Did you pick 8.5 to specifically exclude Hong Kong (8.4), to specifically include Iceland (8.5), or was 8.5 just a good number?;-)
I personally wouldn't put too much trust in their figures, though, given the subjectivity of the questions they ask to "country experts" (e.g. "Is the country’s economy free of excessive state involvement?" You would get wildly different answers from a socialist and a capitalist). I also take issue with comparing these countries even though they weren't asked the same sets of questions.
I do have to give them high praises for at least providing the methodology, data, and sources that they used. We don't get that enough from pollsters.
Only if you begin with the premise that not everybody is capable of competence and self-governance. If that's your case, who really is the elitist? You or him?
Or maybe you just see what you want to see regarding her interest in the case (that she is a "psychopath") and ignore what scholars interpret her interest to mean, as well as her very words published in her Journals.
I have friends that express similar interest in Charles Manson, but it certainly does not mean they support or condone his actions--just that it is interesting how he was able to do what he was able to do.
In Comcast's defense (I feel dirty just saying that) they changed their domain name to wikileaks.ch. An article that I read says they also picked up a few other European ccTLDs.
No, he is still misrepresenting the case. It would be the same as if he were arguing that the Swedes arrested him for eating dinner together at a nearby restaurant. The article even alludes that there were other undisclosed and disputed claims, but the GGP is using only the undisputed facts to determine why the warrant was issued.
You either have enough people do the same thing and they go out of business, create your own cable service advertising that you don't do this practice (don't be a hypocrite while advertising, either;-)), or buy a TV or receiver that has this feature built-in.
I heard that cable sales have dropped 30% this year. With competition from the internet, netflix, and other content providers gaining steam, expect to start seeing the cable companies treat their customers like customers and not commodities granted to them through monopolies and subsidies.
protect the people from large social entities like corporations, businesses, special interest groups, powerful churches, political parties, etc.
The difference between those and the government is that the government is allowed to compel you to do things by force and against your will (e.g. through imprisonment, subpoenas, warrants, etc).
Like another responder stated, the British East India Company was only able to do what it was able to do through their lobbying of the powerful central government. Our founders thought the way to solve this problem would be to limit the powers of the central government thereby limiting who the companies, churches, parties, groups, etc. could lobby to. I would agree this plan has failed; not from the disregard of our founders, but through our inability to keep what they had set up.
I made the falsifiable assertion. It's up to you to disprove it.
Kuwait. There disproven.
Your timeline also conveniently skipped right over it and the other reasons for the embargoes that were "pushed" by the US (I'd say it was pulled by Sadaam acting like every other crack-pot dictator wanting a seat at the world table).
It's not necessarily false. It could mean that suburbs of Houston, TX have a different demographic than the nation as a whole (largely it is just a different demographic than that of the major urban centers). Granted, as a supporter of a small federal government, I would love for him to be elected President.
Did you stop reading after the part you quoted? I'm fairly sure military operations would require some secrecy. Hmmm, that is unless you make a random mission generator. That way, since even you don't know what you're going to do, neither does the enemy.
I believe you are right, though, that there should be no secrets with those you trust (e.g. wife). Perhaps that's the reason I don't trust the government nor do I advocate it.
"A government has no interest of itself to protect and therefor is not justified to be secretive."
That's a logical fallacy. The government does have an interest to protect--a whole slew of them; about 300 million of them, last I checked.
I wonder how many of the Wii Motion Pluses have been sold (I can't find anything recent from Google). Although, I'm not sure it can still be considered an add-on, since I just read that they have begun incorporating it into the WiiMotes.
Have you looked at FluentNHibernate? It does away with the xml mapping files and strongly types everything (although it does this using lambda expressions, so expect a.net 3.5 requirement).
I've been pleased with it and have been able to perform some pretty complex mappings to legacy databases with it (but you have the option to fall back to hml if things get real complex).
You do know that they are still taking a risk with their money, right? Here are some other questions to ponder: Just what does happen to that money they invest? Does it just disappear into a magical money farting machine?
There are, however, major problems when risk is regulated away in an effort to control the cyclical nature of the markets and companies performing risky business practices being too big to fail.
I don't really agree with those laws (and as a plus we don't have the lawful order one in my munipality & state), but I could see situations where things you say can "interfere with an officer's duty." Screaming into bullhorns (not saying anything, just screaming), while officers are attempting to address the public could be one. Instructing people to go into a room with no exit, while officials are dutifully evacuating them from a burning building could be another.
Obviously, I'm stretching it a bit for argument's sake, but really the only situations I could think of, you would have to be a complete asshole to get.;-)
Does blowing bubbles in someone's face who is forced to stand at that exact spot qualify as being a complete asshole? I don't know, but any sane person should know that it doesn't help their case.
What I would really like to see would be for them to relax assault charges. If someone is doing something so overtly annoying, like blowing bubbles in my face, and won't stop, then it is up to a jury of my peers (or an enforcement decision prior to that) to decide if I was right in punching him in the face (obviously, I had to relax the actual details of the story, since from what I read in the comments it was a cute girl--yeah, yeah rtfa...or is it wtfv on this one).
Slashdot Mirror
China supposedly got a chance to audit the code, so now you can rest assured.
How does a union help that? Have you never heard of sexual harassment laws? Should she have filed a union grievance, instead of a police report?
Did you pick 8.5 to specifically exclude Hong Kong (8.4), to specifically include Iceland (8.5), or was 8.5 just a good number? ;-)
I personally wouldn't put too much trust in their figures, though, given the subjectivity of the questions they ask to "country experts" (e.g. "Is the country’s economy free of excessive state involvement?" You would get wildly different answers from a socialist and a capitalist). I also take issue with comparing these countries even though they weren't asked the same sets of questions.
