I don't like the censorship, but would it be fair to discuss if the material is more than tangentially relevant in a biology textbook?
I admit, I haven't taken a bio course in about 25 years. I could conceive of this in a sex ed class (not that that would happen in arizona), a reproductive biology class.... a medical class, a human biology class.
Really? You don't understand how or why explanations of a biological process belongs in a college level text? REALLY?
Seriously, ALL OF YOU, keep your politics out of science. Even if Republicans bring it in, keep the politics out.
I don't understand where A SCIENTIFIC TOPIC discussing SCIENTIFIC FACT is politics.
human contraception efficacy? It's barely relevant.
Sure, human biology might be barely relevant to you, but in a discussion in an educated class (again, COLLEGE LEVEL TEXT, so I'm assuming some degree of actual education), it's extremely relevant. That'd be like someone taking a college level algebra course and never talking about permutations. It's only sensible to expect that to be discussed.
There is no such "favoring" anywhere in the Constitution. We have multiple parties and, in fact, one of them was — the Whigs — once strong enough to gain major chunks in Congress and the Presidency.
Uh, have you read the 12th Amendment? I quote the first relevant section, "...if such number [of electoral votes] be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed..." by definition forcing it to mean 50.0000001% or greater (AKA a majority). So, if 3 candidates are in the running, one gets 10%, one gets 45% and the other gets 45%, no one wins. Following that scenario, "...the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President..." means that, whoever has the majority most members in the OUTGOING House, will (almost undoubtedly) have the winner. Therefore, we would have to magically elect at least a reasonable percent of third parties to have even a REMOTE chance of a third party mattering. Frankly, the 12th is one of (if not) the worst amendments created, not only permitting the focusing of parties, but downright endorsing it.
What confuses many people — including, it seems, yourself — is that in the US we do not vote for parties. We vote for individuals. The individuals may or may not choose to affiliate with a particular party, but such affiliations are not binding. An elected lawmaker can quit/join any party without any official consequences to his position.
I'd thank you to not put words into my mouth, nor attempt to extract thoughts from my mind. I have not voted for a party, ever, in my life. I have always voted for whomever I felt had the most reasoned decisions, the most education, and the most experience as to whatever posting they were applying for.
all the stuff that also happened under a "conservative" president.
Lets not beat around the bush. This has little to do with "liberal" vs "conservative", this has more to do with "democrat" and "republican". Not ideaologies, but formal organizations with well defined leadership and central planning. They are both guilty in varying degrees.
Honestly, what is amazing is that if you watch the "third party" debates, across the board, all canidates involved are dead set against this sort of thing. This includes the Greens, Libertarians, and even pretty standard conservative "Constitution Party".
And people wonder why I feel we need to amend the Constitution to stop favoring the 2 party system...
It's still Federally illegal. Even in any state that it is "legal" it can still be prosecuted. It won't be under the current president, but that can change in 2 years.
Mod parent up. Even if it is legal in Colorado, Washington, Alaska, Oregon, and DC, it's federally illegal. I would be surprised to see the DEA crackdown on it, but legally, they could. Obama has stated that this issue is not of major concern to him and will not be seeking prosecution.
I thought that law enforcement had always been allowed to do this in sting operations and the like. The police are under no obligation to tell the truth when confronting a potential suspect. Yes, their wording to her may have been deceptive, but, frankly, I don't have much faith in someone saying, "Yes I gave them consent to use my photos, but not like this!" It sounds a good deal like buyer's remorse.
If the officer in question were reasonable, he would have used images that are in public record of her, so I can see the outrage to that portion as reasonable, but, frankly, I don't see how this is terribly surprising and front page news.
PS...since when is BuzzFeed considered to be even remotely a reputable news source?
Pretty sure you're in the wrong there bub. About the only things that come to mind are choreography and fashion designs. Otherwise, most things are copyrightable.
Since July 2007, PayPal has operated across the European Union as a Luxembourg-based bank.
But within the US they are not considered a bank, allowing PayPal to freeze funds of US citizens with no legal reason or ramifications. Additionally, point to make towards the OP, PayPal has owned Bill Me Later for a long time, and have been lending for years.
Okay, I see now, maybe because the full amount has been publicized. I'm just a little curious why so many Minecraft stories have been bubbling to the front page recently.
This is/. I see them as so many M$ stories and suddenly it makes sense.
