During the Egyptian revolution the telecom companies, instead of supporting the people, complied with and acted upon the requests of a tyrannical, internationally recognized as leader to shut down internet access, in an attempt to silence the people. [1]
There, fixed that for you....
As tyranical, evil, mass murdered as he could ever be, he was the one in charge. If by giving these orders he overstepped his powers and broke Egyptian laws, then Egyptians courts should try him(*). If the phone companies broke Egyptian laws by doing so, then an Egyptian court must decide about it.
The conclussion of your reasonement is that companies that operate in America must apply American laws and disregard local laws elsewhere?
"Its not clear who paid for the messages which could amount to hundred of thousands of dollars worth of messaging."
The fact that you would have to pay so much money in order to send those messages does not mean that it does cost that. Remember when SMS were free?
(*)Yes, even dictatures have laws and can break them. The main differences are that A) if they do not suit them they can change it really quickly and without explanaition and B) that if they break them nobody will be able to complain. See kidnapping of kids by the Military Junta of Argentina if you need an example about this.
Well, probably handling a single book would add several degrees of complexity:
Book strength is determinated by the strength of paper while the container can be made of a sturdier materiel (and are easier to replace).
In order to select a single book, you cannot have them side-by-side as usual in libraries because it would be complicated to identify the item and it would be a lot more complicate to put it back in place (books at the side falling and all that stuff that is so easily handled by humans.
So, you need individual container for the books. Since books come in lots of sizes and shapes, if you have few container sizes you'll waste lots of space unused inside each container; if you have lots of container formats you'll increase complexity.
Not that it would not be better the way you say, but I think it would probably be too complicated. After all, the big time saver would be in the time going up and down the aisle (or even to another building).
You can't sue China because it is a sovereign state (the lawsuit would be thrown out immediately).
Suing Cisco they get a lot of press coverage where they will center about the HR situation in China and were Cisco will be secondary. That's the primary aim, and they get it even if they lose the lawsuit.
Well, but they were obeying whose orders? And who was not checking the stupid ones?
An intelligent boss won't tell you to do something illegal. He will tell you "I want more deals with China, you work out the details". Then he'll go golfing, not because he likes to but because when thing begin to get hotter, he can then show his horror at your misbehaviour and lament that "if I only had known about that, I would not have never approved of it."
... then it is not false imprisonment. Not to say that the law shouldn't be changed, but hey, get your terms straight...
Not that I side with just another sect, but a government can impose an unlawful imprisonement. This goes like that:
Chinese Government sets a set of laws (even dictatures have laws).
Group or individuals read the laws, and try to get their objectives being careful of not breaking any.
The government notices, and the state security imprison that people even if they didn't break the laws. To avoid making it too obvious, usually the detainees disappear until they have been punished enough, or forever.
Any investigations about the fate of that people is stopped in its tracks, and the officers responsible are rewarded.
There have been news about chinese "unofficial" prisons. So yes, you could have unlawful imprisonment by the state. Anyway, in China the laws that apply are Chinese law, so it should be a Chinese judge who investigates this and issues veredict (I would not count about that). This lawsuit is just a publicity stunt, they are suing Cisco because if they sued China it would be dismissed almost immediately.
Well, to be fair this model works well for defensive operations. For invasions, the "let's everybody get his weapon and start fight" is not so good (you can not fight on your own against an entrenched enemy, you do not know the terrain and you can not live off the terrain so you need a huge logistics organization).
So it really does not server the USA military well.
I don't know how you can call a retard to someone who does not want to risk to speculate with a good that he thinks is doomed to fail. In my book that is just coherent: BTC bad idea ---> Do not buy BTC.
But hey, why are you so nervous about it? Being a wise-I'll get rich gambling-guy? Or is that you just need to sell your BTC? No need to be so angry when you have got such a good deal and had your time to get all the BTC you want. Hey, you can take my share of them, if you want.
Remember, however, that money is worth as much as the value people attribute.
There, fixed that for you.
My car may be devaluating but I get transport from it. My food might decay in a few days but it still has value to me. If you and me are in the desert and I have the water just enough to survive, I won't sell it to you for any amount you can offer me...
And that, why? Because you do not need it to pay people in BTC country for the product of their work. It is just as useful as the dollars/euros you can get from it, not an dime more.
Some of the posts keep saying that "it is because the evil Government keeps printing evil $/€". So, let me raise a question:
Is that people suggesting that the amounts of dollars/euros in use has multiplied by 10 in these years?
I will answer you: no, it has not. This is just a bubble in order to profit a few early adopters, it will deflate and in not so much time.
While gold has some useful properties on its own, it is not due that that it has the value we give it (neither now nor historically). Keep in mind that, before electronics, the only "industrial" use of gold was jewelry yet it was used for coins far more heavily than now.
