No package (at least so far) delivered that way will screw around with your browser settings or plugins, or add stupid search bars (unless what you're downloading *is* a search bar), etc.
It's not because there's no technical way for them to do so (if I remember correctly, apt-get at least allows packages to run arbitrary shell code as root). It's because no-one has bothered, which I suspect is largely because the target audience for such things (which in this case is desktop users - there's no point installing Ask toolbar or changing the search engine on the server) is so small, but also, and probably more importantly, because any package that'd do it would be nuked out of the repo right away.
So basically this is an argument in favor of curated software repos.
Re:Why not go back to consumer sorting.
on
Recycling Is Dying
·
· Score: 1
So basically it's a solved engineering problem, and it's not used universally only because of the extra costs?
Re:The problem is that landfills are too cheap
on
Recycling Is Dying
·
· Score: 1
Hereabouts (remote outskirts of a large metro area), we do get bin collections, but we are billed for it directly, not through taxes. There does seem to be some regulation in place to encourage recycling - they charge separate fees for bin rental and for service separately on each bin, depending on the size, but they're not allowed to charge for the recycling bin, only for the service (and it does not depend on the size of the bin).
Re:The problem is that landfills are too cheap
on
Recycling Is Dying
·
· Score: 1
Some places around here are banning plastic bags in stores outright.
but the H1-Bs have a pretty big impact here. They're guaranteed renters. There's no way to move into a house when you can't claim residency in the country.
As an H1-B who got a mortgage and bought a house, I can confidently state that this is just plain bullshit.
And yes, someone on an H1-B visa is a resident of the country. Just ask the IRS.
My understanding is that the problem with housing in Vancouver predates any Quebec immigration schemes (though they likely contribute to sustaining it), and dates back to Chinese immigration from Hong Kong and Macau peaking right before they were about to be transferred to the PRC - quite a few people there were afraid of living "under the commies" and decided to move, and naturally they picked a reasonably close location in a well-developed country that already had a significant Chinese minority, which was BC in general and Vancouver in particular. Given the prices on property in Hong Kong, those who owned it and sold it for the move were effectively millionaires, and that money flooded the housing market.
IIRC, a typical large Xamarin app contains about 20 Mb of framework code before the linker strips everything that isn't actually used. This usually get reduced to several times less after linking. So in this case, I doubt you'd notice the difference.
Perhaps the more appropriate way to deal with this "real problem" is for candidates to stop giving promises that they know (or should know) they cannot fulfill?
Since I've actually read all of those (as I had to pass exams in all of these jurisdictions), I can compare them meaningfully. I can definitely say that it's not just about the language. For starters, the Russian version has a lot more text in general, while other versions were more picture-heavy. But also the sheer amount of rules was significantly larger in Russia, and the theory test much more complicated as a result.
It's also written in a much drier and more formal language. I suspect it's because the rule books in other countries don't copy the laws verbatim, but try to condense them into something easier to read and understand, while in Russia what you get is what is in the law.
If you're curious, here is [google-translated] current edition. For laughs, go to the annex where it has several sections on signs, and see how many of them you knew before. You are expected to know every single one, and any of them can show up in the theory test.
I should have been more accurate - it's more like "Seattle metro area". There are a few new ones popping up in Bellevue and Redmond lately, and plenty existing ones in Sammamish. There's even one here in North Bend (and cars definitely don't suck out here!).
when you're in France, because France of course is special and knows better than everyone else, so there people who are already inside the roundabout are supposed to give way to the people going in, rather than the other way around like in the rest of the world -- with pretty easily foreseeable consequences.
It's actually the rule in most countries, unless overridden by an explicit "give way" sign for those entering - it is a direct consequence of the "yield to the right" rule, since for the traffic on the roundabout, merging traffic is always on the right and hence has right of way. Most countries just realize that it's a very stupid rule to apply to roundabouts, and so consistently put signs reversing it. I'm not sure if anyone specifically overrides it for all roundabouts by a special rule.
France is not the only country that doesn't put those signs up, though. It's also the norm in Russia.
Russia doesn't have fewer or less defined road rules. If anything, it has more - the book that you has to study to pass the theory exam has like a dozen pages of various signs alone, and overall is thicker than the road rule book for the three other countries where I have studied one (New Zealand, Canada/BC and US/WA) combined. Plenty of signs on the roads, too.
Romney vs Obama is a single data point. Just because money didn't win that election, doesn't mean that money doesn't generally win elections.
What we do know is that 91% of the time, candidates who spend more win, at least for Congress. We don't know if there is a causal link, or it's just a correlation, and the real cause is something else. But to bring up Romney is completely disingenuous.
