If you think bribes are invoked by "you get what you pay for" it only proves two things: you don't understand the English language, and you watch a lot of Fox News.
"Pay to play" in the US is almost never bribes, simply fees and processes that poor people can't afford.
Notice even the words used; the complaint is the playing requires payment, not that there is anything secret. If the troll comes out from under the bridge to try to stop you unless you pay him, people shout "extortion" not "pay to play!"
Another anecdote; as an American, I've never paid a bribe.
I've never seen somebody pay a bribe.
The expectation if you attempted it would be to go to jail.
When political bribery happens, and somebody gets arrested, check the details of the story; invariably they never even discussed the bribe, they just did somebody a "favor" and then were happy when the other person did a "favor" back. The people doing it don't even find it acceptable to talk about it with the people they're doing it with, because it is ingrained in our culture that it is misbehavior that would be punished. In America, bribery is more taboo than adultery, and much less common. It also limits bribery to "favors," it doesn't work to harm a competitor, or to get something you otherwise aren't allowed; even when organized crime is involved, it only works for things that are entirely discretionary, and up to one person. So if you try to bribe your way to a PhD, you get kicked out of school the first year, the first time you try it. And most political corruption is only as deep as swaying one person to give your company an exclusive contract, like trimming the city trees, or something like that. Most of those are really small contracts, most large contracts are divided according to bidding systems.
In my State those sort of tax breaks are tied to the actual creation of the jobs, and are received retrospectively. So when they lie about how many jobs they'll create, they're also lying to themselves about how much of a tax credit they'll get.
The Wisconsin thing worked the same way. In the end they don't get their tax breaks, they only got media reports saying they did.
The company got an option to create jobs and get a tax break.
I'm high as fuck and they sound like paranoid nutters to me, too.
Now I'm gonna go stuff my face with Freedom Fries, because munchies.
Then I'm gonna come back and throw frozen peaches at morons.
The real risk is as you allude; the insurance companies might someday be allowed to force you to take it. I doubt nutters shouting about the ebil gubermint are going to notice or stop that from happening, either. lol
If you look at the situation in the story, it wouldn't be enough to have generic "usual suspects," you'd need DNA from somebody who was near to the crime.
The amount of preparation and opsec involved doesn't seem realistic. If somebody was that good at operations, you wouldn't even know a crime had happened for sure, you'd just have a missing persons report.
Luckily, very few violent crimes are well-planned, and very few violent criminals are good at operations.
That said, it probably already happens at the nation-state actor level.
That's another reason why DNA is irrelevant to this problem; countries that lack freedom they already track everybody. If you need permission from the government just to move to a new residence, then you're already being completely tracked, and they can punish your family for what you do whenever they want. DNA doesn't seem to change things at all in that regard.
If our country loses personal freedom, then we already lost it. So many people seem to be arguing, "if the gubermint took our freedums away, then this would be a powerful tool for them to use." Except, if they took your freedoms away, you already lost them, and these details wouldn't be relevant.
In my State if you don't want to be required to present ID, simply don't carry it and you're not required to present it.
Unless I'm driving or shopping, I don't even carry my wallet.
BTW, cryptocurrencies track every purchase and when you spend the money, you also transfer the purchase history of that money. It seems a little out of place next to your other concerns; you seem to have been taken for a ride by propagandists.
Because legal terms have legal meaning, you don't want to listen to a legal term and just hear whatever it "sounds like," you want to refrain from understanding until after you have the definitions.;)
When you're charged in one State, but you're arrested in another State, there are lots of details and paperwork. The jurisdiction holding you has a right to hold you, but they don't control the actual charges against you. Therefore, to prevent that being some sort of black hole that people can fall into, they have to have a process by which you're accused, locally, of having charges against you in another State. That accusation is what the "being a fugitive from Justice" is. It is not a criminal charge. There is a federal criminal charge with the same name, that applies in the situation you describe. This is something different; any extradition from Maine to another State begins with a DA in Maine filing paperwork accusing the subject of being a Fugitive from Justice.
That's just silly nonsense technicality "gotcha" bullshit, though.
Who cares if skype embeds a sucky browser, or not? How does that affect users who are intentionally using a browser?
This isn't something that is harmful if it is hidden under the hood of another product, it is something that is harmful when it interferes with the choices the user would otherwise be making.