If that was the case, nowadays only jewellers and metallurgies would buy it. Yet it is still used as investment option/reserve/mean of trade.
What was valuable of gold was scarcity, durability and ability to be fractioned. Anything with the same properties (as for example, silver) was also valuable, too. In some places other medium with similar properties, for example, salt, spice, rum or whisky became a medium of exchange because of the same.
The guy with a lot of bitcoins probably knows that releasing them slowly is the only good way to cash out, to avoid disturbing the market too much.
While I agree that the concept of a currency that is hard to mint is not a wise guy, I would say that the best option for the first guy would be selling everything, provided they get it in another currency they are comfortable with (i.e. selling a lots of dollars and devaluating them for buying yuans -and evaluating them- is a supperb idea if you live in China and use Chinese goods, not so good if you live in USA and pay for USA goods).
If the amount of goods available in bitcoins increase faster than the number of bitcoins, yes, the bitcoins increase in value.
An oversimplified example: Just two actors (producer/capitalist). The producer builds cars, the capitalist bitcoins. At the start, the producer makes 10 cars/month and the capitalist 1000 bitcoins/month, since to buy the car you need bitcoins then the maximum price for 10 cars is 1000 bitcoins --> 100 bitcoins/cars.
A year later, the producer has improved technique so he now produces 30 cars/month and the capitalist now produces 2000 bitcoins/month. Again, the maximum profit both can have is by selling the 30 cars by 2000 bitcoins, or 200/3 --> 66,6 bitcons/cars.
Exactly the same was what happened to the gold standard... while both the supply of gold and of goods was more or less stable / related, it was ok. With the industrial revolution they got more sources for gold, but finally the banks had to "print gold" to avoid trouble, finally getting to a point where it was impossible to mantain a fixed equivalence between gold and goods.
...or someone who lives in a community where the term is still applied mainly to black people.
This is the internet, where you cannot be sure of who will read you or from where. Are you sure that, in all the places of the world, there will be no place where this slang will be missinterpreted?
Of course people of these places might try to understand that no everywhere is like their place, but so can you. And, having lots of perfectly correct ways to tell the same idea with standard, non-ambiguous English words, the choice of words is really very poor and shows a substandard work from the editors. Why could not they title it as "Powerline Networks Interfere with (Intelligence RF|Spies|SIGINT)?"? All of these options send the same meaning than the chosen one (or are even more precise), are less prone to error/susceptibility, and are more accessible to people who does not know slang.
In short, except you are writting in your FB profile for your friends, avoid slang while you can because there is a lot of world outside.
The question nobody wants to ask....
on
Perl 5.14 Released
·
· Score: 3, Funny
.... does it have any new operator?:-P
And before you tell, it was just a joke, I know you should now add operators in a minor release.
Burial at sea has the advantage that you cannot convert his tomb in a center for pilgrimage/meeting point for simpatizers. Many old christian churches/cathedrals and mosquees were funded/did profit from the belief that there was a saint buried there.
My opinion? They were there to kill him, capture was not an option. Both because of a security risk (terrorists kidnapping people and asking for his release) and because a trial to that long-time-ago-friend could be very embarrasing for the stablishment.
The issue I see in Libya is that (as in Irak or Afghanistan) we know (think to know *) who we are against but we do not know who we are helping. Even if I am looking for info, the only I get is that we are helping "the rebels". This may be good in a Star Wars film, but I would like to know:
Who are they
Are they united or multiple groups
What are they going to do once (if) they oust Gaddaffi. There is an agreement or will it degenerate in a second civil war between them.
So far, nobody seems insterested in asnwering those questions, and given the recent history I find that very troubling.
*: Of course, our media and politics dumb it down for the people in a single "Mula Omar/Saddam/Gaddaffi is evil and that is all the problem the country has. Once he is gone all is going to be OK" and forget to tell what they are gonna do with the people who allow/ed them to stay in power and who back them.
Wasn't that the mobile phone company that used to develop great cell phone operating systems before it was bought by Microsoft? Are they still around?
Maybe the issue is that phone companies should not try to develop operating systems and leave that to software companies with expertise in operating systems.
Do not know how great Symbian was (some people here disagrees with you), but what I know from the news was that Nokia did not end in a great position using this strategy...
Well, I do not think they have any pipes to pour sea water into the reactor.... so being in a submarine does not help to that (indeed Fukushima was at the coast and that did not get, either).
In your case, you had demonstrated knowledge of the formula by programming it. You had a slight unfair advantage over the other people in your class because you had extra time, but to be honest time is not usually an issue if you know the subject well.
