Yet there are numerous restrictions and bans on them. Or using alcohol. Is there any law which is going to stop a person who is bound and determined to drink and drive?
The real reason for laws and regulations isn't absolute prohibition or removal, just reduction.
You're talking about laws that reduce poor judgment or carelessness. They enforce proper action in good-hearted people. But murder is different. It requires evil intent. There are already laws against murder. Once someone decides that (mass)murder is their goal, there aren't a whole lot of laws that will stop them. Maybe serve as a bar by which to judge and punish the murderer, yes, but precious few laws create an environment which will stop them.
Oops, didn't preview.
Yet there are numerous restrictions and bans on them. Or using alcohol. Is there any law which is going to stop a person who is bound and determined to drink and drive?
The real reason for laws and regulations isn't absolute prohibition or removal, just reduction.
You're talking about laws that reduce poor judgment or carelessness. They enforce proper action in good-hearted people. But murder is different. It requires evil intent. There are already laws against murder. Once someone decides that (mass)murder is their goal, there aren't a whole lot of laws that will stop them. Maybe serve as a bar by which to judge and punish the murderer, yes, but precious few laws create an environment which will stop them.
They could even have received note, but even if they did, they still could not destroy evidence. It is like a cop knowing you are drunk and ordering you to drive. Driving drunk is a felony, but disobeying the officer too. Best thing you can do is do as he says and let him explain later why he ordered you to do so.
No, the best thing is to refuse to follow his orders and if he arrests you, to let him explain later why he was ordering you to break the law. Notice in this scenario you don't endanger others by driving drunk.
instead of letting society decide his fate for his actions
Society doesn't care about this case at all. Ask any man on the street who Aaron Swartz is. I didn't know who he was until he committed suicide and it was posted on/.
I'm guessing you're not familiar with WB's DC Animated Universe. They do some passable superhero stories. WB created Harley Quinn, although they have done a bad job of creating new heroes for other shows they control: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loonatics_Unleashed
Due to the Grandfather Paradox, we can not stop the creation of Superman
But thank goodness we were able to go back in time and prevent the creation of the superhero named Grandfather Paradox. He was awful. Superman is a nice trade-off.
Reddit serves a purpose, it keeps a lot of imps & trolls off of slashdot, i dont use reddit either because i dont like the content but it serves a purpose (it provides a place imps & trolls to vent)
Hate to tell ya, but 99.9% of the articles on/. have already been posted on Reddit, or other aggregation sites, before it gets here.
That's the point GP was making. The other sites winnow the chaff. By the time the stories get here, few reddit readers (or other, more popular sites' readers) will deign to post on/., because the stories will seem old and chewed up to them. To us, they're semi-fresh and we get to discuss them with some intelligent geeks who are not too unlike ourselves, with only the occasional troll (and at least they're often attempts to be humorous instead of genuine trolling).
I don't know about everyone else, but I don't come to/. for "news". Never did, even when I was lurking in the early days. It's all about the comments. No one reads the articles for a reason.
Because the replacement option is to have users downloading snowflake.exe and running it, possibly with admin creds. Users will have their snowflakes (unless they're a built in aero toy, then the users will want bonzi buddy for 00's nostalgia).
They get through by cheating. And not smart cheating. They just copy files, sometimes without changing comments (even leaving original author names). When I started to teach programming years ago, the students were aghast that I diff'd their source code and failed copiers (changing variable names and comments isn't enough when all your other code and whitespace is identical). "But we're allowed to work together!" No, you're allowed to discuss algorithms and pseudocode with each other. You could tell who worked together the proper way because all their variables were named the same or similarly, but their code looked markedly different from each other (enough that it would be more work to change its style than to do the project).
But if the human is holding down the trigger such that the reticle match-up causes the finger to depress the trigger before the human's brain registers there was a match-up, then it's the human authorizing (by applying constant slight pressure) the gun to fire (by changing the trigger mechanical resistance).
"I am anti-cyber-bullying officer 456. My task is to prevent all cyber bullying. Videos can be used for cyber-bullying. Therefore, the logical course of action to prevent cyber-bullying is to destroy all cameras."
"I am anti-murder robo-456. My task is to prevent all murder. Only humans can have the evil intent required for murder. Therefore, the logical course of action to prevent murder is to kill all humans."
"footage was deleted from the camera while in police custody. 'We'll just take this for evidence,'"
So the police are tampering with evidence? Isn't that a crime?
a woman can simply accuse her husband of sexual or physical abuse (or simply express a fear of it) and instantly win a restraining order forcing him away from his home and children, without so much as a hearing. In fact, most divorce lawyers will advise a woman to do this, and those who do not can be sued for legal malpractice.
As an officer of the court, I can't imagine it's a good idea for a lawyer to suggest his client falsely accuse someone.
Slashdot Mirror
Yet there are numerous restrictions and bans on them. Or using alcohol. Is there any law which is going to stop a person who is bound and determined to drink and drive?
The real reason for laws and regulations isn't absolute prohibition or removal, just reduction.
You're talking about laws that reduce poor judgment or carelessness. They enforce proper action in good-hearted people. But murder is different. It requires evil intent. There are already laws against murder. Once someone decides that (mass)murder is their goal, there aren't a whole lot of laws that will stop them. Maybe serve as a bar by which to judge and punish the murderer, yes, but precious few laws create an environment which will stop them.
Oops, didn't preview.
Yet there are numerous restrictions and bans on them. Or using alcohol. Is there any law which is going to stop a person who is bound and determined to drink and drive?
