So whats the rush to regulate it? Oh, thats right money. Money to the people who will game the system and then contribute to the "right" people. Money to special interest groups who will fund 529s and such to support the "right" people.
That's exactly the motivation behind attempts to prevent regulation. Really, of all parts of this debate that seem the silliest, it's this one-sided skepticism of greed that annoys me most.
In your view, it is only scientists, entrepreneurs, and politicians who recognize GW that stand to benefit from this debate. Whereas entire industries such as petroleum, coal, manufacturing, etc and their teams of scientists, entrepreneurs, and incumbent politicians are not in the least motivated by greed. In your view somehow, despite earning profits greater than any in all of recorded history, these groups are simply preventing regulation that would interfere with their profit models out of purely selfless interests. http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/01/news/companies/exxon_earnings/
I think that the following paragraph, which I just wrote, illustrates one problem with your position.
A mutt can be an excellent dog even if it doesn't have any papers. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Neither art nor music should have any position about plagiarism. Plagiarism is for academics whose need for acknowledgment overwhelms their desire to further their own and society's knowledge, and those who care more about their bank account than producing something of value. While it seemed distasteful to me at first, Bowie, Mercury, and Van Halen were all exposed to new audiences when they were sampled, and I truly believe they were better off for being sampled. Jazz, Blues, and Rock and Roll would not exist without constant borrowing and even stealing. The best music in the world was created when everyone was stealing from everyone else in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. Would Hendrix have been as big if he hadn't covered a folk song, All Along the Watchtower? Would Zeppelin, the Stones, or Clapton have been so big without such obviously stolen blues songs and riffs? Did Dylan suffer from Jimi's cover? No, his fan base grew. Did all the Blues musicians suffer? No, in fact many were likely saved from obscurity, for at the time no 'decent' white folk would listen to such music. I think it axiomatic that the more selfish you are, the more yourself and the world suffers. The more generous you are, the more yourself and the world benefits.
As requested, we hereby notify you that we are a "Subversive organization" --a corporation, society, association, camp, group, bund, political party, assembly, body or organization, composed of two or more persons. We hope to directly or indirectly advocate, advise, teach or practice the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government the State of South Carolina and any political subdivision thereof by unlawful means.
Specifically, we wish to advocate doing so by (1) collecting money from business organizations, then (2) using this money to support the campaign efforts of a sufficient number of elected officials to obtain majority influence over the elected branches of the Government of South Carolina. We will solicit and accept donations from corporations subject to foreign control, such as Sonoco Products, SCANA Corporation, Bowater, Inc., and other corporate entities with major investments in both South Carolina and the rest of the world. They do not have to be Fortune 500 companies! We're willing to include profitable corporations of any size, regardless of the national allegiances of their stockholders, board members, or executives.
We will, by funding the continuation of the careers of elected officials in the State of South Carolina, hope to directly or indirectly influence them to pursue policies favorable to the business interests of our donors, particularly when these interests conflict with the rights provided in the constitutions of the State of Carolina and the United States. As we anticipate that these conflicts will be of a constitutional nature, this should suffice to be unlawful enough to warrant registration under your recent legislation. Hopefully you will find this suitably subversive.
Included with our registration fee you will find a 15% gratuity. Please consider this a token of our appreciation of your ongoing efforts to make the realization of our goals easier.
Looking forward to seeing you at the President's Day golf outing. Looks like the weather will keep us in the clubhouse!
I'm only willing to be part of a social network if I can have granular control over the personal information presented to it, and the members of that network. My compromise for fb has been to use a pseudonym; that plus a picture has been sufficient to obtain contacts of people I actually know. It's not foolproof, but it is for me an acceptable privacy buffer.
Gmail is a different story. There is simply too much private info in the account that I am unwilling to subject to a social networking context. Using an anonymous gmail account for Buzz in the same way would defeat the purpose. Using Buzz seems little different than allowing fb comb my gmail account for contacts.
The 11th Circuit didn't reject a national standard. Rather, it said that the district court DID NOT ERR in applying the community standard, which comes from a 1973 SCOTUS case, Miller v. California.
There is a difference. What this means is that another district court, even in the 11th Circuit, could still use a national standard under similar circumstances. In other words, the 11th Circuit has ruled that such a call can currently be made by the trial court.
The area of the law is unclear, and courts have been applying it differently. While there has been some discussion of applying a national standard of decency by O'Connor, the Supreme Court as a whole has yet to rule this way. Until it does, Miller applies, and an interpretation of it that uses a community based standard is not an error.
