How would you feel if some other country was killing your relatives and neighbors, for any reason whatsoever?
That it wouldn't be murder? Getting killed in a war zone is not the same as being murdered (of course, you CAN be murdered in a war zone, but not as part of combat).
Unless civilians posing no threat are specifically and deliberately targeted, it isn't murder. Civilians getting caught in crossfire isn't murder. Civilians getting hit by stray bombs isn't murder. Civilians in the wrong place, at the wrong time (bomb hit on a munitions factory) isn't murder.
For example: Firebombing of Dresden? I think you can reasonably call that murder. Atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Depends on whether you consider strong-arming the Japanese into surrendering sans invasion a legitimate war aim--more civilians would have been killed in an invasion; personally I come down on the side of not murder on this count, but only barely.
The bottom line: killing isn't always murder. It's always awful, but that isn't the same thing.
That is the most stupid line of reasoning I have ever heard.
I hope you're referring to YOUR line of reasoning, because none of your analogies hold up. The parent was clearly talking about changing your mind AFTER the event had taken place. The day after. Every one of your piss-poor analogies uses a change of mind before the act, and are thus irrelevant to the discussion.
So, yes, if you decide that playing russian roulette was a poor decision AFTER the trigger was pulled, too bad for you. If you decide robbing a bank was a bad idea AFTER you robbed it, too bad for you. If you decide adopting a dog was a bad idea AFTER you'd taken it home, and it'd shit on the rug, too bad for you.
If you decide the morning AFTER you wish you hadn't done something, too bad for you. You're the one who did it.
None of this applies, of course, to women who decide they don't want to have sex BEFORE or even DURING. But if they change their mind the day AFTER, then yeah, too bad. That's not rape.
In Capone's case? Lack of evidence (because he didn't commit the crimes himself, and didn't leave a paper trail connecting himself to the money). Ironically, it was the lack of that paper trail that allowed them to get him for tax evasion. Also, the RICO act would have made it easier to convict him, had it existed at the time.
If you want to pronounce it the way it was originally pronounced, then yes (although, really it'd be more like pilistine, with an aspirated p). Similarly Caesar is properly pronounced like Kaisar, Cicero is more like Kikero, etc.
Words borrowed into English from latin and greek are usually spelled how they were in latin and greek, but pronounced differently.
For the first time I've found an issue for which I have no sympathy for jailbreakers--if you engage in unsupported uses, you don't get to complain when shit accidentally breaks them (as opposed to when Apple intentionally and maliciously breaks them with new iOS updates).
Security is a design philosophy. Either you've done it right, from the ground up, with your basic code writing habits, or you haven't. A redesign isn't going to cut it. You'd have to do a total rewrite.
You may not be aware of this because you haven't left your mother's basement in forty years, but terrorists do have access to these newfangled video cameras, and they are quite fond of taping themselves making various absurd statements and taking credit for mass murder and posting the videos online.
Hell, they were doing it back before YouTube made it cool by mailing the damn videos to news organizations.
is either because you are deaf, dumb, or lazy. The research is pretty clear. Flying causes skin cancer, but has little to no effect on the incidence of other kinds of cancer. Thirty seconds of google-fu brings up:
Why? Why is what the market will support the moral arbiter?
Setting that aside, there's a reason tickets like those are priced lower than what the venue could get for them. It's to create shortage. Raising the prices would eliminate the shortage, sure. That's not what the venue, or the bands, want though. They want people fighting to get their hands on the ticket. By pricing the tickets lower they increase the number who will want to go to that show--and if they can't, then the next one (or the next one). Pricing tickets as high as the market will support is NOT always the best strategy, regardless of your dogma.
You misunderstand me. My parent said the government can do illegal things. I pointed out that government officials are not fond of convicting other government officials. That's all. I didn't say anything about the screeners having immunity, just that the government isn't fond of convicting itself regardless of how guilty it is.
Slashdot Mirror
How would you feel if some other country was killing your relatives and neighbors, for any reason whatsoever?
That it wouldn't be murder? Getting killed in a war zone is not the same as being murdered (of course, you CAN be murdered in a war zone, but not as part of combat).
Unless civilians posing no threat are specifically and deliberately targeted, it isn't murder. Civilians getting caught in crossfire isn't murder. Civilians getting hit by stray bombs isn't murder. Civilians in the wrong place, at the wrong time (bomb hit on a munitions factory) isn't murder.
For example: Firebombing of Dresden? I think you can reasonably call that murder. Atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Depends on whether you consider strong-arming the Japanese into surrendering sans invasion a legitimate war aim--more civilians would have been killed in an invasion; personally I come down on the side of not murder on this count, but only barely.
The bottom line: killing isn't always murder. It's always awful, but that isn't the same thing.
I would not be overly worried about an American criminal prosecution for his activities.