Actually, that's not quite right. From my understanding, Bukkit, a separate plugin that is dependent upon the Server, was created using GPL. As such, Bukkit itself should be GPL. But saying that the Server should be as well, that's like saying because I wrote a GPL piece of software for Windows, Windows must be GPL'd.
As far as I can tell, both of you are making mountains out of molehills.
That being said (yes, I'm going to help with that mountain, let me pull a car analogy), if I said I have no interest in driving, you would fault me as a liar when I mean I have no interest in driving a semi and would love to drive a Shelby Cobra, so I kinda gotta side with i kan read on this one. I don't think you would go ahead and defend my example as imprecise so much as lying (I clearly have interest in driving, just not one specific style of it). She clearly wants to play games, just not shooters. I'm not a huge fan of shooters, so it's perfectly reasonable to me to think of being a gamer without playing shooters.
This isn't a "knee jerk" reaction, it's a logical statement.
It may be missed in this debate, but cameras should change the behavior of citizens also. If a moron is arrested, claims the usual 'brutality' defense, and is confronted with video that prejudices the judge or jury against them to the tune of some time in jail, perhaps they will stop short the next time and try not to pile on additional charges.
Well this point was made in the summary by the senator who wants this to be requiredso I doubt it's lost, just lost on/.
And your previous comment ignored TFA where it is stated that, if it were out of warranty, that's how much it would cost. A number of people have needed that repair, but it does not mention that those people ever were out of warranty.
Actually, I work in a sales position where, so long as what you're doing makes the company money, you're pretty well set. Not 100%, there's still general things you have to do or you'll get the axe, but you almost have to try to get fired Of course, if you don't sell, you make a pitiful base check...
Slashdot Mirror
I think faking terrorist threats is a teeny tiny bit against the law.
And that's stopped Sony when?
MC Lars - O.G. Original Gamer
N64 was not the beginning of the "3D era on consoles." That would be Sega 32x, Sega CD, or at the very least Playstation.
If you want to be picky, it would be Game Boy:
X
or SNES if you mean set top console:
Star Fox
I don't like the censorship, but would it be fair to discuss if the material is more than tangentially relevant in a biology textbook?
I admit, I haven't taken a bio course in about 25 years. I could conceive of this in a sex ed class (not that that would happen in arizona), a reproductive biology class.... a medical class, a human biology class.
Really? You don't understand how or why explanations of a biological process belongs in a college level text? REALLY?
Seriously, ALL OF YOU, keep your politics out of science. Even if Republicans bring it in, keep the politics out.
I don't understand where A SCIENTIFIC TOPIC discussing SCIENTIFIC FACT is politics.
human contraception efficacy? It's barely relevant.
Sure, human biology might be barely relevant to you, but in a discussion in an educated class (again, COLLEGE LEVEL TEXT, so I'm assuming some degree of actual education), it's extremely relevant. That'd be like someone taking a college level algebra course and never talking about permutations. It's only sensible to expect that to be discussed.
There is no such "favoring" anywhere in the Constitution. We have multiple parties and, in fact, one of them was — the Whigs — once strong enough to gain major chunks in Congress and the Presidency.
Uh, have you read the 12th Amendment? I quote the first relevant section, "...if such number [of electoral votes] be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed..." by definition forcing it to mean 50.0000001% or greater (AKA a majority). So, if 3 candidates are in the running, one gets 10%, one gets 45% and the other gets 45%, no one wins. Following that scenario, "...the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President..." means that, whoever has the majority most members in the OUTGOING House, will (almost undoubtedly) have the winner. Therefore, we would have to magically elect at least a reasonable percent of third parties to have even a REMOTE chance of a third party mattering. Frankly, the 12th is one of (if not) the worst amendments created, not only permitting the focusing of parties, but downright endorsing it.
What confuses many people — including, it seems, yourself — is that in the US we do not vote for parties. We vote for individuals. The individuals may or may not choose to affiliate with a particular party, but such affiliations are not binding. An elected lawmaker can quit/join any party without any official consequences to his position.
I'd thank you to not put words into my mouth, nor attempt to extract thoughts from my mind. I have not voted for a party, ever, in my life. I have always voted for whomever I felt had the most reasoned decisions, the most education, and the most experience as to whatever posting they were applying for.
all the stuff that also happened under a "conservative" president.
Lets not beat around the bush. This has little to do with "liberal" vs "conservative", this has more to do with "democrat" and "republican". Not ideaologies, but formal organizations with well defined leadership and central planning. They are both guilty in varying degrees.
