Were I a rioter, I'd rather contend with weapons designed to be less-lethal than ball ammo, or nightsticks (skull fracture, anyone?), or pepper spray.
Were you a peaceful protester your opinion ought to be heard. Were you a rioter, responding to you with violence is justified. As far as I'm concerned initiating violence removes your right to demand legal protection until such time as you stop and return to peaceful methods.
Being married with children, I can't help but agree. Having only one parent makes day to day life with children tremendously harder (as you experience temporarily if your spouse is away for some reason, such as being in hospital having the next baby). Doing something as basic as going to the shop to pick up a few items takes a lot more effort if you have to take young children with you compared to one parent going to the shop while the other stays with the children.
Of course, the strength of the relationship is more important than government certification, but people who commit to their relationships are probably more likely to legally formalise the relationship as well.
When the Edu4 group removed the GPL and copyright information, they also removed you as the intended beneficiary for all intends and purposes. They did this in violation of the law, the contract given to them, and copyright, but it's the effect it would have.
You evidently understand the justification for the lawsuit better than you want to let on.
The gist of it: a cop has no right to sentence you to anything, only a judge can, but it's assumed that if a cop directly witnessed you speeding then you're as good as guilty and a simplified, faster procedure is thus used; that's the ordonnance pénale. You can challenge the ruling, in which case it goes to a regular court.
So is this procedure appropriate to the case of copyright infringement? Hell no. To start with infringement can be witnessed as coming from a given IP address, not an identified person, making those cases immensely less clear cut than common driving-related offenses.
Not sure how it works in France, but you can get a ticket for speeding sent to you because of the car number plate, which identifies the car not you. If it wasn't you the options are to identify who was driving your car, requiring a statutory declaration from them, or challenge it in court. Sounds like this law will work much the same way.
The GPL is difficult to understand, which is documented by the massive amount of posts, threads and questions on what is and what is not allowed.
That could indicate something about the GPL or something about the posters. Having read the GPL and some of the posts in question, I suspect the latter.
Fair enough, as I said: If that is correct (it may not be)
I do know that incidence of HIV is predominantly among homosexuals in my country, but I don't have any evidence to say why that is and I certainly wouldn't see it as a reason to have heterosexual sex unprotected.
As I understand it (not very well since HIV transmission is not a topic that interests me much) it would be the combination of microtears and ejaculating inside the anus that produces the increased risk of transmission. If that is correct (it may not be) then it is receiving anal sex from an infected male partner that carries high risk, regardless of the gender of the receiver. However, only a male who gets infected can then infect someone the same manner as the woman will not be ejaculating in another partners anus. Under those assumptions homosexual anal sex will indeed be riskier, that is it will spread the disease through a population faster and more easily, than heterosexual sex. If giving anal sex to an infected parter carries the same risk as receiving then that would not be so.
That is no more bigotry than it is to say that heterosexual sex carries a higher risk of pregnancy.
Well, you seem to have put more thought into what a different tax structure should look like than I have. To the extent I've thought about it, I've considered how to lower the cost and effort of collecting it.
I'd like to see income tax go just to remove the requirement of tracking everyone's jobs and income and reporting requirements etc. I would tend to favour forms of taxation that can be collected at a single point or at least fewer points than every individual. Just the paperwork involved in employment is prohibitive. I'm a contractor (often a sub-contractor). If I have a job where I could use someone for one or two days, it's just not worth it. My business is not enough for me to employ someone full-time. I can't take the risk of just paying cash in case they have an accident because they'd be uninsured. If I could just pay insurance cover and cash to the worker and have it legal would be the optimal solution.
Where I am our ambulance insurance is compulsory and gets paid with our electricity. Without going into a debate of whether ambulance cover should be compulsory, it seems to work pretty well as a collection measure because the government just deals with one agency (the power company) so it's very simple. It does mean that people with business premises end up paying twice and I suppose you could dodge the tax if you went solar but that doesn't seem to be much of a problem at the moment.
If you eliminate violent deaths from the lifespan number, then we would actually have a higher lifespan than the EU."
Easy way to avoid that...DON'T live in the inner, crime infested cities.
If you include those stats though, violent death at the hands of criminals, then it also makes sense to include the Europeans violent deaths at the hands of their own and other European governments. Average that out over the last 100 years and see what you come up with. We're talking government policy and society here, so we ought to take a long term view, not just a snapshot.
