over, anonymously or not.
Or, if even publishing it scares you, just drop enough hints for somebody else to figure it out, and post it to wherever, anonymously or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, only those geeks that are breeders...
Writing documents with or without LaTeX is a different matter, because you always have to think about the health of your partner to whom you'll send your documents too. Of course, all this becomes moot if you only exchange documents with a single person (you'd only sent back viruses to where they came from in the first place), but after a while it'd be rather boring.
Just let's hope that the bridge won't be a toll bridge when it'll be finished...
You mean, even LaTeX is not safe against Viruses? What should we use then? Or should we just abstain from writing documents altogether...
Clearly, if god hadn't intended same spin entanglement he wouldn't have created bosons.
Just depends on how handsome they are. If they look good enough, some prisoners might want to keep them alive, for their personal enjoyment...
Even on what feels like a perfectly smooth track, there's still a lot of humping and bumping going on.
And even in what feels like a car that stands still (such as parked in a lonely forest parking lot), there's still a lot of humping and bumping going on...
It is no different from the king being brothers with the man who owns the newspapers.
Strangely appropriate comment about Italy... You do know where Berlusconi comes from?
Or the $2800 you invested over 18 years could be worth $15500 as a typical stock investment.
Or $0, after a typical financial crisis...
Isn't that illegal too....wait does that mean you can't have pictures of naked animals?
You mean, I could get in trouble for pictures such as this? Or this? Or this puppy?
Unless the framer is smart enough to somehow make sure that the authorities notice it before the victim does...
... that they totally screwed the pooch.
Offtopic: That would be zoophilia, not paedophilia...
Mobile phones that go out of range when you walk around a corner?
Mobile phones that never ring, because your trousers aren't transparent...
... is NOT more secure, unless the room has no windows,
But isn't that actually true for all kinds of networks?
Yeah, that, and also all the trojans and virii that an attacker could infect windows with.
simple, where would you rather work? Company A where your marriage is legal, you get benefits and tax breaks for that... or Company B where you and your husband/wife are legally "just good friends".
But how would California treat marriages concluded in other States? Aren't States supposed to recognize each other's administrative acts? So, couldn't you just fly over to Nevada, get married there, and come back?
I don't think any breaks should be given to anyone just for being married or having kids.
Those kids will pay our pensions when we'll be wry and old. And don't start waffling about your pensions being backed by funds. Because even those funds won't be worth anything if there's nobody around to perform any work.
So there is actually a good case to be made to encourage people (who are biologically able to ...) to have kids.
So, no...I don't think tax breaks should be there for anyone as a 'couple', straight or gay.
I agree here. But if they've got kids, they should get a tax break IMHO. Oh, and please allow gay couples to adopt.
And what about states that automatically deem a couple to be in common-law marriage without them consciously having entered into that contract?
South Africa has such a law, apparently. If you live together for 6 months, you're legally married. So I wonder how they'd handle the case of two men living together for such period.
O, hehe, and whether it'll apply too if they lived together in the same house abroad, but then came back to the country...
Gays need to drop the gay-marriage campaign, and go for civil-unions which are identical, yet more palatable to the general(voting) public.
Or even better: drop straight marriage too. The state should only do civil unions for everybody, nothing more. Marriage should only be a religious affair, without any state involvment.
Btw, what would happen if somebody founded a religion forbidding marriage between people of different skin color, and lobbied the state to make such marriages illegal as it would violate their religious belief? Think about it.
A person marrying a goat doesn't harm me.
But it might harm the goat, hehe. And how do you make sure the goat is consenting?
What, you're afraid your little snowflake will see two people of the same sex kissing each other and think , "Hmmmmm, I'll kiss my buddy Rod!" Again, so what? In many cultures, heterosexual MEN kiss each other.
And in today's world, people don't wait until they're married before kissing each other. So, forbidding gay marriage does stop exactly what?
Separation of Church and State, y'a know.
No, I prefer snails.
As a result, we now have that strange ritual where guys wearing funny-looking caps point funny-looking cones at oncoming cars. And if their funny-looking cone device shows a number that is too high, they'll sign the driver of the "offending" car to stop. And then he has to pay, lose points off his license (or if the number on the cone dingbat was sufficiently high, the license is gone in one time), and that's definitely less funny.
In this analogy, the cars causing high numbers to come up are the botnet computers, and the guys in funny hats with their funny cones are the researchers trying to shut it down.
But, you see, occasionally, SNAFU happens. Sometimes, one of the car drivers is on a really important mission. Such as driving to the intervention center to pick up an ambulance to rescue a patient. Who will die if the driver loses his license. So now, we have a case where it's not speeding that kills, but speeding checks that kill...
That's the analogy for accidentally fouling up a hospital computer.
But for some weird reason this weird cap-and-cone ritual is still done. If we're so concerned about collateral damage, shouldn't we stop that silly ritual first?
Launch a war on Belgium for ridding the world of spam?
hihi. War on Belgium.... The shear thought of it! And impose a potato embargo on them, so that they run out of fries...
This affects the people who are not criminals but who want to clean up the mess made by the criminals.
They should not care either. If a law is stoopid, it deserves to be ignored. The only imperative should be "don't get caught".
But in this case the solution is incredibly easy: the researchers shouldn't execute the bot-nixing code themselves, but just publish it. From there on, more brave people can take over, anonymously or not.
Or, if even publishing it scares you, just drop enough hints for somebody else to figure it out, and post it to wherever, anonymously or not.