The last few years in this case is more like the last decade. Before JSON, there were (and are) XML-typed columns, and any decent RDBMS will let you use XQuery or similar to query on them directly within your SQL query (and will use special indices to optimize such queries). SQL/XML spec, that standardizes this, was published in 2003. Oracle shipped preliminary support of the then-draft spec in 2002; Microsoft shipped it in SQL Server 2005 in, well, 2005; and Postgres shipped it in 8.3 in 2008.
Homeopathics, on the other hand, have not the intended effects they are sold by, so it becomes false advertisement and outright fraud.
Hence why I specifically said that the mandatory label should clearly state that they have no medical efficacy. I doubt they'd sell many "remedies" that way, but if they want to try, I don't see why not.
I would say that it should be allowed to be sold, but, like cigarettes, with a mandatory warning to the effect that it contains no chemicals other than water and has no medical efficacy. If people are still willing to buy it then, it's not fraud.
What should absolutely be forbidden is any spending of public funds on this stuff (which is the huge part of the controversy in UK, where NHS funds homeopathic treatments for patients).
From my personal experience, if the check is denied, the dealers usually go to great length to help figure out what went wrong, including calling NICS again and going over all the details in the form to catch any mistakes. But yes, they won't let you have the gun if you are denied, for obvious reasons. There is a formal procedure in place that lets you challenge a denial, and they direct you towards that.
(As a non-citizen resident, I have been denied twice in the past, both times because the dolts at FBI have messed things up, as there's more data that they have to verify for us, such as any CBP records - it's also why I always get delayed, and that "instant" check is literally never instant for me, and usually takes a couple of days to clear. In both cases the dealers involved were very helpful, and the issue was ultimately resolved after some back and forth with FBI.)
Note though that the third option is that they simply didn't process his background check in time. Remember that the law sets a hard limit on how long a NICS check can be deferred for - IIRC, it's 5 business days? And if they don't come back with an answer by then, the buyer can take the gun, and most dealers will let them do that (again, from personal experience - it happened something like 3 times for me, out of the thirty-something transfers that I have made in total - but such a high rate probably has more to do with me being non-citizen and hence always deferred, so I don't know how it is for citizens).
Slashdot Mirror
Please don't burn Confederate flags. Think of the environment!
It's essentially a full retard adoption of judicial deference.
Which is ironic, because it's exactly what Scalia opposed in, say, the Heller case.
He doesn't get to pick and choose. Either SCOTUS gets to decide, or it's unrestricted majority rule.
No package (at least so far) delivered that way will screw around with your browser settings or plugins, or add stupid search bars (unless what you're downloading *is* a search bar), etc.
It's not because there's no technical way for them to do so (if I remember correctly, apt-get at least allows packages to run arbitrary shell code as root). It's because no-one has bothered, which I suspect is largely because the target audience for such things (which in this case is desktop users - there's no point installing Ask toolbar or changing the search engine on the server) is so small, but also, and probably more importantly, because any package that'd do it would be nuked out of the repo right away.
So basically this is an argument in favor of curated software repos.
So basically it's a solved engineering problem, and it's not used universally only because of the extra costs?
Paper can also be composted quite nicely.
Hereabouts (remote outskirts of a large metro area), we do get bin collections, but we are billed for it directly, not through taxes. There does seem to be some regulation in place to encourage recycling - they charge separate fees for bin rental and for service separately on each bin, depending on the size, but they're not allowed to charge for the recycling bin, only for the service (and it does not depend on the size of the bin).
Some places around here are banning plastic bags in stores outright.
but the H1-Bs have a pretty big impact here. They're guaranteed renters. There's no way to move into a house when you can't claim residency in the country.
As an H1-B who got a mortgage and bought a house, I can confidently state that this is just plain bullshit.
And yes, someone on an H1-B visa is a resident of the country. Just ask the IRS.
My understanding is that the problem with housing in Vancouver predates any Quebec immigration schemes (though they likely contribute to sustaining it), and dates back to Chinese immigration from Hong Kong and Macau peaking right before they were about to be transferred to the PRC - quite a few people there were afraid of living "under the commies" and decided to move, and naturally they picked a reasonably close location in a well-developed country that already had a significant Chinese minority, which was BC in general and Vancouver in particular. Given the prices on property in Hong Kong, those who owned it and sold it for the move were effectively millionaires, and that money flooded the housing market.
What makes you believe it's a government requirement? I suspect it's rather what the companies that rent out the property demand.
IIRC, a typical large Xamarin app contains about 20 Mb of framework code before the linker strips everything that isn't actually used. This usually get reduced to several times less after linking. So in this case, I doubt you'd notice the difference.
Perhaps the more appropriate way to deal with this "real problem" is for candidates to stop giving promises that they know (or should know) they cannot fulfill?