I do have to give them high praises for at least providing the methodology, data, and sources that they used. We don't get that enough from pollsters.
that's an excellent illustration of the elitism
Only if you begin with the premise that not everybody is capable of competence and self-governance. If that's your case, who really is the elitist? You or him?
That is exactly why it is so ludicrous, though, because anything and everything can thusly be said to impact interstate trade.
For those interested: 1.5MB for the cache and 50MB for localStorage (user is prompted every 5MB to increase the db size).
Or maybe you just see what you want to see regarding her interest in the case (that she is a "psychopath") and ignore what scholars interpret her interest to mean, as well as her very words published in her Journals.
I have friends that express similar interest in Charles Manson, but it certainly does not mean they support or condone his actions--just that it is interesting how he was able to do what he was able to do.
Except, why would anybody buy their expensive hardware, then?
In Comcast's defense (I feel dirty just saying that) they changed their domain name to wikileaks.ch. An article that I read says they also picked up a few other European ccTLDs.
No, he is still misrepresenting the case. It would be the same as if he were arguing that the Swedes arrested him for eating dinner together at a nearby restaurant. The article even alludes that there were other undisclosed and disputed claims, but the GGP is using only the undisputed facts to determine why the warrant was issued.
You either have enough people do the same thing and they go out of business, create your own cable service advertising that you don't do this practice (don't be a hypocrite while advertising, either ;-)), or buy a TV or receiver that has this feature built-in.
I heard that cable sales have dropped 30% this year. With competition from the internet, netflix, and other content providers gaining steam, expect to start seeing the cable companies treat their customers like customers and not commodities granted to them through monopolies and subsidies.
protect the people from large social entities like corporations, businesses, special interest groups, powerful churches, political parties, etc.
The difference between those and the government is that the government is allowed to compel you to do things by force and against your will (e.g. through imprisonment, subpoenas, warrants, etc).
Like another responder stated, the British East India Company was only able to do what it was able to do through their lobbying of the powerful central government. Our founders thought the way to solve this problem would be to limit the powers of the central government thereby limiting who the companies, churches, parties, groups, etc. could lobby to. I would agree this plan has failed; not from the disregard of our founders, but through our inability to keep what they had set up.
Bearer bonds are lighter.
How about postal services choosing not to allow people to post certain items?
Ummmmmm....I'm feeling kind of bad about breaking it to you, but they already do that.
I made the falsifiable assertion. It's up to you to disprove it.
Kuwait. There disproven.
Your timeline also conveniently skipped right over it and the other reasons for the embargoes that were "pushed" by the US (I'd say it was pulled by Sadaam acting like every other crack-pot dictator wanting a seat at the world table).
They could have signed up here, possibly leaving Amazon to only find out after the media started calling.
It's not necessarily false. It could mean that suburbs of Houston, TX have a different demographic than the nation as a whole (largely it is just a different demographic than that of the major urban centers). Granted, as a supporter of a small federal government, I would love for him to be elected President.
Did you stop reading after the part you quoted? I'm fairly sure military operations would require some secrecy. Hmmm, that is unless you make a random mission generator. That way, since even you don't know what you're going to do, neither does the enemy.
I believe you are right, though, that there should be no secrets with those you trust (e.g. wife). Perhaps that's the reason I don't trust the government nor do I advocate it.
"A government has no interest of itself to protect and therefor is not justified to be secretive."
That's a logical fallacy. The government does have an interest to protect--a whole slew of them; about 300 million of them, last I checked.
Popular Mechanics is claiming an Icelandic study showed 10-25x increased rates of skin cancer than the general public.
link
I wonder how many of the Wii Motion Pluses have been sold (I can't find anything recent from Google). Although, I'm not sure it can still be considered an add-on, since I just read that they have begun incorporating it into the WiiMotes.
Have you looked at FluentNHibernate? It does away with the xml mapping files and strongly types everything (although it does this using lambda expressions, so expect a .net 3.5 requirement).
I've been pleased with it and have been able to perform some pretty complex mappings to legacy databases with it (but you have the option to fall back to hml if things get real complex).
"You do know about stocks and dividends, right?"
You do know that they are still taking a risk with their money, right? Here are some other questions to ponder: Just what does happen to that money they invest? Does it just disappear into a magical money farting machine?
There are, however, major problems when risk is regulated away in an effort to control the cyclical nature of the markets and companies performing risky business practices being too big to fail.
I don't really agree with those laws (and as a plus we don't have the lawful order one in my munipality & state), but I could see situations where things you say can "interfere with an officer's duty." Screaming into bullhorns (not saying anything, just screaming), while officers are attempting to address the public could be one. Instructing people to go into a room with no exit, while officials are dutifully evacuating them from a burning building could be another.
;-)
Obviously, I'm stretching it a bit for argument's sake, but really the only situations I could think of, you would have to be a complete asshole to get.
Does blowing bubbles in someone's face who is forced to stand at that exact spot qualify as being a complete asshole? I don't know, but any sane person should know that it doesn't help their case.
What I would really like to see would be for them to relax assault charges. If someone is doing something so overtly annoying, like blowing bubbles in my face, and won't stop, then it is up to a jury of my peers (or an enforcement decision prior to that) to decide if I was right in punching him in the face (obviously, I had to relax the actual details of the story, since from what I read in the comments it was a cute girl--yeah, yeah rtfa...or is it wtfv on this one).
Or a really short song! ;)
Maybe GP was thinking there was a law against pissing off a cop.
It could possibly be"interference with public duties" or "failure to obey a lawful order". Maybe Canada's a different story, though.