The real reason for laws and regulations isn't absolute prohibition or removal, just reduction.
You're talking about laws that reduce poor judgment or carelessness. They enforce proper action in good-hearted people. But murder is different. It requires evil intent. There are already laws against murder. Once someone decides that (mass)murder is their goal, there aren't a whole lot of laws that will stop them. Maybe serve as a bar by which to judge and punish the murderer, yes, but precious few laws create an environment which will stop them.
Because a criminal obviously can't carry more than one gun or magazine. Hell, no one reads magazines these days anyway.
They could even have received note, but even if they did, they still could not destroy evidence. It is like a cop knowing you are drunk and ordering you to drive. Driving drunk is a felony, but disobeying the officer too. Best thing you can do is do as he says and let him explain later why he ordered you to do so.
No, the best thing is to refuse to follow his orders and if he arrests you, to let him explain later why he was ordering you to break the law. Notice in this scenario you don't endanger others by driving drunk.
instead of letting society decide his fate for his actions
Society doesn't care about this case at all. Ask any man on the street who Aaron Swartz is. I didn't know who he was until he committed suicide and it was posted on /.
Probably because the siegels have no money to pay the lawyer (guessing you missed the mention of a 50K settlement).
I'm guessing you're not familiar with WB's DC Animated Universe. They do some passable superhero stories. WB created Harley Quinn, although they have done a bad job of creating new heroes for other shows they control: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loonatics_Unleashed
Due to the Grandfather Paradox, we can not stop the creation of Superman
But thank goodness we were able to go back in time and prevent the creation of the superhero named Grandfather Paradox. He was awful. Superman is a nice trade-off.
It's a joke, son. You're suppos'd to laugh! /foghorn
Implementor. Oldish job title for programmer.
Reddit serves a purpose, it keeps a lot of imps & trolls off of slashdot, i dont use reddit either because i dont like the content but it serves a purpose (it provides a place imps & trolls to vent)
Hate to tell ya, but 99.9% of the articles on /. have already been posted on Reddit, or other aggregation sites, before it gets here.
That's the point GP was making. The other sites winnow the chaff. By the time the stories get here, few reddit readers (or other, more popular sites' readers) will deign to post on /., because the stories will seem old and chewed up to them. To us, they're semi-fresh and we get to discuss them with some intelligent geeks who are not too unlike ourselves, with only the occasional troll (and at least they're often attempts to be humorous instead of genuine trolling). /. for "news". Never did, even when I was lurking in the early days. It's all about the comments. No one reads the articles for a reason.
I don't know about everyone else, but I don't come to
Let me guess, you believe that only governments can censor by definition?
Because the replacement option is to have users downloading snowflake.exe and running it, possibly with admin creds. Users will have their snowflakes (unless they're a built in aero toy, then the users will want bonzi buddy for 00's nostalgia).
http://ask.slashdot.org/story/13/01/03/2255204/ask-slashdot-how-to-react-to-coworker-who-says-my-code-is-bad
http://ask.slashdot.org/story/13/01/03/1859210/ask-slashdot-how-can-i-explain-to-a-coworker-that-he-writes-bad-code
On a web forum no less?
Robosome.
They get through by cheating. And not smart cheating. They just copy files, sometimes without changing comments (even leaving original author names). When I started to teach programming years ago, the students were aghast that I diff'd their source code and failed copiers (changing variable names and comments isn't enough when all your other code and whitespace is identical). "But we're allowed to work together!" No, you're allowed to discuss algorithms and pseudocode with each other. You could tell who worked together the proper way because all their variables were named the same or similarly, but their code looked markedly different from each other (enough that it would be more work to change its style than to do the project).
Stargate Universe was a more sci-fi LOST, barely set in the Stargate universe.
But if the human is holding down the trigger such that the reticle match-up causes the finger to depress the trigger before the human's brain registers there was a match-up, then it's the human authorizing (by applying constant slight pressure) the gun to fire (by changing the trigger mechanical resistance).
Another case of gun nuts taking useful technology and exploiting it.
Yes. The hacker spirit lives.
We just had them ruin 3D printing. I guess Linux is next?
FYI, 3D printing lower receivers didn't ruin 3D printing. People with your attitude did. "Ahhh! It's a plastic gun! Overreact or it will kill us all!"
Trying to prevent?
"I am anti-cyber-bullying officer 456. My task is to prevent all cyber bullying. Videos can be used for cyber-bullying. Therefore, the logical course of action to prevent cyber-bullying is to destroy all cameras."
"I am anti-murder robo-456. My task is to prevent all murder. Only humans can have the evil intent required for murder. Therefore, the logical course of action to prevent murder is to kill all humans."
Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease.
C-sharp? Pointless? I guess it could just have an edge without a point, like Xena's Chakram.
"footage was deleted from the camera while in police custody. 'We'll just take this for evidence,'"
So the police are tampering with evidence? Isn't that a crime?
a woman can simply accuse her husband of sexual or physical abuse (or simply express a fear of it) and instantly win a restraining order forcing him away from his home and children, without so much as a hearing. In fact, most divorce lawyers will advise a woman to do this, and those who do not can be sued for legal malpractice.
As an officer of the court, I can't imagine it's a good idea for a lawyer to suggest his client falsely accuse someone.
Women are the only gender that can have children, and men need them if they want offspring themselves.
Is parthenogenesis on the rise? I was under the impression it takes one female and one male.
Let me guess: the classes are restricted to non-UC students, making them mostly worthless.