I'm sure a lot of people will cynically disregard the opportunity to comment as pointless; ignore this urge! While this comment period touches a fairly narrow area, if you care about this issue PLEASE COMMENT. Bring yourself up to speed on the proposed regulation (summary: http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480a7dc9b), and make your comment as efficient, relevant, and precise as possible.
Commenting on regs is NOT like writing your congressperson! Public comments to proposed regs are reviewed, and are considered; these public comment periods are not just for show. Industries with vested interests in an agency's regulations are aware of this, and are certain to have their say in the matter. Have yours!
There's more context in the linked summary, but here's basically what they're asking for input on:
USTR requests that interested persons identify those countries that deny adequate and effective protection for intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection. USTR requests that, where relevant, submissions mention particular regions, provinces, states, or other subdivisions of a country in which an act, policy, or practice is believed to warrant special attention. Submissions may report positive or negative developments with respect to these sub-national entities.
For me the value in writing is primarily the cementing of information in my memory. It's a style of learning. For those of us who work this way, it's not about easily being able to refer back to them. The act of writing itself is a kind of entrenchment of the cognitive pathways, and because of it I almost never have to refer to my handwritten notes. My recollection of them has consistently proven to be very accurate.
Notes I've taken via laptop I do not find as easy to recall, but they are generally more thorough and easier to use for review.
That's interesting. I just finished a semester on consumer protection law, with a heavy focus on Equal Credit Opportunity Act and similar measures that are designed to eliminate, among other things, gender discrimination in lending.
A statistically significant disparity in loan approval ratings probably indicates that there are significant violations of the ECOA. This is curious, because the ECOA provides for considerable punitive damages for discriminatory lending practices. ($10k for individual actions and up to $500k for class actions.) http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/credit/cre15.shtm
While venture capital is another story, these kinds of bank loans should be covered under the ECOA. (At least, I am not aware of a statutory exception that would eliminate entrepreneurial loans.) It sounds like the bankers' actions were very clear violations of the ECOA. The Blake article you mentioned is behind a pay wall and I can't afford the $30 to get to it at the moment. Did it have any account of subsequent legal actions on the part of the women entrepreneurs who were subjected to gender discrimination? I certainly hope so.
Executive Orders can be overturned simply by issuing a subsequent Executive Order. For example, overturning notorious Bush EO#13233 by issuing EO #13489 was something Obama did on his first day in office. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13233
We've had many clearly pro-nuclear presidents since Carter, particularly Bush Sr. Since anyone of them could have easily overturned Carter's EO --and since North Korea was able to get nukes by reprocessing its own spent fuel rods-- you might want to reconsider your assessment of that particular EO.
seafood is usually great, but don't get the mixed seafood, it's always chewy.
That's actually a good suggestion for every place I've been so far. It's also good idea to generally avoid any "seafood special" for the same reason -- both are often the leftover, older seafood the restaurant is trying to get rid of before it expires.
Do you recall how unfair you thought it was when your third-grade teacher punished the entire class for the misbehavior of one student because she couldn't identify the perpetrator? That's exactly what Google is doing.
Not quite. In the classroom setting, the punished students all have the same amount of (no) power, and the teacher has the most.
So if this situation is a classroom, the Chinese government is the teacher (has all the power), the students are Chinese citizens (same amount of no power), and Google is the guest speaker who, while giving his career presentation, was pickpocketed by the teacher.
I can't say I fully agree with the decision to bar AD&D, but I can say that I understand the reasoning behind the decision.
That's rational basis review for you. It's a very deferential level of review, and it is applied to most prison situations. To pass it, a party just has show a somewhat plausible line of reasoning. The rule doesn't actually have to *work*, nor does it have to be correct.
The court didn't have the ability to question the findings of the "gang expert", as dubious as his testimony might have been. Expert witness testimony countering each and every one of that guy's points wouldn't have helped, either. As long as the "gang expert" was a qualified witness, and as long as the warden claimed that he believed the witness, D&D didn't stand a chance.
Companies with a lot of sedentary work, if they could find it profitable to encourage the physical health of their employees (through insurance costs and lost productivity), should abandon the strictly desk/chair office model with various kinds of workstations that can provide for exercise. (Liability would be an issue, but then it always is.)
Standing workstations, reading stations for cardio, appropriate alternatives for the disabled for fairness's sake, and company shower/laundry facilities could reintegrate physical aspects into what has become mostly intellectual activity. I find that my focus for certain tasks is enhanced if I'm exercising during it --particularly reading challenging material while on the treadmill.
