Gold is a terrible currency, the most overvalued material on earth. It has almost no real value. Its only practical use is as a corrosion resistant connector in basic electronics.
No, it doesn't show that at all. It provides no effect size statistics to back up such a claim.
Well, by all means, lets have a larger study, then. However, I would still bet large sums of money that browsers that people have to go out of their way to find and use will tend to have smarter users than browsers that come by default with almost every computer
.
My first thought was "Or maybe those other browsers give their users a better more engaging experience." It's not what I believe, but then again there's a reason people go out of their way to find these browsers, right?
You don't have to get offended, just because this small sampling tends to back up what just plain makes sense.
No, but we should be wary of believing evidence that supports our prejudices.
The unanswered question is, why was the second judge found to be biased?
Normally a question of bias would involve that judge's personal life - family, friends, business relationships or other circumstances that make them unsuited for ruling the case and so there's no problem that a judge from the same department does it. In this case the judge has been accused of being favorable to copyright holders more or less in general, which could apply to pretty much everyone working in that department. To avoid most of the wild conspiracy theories and any hint of bias they've appointed a three judge panel from another department, the second judge has not in any shape, way or form found to be biased. This is to make sure they got a 100% legally sound decision on what's acceptable relations for a judge and will not cause worldwide headlines of "Pirate Bay judge accused of bias" again. Look at it from their point of view, never before has Sweden's court system been so publicly dragged through the mud with the eyes of the world watching. And I don't mean slashdot but every top 100 news site in the world.
The article in Swedish clearly states that the second judge was removed (and if not because of his rather obvious interest in the case. For what else?) And then a three judge panel (with one clear senior) was appointed.
How was this modded troll? It's a fact of life, and he even added "This isn't really Microsoft's fault" which most slashdotters wouldn't have bothered with.
Some of us have our own democratic systems not based on the US.
The fact is that the rest of us have our democracies based either on the French Republic + 200 years of bug fixes, or on English parliamentarianism[1] + the very same byg fixes
The USA is a pre-alpha fork of the same system. And Since the USA does not fix bugs[2], no-one else wants to adapt that fork.
[1] Nice long word, isn't it.
[2] It's better than anything that went before so why fix it?
Most families are working models of communism - the family shares its possessions etc. It's true that many of the states that have called themselves "Communist" have failed, most notably the Soviet Union, but the question still remains whether this was because of communism or because of other factors - such as the permanent state of conflict with the Western world, the general incompetence of its leaders, the extreme paranoia of the same or whatever.
Whatever is wrong with Russia it doesn't seem to have been cured by capitalism.
I would say that it is impossible to have a stable society that is based on constant oppression of the majority, there is nothing inherent in socialism that requires oppression.
The argument one sees elsewhere, that oppression becomes necessary "because there will always be some that are too selfish", is only valid in the special case where the state insists on an extreme form of "perfect" socialism; but that is the same whether you insist on pure capitalism, theocracy or just about anything else. If deviation from the ideal is not tolerated, oppression becomes necessary.
There are many stable countries in the world that are predominantly socialist - Scandinavia springs to mind, but China is a good example; China is still a communist society and likely to remain so for the foreseable future, not despite its opening up to the international community, but because of it. The openness has taken away much of the oppression and people don't feel the need to revolt.
Noote that we here in Scandinavia have found ample room to be both socialist and capitalistic.
I have little doubt that the Chinese leadership has noted that the two things can be combined. Whether it works for a country of more than 1 billion people still is undecided of course.
Significant adjustment is needed, but as you see the Chinese has plenty of ingenuity.
Why does everyone focus immediately on the "black hat" side of the story, and neglect that the group is supposed to do BOTH sides, which in some ways, is a good aspect of ANY security team... just hopefully, your security team follows ethics.
Because in general, the military is not exactly known for it's humanitarian altruistic approach. Most military define security by going into the enemies home and screwing them there.
Which is why the majority of soldiers in the "Democratic" Republic of Congo has AIDS.
I hope our German friends have better security than that.
Slashdot Mirror
Gold is a terrible currency, the most overvalued material on earth. It has almost no real value. Its only practical use is as a corrosion resistant connector in basic electronics.
That''s silly. It's pretty and attracts girls.
(And it's corrosion resistant for most any use)
And why they encourage ad-supported apps over free apps.
Notice how unhelpful the market* is at finding free apps.
* by whatever name.
And it's only two because nobody ever bothered with rock'n roll.
Ever hear of the MAFIAA?
No, it doesn't show that at all. It provides no effect size statistics to back up such a claim. Well, by all means, lets have a larger study, then. However, I would still bet large sums of money that browsers that people have to go out of their way to find and use will tend to have smarter users than browsers that come by default with almost every computer
.
My first thought was "Or maybe those other browsers give their users a better more engaging experience." It's not what I believe, but then again there's a reason people go out of their way to find these browsers, right?
You don't have to get offended, just because this small sampling tends to back up what just plain makes sense.
