If there is enough evidence for a conviction, and there are enough aggravating factors to bump it up to first degree, then yes. Keep in mind that this is essentially the threat that police work under, except that there is no need to convict a policeman to (approximately) end his life.
You capitalized it, which led me to believe you were talking about some product that I was unfamiliar with. If you just mean "everywhere", I should point out that "everywhere" is never everywhere everywhere, but is always everywhere in some scope.
Stocks don't really circulate anywhere that I know of. There may be country clubs where they are passed around, but I don't know of any. For the most part, they are transacted through limited access markets by specialist traders. In those markets, it may be possible to say that they circulate, but not elsewhere (maybe in the hypothetical country clubs too). Ditto most of the other stuff you listed.
Cigarettes in prison are often used as the example of an unusual currency. Debts and services, in such places, are denominated in cigarettes, and the expectation is generally that you can trade them freely - even people that are neither producers nor consumers of cigarettes. That meets circulation and (scoped) ubiquity.
Are you aware of any circulation of Disney gift certificates between people who are neither producers nor consumers of said cards? That is - of people using them as money? Someone who gets one as a gift, but has no intention of using it may sell it for money, but that chain has both a producer and a consumer occupying two of the three steps spanning production to consumption. That's not circulation.
Bitcoin, however, does have a global circulation. People who aren't miners buy it to use as money, and people accept it as money that they can use to buy other goods and services with, not just so that they can cash out. This circulation is, to be sure, relatively thin. But it is there, and the same can't be said about most other things.
Islam is a particularly extreme ideology that's inherently violent, both on a microlevel originating (and still existing) as mosque level politics whose imams openly advocate violence against opponents, and macro level where it's caused wars. Advocating for it is doing more than simply advocating a different point of view, it has direct real life consequences for those victimized by islamist groups.
Does reading that cause you to pause and re-evaluate your beliefs? Why, or why not?
On the most basic level, currency is that which circulates. Bitcoin circulates, Disney gift certificates do not.
Without knowing which definition of currency you've chosen, it is hard to assess your claim of technicality. Or, for that matter, how closely your definition matches the ordinary meaning of the word.
I'm inclined to cut Snowden some slack for two reasons. First, he took pains to release the information in as responsible a way as possible. Second, what he exposed was a pile of crimes against the American people (whether technically legal or not). It has been a long time since I studied the Manning incident, but my recollection is that he was trying to hurt America by casting wartime battlefield events as if they should be held to peaceful homeland standards.
If I were President, I'd offer Snowden a deal where he can return home and serve 13 months under house arrest for stealing secrets in exchange for a pardon of everything else.
If I were Emperor, or had an agreeable Congress, I'd also make it a capital offense to abuse government against the American people as a whole or American citizens individually - including spying, IRS bullshit, etc.
Before the election, people mocked me when I said that they should support Trump as one of our last chances to come to a peaceful resolution before facing Powell's rivers of blood. People who refused to even listen to the religious right are now horrified by the post-religious right. Those that have turned to street violence against the nationalists are unable to see the ultra-nationalists that will follow if the people are not able to work things out.
Thanks to the antifa, these are no longer fringe ideas. I hear them from workers, from retirees, from middle class professionals, from farmers, from laborers, and now from you, you random/. stranger. And onlookers hearing them for the first time no longer look shocked..
I'm not in South Korea or Canada, and I have access to two fiber optic ISPs, plus DSL from the phone company, plus two wireless ISPs, plus I think 3 cellular ISPs. I'm in the US, in a semi-rural area a few minutes outside of a small town and about 100 miles from a major metro area.
There are anti-monopoly regulations here, but they are inoperative. Meaning that the phone company must allow competing companies access to their physical infrastructure at below-cost rates, but no one is interested.
The competing fiber ISPs are the result of not having pro-monopoly regulation, and I strongly suggest that you urge your local regulator bodies to consider it if you are unhappy with your local options. And don't try the "it costs too much to build two plants" line of bullshit on me - I've debunked it many times in my post history.