Gym currently don't seem the most conducive to work, but they are often designed with tons of distractions --blaring music to get you "pumped", treadmills with monitors playing only brain candy entertainment fare, lighting too poor for reading, etc. Put a cardio machine into an office setting and it takes on a different character.
Al Qaeda, from Afghanistan, planned and organized the 9-11 attacks. Al Qaeda issued a fatwa calling for killing US civilians, also from Afghanistan. Al Qaeda is an organization that was supported & protected by the Taliban, and the Taliban at that time ruled Afghanistan.
These things are all "something to do with the attack."
You might not think these are as relevant as other matters. But that's not what you're saying: you in effect are pretending that these connections do not exist. This suggests that you are not even familiar with very basic details which, in turn, undermines your credibility.
Our government attacked.... Afghanistan, which had nothing to do with the attack on us. Billions spent.
Afghanistan most certainly had something to do with the attack on us. Claiming otherwise is such a distortion of reality on your part that it undermines whatever other points you might wish to discuss.
I would think that the line of sight principle and limits of VHF range both would make VOR completely impractical for navigation at sea. You'd have to dot the ocean with VOR platforms.
This study gave half the group gingko, and the other half a placebo. It would have been more thorough to include a control group that did not take any supplement at all.
The study measured certain aspects of cognitive function. It seems reasonable to allow for the possibility that cognition itself --specifically, a belief (or misbelief) that one is taking a supplement or a placebo-- could measurably affect cognitive function.
While I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't done much to change the situation, I see nothing in that huffpo article describing the efficacy or lack thereof of the PREA.
Slashdot Mirror
So whats the rush to regulate it? Oh, thats right money. Money to the people who will game the system and then contribute to the "right" people. Money to special interest groups who will fund 529s and such to support the "right" people.
That's exactly the motivation behind attempts to prevent regulation. Really, of all parts of this debate that seem the silliest, it's this one-sided skepticism of greed that annoys me most.
In your view, it is only scientists, entrepreneurs, and politicians who recognize GW that stand to benefit from this debate. Whereas entire industries such as petroleum, coal, manufacturing, etc and their teams of scientists, entrepreneurs, and incumbent politicians are not in the least motivated by greed. In your view somehow, despite earning profits greater than any in all of recorded history, these groups are simply preventing regulation that would interfere with their profit models out of purely selfless interests. http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/01/news/companies/exxon_earnings/
My post plagiarized the parent post in its entirety. Too subtle?
Why aren't you citing your own material, rather than rewording it?
I think that the following paragraph, which I just wrote, illustrates one problem with your position.
A mutt can be an excellent dog even if it doesn't have any papers. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Neither art nor music should have any position about plagiarism. Plagiarism is for academics whose need for acknowledgment overwhelms their desire to further their own and society's knowledge, and those who care more about their bank account than producing something of value. While it seemed distasteful to me at first, Bowie, Mercury, and Van Halen were all exposed to new audiences when they were sampled, and I truly believe they were better off for being sampled. Jazz, Blues, and Rock and Roll would not exist without constant borrowing and even stealing. The best music in the world was created when everyone was stealing from everyone else in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. Would Hendrix have been as big if he hadn't covered a folk song, All Along the Watchtower? Would Zeppelin, the Stones, or Clapton have been so big without such obviously stolen blues songs and riffs? Did Dylan suffer from Jimi's cover? No, his fan base grew. Did all the Blues musicians suffer? No, in fact many were likely saved from obscurity, for at the time no 'decent' white folk would listen to such music. I think it axiomatic that the more selfish you are, the more yourself and the world suffers. The more generous you are, the more yourself and the world benefits.
If you limit "the governed" to free persons, well sure.
But it's a safe guess that the governed slaves were pulling for the United States in that particular dispute, though.
Dear South Carolina,
As requested, we hereby notify you that we are a "Subversive organization" --a corporation, society, association, camp, group, bund, political party, assembly, body or organization, composed of two or more persons. We hope to directly or indirectly advocate, advise, teach or practice the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government the State of South Carolina and any political subdivision thereof by unlawful means.
Specifically, we wish to advocate doing so by (1) collecting money from business organizations, then (2) using this money to support the campaign efforts of a sufficient number of elected officials to obtain majority influence over the elected branches of the Government of South Carolina. We will solicit and accept donations from corporations subject to foreign control, such as Sonoco Products, SCANA Corporation, Bowater, Inc., and other corporate entities with major investments in both South Carolina and the rest of the world. They do not have to be Fortune 500 companies! We're willing to include profitable corporations of any size, regardless of the national allegiances of their stockholders, board members, or executives.