But if you had copied your program to someone else, that one would have been able to show that he had some basic understanding that he did not really have. That would be the trouble with cheating.
One might point your student to Laughter in the Dark: you know, the Nabokov novel about the dilettante who's self-satisfaction and self-deception are his undoing.
He did point the student to that book. In fact the student did produce a very insightful report about it the following day.
"Mating Habits Of The Earthbound Human"... of course I did listen to it in Spanish so maybe it was the just the guy doubling Attenborough who was as a narrator, and in the original version it was not Attenborough. Anyway it was moderately funny and had Carmen Electra in it...
Slashdot Mirror
There, fixed that for you....
As tyranical, evil, mass murdered as he could ever be, he was the one in charge. If by giving these orders he overstepped his powers and broke Egyptian laws, then Egyptians courts should try him(*). If the phone companies broke Egyptian laws by doing so, then an Egyptian court must decide about it.
The conclussion of your reasonement is that companies that operate in America must apply American laws and disregard local laws elsewhere?
The fact that you would have to pay so much money in order to send those messages does not mean that it does cost that. Remember when SMS were free?
(*)Yes, even dictatures have laws and can break them. The main differences are that A) if they do not suit them they can change it really quickly and without explanaition and B) that if they break them nobody will be able to complain. See kidnapping of kids by the Military Junta of Argentina if you need an example about this.
Well, probably handling a single book would add several degrees of complexity:
Not that it would not be better the way you say, but I think it would probably be too complicated. After all, the big time saver would be in the time going up and down the aisle (or even to another building).
Publicity.
You can't sue China because it is a sovereign state (the lawsuit would be thrown out immediately).
Suing Cisco they get a lot of press coverage where they will center about the HR situation in China and were Cisco will be secondary. That's the primary aim, and they get it even if they lose the lawsuit.
Well, but they were obeying whose orders? And who was not checking the stupid ones?
An intelligent boss won't tell you to do something illegal. He will tell you "I want more deals with China, you work out the details". Then he'll go golfing, not because he likes to but because when thing begin to get hotter, he can then show his horror at your misbehaviour and lament that "if I only had known about that, I would not have never approved of it."
Not that I side with just another sect, but a government can impose an unlawful imprisonement. This goes like that:
There have been news about chinese "unofficial" prisons. So yes, you could have unlawful imprisonment by the state. Anyway, in China the laws that apply are Chinese law, so it should be a Chinese judge who investigates this and issues veredict (I would not count about that). This lawsuit is just a publicity stunt, they are suing Cisco because if they sued China it would be dismissed almost immediately.
Well, to be fair this model works well for defensive operations. For invasions, the "let's everybody get his weapon and start fight" is not so good (you can not fight on your own against an entrenched enemy, you do not know the terrain and you can not live off the terrain so you need a huge logistics organization).
So it really does not server the USA military well.
I finally solved the issue of logs of failed logins with a way simpler metod... in the initial message I tell everybody the root password.
Been years since I saw one of those pesky messages.
I don't know how you can call a retard to someone who does not want to risk to speculate with a good that he thinks is doomed to fail. In my book that is just coherent: BTC bad idea ---> Do not buy BTC.
But hey, why are you so nervous about it? Being a wise-I'll get rich gambling-guy? Or is that you just need to sell your BTC? No need to be so angry when you have got such a good deal and had your time to get all the BTC you want. Hey, you can take my share of them, if you want.
There, fixed that for you.
My car may be devaluating but I get transport from it. My food might decay in a few days but it still has value to me. If you and me are in the desert and I have the water just enough to survive, I won't sell it to you for any amount you can offer me...
And that, why? Because you do not need it to pay people in BTC country for the product of their work. It is just as useful as the dollars/euros you can get from it, not an dime more.
Some of the posts keep saying that "it is because the evil Government keeps printing evil $/€". So, let me raise a question:
Is that people suggesting that the amounts of dollars/euros in use has multiplied by 10 in these years?
I will answer you: no, it has not. This is just a bubble in order to profit a few early adopters, it will deflate and in not so much time.
He must be from the USA.
While gold has some useful properties on its own, it is not due that that it has the value we give it (neither now nor historically). Keep in mind that, before electronics, the only "industrial" use of gold was jewelry yet it was used for coins far more heavily than now.
If that was the case, nowadays only jewellers and metallurgies would buy it. Yet it is still used as investment option/reserve/mean of trade.
What was valuable of gold was scarcity, durability and ability to be fractioned. Anything with the same properties (as for example, silver) was also valuable, too. In some places other medium with similar properties, for example, salt, spice, rum or whisky became a medium of exchange because of the same.
Well... at least it will provide for a good laughs, in a not so long time.
