Looking at the actual content of the bill that passed, it looks much less sinister than presented here. In particular, here:
IN GENERAL.--Whoever, while engaged in providing an electronic communication service or a remote computing service to the public through a facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, obtains actual knowledge of any facts or circumstances described in paragraph (2) shall, as soon as reasonably possible--
and here:
PROTECTION OF PRIVACY.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to require an electronic communication service provider or a remote computing service provider to-- (1) monitor any user, subscriber, or customer of that provider; (2) monitor the content of any communication of any person described in paragraph (1); or (3) affirmatively seek facts or circumstances described in subsection (a)(2).
However Ron Paul voted no!
Which raises the question, what were his reasons for voting no? Or does he vote no on everything just on principle?
Can't the attorneys be punished and thereby discourage those practices?
Both your examples talk about judges awarding attorneys fees to the defendants.
While laudable, this is nothing to do with Earl's question as the "punishment" (if you can call it that) was directed against the plaintiffs, not at the misbehaving attorneys.
So let me asked again, how often attorneys that abuse their position as officers of the court are punished strongly enough to serve as a deterrent?
Recently I was asked to provide some info about the quality of a PRNG generator used in one of our programs. One of the questions was how well it does on the NIST Statistical Test Suite.
So, I head over to the NIST site and download the latest version for Windows, dated March 22, 2005.
First thing that I notice is that it does not compile under Visual Studio 2005. OK, I understand, they only had about two and a half years to fix this which is obviously not enough for an organization of their size and with their budget. Never mind, let's see what I can do.
Add some missing #include statements, comment out a test function that passes a string instead of a pointer to structure, fix some implicit ints, add some casts to remove ambiguity in calling math functions and everything seems in order.
Or is it?
It crashes on every run. Debugging time...
The code looks like a horrible mix of MFC C++ and C written by a FORTRAN programmer doing an assignment for the dailyWTF.
Gems like
char assignment[7];
followed by
strcpy(assignment,"SUCCESS");
Zero termination anyone? Nah... Let's overflow the buffer for real!
NIST proudly proclaims that "This software was developed at the National Institute of Standards and Technology by employees of the Federal Government in the course of their official duties". At least they have the decency to add that "NIST assumes no responsibility whatsoever for its use by other parties, and makes no guarantees, expressed or implied, about its quality, reliability, or any other characteristic."
you have an indifferent and predominately ignorant populace and a highly motivated, high profit industries that are willing to fork over truck loads of cash to keep them in that state.
Here are some of the articles created as a part of the assignments we're talking about:
* Deforestation during the Roman period
* Americanization (of Native Americans)
* 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus
* Communal Wildlife Conservancies in Namibia
* Akosombo Dam
* Renewable energy in Africa
It has been suggested that these articles or sections be merged into "New Revelations on the deforestation of Native Americans using the Akosombo Dam for renewable energy in Namibia" (Discuss).
Slashdot Mirror
It was done over a hundred years ago.
According to Wikipedia, the last glacial period ended 12,000 years ago.
IN GENERAL.--Whoever, while engaged in providing an electronic communication service or a remote computing service to the
public through a facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, obtains actual knowledge of any facts or circumstances described in paragraph (2) shall, as soon as reasonably possible--
and here:
PROTECTION OF PRIVACY.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to require an electronic communication service provider
or a remote computing service provider to--
(1) monitor any user, subscriber, or customer of that provider;
(2) monitor the content of any communication of any person described in paragraph (1); or
(3) affirmatively seek facts or circumstances described in subsection (a)(2). Which raises the question, what were his reasons for voting no?
Or does he vote no on everything just on principle?
> Because you dont need a hospital? Or First aid?
Yea, right.
> Oh, I've seen a gay dog myself...
Dogs do it to assert dominance, not because of sexual attraction.
> And there's the 7% or so of rams that mount other rams...
Perhaps they're just shortsighted?
> And there's the many firsthand accounts of men getting molested
> by overly frisky polymorphously perverse adolescent male dolphins...
Pray tell.
I believe we are talking about different things.
Earl wrote:
Both your examples talk about judges awarding attorneys fees to the defendants.
While laudable, this is nothing to do with Earl's question as the "punishment" (if you can call it that) was directed against the plaintiffs, not at the misbehaving attorneys.
So let me asked again, how often attorneys that abuse their position as officers of the court are punished strongly enough to serve as a deterrent?
Pervert!
Recently I was asked to provide some info about the quality of a PRNG generator used in one of our programs.
One of the questions was how well it does on the NIST Statistical Test Suite.
So, I head over to the NIST site and download the latest version for Windows, dated March 22, 2005.
First thing that I notice is that it does not compile under Visual Studio 2005.
OK, I understand, they only had about two and a half years to fix this which is obviously not enough for an organization of their size and with their budget. Never mind, let's see what I can do.
Add some missing #include statements, comment out a test function that passes a string instead of a pointer to structure, fix some implicit ints, add some casts to remove ambiguity in calling math functions and everything seems in order.
Or is it?
It crashes on every run. Debugging time...
The code looks like a horrible mix of MFC C++ and C written by a FORTRAN programmer doing an assignment for the dailyWTF.
Gems like followed by Zero termination anyone? Nah... Let's overflow the buffer for real! Or how about followed by when generatorDir[option] is hardcoded to be "AlgorithmTesting"? Try counting the characters.
Or this allocation and the following access Remember boys and girls, C arrays are zero based.
Amazing!
NIST proudly proclaims that "This software was developed at the National Institute of Standards and Technology by employees of the Federal Government in the course of their official duties".
At least they have the decency to add that "NIST assumes no responsibility whatsoever for its use by other parties, and makes no guarantees, expressed or implied, about its quality, reliability, or any other characteristic."
> 5. We have beautiful natural wonders
Sorry to disappoint you, but most of them are silicone, not natural.
Are they moving Israel to Washington state or relocating Washington state to Israel?
.
I like "vanilla" Nethack but the DevTeam have really been dragging their heels...
you have an indifferent and predominately ignorant populace and a highly motivated, high profit industries that are willing to fork over truck loads of cash to keep them in that state .
.
That's easy, one million, since lomainacs are not binary.
Also remember that:
There are 10^12 picornaviruses in a rnavirus.
There are 10^6 microbes = in a be.
There are 10 millipedes in a centipede (and a whole 1000 in a pede).
There are 10 decisions = in a sion.
A hectograph is a 100 graphs.
A megaphone is a 1000 phones (and 10^9 microphones).
A gigantism is 10^9 ntisms.
A teratoma is 10^12 tomas.
A petasos is 10^15 soses.
And finally, an examination is 10^18 minations!
"Mighty Mice" Made Mightier
Quadrupling Muscle Mass
A quick Googling unearthed some interesting articles about "super strength" effects in humans:
"Mighty mouse" gene found in humans
Rare condition gives toddler super strength
Why the separation by Mediawiki | TikiWiki | DekiWiki ?
When I'm looking for a wiki I'm interested in the information, not the platform.
What about laser?