A 14 year old knows the difference between building and inventing.
Ah-HA! I found the clone who raised in an acceleration vat. You were obviously never 14.
Even into their mid-20s, you can't expect people to have good vocabulary; even people with degrees! Even nerds will have shocking gaps.
Even me. In elementary school my nickname was "dictionary" because I was always quoting the thing. I was certainly the only kid in my class who, over their whole childhood, frequently read the dictionary. Certainly the only person who would take the time and care to attempt to correct the poor vocabulary of my peers. It never dissuaded me, I always just assumed they eventually figure it out and prefer to use the words correctly so people could understand them.
And you're such a bright guy, you don't believe it is even possible for them to continue misusing words! You should hear the idiotic things adults in their 30s with letters by their names say.
See, here is the thing: Only a really incredible racist would think that words whining about media coverage somehow counter the claim that a person was shot in cold blood. How the media reacts has nothing to do with the subject of an innocent person being killed. Nothing at all. Racists are racist and there is no way around it.
It's funny and concerning people refuse to look into this case and realize the cop was protecting himself. But go ahead, pretend nobody bothered to investigate this.
That's just horse shit, and in fact, blatantly racist horse shit.
A lot of these racists even forget that the 2nd Amendment would theoretically apply to black people, even in the rare case that a gun was involved.
I wish I could shoot every scary looking white guy with a gun I see, I'd have to buy a lot of ammo because we have a lot of scary hicks where I'm from.
So when police claim they are always reaching for the gun, you'll believe them no question, despite mounting video evidence that is almost never the case.
Good to know so many people on Slashdot are in support of a literal police state.
No, but they'll pretend to be if the conversation leads to a place where it makes the black guy look bad.
That is just how they talk in the South. Every single conversation, if one of the people they're talking about is black, then up is down and down is up, at least in that half of the sentence.
And if you want a good laugh... you always hear people in the news talk about "State's rights," just look that one that up for the history and you'll find out the upsidedown world you live in. Remember, about 40% of the viewers are from a region that still supports the original "State's rights" argument. And just a hint for people who haven't looked it up yet: it isn't about State's having rights. At all. It is about slavery in non-slavery States, or at least non-State federal territories.
Definitely, absolutely, without a doubt, and without having to look it up: multiple currencies, specifically not including the dollar.
And if in fact they were allowed to include dollars, it would have been all dollars.
Where I said something about Congress, that was the hint that there was something substantial to the comment. A reason for there not be dollars. You got hung up on a pedanticism; that it was a basket of multiple currencies used to pay the debt. True. But actually, it was given in multiple shipments, and the shipment being discussed in the news was mostly euros, and indeed most of the total was euros.
We owed them the money for over 30 years, after all. That's how far from "new" it was.
The thing is, Iran paid us the money for military equipment right before they experienced regime change, and then afterwards we weren't willing to give them the weapons. However much we hate their new government, we do have to give the money back. They paid us real cash money for products that we refused to deliver. They were owed a refund.
But relations were so bad, even though we knew we owed them the money we never got along with them well enough to even be able to hand it over to them. Eventually it happened, because of the nuclear deal.
There is real diplomatic value in paying it, because it has always been an important propaganda point for them. Now the story is, in the end the Americans paid the money they owed, with all the interest, in the amount that was determined by arbitration. Because the American government always pay its debts.
And we had to pay in euros, because Congress. wtf, why does Congress hate dollars?
Right, it would be exactly like that, except that in Oregon we don't have "grant theft auto" we have "unauthorized use of a motor vehicle" and unlike the computer law, it uses an analog measurement where the intended use is taken into consideration. If you borrow a car and say you're going to the library, and you go to a concert, that is actually a felony in Oregon.
No, the Oregon law only covers authorized access to systems that are protected from authorized access. Walking up and typing on an unattended laptop is clearly not covered. Also, if she embezzled or not (not, here, as it was just simple theft not a misappropriation) is irrelevant. If she worked in a stock room and was not authorized to sell the tickets using the machine, then she would have violated the computer crime law. That law is about if you were authorized or not, and if the system was clearly protected from unauthorized access.
For a criminal law to apply to an action, the action has to violate both the letter and the spirit of the law. Just violating the spirit of the law but not the letter isn't enough. In a civil action, it might be, depending.
You have to use an interstate system for that. This is a State lottery system; you can't buy tickets outside the State at all. And it has to be fraud to be wire fraud; she didn't do anything fraudulent, she simply didn't pay for items (lottery tickets) that she took. She didn't lie or misrepresent anything to gain access to the system; she was a real employee.