And, Firefox has a RAM advantage if you keep a lot of tabs open.
Right, so you can comprehend that it is inaccurate to refer to the US as an English colony, right?
"The Ukraine" is short for "The Ukrainian Soviet Blah Blah Blah." It is what their name was when a foreign power occupied their country. After gaining freedom as a sovereign State, their name became simple "Ukraine." Other examples not rooted in that name are from the translation of "Ukraine" as "borderland," which is just as insulting because it implies dismissively that it is part of Russia, and merely a remote area at that. For example, Canada is called "Canada," not "the northern borderland."
The only commonly-named country that has "the" in their short name is The Bahamas. Most other cases are offensive denigrations of sovereignty.
The entire purpose, the reason, for education the kids was so they could be better factory workers.
There is no need to backfit nonsense about regimentation, when regimentation is how you manage to teach groups. There is no mystery there to solve with a conspiracy. There is no dishonest purpose, or surprising element. There is simply modern ignorance, and the back-fitting of data-points that for some odd reason seem surprising to you, but are actually required elements in the first place for basic reasons.
That book is the Atlas Shrugged of History; it appeals to many people disillusioned with the low general quality of history books, and then they treat it like a bible.
Slashdot Mirror
If you think bribes are invoked by "you get what you pay for" it only proves two things: you don't understand the English language, and you watch a lot of Fox News.
"Pay to play" in the US is almost never bribes, simply fees and processes that poor people can't afford.
Notice even the words used; the complaint is the playing requires payment, not that there is anything secret. If the troll comes out from under the bridge to try to stop you unless you pay him, people shout "extortion" not "pay to play!"
Another anecdote; as an American, I've never paid a bribe.
I've never seen somebody pay a bribe.
The expectation if you attempted it would be to go to jail.
When political bribery happens, and somebody gets arrested, check the details of the story; invariably they never even discussed the bribe, they just did somebody a "favor" and then were happy when the other person did a "favor" back. The people doing it don't even find it acceptable to talk about it with the people they're doing it with, because it is ingrained in our culture that it is misbehavior that would be punished. In America, bribery is more taboo than adultery, and much less common. It also limits bribery to "favors," it doesn't work to harm a competitor, or to get something you otherwise aren't allowed; even when organized crime is involved, it only works for things that are entirely discretionary, and up to one person. So if you try to bribe your way to a PhD, you get kicked out of school the first year, the first time you try it. And most political corruption is only as deep as swaying one person to give your company an exclusive contract, like trimming the city trees, or something like that. Most of those are really small contracts, most large contracts are divided according to bidding systems.
You're agreeing with him, most things you do you use a digital wallet connected to your Indian bank account.
You simply lied and said it wasn't true and that you didn't have one, and then explained that yes, that's how you do things.
Crime against humanity
In my State those sort of tax breaks are tied to the actual creation of the jobs, and are received retrospectively. So when they lie about how many jobs they'll create, they're also lying to themselves about how much of a tax credit they'll get.
The Wisconsin thing worked the same way. In the end they don't get their tax breaks, they only got media reports saying they did.
The company got an option to create jobs and get a tax break.
Stop blaming the weed, man.
I'm high as fuck and they sound like paranoid nutters to me, too.
Now I'm gonna go stuff my face with Freedom Fries, because munchies.
Then I'm gonna come back and throw frozen peaches at morons.
The real risk is as you allude; the insurance companies might someday be allowed to force you to take it. I doubt nutters shouting about the ebil gubermint are going to notice or stop that from happening, either. lol
If you look at the situation in the story, it wouldn't be enough to have generic "usual suspects," you'd need DNA from somebody who was near to the crime.
The amount of preparation and opsec involved doesn't seem realistic. If somebody was that good at operations, you wouldn't even know a crime had happened for sure, you'd just have a missing persons report.
Luckily, very few violent crimes are well-planned, and very few violent criminals are good at operations.
That said, it probably already happens at the nation-state actor level.
That's another reason why DNA is irrelevant to this problem; countries that lack freedom they already track everybody. If you need permission from the government just to move to a new residence, then you're already being completely tracked, and they can punish your family for what you do whenever they want. DNA doesn't seem to change things at all in that regard.
