Well that's because it's stupid to keep following money back. You could say it comes from the employers of those people or back more to the customers of those employers - eventually I guess you'd get back to the government.
It's the same way you say you're paid by your employer, not the customers or the customers' employers.
But that's assumed since everyone knows that's how money works. When something says "free dispenser" it means that you do not have to pay money to use the dispenser, not that the dispenser was created and stocked via magic.
Of course it isn't since there are no known safety concerns of GMOs. It's about fear mongering and irrational people that don't understand scary words like "GENETIC".
What's "deficient" is knowledge of which products are using a technology that people object to on, for example, the grounds that Monsanto's use of patented GMO crops are polluting neighbor small farmers who are then inadvertently find themselves in trouble for patent infringement.
Not all GMO crops are patented under abusive corporations and not all GMO crops can cross-pollinate. Unless we label all products that come from unethical corporations, no reason to start here. If we do start here, we should label them "Unethical corporation food", not "GMO"
Another reason is people don't like new technologies forced on them whether they like it or not.
Do we give them that choice for other technologies? Of course not! If some crops are grown with a new type of fertilizer or processed in a different way, that's not indicated in any way, should we label food with "Harvested with Mark-12 combine harvester" as well? What about just a generic "Brought to you by new technology" rather than just the specific case for GMO
They know if they label GMOs some people won't buy them because of it.
This is exactly the reason why we shouldn't have mandatory labeling - people won't buy products they see have scary "GMO" on them, but they aren't doing that for any reason.
Now if food manufacturers want to label their foods as "GMO-free" or "Asbestos-free" or even "GMO", they should be free to do so, but we shouldn't be passing laws requiring food that comes from a different process be labeled because some people don't like scary words.
You don't seriously think the meaning of the law was changed, do you? Have you been paying attention to any of this health care debate or how the system was rolled out? If the SCOTUS changed the meaning by deciding it should be a broken law, that would be a bad joke and they should be ashamed.
Yes, there is a mistake in the writing of the law. The intent of it however is clear, do you think the people who voted it in or the president who signed it thought that the subsidies were only suppose to be for the state exchanges, not the federal ones? Obviously not as we can see from how it has been implemented. The courts are suppose to read a little deeper than just 4 words and in this case they did that (well most of them).
There are no laws preventing you from showing you're racist, but the government does not need to be doing that and people may choose to not buy from companies that are bigoted.
Similar, but it's like on slashdot where you have to do a preview of your post before you post it, except in this case it sends after 30 seconds. Enough time to review it quickly and realize you didn't mean to reply-all.
The only thing people who carry are afraid of is being in the wrong place at the wrong time and having to watch their loved ones die because they didn't have the means to at least try to defend them or get them to safety.
The world must be a scary place for them!
The good thing about first aid and insurance are that they help make realistic issues better. I don't keep a surgical table or have volcano insurance because those aren't issues I will realistically have to deal with, and if they are then there are others better equipped to handle them
Need to start a movement to walk by the school in a different costume every day to see what triggers the police response. Think storm trooper man is up for the job?
I think that's one thing that makes Java both desired and despised. There are a lot of "clever" code chunks in other languages that are short AND easier to read. Even if it's not as easy to read, it's much nicer to decipher 4 lines of "clever" code than 100 lines of enterprise code spread over multiple files. To find out what a function does, you sometimes have to dig down through several layers of classes and compare across files. It's straightforward if you have the time to deal with it and you don't have to know too much about complicated theories to do it.
Slashdot Mirror
Well that's because it's stupid to keep following money back. You could say it comes from the employers of those people or back more to the customers of those employers - eventually I guess you'd get back to the government.
It's the same way you say you're paid by your employer, not the customers or the customers' employers.
But that's assumed since everyone knows that's how money works. When something says "free dispenser" it means that you do not have to pay money to use the dispenser, not that the dispenser was created and stocked via magic.
Fortunately you can disable that
I know right?
The correct solution is to fire a rocket that deploys counter drones to take out the invader.
Bonus points are awarded if all parts (including the invading drone) can be recovered.
On OSX it's the Apple key which is also very useful.
The context menu key on the other hand...