We will, by funding the continuation of the careers of elected officials in the State of South Carolina, hope to directly or indirectly influence them to pursue policies favorable to the business interests of our donors, particularly when these interests conflict with the rights provided in the constitutions of the State of Carolina and the United States. As we anticipate that these conflicts will be of a constitutional nature, this should suffice to be unlawful enough to warrant registration under your recent legislation. Hopefully you will find this suitably subversive.
Included with our registration fee you will find a 15% gratuity. Please consider this a token of our appreciation of your ongoing efforts to make the realization of our goals easier.
Looking forward to seeing you at the President's Day golf outing. Looks like the weather will keep us in the clubhouse!
Toodles,
-The Old Boy Network
I'm only willing to be part of a social network if I can have granular control over the personal information presented to it, and the members of that network. My compromise for fb has been to use a pseudonym; that plus a picture has been sufficient to obtain contacts of people I actually know. It's not foolproof, but it is for me an acceptable privacy buffer.
Gmail is a different story. There is simply too much private info in the account that I am unwilling to subject to a social networking context. Using an anonymous gmail account for Buzz in the same way would defeat the purpose. Using Buzz seems little different than allowing fb comb my gmail account for contacts.
The 11th Circuit didn't reject a national standard. Rather, it said that the district court DID NOT ERR in applying the community standard, which comes from a 1973 SCOTUS case, Miller v. California.
There is a difference. What this means is that another district court, even in the 11th Circuit, could still use a national standard under similar circumstances. In other words, the 11th Circuit has ruled that such a call can currently be made by the trial court.
The area of the law is unclear, and courts have been applying it differently. While there has been some discussion of applying a national standard of decency by O'Connor, the Supreme Court as a whole has yet to rule this way. Until it does, Miller applies, and an interpretation of it that uses a community based standard is not an error.
Here's the actual opinion, this issue is discussed on pages 6-10: http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/unpub/ops/200815964.pdf
I'm sure a lot of people will cynically disregard the opportunity to comment as pointless; ignore this urge! While this comment period touches a fairly narrow area, if you care about this issue PLEASE COMMENT. Bring yourself up to speed on the proposed regulation (summary: http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480a7dc9b), and make your comment as efficient, relevant, and precise as possible.
Commenting on regs is NOT like writing your congressperson! Public comments to proposed regs are reviewed, and are considered; these public comment periods are not just for show. Industries with vested interests in an agency's regulations are aware of this, and are certain to have their say in the matter. Have yours!
There's more context in the linked summary, but here's basically what they're asking for input on:
USTR requests that interested persons identify those countries that deny adequate and effective protection for intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection. USTR requests that, where relevant, submissions mention particular regions, provinces, states, or other subdivisions of a country in which an act, policy, or practice is believed to warrant special attention. Submissions may report positive or negative developments with respect to these sub-national entities.
Was anything preventing you from lying about doing a hard reset?
"The last rep said I needed to do this before he could open a ticket. Of course it cut off our call. Still doesn't work."
For me the value in writing is primarily the cementing of information in my memory. It's a style of learning. For those of us who work this way, it's not about easily being able to refer back to them. The act of writing itself is a kind of entrenchment of the cognitive pathways, and because of it I almost never have to refer to my handwritten notes. My recollection of them has consistently proven to be very accurate.
Notes I've taken via laptop I do not find as easy to recall, but they are generally more thorough and easier to use for review.
That's interesting. I just finished a semester on consumer protection law, with a heavy focus on Equal Credit Opportunity Act and similar measures that are designed to eliminate, among other things, gender discrimination in lending.
A statistically significant disparity in loan approval ratings probably indicates that there are significant violations of the ECOA. This is curious, because the ECOA provides for considerable punitive damages for discriminatory lending practices. ($10k for individual actions and up to $500k for class actions.) http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/credit/cre15.shtm
While venture capital is another story, these kinds of bank loans should be covered under the ECOA. (At least, I am not aware of a statutory exception that would eliminate entrepreneurial loans.) It sounds like the bankers' actions were very clear violations of the ECOA. The Blake article you mentioned is behind a pay wall and I can't afford the $30 to get to it at the moment. Did it have any account of subsequent legal actions on the part of the women entrepreneurs who were subjected to gender discrimination? I certainly hope so.
