Unless you superinsulate it, you may have condensation problems on the interior, leading to mold. Airplanes avoid this by constantly blowing fresh air through the fuselage. Stationary objects, particularly partially underground ones, can only avoid it by constantly running dehumidifiers. My parents house with a partially underground bottom floor with cinder block walls gets puddles on the floor if they don't run the dehumidifier.
The generally accepted practice is to disclose the vulnerability to the publisher first, and give them 30 days to issue a fix. If there is no fix available after the waiting period, THEN you disclose it to the general public. Although I'm sure the length of the waiting period can be a source of much debate, I don't believe making vulnerabilities public before giving the publisher a chance to fix the problem is in the best interest of computer users.
I've always wondered why they choose to ignore the biblical law that adulterers should be stoned to death, and focus only on the proscriptions against homosexuality. (At the time the bible was written, the prosperity of a culture was largely dependent on it's population growth, so anything that adversely effected the birth rate was made taboo. Sparta fully accepted homosexual behavior, but eventually faltered because their population dwindled.)
I believe criminal trespass restraining orders can be issued without a trial, but I also believe they have to be delivered in writing before they can be enforced. Just telling someone "you are banned for life" is NOT legally serving them with a trespass order.
I believe that people that put a lot of work into developing ideas should be compensated for doing so. I'm not sure that allowing the ownership of said ideas to be transfered to corporations, or allowing the lifetime of the license for exclusive use of the idea to exceed the lifetime of the author, are in the best interests of society.
So, if I start a "Get 'em young" party, whose political mandate is to have sex with underage girls, it is legal for me to do that in Sweden, as long as it is done inside the Parliament? Won't somebody think of the children!
So, if the mob "only wanted to talk to the nice angels", why do so many homophobic bible thumpers cite the story of Sodom and Gomorrah as proof that God hates homosexuals? There are plenty of other less ambiguous condemnations of homosexual behavior in the Bible.
Anybody who understands what a diode is could design a circuit to do this in a few minutes. Only drawback is it requires 4 diodes per battery. Designing a contact with a small contact in the middle for + and a contact on the outside for - seems pretty obvious too -- I'm really surprised this wasn't patented 50 years ago.
In general, we are not supposed to harm others except to prevent a greater harm. If you truly believe that abortion is murder, then it is ethical to harm abortionists to prevent further murders. However, when seeking to prevent a harm, one should use the least harmful method available. Surely there are less extreme methods of keeping an abortionist from performing further abortions than simply shooting him. "Thou shall not kill" is not usually interpreted as banning killing in self defense or in the defense of others, hence many Christians support some wars.
As far as "The mark of the beast", just try getting a job or financing a house without giving out your social security number!
My understanding of the story is that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for the practice of homosexual forced rape, that the mob asked that the angel be sent out so they could have sex with him. Yes, Lot did offer his daughters as an alternative in order to protect the angel, and this alternative was refused (his daughters must have been really, really ugly!) Probably the wording has been toned down in some translations, but I believe that was the original essence of the story. Yes, it was only after Lot was rewarded by being spared from the destruction that he became a dirty perv -- but at that point, he should have been punished just like the other Sodomites, if you accept the premise that God punishes people for sinful behavior. Personally, I believe that sinful behavior is sinful precisely because it is inherently harmful, thus in many cases it is it's own punishment.
The practice of issuing SSNs at birth wasn't started until 1987 As you can see from the timeline, what was originally promised as just a unique identifier for one's Social Security "Insurance" account has been given more and more uses by congress over time. Once the camel gets its nose in the tent, it is only a matter of time before you've got the whole camel in there...
If a person is downloading copyrighted material to avoid payment of a reasonable fee for said material, then a copyright violation is an ethics violation. Likewise, knowing and willful distribution of copyrighted material may still be an ethics violation, even without a profit motive involved, because there may still be the expectation that other people will make copyrighted material available in exchange.
As for assisting somebody else to violates ethics being an ethics violation, yes, that is a gray area. One thing is certain: people submitting plagiarized or purchased reports are hurting themselves more than anyone else.
Slashdot Mirror
Is the kidnapping done by attractive blonds in black leather teddies? 'Cause if it is, then I might be interested...
What are the chances there will be more than one John Smith on the forum?
Unless you superinsulate it, you may have condensation problems on the interior, leading to mold. Airplanes avoid this by constantly blowing fresh air through the fuselage. Stationary objects, particularly partially underground ones, can only avoid it by constantly running dehumidifiers. My parents house with a partially underground bottom floor with cinder block walls gets puddles on the floor if they don't run the dehumidifier.