Criminals will never be the danger to you that governments are. Americans understand that, and live.
I believed I knew just how much people can possibly be deluded. God was I wrong...
It's not tax the poor more. The burden of tax is heaviest on employees right now because they don't get the deductions you get for running a business. Progressive income tax hits employees harder when they earn more. If you so much prefer an income tax though, at least make overtime or second jobs exempt.
If you haven't heard people complain that overtime isn't worth it because of higher tax then you haven't been among the working class much. Sometimes it's due to people misunderstanding how tax is calculated, but I know plenty of people who have declined extra work that they would have done had the tax not been so steep. In short, there are many on lower incomes not because they are lazy or lack opportunity but because they don't want to put in much extra effort only to have the fruits of their labour taken from them.
The implementation of progressive income tax is part of the strategy set out in the communist manifesto, as is destruction of the middle class and their absorption into the proletariat. Progressive income tax isn't doing a thing to the rich, it just helps make it harder to attain or keep a middle class level of income.
Fair dinkum mate, I back you up and you respond with a low blow like that!
My country's more closely related to you than the Brits, who you forcefully evicted from your shores. When you stopped accepting convicts they started sending them here. We copied some ideas from your constitution in ours, including limits of the power of the federal government with powers reserved to the states.
although considering the fact that individuals with low income do not have the option of saving
Providing an incentive to earn more. Yes, I mean it, I've heard too many people complain that overtime isn't worth it because of the amount of tax to swallow your argument. Many low income people would earn more if they didn't think the government would just take it.
It's a capitalists dream.
Good. You've totally convinced me it's the way to go.
A good portion of my income goes to feed the hungry.
My wife, my children and I get hungry pretty much every day.
Joke stolen from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJfYAJJYMqg
Don't bother going to look for it at that link, I already told you I stole it. It's not there anymore, it's in my post now.
"Hey, did you see those new [teen pregnancy / STI rates / quality of life / lifespan / literacy / numeracy / anything, anything at all] rates?"
Anything at all? How about the military? If Europe started paying for it's own defence the US would have a heap of money to put into their economy. Smug arseholes, you'd all be living under dictatorships if it wasn't for the US, let's see what you'd say about your quality of life then.
See the way I spelt arse? That's because I'm not American, I've just had enough of all the US bashing, especially from the people who intersperse it with cries for help.
She may of very well thought of you as a man, just not one she would be romantically interested in.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure she didn't think I was a woman.
I'm hoping they can also help me get financial aid so I can get back into college. Between the three, people I'm working with, social activities, and college I'm hoping to start dating again as well as make friends.
I hope it works out for you.
As far as rejection goes, I figure that people rarely do anything against you, they do it for themselves. So they're really trying to get themselves out of an uncomfortable situation with minimum embarrassment. Some of them do that by "trying to let you down easy" some of them by being rude. Either way it's just a "no" and there are plenty more to ask. It's worse to have a secret crush on someone than an open rejection from them. Much better to have rejection than pine for someone you fear to talk to.
No customer is going to go out of their way to avoid what is known as "most hackable"
I suspect that many people would take that to mean it is easily "hacked" by a "hacker" ie "oh no, someone could get my bank password or delete my documents"
Mind you, they still buy windows, so you're probably right.
Do It Yourself (DIY) Auto Repair Manuals from Haynes
http://www.haynes.com/
Heaps of it is easy with instructions, otherwise you can at least get an idea of what needs to be done so you don't get ripped off as easily.
Slashdot Mirror
Were I a rioter, I'd rather contend with weapons designed to be less-lethal than ball ammo, or nightsticks (skull fracture, anyone?), or pepper spray.
Were you a peaceful protester your opinion ought to be heard. Were you a rioter, responding to you with violence is justified. As far as I'm concerned initiating violence removes your right to demand legal protection until such time as you stop and return to peaceful methods.
It's always good to re-evaluate strategies, but it's not for you to say so. It is yours to listen for once.
So the message of the protesters is that we should shut up and listen?
Being married with children, I can't help but agree. Having only one parent makes day to day life with children tremendously harder (as you experience temporarily if your spouse is away for some reason, such as being in hospital having the next baby). Doing something as basic as going to the shop to pick up a few items takes a lot more effort if you have to take young children with you compared to one parent going to the shop while the other stays with the children.