Nice, but I find it more satisfying to simply refer back to the formula behind every Garfield strip ever made.
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=garfield_sucks
Executive Orders can be overturned simply by issuing a subsequent Executive Order. For example, overturning notorious Bush EO#13233 by issuing EO #13489 was something Obama did on his first day in office. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13233
We've had many clearly pro-nuclear presidents since Carter, particularly Bush Sr. Since anyone of them could have easily overturned Carter's EO --and since North Korea was able to get nukes by reprocessing its own spent fuel rods-- you might want to reconsider your assessment of that particular EO.
seafood is usually great, but don't get the mixed seafood, it's always chewy.
That's actually a good suggestion for every place I've been so far. It's also good idea to generally avoid any "seafood special" for the same reason -- both are often the leftover, older seafood the restaurant is trying to get rid of before it expires.
If that's the case, then we'll need a car analogy.
Do you recall how unfair you thought it was when your third-grade teacher punished the entire class for the misbehavior of one student because she couldn't identify the perpetrator? That's exactly what Google is doing.
Not quite. In the classroom setting, the punished students all have the same amount of (no) power, and the teacher has the most.
So if this situation is a classroom, the Chinese government is the teacher (has all the power), the students are Chinese citizens (same amount of no power), and Google is the guest speaker who, while giving his career presentation, was pickpocketed by the teacher.
I can't say I fully agree with the decision to bar AD&D, but I can say that I understand the reasoning behind the decision.
That's rational basis review for you. It's a very deferential level of review, and it is applied to most prison situations. To pass it, a party just has show a somewhat plausible line of reasoning. The rule doesn't actually have to *work*, nor does it have to be correct.
The court didn't have the ability to question the findings of the "gang expert", as dubious as his testimony might have been. Expert witness testimony countering each and every one of that guy's points wouldn't have helped, either. As long as the "gang expert" was a qualified witness, and as long as the warden claimed that he believed the witness, D&D didn't stand a chance.
Companies with a lot of sedentary work, if they could find it profitable to encourage the physical health of their employees (through insurance costs and lost productivity), should abandon the strictly desk/chair office model with various kinds of workstations that can provide for exercise. (Liability would be an issue, but then it always is.)
The geek cycle concept isn't particularly new: http://lifehacker.com/203760/exercise-while-you-work-with-the-geek+a+cycle-tm
Standing workstations, reading stations for cardio, appropriate alternatives for the disabled for fairness's sake, and company shower/laundry facilities could reintegrate physical aspects into what has become mostly intellectual activity. I find that my focus for certain tasks is enhanced if I'm exercising during it --particularly reading challenging material while on the treadmill.
Gym currently don't seem the most conducive to work, but they are often designed with tons of distractions --blaring music to get you "pumped", treadmills with monitors playing only brain candy entertainment fare, lighting too poor for reading, etc. Put a cardio machine into an office setting and it takes on a different character.
Al Qaeda, from Afghanistan, planned and organized the 9-11 attacks. Al Qaeda issued a fatwa calling for killing US civilians, also from Afghanistan. Al Qaeda is an organization that was supported & protected by the Taliban, and the Taliban at that time ruled Afghanistan.
These things are all "something to do with the attack."
You might not think these are as relevant as other matters. But that's not what you're saying: you in effect are pretending that these connections do not exist. This suggests that you are not even familiar with very basic details which, in turn, undermines your credibility.
Afghanistan most certainly had something to do with the attack on us. Claiming otherwise is such a distortion of reality on your part that it undermines whatever other points you might wish to discuss.
I would think that the line of sight principle and limits of VHF range both would make VOR completely impractical for navigation at sea. You'd have to dot the ocean with VOR platforms.
Why do you need to multimedia dock to use its alarm function? It comes w/ an alarm clock app. I've been using it as an alarm clock for a few weeks.
This study gave half the group gingko, and the other half a placebo. It would have been more thorough to include a control group that did not take any supplement at all.
The study measured certain aspects of cognitive function. It seems reasonable to allow for the possibility that cognition itself --specifically, a belief (or misbelief) that one is taking a supplement or a placebo-- could measurably affect cognitive function.
After all, it could be that both gingko and placebos are both more effective than nothing at all; particularly since it appears that placebos themselves are somehow becoming more effective. http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/09/07/1526234/Placebos-Are-Getting-More-Effective
While I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't done much to change the situation, I see nothing in that huffpo article describing the efficacy or lack thereof of the PREA.
This one seems to describe some progress.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/23/60000-inmates-sexually-ab_n_219385.html