The generally accepted practice is to disclose the vulnerability to the publisher first, and give them 30 days to issue a fix. If there is no fix available after the waiting period, THEN you disclose it to the general public. Although I'm sure the length of the waiting period can be a source of much debate, I don't believe making vulnerabilities public before giving the publisher a chance to fix the problem is in the best interest of computer users.
I've always wondered why they choose to ignore the biblical law that adulterers should be stoned to death, and focus only on the proscriptions against homosexuality. (At the time the bible was written, the prosperity of a culture was largely dependent on it's population growth, so anything that adversely effected the birth rate was made taboo. Sparta fully accepted homosexual behavior, but eventually faltered because their population dwindled.)
I believe criminal trespass restraining orders can be issued without a trial, but I also believe they have to be delivered in writing before they can be enforced. Just telling someone "you are banned for life" is NOT legally serving them with a trespass order.
I believe that people that put a lot of work into developing ideas should be compensated for doing so. I'm not sure that allowing the ownership of said ideas to be transfered to corporations, or allowing the lifetime of the license for exclusive use of the idea to exceed the lifetime of the author, are in the best interests of society.
So, if I start a "Get 'em young" party, whose political mandate is to have sex with underage girls, it is legal for me to do that in Sweden, as long as it is done inside the Parliament? Won't somebody think of the children!
Sovereign Immunity? In Sweden is it legal to sue the government for copyright infringement?
So, if the mob "only wanted to talk to the nice angels", why do so many homophobic bible thumpers cite the story of Sodom and Gomorrah as proof that God hates homosexuals? There are plenty of other less ambiguous condemnations of homosexual behavior in the Bible.
The solution is obvious: you need to carry a flashlight with you, so that you can see the correct way to put batteries in your flashlight!
Worse than that, the embossed instructions, instead of showing little "-" and "+" signs, will just say "whatever".
Then some "toys" should be designed with an AC power cord instead. Either that, or someones husband should come home earlier at night.
Anybody who understands what a diode is could design a circuit to do this in a few minutes. Only drawback is it requires 4 diodes per battery. Designing a contact with a small contact in the middle for + and a contact on the outside for - seems pretty obvious too -- I'm really surprised this wasn't patented 50 years ago.
In general, we are not supposed to harm others except to prevent a greater harm. If you truly believe that abortion is murder, then it is ethical to harm abortionists to prevent further murders. However, when seeking to prevent a harm, one should use the least harmful method available. Surely there are less extreme methods of keeping an abortionist from performing further abortions than simply shooting him. "Thou shall not kill" is not usually interpreted as banning killing in self defense or in the defense of others, hence many Christians support some wars.
As far as "The mark of the beast", just try getting a job or financing a house without giving out your social security number!
My understanding of the story is that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for the practice of homosexual forced rape, that the mob asked that the angel be sent out so they could have sex with him. Yes, Lot did offer his daughters as an alternative in order to protect the angel, and this alternative was refused (his daughters must have been really, really ugly!) Probably the wording has been toned down in some translations, but I believe that was the original essence of the story. Yes, it was only after Lot was rewarded by being spared from the destruction that he became a dirty perv -- but at that point, he should have been punished just like the other Sodomites, if you accept the premise that God punishes people for sinful behavior. Personally, I believe that sinful behavior is sinful precisely because it is inherently harmful, thus in many cases it is it's own punishment.
I don't know about you, but the speedometer on my car is calibrated in furlongs per fortnight!
Got a great big belt buckle right above your little bitty pecker? There's an app for that!
Wasn't explaining complicated things in a way that anyone could understand something that Richard Feynman was famous for? A hallmark of true understanding of a subject is being able to put it into layman's terms.
What did he expect? It supports printing!
The practice of issuing SSNs at birth wasn't started until 1987 As you can see from the timeline, what was originally promised as just a unique identifier for one's Social Security "Insurance" account has been given more and more uses by congress over time. Once the camel gets its nose in the tent, it is only a matter of time before you've got the whole camel in there...
If a person is downloading copyrighted material to avoid payment of a reasonable fee for said material, then a copyright violation is an ethics violation. Likewise, knowing and willful distribution of copyrighted material may still be an ethics violation, even without a profit motive involved, because there may still be the expectation that other people will make copyrighted material available in exchange.
As for assisting somebody else to violates ethics being an ethics violation, yes, that is a gray area. One thing is certain: people submitting plagiarized or purchased reports are hurting themselves more than anyone else.
At what point in the passage are Lot and his daughters punished by God for the act of incest?
Free Geek
Doorstops.