4. Receive visit from FCC
So probably a good analogy with GMO then
GMO LABELLING IS NOT JUST ABOUT SAFETY.
Of course it isn't since there are no known safety concerns of GMOs. It's about fear mongering and irrational people that don't understand scary words like "GENETIC".
What's "deficient" is knowledge of which products are using a technology that people object to on, for example, the grounds that Monsanto's use of patented GMO crops are polluting neighbor small farmers who are then inadvertently find themselves in trouble for patent infringement.
Not all GMO crops are patented under abusive corporations and not all GMO crops can cross-pollinate. Unless we label all products that come from unethical corporations, no reason to start here. If we do start here, we should label them "Unethical corporation food", not "GMO"
Another reason is people don't like new technologies forced on them whether they like it or not.
Do we give them that choice for other technologies? Of course not! If some crops are grown with a new type of fertilizer or processed in a different way, that's not indicated in any way, should we label food with "Harvested with Mark-12 combine harvester" as well? What about just a generic "Brought to you by new technology" rather than just the specific case for GMO
They know if they label GMOs some people won't buy them because of it.
This is exactly the reason why we shouldn't have mandatory labeling - people won't buy products they see have scary "GMO" on them, but they aren't doing that for any reason.
Now if food manufacturers want to label their foods as "GMO-free" or "Asbestos-free" or even "GMO", they should be free to do so, but we shouldn't be passing laws requiring food that comes from a different process be labeled because some people don't like scary words.
They give it away for free, but it's ad supported.
You don't seriously think the meaning of the law was changed, do you? Have you been paying attention to any of this health care debate or how the system was rolled out? If the SCOTUS changed the meaning by deciding it should be a broken law, that would be a bad joke and they should be ashamed.
Yes, there is a mistake in the writing of the law. The intent of it however is clear, do you think the people who voted it in or the president who signed it thought that the subsidies were only suppose to be for the state exchanges, not the federal ones? Obviously not as we can see from how it has been implemented. The courts are suppose to read a little deeper than just 4 words and in this case they did that (well most of them).
There are no laws preventing you from showing you're racist, but the government does not need to be doing that and people may choose to not buy from companies that are bigoted.
Similar, but it's like on slashdot where you have to do a preview of your post before you post it, except in this case it sends after 30 seconds. Enough time to review it quickly and realize you didn't mean to reply-all.
But you wouldn't do it like that because you could just do:
Today is <?=date("Y/m/d");?><br>
A big part of the appeal of PHP was how it could be mixed in to HTML documents to make a mess of server side and client side code.
The only thing people who carry are afraid of is being in the wrong place at the wrong time and having to watch their loved ones die because they didn't have the means to at least try to defend them or get them to safety.
The world must be a scary place for them!
The good thing about first aid and insurance are that they help make realistic issues better. I don't keep a surgical table or have volcano insurance because those aren't issues I will realistically have to deal with, and if they are then there are others better equipped to handle them
Should we teach everyone about all dangerous things? Have a class on crossbow safety just in case people come across a medieval crossbow?
We give 16 year olds access to cars because cars are useful. Guns really have no use in modern society other than dangerous toys.
Need to start a movement to walk by the school in a different costume every day to see what triggers the police response. Think storm trooper man is up for the job?
So being so afraid that you feel the need to carry guns everywhere is "brave" now?
It saves quite a bit of space though as you just need one room rather than two.
After a time limit, lock the screen and turn off the monitor.
In Pascal (1960's) you could just do something like: integer number; read(number);
Unless they changed it in the past 30 years, I believe you'd have to do:
number : integer;
read(number);
I think that's one thing that makes Java both desired and despised. There are a lot of "clever" code chunks in other languages that are short AND easier to read. Even if it's not as easy to read, it's much nicer to decipher 4 lines of "clever" code than 100 lines of enterprise code spread over multiple files. To find out what a function does, you sometimes have to dig down through several layers of classes and compare across files. It's straightforward if you have the time to deal with it and you don't have to know too much about complicated theories to do it.
You should switch to a RAID5! Then you'd get a little extra capacity while still being protected against 1 drive failing.
Then the reflective layer is covered with burnt cover residue and heats up...
Hadoop is open source software so it's more significant if it's in decline than a closed commercial alternative.