If our country loses personal freedom, then we already lost it. So many people seem to be arguing, "if the gubermint took our freedums away, then this would be a powerful tool for them to use." Except, if they took your freedoms away, you already lost them, and these details wouldn't be relevant.
It seems that if your country does this, that is the problem already, and it has nothing at all to do with DNA.
I mean with DNA, or without DNA, either your country avoids this problem, or it happens. Using DNA for evidence doesn't seem to even touch this issue.
In my State if you don't want to be required to present ID, simply don't carry it and you're not required to present it.
Unless I'm driving or shopping, I don't even carry my wallet.
BTW, cryptocurrencies track every purchase and when you spend the money, you also transfer the purchase history of that money. It seems a little out of place next to your other concerns; you seem to have been taken for a ride by propagandists.
Because legal terms have legal meaning, you don't want to listen to a legal term and just hear whatever it "sounds like," you want to refrain from understanding until after you have the definitions. ;)
When you're charged in one State, but you're arrested in another State, there are lots of details and paperwork. The jurisdiction holding you has a right to hold you, but they don't control the actual charges against you. Therefore, to prevent that being some sort of black hole that people can fall into, they have to have a process by which you're accused, locally, of having charges against you in another State. That accusation is what the "being a fugitive from Justice" is. It is not a criminal charge. There is a federal criminal charge with the same name, that applies in the situation you describe. This is something different; any extradition from Maine to another State begins with a DA in Maine filing paperwork accusing the subject of being a Fugitive from Justice.
Just because he has a lot of bullies doesn't mean he isn't also well-liked.
I'd choose ten of him over one of his bullies, personally.
I'm a user, and I choose not to see any of the ads. They're not skipable because I never saw them in the first place.
Some of my boxes still have them in the hosts file :)
Oh, doubleclick? I love them so much, I love them like localhost. ;)
That's just silly nonsense technicality "gotcha" bullshit, though.
Who cares if skype embeds a sucky browser, or not? How does that affect users who are intentionally using a browser?
This isn't something that is harmful if it is hidden under the hood of another product, it is something that is harmful when it interferes with the choices the user would otherwise be making.
And, Firefox has a RAM advantage if you keep a lot of tabs open.
Right, so you can comprehend that it is inaccurate to refer to the US as an English colony, right?
"The Ukraine" is short for "The Ukrainian Soviet Blah Blah Blah." It is what their name was when a foreign power occupied their country. After gaining freedom as a sovereign State, their name became simple "Ukraine." Other examples not rooted in that name are from the translation of "Ukraine" as "borderland," which is just as insulting because it implies dismissively that it is part of Russia, and merely a remote area at that. For example, Canada is called "Canada," not "the northern borderland."
The only commonly-named country that has "the" in their short name is The Bahamas. Most other cases are offensive denigrations of sovereignty.
The entire purpose, the reason, for education the kids was so they could be better factory workers.
There is no need to backfit nonsense about regimentation, when regimentation is how you manage to teach groups. There is no mystery there to solve with a conspiracy. There is no dishonest purpose, or surprising element. There is simply modern ignorance, and the back-fitting of data-points that for some odd reason seem surprising to you, but are actually required elements in the first place for basic reasons.
That book is the Atlas Shrugged of History; it appeals to many people disillusioned with the low general quality of history books, and then they treat it like a bible.
For peoplewho didn't get the sarcasm:
https://www.theguardian.com/ar...
What do you expect, they can't even tell the difference between Standard American units and the "Imperial" units from their own history.
Ukraine is a country, not "the Ukrainian Slaveland" or whatever the Soviet-controlled name was. You uneducated swine.
Ukraine. Not "the" Ukraine.
I agree. The class clown is definitely going out the air lock first on a long trip.
If it isn't "that joke," it will be somebody's toothpaste, underwear, or personal media device.
Derp derp derp.
Shorter you: "I can't read! Everybody must be a moronic stereotype!"
Learn how to read, then you'll be capable of being in discussions about policy.
You leave out possibilities like, maybe he did more than pay for it, maybe he actively coached people through the exfiltration process.
That seems to be the direction indicated by what has leaked so far.
wait, wait, wait, you've got to tell us what backwater you're from where you didn't know that the US has been accused of hypocrisy.
Oh, nevermind, it's in your username.