The Court ruled here that because as an employee she was authorized to use the lottery machine, they can't accuse her of unauthorized use of the machine; the law doesn't establish gray areas of partial authorization, it only punishes use of a computer system that was not authorized. Clearly, misuse while authorized is still authorized use, even if it violates laws related to paying for things you walk out of a store with.
Very few prisoners in Oregon are in private institutions, so probably not.
You gotta know your head from a hole in the ground before you can decide who the "masters" are, unless you're just going to point in the shadows all the time.
This is a typical case for Oregon. Our cops and prosecutors suck the same as everywhere, but we have pretty good laws and pretty good courts.
Perhaps that is how it works in the US, that I don't know. In my country we don't have the legions of Lawyers that you have in the US
So you probably don't even know if we have "legions of lawyers" or if you just were overly credulous. Doesn't "don't know" mean you get to make it up, or just that you don't know? Why not stop typing at "I don't know," since you're clearly not asking any useful question?
Maybe, how many lawyers we have has nothing at all to do with what is a good advertising strategy for a service industry? Why are you letting all these stereotypes about my country interfere with understanding the very very very basic claim that people in service industries tend to claim their service is important?
And BTW, a "personal trainer" is not a trainer that trains people to compete at anything. That is an "athletic trainer." The "personal" in "personal trainer" means that they're just training one person at a time. So if you go to a gym, and there is an employee that can teach you how to use the weight machine, or help you decide how many reps to do of a particular weight, that is a personal trainer. If you're competing at something, you want a something-trainer. Personal trainer means their specialty is helping people that don't know how to train. The idea that a personal trainer would need a personal trainer is laughable, but they will still say it. Very consistently. Because small business people have usually read at least the "101-level" stuff about marketing a service, and that is what they're told is good to say.
Yes, yes, but that says nothing about the science, which is promising. A bunch of self-appointed guardians of all things sciencey apparently didn't read the stories about it and are blathering, that's the issue.
Why should the 1% worry that they're the ones who would benefit? What sort of argument is that? How do you know you have the moral high ground? Maybe the science fiction future of living a bit longer is good?
I thought she was sidelined for 2 years? Seriously, what blessed lives these people lead to be taken seriously after screwing up so terribly. If I messed up half that bad at my job I'd be out on the street.
Yes, but it didn't start yet and will be on hold if she appeals. The company so far hasn't admitted that it has to shut the Arizona lab unless she resigns or appeals. She controls the company, so at this point she can steer it in for any sort of crash vector she wants.
Interestingly, other media are not reporting this the way slashdot is, with her having finally released the data people want. Ars is running it as, she didn't release the data at all, she just launched a new product instead and left everybody scratching their heads. The new product isn't anything new, either, it competes with a lot of similar products from established companies.
If you think you found a conspiracy theory, I guess you're reading something other than what I wrote.
Lets just clarify right here that I only meant the words I said. Words I didn't say are not to be assumed, most of the potential words that you could imagine me saying that I didn't say are words I would not in fact have ever said.
Pretend you took a business class at the local community college, and the whole class was about PR for your small business. Right, that's the knowledge level for understanding what I said. Everything I said or implied is consistent with what you would learn in that class. There is absolutely no conspiracy involved. Most, but not all, small business owners will give you a "what I think is going to help my business" type of answer for any question about major topics for their industry. And most of them also read magazines targeted at people who provide the same service as them. And those magazines will have articles like, "Why Every Personal Trainer Has a Personal Trainer (Even If They Don't Really)." It is not a conspiracy. It is just the way business works. Service industries are populated by businesses who take a public position that their service is important to buy, even if you think you can do it yourself instead of hiring them. Is that really a surprise? Do you really need to seek out a conspiracy for that to be true?
The headline for the same data could read, "JS is the hardest programming language" lol
Just because people on stack overflow need help, doesn't automatically mean it is popular; or that the people whose questions are being counted as popularity even like it.
Github is perhaps a better data source, but still problematic. I know in my case, most of code that goes to github is in different languages than most of my code overall. Very little of my C goes there, for example.
You think this because you don't understand how things change with the chip. I used to agree; fraud was visa's problem, in my case. But check the liability changes attached to chip use.
Slashdot Mirror
A 14 year old knows the difference between building and inventing.
Ah-HA! I found the clone who raised in an acceleration vat. You were obviously never 14.
Even into their mid-20s, you can't expect people to have good vocabulary; even people with degrees! Even nerds will have shocking gaps.
Even me. In elementary school my nickname was "dictionary" because I was always quoting the thing. I was certainly the only kid in my class who, over their whole childhood, frequently read the dictionary. Certainly the only person who would take the time and care to attempt to correct the poor vocabulary of my peers. It never dissuaded me, I always just assumed they eventually figure it out and prefer to use the words correctly so people could understand them.