Of course, the strength of the relationship is more important than government certification, but people who commit to their relationships are probably more likely to legally formalise the relationship as well.
Perhaps it was a "hard" winter because of the seasonal unavailability of receptive fertile women.
It is not some mickey mouse musician trade organizations that are moving us closer to a dictatorship, it is people like you.
It's both. They're like the "left" and "right" wings of two party political systems.
When the Edu4 group removed the GPL and copyright information, they also removed you as the intended beneficiary for all intends and purposes. They did this in violation of the law, the contract given to them, and copyright, but it's the effect it would have.
You evidently understand the justification for the lawsuit better than you want to let on.
Well no, we're arguing the benefits of GPL over public domain... what abuse does the GPL prevent.
The abuse is to sell someone a product and retain control over it, such as with the printer drivers that got RMS steamed up.
Lots of people, even most people, wouldn't consider that to be abuse but it is nonetheless the abuse being referred to.
The gist of it: a cop has no right to sentence you to anything, only a judge can, but it's assumed that if a cop directly witnessed you speeding then you're as good as guilty and a simplified, faster procedure is thus used; that's the ordonnance pénale. You can challenge the ruling, in which case it goes to a regular court.
So is this procedure appropriate to the case of copyright infringement? Hell no. To start with infringement can be witnessed as coming from a given IP address, not an identified person, making those cases immensely less clear cut than common driving-related offenses.
Not sure how it works in France, but you can get a ticket for speeding sent to you because of the car number plate, which identifies the car not you. If it wasn't you the options are to identify who was driving your car, requiring a statutory declaration from them, or challenge it in court. Sounds like this law will work much the same way.
The GPL is difficult to understand, which is documented by the massive amount of posts, threads and questions on what is and what is not allowed.
That could indicate something about the GPL or something about the posters. Having read the GPL and some of the posts in question, I suspect the latter.
Fair enough, as I said:
If that is correct (it may not be)
I do know that incidence of HIV is predominantly among homosexuals in my country, but I don't have any evidence to say why that is and I certainly wouldn't see it as a reason to have heterosexual sex unprotected.
As I understand it (not very well since HIV transmission is not a topic that interests me much) it would be the combination of microtears and ejaculating inside the anus that produces the increased risk of transmission. If that is correct (it may not be) then it is receiving anal sex from an infected male partner that carries high risk, regardless of the gender of the receiver. However, only a male who gets infected can then infect someone the same manner as the woman will not be ejaculating in another partners anus. Under those assumptions homosexual anal sex will indeed be riskier, that is it will spread the disease through a population faster and more easily, than heterosexual sex. If giving anal sex to an infected parter carries the same risk as receiving then that would not be so.
That is no more bigotry than it is to say that heterosexual sex carries a higher risk of pregnancy.
Well, you seem to have put more thought into what a different tax structure should look like than I have. To the extent I've thought about it, I've considered how to lower the cost and effort of collecting it.
I'd like to see income tax go just to remove the requirement of tracking everyone's jobs and income and reporting requirements etc. I would tend to favour forms of taxation that can be collected at a single point or at least fewer points than every individual. Just the paperwork involved in employment is prohibitive. I'm a contractor (often a sub-contractor). If I have a job where I could use someone for one or two days, it's just not worth it. My business is not enough for me to employ someone full-time. I can't take the risk of just paying cash in case they have an accident because they'd be uninsured. If I could just pay insurance cover and cash to the worker and have it legal would be the optimal solution.
Where I am our ambulance insurance is compulsory and gets paid with our electricity. Without going into a debate of whether ambulance cover should be compulsory, it seems to work pretty well as a collection measure because the government just deals with one agency (the power company) so it's very simple. It does mean that people with business premises end up paying twice and I suppose you could dodge the tax if you went solar but that doesn't seem to be much of a problem at the moment.
If you eliminate violent deaths from the lifespan number, then we would actually have a higher lifespan than the EU."
Easy way to avoid that...DON'T live in the inner, crime infested cities.
If you include those stats though, violent death at the hands of criminals, then it also makes sense to include the Europeans violent deaths at the hands of their own and other European governments. Average that out over the last 100 years and see what you come up with. We're talking government policy and society here, so we ought to take a long term view, not just a snapshot.