Trump one-ups your conversation-documenter with a 30 year history of actually recording conversations. There have been at least two cases where he has called bullshit on testimony against him, given in court, and under oath, by producing a recording that contradicted the testimony.
It is cynical and hypocritical for Democrats and progressives to complain about how automation displaces blue collar workers, when they support vastly increasing the population of low skill workers in the US by importing them.
Of course, robots don't vote Democrat, and neither do their children.
by Anonymous Coward on 2017-05-10 18:57 (#54396915):
REEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEE.
There are times when 99% means 99 per 100, and there are times when it means "This category is vile in general, but I can't say all because I know of a few exceptions."
Not at all. I've answered that question several times.
I voted for Trump because I don't want the current cold civil war to go hot. Someone once said to a progressive, "If you don't like the religious right, just wait until you see the post-religious right." In the same way, Trump is a nationalist, and I hope you never see an ultra-nationalist here. I also don't think many of you know how close we were - not to an immediate ultra, but to the tipping point that makes the ultras inevitable. (There are countless examples of these paths in history.)
In more practical terms, I wanted more border security, less immigration, less invasion, a supreme court justice that reads the Constitution, and the death of the Republican Party as the party of graceful losers. So far, I've got 3 of those and tangible progress on the other two, plus as a free bonus, endless dank memes and salty tears. The last two years have also been, by far, the most entertaining 2 years in my memory.
All three articles were about the same hearing, which was a while ago. The rat guy was claiming that the three articles supported his theory that the FBI was investigating Trump for treason. Comey said nothing of the sort. *Poof* his delusional claims vanish in a puff of reality.
Scott Adams has been calling this pre-bribery. Basically, they show the current office holder that they will be well cared for by throwing unearned money at the previous guy.
And how about if he fired a FBI director that has publicly said on at least three different occasions that he isn't under investigation for anything at all?
Slashdot Mirror
MisterHouse has been doing all of that, or at least most of it, for 15-20 years now.
If we were willing to let people starving on the street as the product of their bad decisions, we wouldn't need a welfare system at all.
If there is enough evidence for a conviction, and there are enough aggravating factors to bump it up to first degree, then yes. Keep in mind that this is essentially the threat that police work under, except that there is no need to convict a policeman to (approximately) end his life.
How DARE you bring logic and fact into this? Don't you know this is an online anti-Trump rally?
You capitalized it, which led me to believe you were talking about some product that I was unfamiliar with. If you just mean "everywhere", I should point out that "everywhere" is never everywhere everywhere, but is always everywhere in some scope .
Stocks don't really circulate anywhere that I know of. There may be country clubs where they are passed around, but I don't know of any. For the most part, they are transacted through limited access markets by specialist traders. In those markets, it may be possible to say that they circulate, but not elsewhere (maybe in the hypothetical country clubs too). Ditto most of the other stuff you listed.
Cigarettes in prison are often used as the example of an unusual currency. Debts and services, in such places, are denominated in cigarettes, and the expectation is generally that you can trade them freely - even people that are neither producers nor consumers of cigarettes. That meets circulation and (scoped) ubiquity.
Are you aware of any circulation of Disney gift certificates between people who are neither producers nor consumers of said cards? That is - of people using them as money? Someone who gets one as a gift, but has no intention of using it may sell it for money, but that chain has both a producer and a consumer occupying two of the three steps spanning production to consumption. That's not circulation.
Bitcoin, however, does have a global circulation. People who aren't miners buy it to use as money, and people accept it as money that they can use to buy other goods and services with, not just so that they can cash out. This circulation is, to be sure, relatively thin. But it is there, and the same can't be said about most other things.
Thought experiment:
Does reading that cause you to pause and re-evaluate your beliefs? Why, or why not?
On the most basic level, currency is that which circulates. Bitcoin circulates, Disney gift certificates do not.
Without knowing which definition of currency you've chosen, it is hard to assess your claim of technicality. Or, for that matter, how closely your definition matches the ordinary meaning of the word.