Since I've actually read all of those (as I had to pass exams in all of these jurisdictions), I can compare them meaningfully. I can definitely say that it's not just about the language. For starters, the Russian version has a lot more text in general, while other versions were more picture-heavy. But also the sheer amount of rules was significantly larger in Russia, and the theory test much more complicated as a result.
It's also written in a much drier and more formal language. I suspect it's because the rule books in other countries don't copy the laws verbatim, but try to condense them into something easier to read and understand, while in Russia what you get is what is in the law.
If you're curious, here is [google-translated] current edition. For laughs, go to the annex where it has several sections on signs, and see how many of them you knew before. You are expected to know every single one, and any of them can show up in the theory test.
I should have been more accurate - it's more like "Seattle metro area". There are a few new ones popping up in Bellevue and Redmond lately, and plenty existing ones in Sammamish. There's even one here in North Bend (and cars definitely don't suck out here!).
I've seen plenty of roundabouts in Seattle, including new ones being installed to replace intersections.
when you're in France, because France of course is special and knows better than everyone else, so there people who are already inside the roundabout are supposed to give way to the people going in, rather than the other way around like in the rest of the world -- with pretty easily foreseeable consequences.
It's actually the rule in most countries, unless overridden by an explicit "give way" sign for those entering - it is a direct consequence of the "yield to the right" rule, since for the traffic on the roundabout, merging traffic is always on the right and hence has right of way. Most countries just realize that it's a very stupid rule to apply to roundabouts, and so consistently put signs reversing it. I'm not sure if anyone specifically overrides it for all roundabouts by a special rule.
France is not the only country that doesn't put those signs up, though. It's also the norm in Russia.
Russia doesn't have fewer or less defined road rules. If anything, it has more - the book that you has to study to pass the theory exam has like a dozen pages of various signs alone, and overall is thicker than the road rule book for the three other countries where I have studied one (New Zealand, Canada/BC and US/WA) combined. Plenty of signs on the roads, too.
Indeed. It's time to ban masturbation already.
Romney vs Obama is a single data point. Just because money didn't win that election, doesn't mean that money doesn't generally win elections.
What we do know is that 91% of the time, candidates who spend more win, at least for Congress. We don't know if there is a causal link, or it's just a correlation, and the real cause is something else. But to bring up Romney is completely disingenuous.
The last few years in this case is more like the last decade. Before JSON, there were (and are) XML-typed columns, and any decent RDBMS will let you use XQuery or similar to query on them directly within your SQL query (and will use special indices to optimize such queries). SQL/XML spec, that standardizes this, was published in 2003. Oracle shipped preliminary support of the then-draft spec in 2002; Microsoft shipped it in SQL Server 2005 in, well, 2005; and Postgres shipped it in 8.3 in 2008.
I mean the Amazon app store for Android, that is pre-installed on Kindle Fire, but can also be installed as an app on any Android device.
What about, say, Amazon Appstore?
Homeopathics, on the other hand, have not the intended effects they are sold by, so it becomes false advertisement and outright fraud.
Hence why I specifically said that the mandatory label should clearly state that they have no medical efficacy. I doubt they'd sell many "remedies" that way, but if they want to try, I don't see why not.
I would say that it should be allowed to be sold, but, like cigarettes, with a mandatory warning to the effect that it contains no chemicals other than water and has no medical efficacy. If people are still willing to buy it then, it's not fraud.
What should absolutely be forbidden is any spending of public funds on this stuff (which is the huge part of the controversy in UK, where NHS funds homeopathic treatments for patients).
From my personal experience, if the check is denied, the dealers usually go to great length to help figure out what went wrong, including calling NICS again and going over all the details in the form to catch any mistakes. But yes, they won't let you have the gun if you are denied, for obvious reasons. There is a formal procedure in place that lets you challenge a denial, and they direct you towards that.
(As a non-citizen resident, I have been denied twice in the past, both times because the dolts at FBI have messed things up, as there's more data that they have to verify for us, such as any CBP records - it's also why I always get delayed, and that "instant" check is literally never instant for me, and usually takes a couple of days to clear. In both cases the dealers involved were very helpful, and the issue was ultimately resolved after some back and forth with FBI.)
Note though that the third option is that they simply didn't process his background check in time. Remember that the law sets a hard limit on how long a NICS check can be deferred for - IIRC, it's 5 business days? And if they don't come back with an answer by then, the buyer can take the gun, and most dealers will let them do that (again, from personal experience - it happened something like 3 times for me, out of the thirty-something transfers that I have made in total - but such a high rate probably has more to do with me being non-citizen and hence always deferred, so I don't know how it is for citizens).