Criminals will never be the danger to you that governments are. Americans understand that, and live.
90% of everything (you read) is horsepucky.
Bold characters in that post worth reading, the rest is horsepucky. DiscountBorg(TM) told me.
"Tax the poor more, it's good for them!"
I believed I knew just how much people can possibly be deluded. God was I wrong...
It's not tax the poor more. The burden of tax is heaviest on employees right now because they don't get the deductions you get for running a business. Progressive income tax hits employees harder when they earn more. If you so much prefer an income tax though, at least make overtime or second jobs exempt.
If you haven't heard people complain that overtime isn't worth it because of higher tax then you haven't been among the working class much. Sometimes it's due to people misunderstanding how tax is calculated, but I know plenty of people who have declined extra work that they would have done had the tax not been so steep. In short, there are many on lower incomes not because they are lazy or lack opportunity but because they don't want to put in much extra effort only to have the fruits of their labour taken from them.
The implementation of progressive income tax is part of the strategy set out in the communist manifesto, as is destruction of the middle class and their absorption into the proletariat. Progressive income tax isn't doing a thing to the rich, it just helps make it harder to attain or keep a middle class level of income.
Thank you British cousin.
Fair dinkum mate, I back you up and you respond with a low blow like that!
My country's more closely related to you than the Brits, who you forcefully evicted from your shores. When you stopped accepting convicts they started sending them here. We copied some ideas from your constitution in ours, including limits of the power of the federal government with powers reserved to the states.
although considering the fact that individuals with low income do not have the option of saving
Providing an incentive to earn more. Yes, I mean it, I've heard too many people complain that overtime isn't worth it because of the amount of tax to swallow your argument. Many low income people would earn more if they didn't think the government would just take it.
It's a capitalists dream.
Good. You've totally convinced me it's the way to go.
Or do you work for altruistic reasons?
A good portion of my income goes to feed the hungry.
My wife, my children and I get hungry pretty much every day.
Joke stolen from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJfYAJJYMqg
Don't bother going to look for it at that link, I already told you I stole it. It's not there anymore, it's in my post now.
You want to show us how patriotic you are, corporate America? Pay your fucking taxes like you are supposed to.
Alternatively:
You want to show us how patriotic you are, citizens of America? Make your country a tax haven like you used to.
"Hey, did you see those new [teen pregnancy / STI rates / quality of life / lifespan / literacy / numeracy / anything, anything at all] rates?"
Anything at all? How about the military? If Europe started paying for it's own defence the US would have a heap of money to put into their economy. Smug arseholes, you'd all be living under dictatorships if it wasn't for the US, let's see what you'd say about your quality of life then.
See the way I spelt arse? That's because I'm not American, I've just had enough of all the US bashing, especially from the people who intersperse it with cries for help.
She may of very well thought of you as a man, just not one she would be romantically interested in.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure she didn't think I was a woman.
I'm hoping they can also help me get financial aid so I can get back into college. Between the three, people I'm working with, social activities, and college I'm hoping to start dating again as well as make friends.
I hope it works out for you.
As far as rejection goes, I figure that people rarely do anything against you, they do it for themselves. So they're really trying to get themselves out of an uncomfortable situation with minimum embarrassment. Some of them do that by "trying to let you down easy" some of them by being rude. Either way it's just a "no" and there are plenty more to ask. It's worse to have a secret crush on someone than an open rejection from them. Much better to have rejection than pine for someone you fear to talk to.
No customer is going to go out of their way to avoid what is known as "most hackable"
I suspect that many people would take that to mean it is easily "hacked" by a "hacker" ie "oh no, someone could get my bank password or delete my documents"
Mind you, they still buy windows, so you're probably right.
But embedded Linux means it's much more likely to be hackable. That is useful to know.
I'd recommend not to say that to your customers unless you are absolutely sure they will understand it the way you mean it.
Do It Yourself (DIY) Auto Repair Manuals from Haynes
http://www.haynes.com/
Heaps of it is easy with instructions, otherwise you can at least get an idea of what needs to be done so you don't get ripped off as easily.
And now I will be labeled "troll" because I'm a customer who speaks the truth.
You're not a customer unless you paid.