Financial engineering is to economics what software engineering is to computer science - use of engineering/mathematical principles to analyse and exploit a given system.
As for not paying out. the fact of the matter is that many insurance agents go out of their way to find reasons to NOT pay anything out at all, and, failing that, to minimuze the amount paid out.
To be fair, that's why insurance companies hire agents in the first place, and ultimately it's a positive means of curbing fraud.
That said, some of the criteria for withholding cover are overly stringent. As an example, if a building catches fire, and even a single cigarette butt is found anywhere on the premises, many insurance companies will refuse a claim.
If the reply part of this works anything like it's supposed to, the money will run out of spamming and spammers will retreat to pushing pills in street corners or whatever (I suppose cutting your hair and getting a real job is out of the question)
I love that you have a mental picture of spammers as crack dealers, when most of them look just like the rest of us (although I use term "us" loosely, since I do look like a crack dealer).
And yet, compared to spamming, "narcotic retail" is almost a legitimate profession...
Slashdot Mirror
And yet still we're trotting merrily down the same path...
You have no chance to parboil make your chips.
I don't understand how some of these morons can't look at the storyboard once a day and remember what they've seen at a later date.
Probably because most people can't see into the future.
Yeah, gotta love that the only broken link is to the Microsoft site.
Financial engineering is to economics what software engineering is to computer science - use of engineering/mathematical principles to analyse and exploit a given system.
I can live with that. (At least, I have thus far.)
I'd've been more impressed with this troll if it was correct...
("Worker bees...", "Even drones...")
"Yeah, dude, I just, like, totally remixed my PHP scripts."
Simple answer: it isn't.
Who says terrorist acts have to support an unpopular view?
wait what? "Terrorism" in which no one is physically hurt and no property is damaged? Wouldn't that just be "protesting?"
Threat of force is as valid a form of terrorism as force itself (which is actually secondary - the point of the violence is to induce fear).
The point of terrorism is the use of terror, not necessarily violence, to achieve your aims. The clue's in the word.
As for not paying out. the fact of the matter is that many insurance agents go out of their way to find reasons to NOT pay anything out at all, and, failing that, to minimuze the amount paid out.
To be fair, that's why insurance companies hire agents in the first place, and ultimately it's a positive means of curbing fraud.
That said, some of the criteria for withholding cover are overly stringent. As an example, if a building catches fire, and even a single cigarette butt is found anywhere on the premises, many insurance companies will refuse a claim.
If the reply part of this works anything like it's supposed to, the money will run out of spamming and spammers will retreat to pushing pills in street corners or whatever (I suppose cutting your hair and getting a real job is out of the question)
I love that you have a mental picture of spammers as crack dealers, when most of them look just like the rest of us (although I use term "us" loosely, since I do look like a crack dealer).
And yet, compared to spamming, "narcotic retail" is almost a legitimate profession...
Vigellanteism [sic] is okay if you can get away with it and noone is physically hurt and no property damaged.
I've heard the same argument for terrorism...
... but it'll handle the woman's needs quite nicely, just ask any lesbian.
Who says it's just lesbians who use vibrators? I know plenty of single girls (and a couple of guys) who love them...