The pity is all the power/computing cycles wasted on this (instead of just saving energy or using it to some useful/interesting @Home project).
While I agree that the concept of a currency that is hard to mint is not a wise guy, I would say that the best option for the first guy would be selling everything, provided they get it in another currency they are comfortable with (i.e. selling a lots of dollars and devaluating them for buying yuans -and evaluating them- is a supperb idea if you live in China and use Chinese goods, not so good if you live in USA and pay for USA goods).
If the amount of goods available in bitcoins increase faster than the number of bitcoins, yes, the bitcoins increase in value.
An oversimplified example: Just two actors (producer/capitalist). The producer builds cars, the capitalist bitcoins. At the start, the producer makes 10 cars/month and the capitalist 1000 bitcoins/month, since to buy the car you need bitcoins then the maximum price for 10 cars is 1000 bitcoins --> 100 bitcoins/cars.
A year later, the producer has improved technique so he now produces 30 cars/month and the capitalist now produces 2000 bitcoins/month. Again, the maximum profit both can have is by selling the 30 cars by 2000 bitcoins, or 200/3 --> 66,6 bitcons/cars.
Exactly the same was what happened to the gold standard... while both the supply of gold and of goods was more or less stable / related, it was ok. With the industrial revolution they got more sources for gold, but finally the banks had to "print gold" to avoid trouble, finally getting to a point where it was impossible to mantain a fixed equivalence between gold and goods.
...or someone who lives in a community where the term is still applied mainly to black people.
This is the internet, where you cannot be sure of who will read you or from where. Are you sure that, in all the places of the world, there will be no place where this slang will be missinterpreted?
Of course people of these places might try to understand that no everywhere is like their place, but so can you. And, having lots of perfectly correct ways to tell the same idea with standard, non-ambiguous English words, the choice of words is really very poor and shows a substandard work from the editors. Why could not they title it as "Powerline Networks Interfere with (Intelligence RF|Spies|SIGINT)?"? All of these options send the same meaning than the chosen one (or are even more precise), are less prone to error/susceptibility, and are more accessible to people who does not know slang.
In short, except you are writting in your FB profile for your friends, avoid slang while you can because there is a lot of world outside.
.... does it have any new operator? :-P
And before you tell, it was just a joke, I know you should now add operators in a minor release.
Burial at sea has the advantage that you cannot convert his tomb in a center for pilgrimage/meeting point for simpatizers. Many old christian churches/cathedrals and mosquees were funded/did profit from the belief that there was a saint buried there.
My opinion? They were there to kill him, capture was not an option. Both because of a security risk (terrorists kidnapping people and asking for his release) and because a trial to that long-time-ago-friend could be very embarrasing for the stablishment.
The issue I see in Libya is that (as in Irak or Afghanistan) we know (think to know *) who we are against but we do not know who we are helping. Even if I am looking for info, the only I get is that we are helping "the rebels". This may be good in a Star Wars film, but I would like to know:
So far, nobody seems insterested in asnwering those questions, and given the recent history I find that very troubling.
*: Of course, our media and politics dumb it down for the people in a single "Mula Omar/Saddam/Gaddaffi is evil and that is all the problem the country has. Once he is gone all is going to be OK" and forget to tell what they are gonna do with the people who allow/ed them to stay in power and who back them.
Wasn't that the mobile phone company that used to develop great cell phone operating systems before it was bought by Microsoft? Are they still around?
Maybe the issue is that phone companies should not try to develop operating systems and leave that to software companies with expertise in operating systems.
Do not know how great Symbian was (some people here disagrees with you), but what I know from the news was that Nokia did not end in a great position using this strategy...
It didn't even include two of the sketches more appropiate to CS:
The one were a medieval monk receives formation about "how-to-use" a book.
The part of "Holy Grail" where they RTFM for the grenade, about how to be precise in your writing.
.
Well, I do not think they have any pipes to pour sea water into the reactor.... so being in a submarine does not help to that (indeed Fukushima was at the coast and that did not get, either).
In your case, you had demonstrated knowledge of the formula by programming it. You had a slight unfair advantage over the other people in your class because you had extra time, but to be honest time is not usually an issue if you know the subject well.
But if you had copied your program to someone else, that one would have been able to show that he had some basic understanding that he did not really have. That would be the trouble with cheating.
One might point your student to Laughter in the Dark: you know, the Nabokov novel about the dilettante who's self-satisfaction and self-deception are his undoing.
He did point the student to that book. In fact the student did produce a very insightful report about it the following day.
"Mating Habits Of The Earthbound Human"... of course I did listen to it in Spanish so maybe it was the just the guy doubling Attenborough who was as a narrator, and in the original version it was not Attenborough. Anyway it was moderately funny and had Carmen Electra in it...