No, but we should be wary of believing evidence that supports our prejudices.
That's the "Big Man" theory.
It goes something like this;
..., and they'll defend themselves, violetly if necessary.
There, fixed that for you.
Have you seen Higurashi When They Cry?
Now imagine an entire army camp going insane like that ...
If you're not doing anything wrong, why won't you let me install cameras in your daughters shower?
... you'll get screwed in the face?
There's a difference between were there money is registered as earned, for tax purposes, and in what pockets they end up.
Anyway, yes, I think EU regulators are acting towards Microsoft as if they (Microsoft) were an immoral foreign entity.
(As opposed to one of our wholesome homegrown immoral entities.)
The Micro$oft tax goes to America.
US regulators like that. EU regulators doesn't.
The people of Finland may not care all that much about what all America was built on. Fuck's sake or otherwise.
You need not be sad though, It's not that they won't accept it. It's just not really relevant to Finnish law.
However, the gaps continue to shrink as more and more evidence is found, and that is the best we can hope for, to keep expanding on our knowledge.
The gaps split. They don't really shrink, they just get cut up..
Unlike boards though, those might hit back.
Around here broads do hit back.
But it is rather cool!
They let a clown (the first judge) into the arena.
Getting him out will cause some hubbub.
Do you think they should just give up on justice to save face, though?
The unanswered question is, why was the second judge found to be biased?
Normally a question of bias would involve that judge's personal life - family, friends, business relationships or other circumstances that make them unsuited for ruling the case and so there's no problem that a judge from the same department does it. In this case the judge has been accused of being favorable to copyright holders more or less in general, which could apply to pretty much everyone working in that department. To avoid most of the wild conspiracy theories and any hint of bias they've appointed a three judge panel from another department, the second judge has not in any shape, way or form found to be biased. This is to make sure they got a 100% legally sound decision on what's acceptable relations for a judge and will not cause worldwide headlines of "Pirate Bay judge accused of bias" again. Look at it from their point of view, never before has Sweden's court system been so publicly dragged through the mud with the eyes of the world watching. And I don't mean slashdot but every top 100 news site in the world.
The article in Swedish clearly states that the second judge was removed (and if not because of his rather obvious interest in the case. For what else?) And then a three judge panel (with one clear senior) was appointed.
Would you really want to live in that thing?
How was this modded troll? It's a fact of life, and he even added "This isn't really Microsoft's fault" which most slashdotters wouldn't have bothered with.
Obvious flame bait, that.
Some of us have our own democratic systems not based on the US.
The fact is that the rest of us have our democracies based either on the French Republic + 200 years of bug fixes, or on English parliamentarianism[1] + the very same byg fixes
The USA is a pre-alpha fork of the same system. And Since the USA does not fix bugs[2], no-one else wants to adapt that fork.
[1] Nice long word, isn't it.
[2] It's better than anything that went before so why fix it?
communism hasn't worked anywhere
Most families are working models of communism - the family shares its possessions etc. It's true that many of the states that have called themselves "Communist" have failed, most notably the Soviet Union, but the question still remains whether this was because of communism or because of other factors - such as the permanent state of conflict with the Western world, the general incompetence of its leaders, the extreme paranoia of the same or whatever.
Whatever is wrong with Russia it doesn't seem to have been cured by capitalism.
I would say that it is impossible to have a stable society that is based on constant oppression of the majority, there is nothing inherent in socialism that requires oppression.
The argument one sees elsewhere, that oppression becomes necessary "because there will always be some that are too selfish", is only valid in the special case where the state insists on an extreme form of "perfect" socialism; but that is the same whether you insist on pure capitalism, theocracy or just about anything else. If deviation from the ideal is not tolerated, oppression becomes necessary.
There are many stable countries in the world that are predominantly socialist - Scandinavia springs to mind, but China is a good example; China is still a communist society and likely to remain so for the foreseable future, not despite its opening up to the international community, but because of it. The openness has taken away much of the oppression and people don't feel the need to revolt.
Noote that we here in Scandinavia have found ample room to be both socialist and capitalistic.
I have little doubt that the Chinese leadership has noted that the two things can be combined. Whether it works for a country of more than 1 billion people still is undecided of course.
Significant adjustment is needed, but as you see the Chinese has plenty of ingenuity.
(Yes, I know what the FAQ says. The URL sends a stronger and more direct message than the FAQ, however.)
It's not as if 'US-centric' necessarily means English only. Other languages are spoken there.
Why does everyone focus immediately on the "black hat" side of the story, and neglect that the group is supposed to do BOTH sides, which in some ways, is a good aspect of ANY security team... just hopefully, your security team follows ethics.
Because in general, the military is not exactly known for it's humanitarian altruistic approach. Most military define security by going into the enemies home and screwing them there.
Which is why the majority of soldiers in the "Democratic" Republic of Congo has AIDS.
I hope our German friends have better security than that.
that is 40% pro anno, sorry.