Being disappeared mysteriously however, is a comparatively real concern.
That is the most stupid line of reasoning I have ever heard.
I hope you're referring to YOUR line of reasoning, because none of your analogies hold up. The parent was clearly talking about changing your mind AFTER the event had taken place. The day after. Every one of your piss-poor analogies uses a change of mind before the act, and are thus irrelevant to the discussion.
So, yes, if you decide that playing russian roulette was a poor decision AFTER the trigger was pulled, too bad for you. If you decide robbing a bank was a bad idea AFTER you robbed it, too bad for you. If you decide adopting a dog was a bad idea AFTER you'd taken it home, and it'd shit on the rug, too bad for you.
If you decide the morning AFTER you wish you hadn't done something, too bad for you. You're the one who did it.
None of this applies, of course, to women who decide they don't want to have sex BEFORE or even DURING. But if they change their mind the day AFTER, then yeah, too bad. That's not rape.
why the obviously guilty cannot be punished.
In Capone's case? Lack of evidence (because he didn't commit the crimes himself, and didn't leave a paper trail connecting himself to the money). Ironically, it was the lack of that paper trail that allowed them to get him for tax evasion. Also, the RICO act would have made it easier to convict him, had it existed at the time.
all your solution will do is create a market for bumping off newly popular writers.
This is the stupidest argument I have ever seen, on any subject.
it's someone else's rights you are talking about
Only for the loosest definition of 'right.'
Real rights are not given by law, they are protected by law. Copyrights are not a real right. They are a privilege.
LD50 for men is age 75. Women is higher (78?
LD50 means Lethal Dose for 50%.
I think you mean MTBF -- Median Time Before (organ) Failure
He MUST be new here.
If you want to pronounce it the way it was originally pronounced, then yes (although, really it'd be more like pilistine, with an aspirated p). Similarly Caesar is properly pronounced like Kaisar, Cicero is more like Kikero, etc.
Words borrowed into English from latin and greek are usually spelled how they were in latin and greek, but pronounced differently.
Are you encrypting your emails end to end? If not, losing your phone seems irrelevant.
For the first time I've found an issue for which I have no sympathy for jailbreakers--if you engage in unsupported uses, you don't get to complain when shit accidentally breaks them (as opposed to when Apple intentionally and maliciously breaks them with new iOS updates).
Security is a design philosophy. Either you've done it right, from the ground up, with your basic code writing habits, or you haven't. A redesign isn't going to cut it. You'd have to do a total rewrite.
Facebook didn't have those until four or five years after it was created.
You haven't checked your local Craigslist lately then, because that's the FIRST thing I'd expect to be gone.
You may not be aware of this because you haven't left your mother's basement in forty years, but terrorists do have access to these newfangled video cameras, and they are quite fond of taping themselves making various absurd statements and taking credit for mass murder and posting the videos online.
Hell, they were doing it back before YouTube made it cool by mailing the damn videos to news organizations.
The only thing I care about is...is it green?!
And does it give blowjobs?
The only possible reason you've heard
absolutely no science to back that statement up.
is either because you are deaf, dumb, or lazy. The research is pretty clear. Flying causes skin cancer, but has little to no effect on the incidence of other kinds of cancer. Thirty seconds of google-fu brings up:
http://www.cancerhelp.org.uk/about-cancer/cancer-questions/airline-staff-and-cancer
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC124549/
http://oem.bmj.com/content/57/3/175.abstract
Are you really arguing that building botnets is okay?
Are you really that dense?
after hiring Bulgarian programmers to build 'a nationwide network of computers that impersonated individual visitors'
They rented a botnet to buy the tickets with. I don't expect you to RTFA before posting, but is the summary that much to ask for?
It's not like they hacked anyone's servers and got tickets that they shouldn't have had access to.
It sounds like that's exactly what they did in order to build a botnet to purchase the tickets for them.
Why? Why is what the market will support the moral arbiter?
Setting that aside, there's a reason tickets like those are priced lower than what the venue could get for them. It's to create shortage. Raising the prices would eliminate the shortage, sure. That's not what the venue, or the bands, want though. They want people fighting to get their hands on the ticket. By pricing the tickets lower they increase the number who will want to go to that show--and if they can't, then the next one (or the next one). Pricing tickets as high as the market will support is NOT always the best strategy, regardless of your dogma.
The mistake you make is thinking that the GP wants to keep in touch with people like you.
You misunderstand me. My parent said the government can do illegal things. I pointed out that government officials are not fond of convicting other government officials. That's all. I didn't say anything about the screeners having immunity, just that the government isn't fond of convicting itself regardless of how guilty it is.
Yes it is. That's the mistake people have been making for years.
Not with regards to child pornography. Possession, period, is 100% of the law.