I'm inclined to cut Snowden some slack for two reasons. First, he took pains to release the information in as responsible a way as possible. Second, what he exposed was a pile of crimes against the American people (whether technically legal or not). It has been a long time since I studied the Manning incident, but my recollection is that he was trying to hurt America by casting wartime battlefield events as if they should be held to peaceful homeland standards.
If I were President, I'd offer Snowden a deal where he can return home and serve 13 months under house arrest for stealing secrets in exchange for a pardon of everything else.
If I were Emperor, or had an agreeable Congress, I'd also make it a capital offense to abuse government against the American people as a whole or American citizens individually - including spying, IRS bullshit, etc.
You are a Republican?
If only we had some data on identical twins adopted into different families that would shed light on this mystery.
Oh, wait...
Before the election, people mocked me when I said that they should support Trump as one of our last chances to come to a peaceful resolution before facing Powell's rivers of blood. People who refused to even listen to the religious right are now horrified by the post-religious right. Those that have turned to street violence against the nationalists are unable to see the ultra-nationalists that will follow if the people are not able to work things out.
Thanks to the antifa, these are no longer fringe ideas. I hear them from workers, from retirees, from middle class professionals, from farmers, from laborers, and now from you, you random /. stranger. And onlookers hearing them for the first time no longer look shocked..
I'm not in South Korea or Canada, and I have access to two fiber optic ISPs, plus DSL from the phone company, plus two wireless ISPs, plus I think 3 cellular ISPs. I'm in the US, in a semi-rural area a few minutes outside of a small town and about 100 miles from a major metro area.
There are anti-monopoly regulations here, but they are inoperative. Meaning that the phone company must allow competing companies access to their physical infrastructure at below-cost rates, but no one is interested.
The competing fiber ISPs are the result of not having pro-monopoly regulation, and I strongly suggest that you urge your local regulator bodies to consider it if you are unhappy with your local options. And don't try the "it costs too much to build two plants" line of bullshit on me - I've debunked it many times in my post history.
LOL
Trump one-ups your conversation-documenter with a 30 year history of actually recording conversations. There have been at least two cases where he has called bullshit on testimony against him, given in court, and under oath, by producing a recording that contradicted the testimony.
I guess we'll see who the moron is soon enough.
Of course, robots don't vote Democrat, and neither do their children.
Just a reminder that that the technical term for an unnamed source discussing information obtained through FISA is "Felon".
Also, so far the only crime known to have occurred during this fiasco is the leaking of Flynn's name. That is a felony too.
That would be an imaginary server.
The parts that he doesn't like. REEEEEE
by Anonymous Coward on 2017-05-10 18:57 (#54396915):
There are times when 99% means 99 per 100, and there are times when it means "This category is vile in general, but I can't say all because I know of a few exceptions."
Not at all. I've answered that question several times.
I voted for Trump because I don't want the current cold civil war to go hot. Someone once said to a progressive, "If you don't like the religious right, just wait until you see the post-religious right." In the same way, Trump is a nationalist, and I hope you never see an ultra-nationalist here. I also don't think many of you know how close we were - not to an immediate ultra, but to the tipping point that makes the ultras inevitable. (There are countless examples of these paths in history.)
In more practical terms, I wanted more border security, less immigration, less invasion, a supreme court justice that reads the Constitution, and the death of the Republican Party as the party of graceful losers. So far, I've got 3 of those and tangible progress on the other two, plus as a free bonus, endless dank memes and salty tears. The last two years have also been, by far, the most entertaining 2 years in my memory.
All three articles were about the same hearing, which was a while ago. The rat guy was claiming that the three articles supported his theory that the FBI was investigating Trump for treason. Comey said nothing of the sort. *Poof* his delusional claims vanish in a puff of reality.
Nice fiction. Too bad in reality Comey was part of the coverup in the 90s.
From your first link:
Scott Adams has been calling this pre-bribery. Basically, they show the current office holder that they will be well cared for by throwing unearned money at the previous guy.
And how about if he fired a FBI director that has publicly said on at least three different occasions that he isn't under investigation for anything at all?