Honestly, what is amazing is that if you watch the "third party" debates, across the board, all canidates involved are dead set against this sort of thing. This includes the Greens, Libertarians, and even pretty standard conservative "Constitution Party".
And people wonder why I feel we need to amend the Constitution to stop favoring the 2 party system...
What's happened to /. this isn't about Ubuntu or RedHat?
Seriously? Ubuntu? If you were here as long ago as you imply, you'd be asking about Debian or Slackware.
So, a mini-windtrap? Kinda cool.
Political drama? HBO has shown they can do those too (and do them well) with West Wing :)
Uh...Did you mean NBC? Cause HBO didn't carry The West Wing...
It's still Federally illegal. Even in any state that it is "legal" it can still be prosecuted. It won't be under the current president, but that can change in 2 years.
Mod parent up. Even if it is legal in Colorado, Washington, Alaska, Oregon, and DC, it's federally illegal. I would be surprised to see the DEA crackdown on it, but legally, they could. Obama has stated that this issue is not of major concern to him and will not be seeking prosecution.
Red Bull didn't sponsor him because they gave everybody who ever drank their product $10.
I thought that law enforcement had always been allowed to do this in sting operations and the like. The police are under no obligation to tell the truth when confronting a potential suspect. Yes, their wording to her may have been deceptive, but, frankly, I don't have much faith in someone saying, "Yes I gave them consent to use my photos, but not like this!" It sounds a good deal like buyer's remorse.
If the officer in question were reasonable, he would have used images that are in public record of her, so I can see the outrage to that portion as reasonable, but, frankly, I don't see how this is terribly surprising and front page news.
PS...since when is BuzzFeed considered to be even remotely a reputable news source?
Pretty sure you're in the wrong there bub. About the only things that come to mind are choreography and fashion designs. Otherwise, most things are copyrightable.
No programming though, she's a music teacher. If it isn't midi, she's clueless about computers.
Introduce her to Max/MSP sometime. You two might find a new, shared passion.
"Then eBay can become a bank. "
Since July 2007, PayPal has operated across the European Union as a Luxembourg-based bank.
But within the US they are not considered a bank, allowing PayPal to freeze funds of US citizens with no legal reason or ramifications. Additionally, point to make towards the OP, PayPal has owned Bill Me Later for a long time, and have been lending for years.
Haven't we seen this story before?
That was speculation where as this is fact.
Okay, I see now, maybe because the full amount has been publicized. I'm just a little curious why so many Minecraft stories have been bubbling to the front page recently.
This is /. I see them as so many M$ stories and suddenly it makes sense.
Actually, that's not quite right. From my understanding, Bukkit, a separate plugin that is dependent upon the Server, was created using GPL. As such, Bukkit itself should be GPL. But saying that the Server should be as well, that's like saying because I wrote a GPL piece of software for Windows, Windows must be GPL'd.
Scrutiny is not hard evidence. At best, it is circumstantial evidence. And it is not at all associated with the aforementioned situation.
As far as I can tell, both of you are making mountains out of molehills.
That being said (yes, I'm going to help with that mountain, let me pull a car analogy), if I said I have no interest in driving, you would fault me as a liar when I mean I have no interest in driving a semi and would love to drive a Shelby Cobra, so I kinda gotta side with i kan read on this one. I don't think you would go ahead and defend my example as imprecise so much as lying (I clearly have interest in driving, just not one specific style of it). She clearly wants to play games, just not shooters. I'm not a huge fan of shooters, so it's perfectly reasonable to me to think of being a gamer without playing shooters.
This isn't a "knee jerk" reaction, it's a logical statement.
It may be missed in this debate, but cameras should change the behavior of citizens also. If a moron is arrested, claims the usual 'brutality' defense, and is confronted with video that prejudices the judge or jury against them to the tune of some time in jail, perhaps they will stop short the next time and try not to pile on additional charges.
Well this point was made in the summary by the senator who wants this to be requiredso I doubt it's lost, just lost on /.
Aw forget the whole thing.
Really? Can't even finish headlines anymore?
And your previous comment ignored TFA where it is stated that, if it were out of warranty, that's how much it would cost. A number of people have needed that repair, but it does not mention that those people ever were out of warranty.
... that one of them will find the successor of General Relativity in his goof-off time :-)
Nah. This is the US Patent office, not the Swiss one.
Actually, I work in a sales position where, so long as what you're doing makes the company money, you're pretty well set. Not 100%, there's still general things you have to do or you'll get the axe, but you almost have to try to get fired Of course, if you don't sell, you make a pitiful base check...