And you're such a bright guy, you don't believe it is even possible for them to continue misusing words! You should hear the idiotic things adults in their 30s with letters by their names say.
A dead guy?! Blah blah blah, blah blah!
See, here is the thing: Only a really incredible racist would think that words whining about media coverage somehow counter the claim that a person was shot in cold blood. How the media reacts has nothing to do with the subject of an innocent person being killed. Nothing at all. Racists are racist and there is no way around it.
It's funny and concerning people refuse to look into this case and realize the cop was protecting himself. But go ahead, pretend nobody bothered to investigate this.
That's just horse shit, and in fact, blatantly racist horse shit.
A lot of these racists even forget that the 2nd Amendment would theoretically apply to black people, even in the rare case that a gun was involved.
I wish I could shoot every scary looking white guy with a gun I see, I'd have to buy a lot of ammo because we have a lot of scary hicks where I'm from.
Racism is racist, regardless of if you found some idiotic words that purport to blame the blacks for your racism. Racism is still racist, even then.
So when police claim they are always reaching for the gun, you'll believe them no question, despite mounting video evidence that is almost never the case.
Good to know so many people on Slashdot are in support of a literal police state.
No, but they'll pretend to be if the conversation leads to a place where it makes the black guy look bad.
That is just how they talk in the South. Every single conversation, if one of the people they're talking about is black, then up is down and down is up, at least in that half of the sentence.
And if you want a good laugh... you always hear people in the news talk about "State's rights," just look that one that up for the history and you'll find out the upsidedown world you live in. Remember, about 40% of the viewers are from a region that still supports the original "State's rights" argument. And just a hint for people who haven't looked it up yet: it isn't about State's having rights. At all. It is about slavery in non-slavery States, or at least non-State federal territories.
Definitely, absolutely, without a doubt, and without having to look it up: multiple currencies, specifically not including the dollar.
And if in fact they were allowed to include dollars, it would have been all dollars.
Where I said something about Congress, that was the hint that there was something substantial to the comment. A reason for there not be dollars. You got hung up on a pedanticism; that it was a basket of multiple currencies used to pay the debt. True. But actually, it was given in multiple shipments, and the shipment being discussed in the news was mostly euros, and indeed most of the total was euros.
The claim isn't, "the sky is falling." The claim is, "the secret garbage pile might not remain secret forever. And is made of garbage."
Plus the guy on the news on the rad-io said they always flip-flop and rewrite their data. Where there's smoke, there's fire, even grandpa knew that.
President W suggested a space umbrella. What do you think?
We owed them the money for over 30 years, after all. That's how far from "new" it was.
The thing is, Iran paid us the money for military equipment right before they experienced regime change, and then afterwards we weren't willing to give them the weapons. However much we hate their new government, we do have to give the money back. They paid us real cash money for products that we refused to deliver. They were owed a refund.
But relations were so bad, even though we knew we owed them the money we never got along with them well enough to even be able to hand it over to them. Eventually it happened, because of the nuclear deal.
There is real diplomatic value in paying it, because it has always been an important propaganda point for them. Now the story is, in the end the Americans paid the money they owed, with all the interest, in the amount that was determined by arbitration. Because the American government always pay its debts.
And we had to pay in euros, because Congress. wtf, why does Congress hate dollars?
Everything is unisex in space.
Right, it would be exactly like that, except that in Oregon we don't have "grant theft auto" we have "unauthorized use of a motor vehicle" and unlike the computer law, it uses an analog measurement where the intended use is taken into consideration. If you borrow a car and say you're going to the library, and you go to a concert, that is actually a felony in Oregon.
No, the Oregon law only covers authorized access to systems that are protected from authorized access. Walking up and typing on an unattended laptop is clearly not covered. Also, if she embezzled or not (not, here, as it was just simple theft not a misappropriation) is irrelevant. If she worked in a stock room and was not authorized to sell the tickets using the machine, then she would have violated the computer crime law. That law is about if you were authorized or not, and if the system was clearly protected from unauthorized access.
For a criminal law to apply to an action, the action has to violate both the letter and the spirit of the law. Just violating the spirit of the law but not the letter isn't enough. In a civil action, it might be, depending.
Addicts aren't engaged in long-term planning, that is well known. Gambling is one of the most addictive things known.
You have to use an interstate system for that. This is a State lottery system; you can't buy tickets outside the State at all. And it has to be fraud to be wire fraud; she didn't do anything fraudulent, she simply didn't pay for items (lottery tickets) that she took. She didn't lie or misrepresent anything to gain access to the system; she was a real employee.
The Court ruled here that because as an employee she was authorized to use the lottery machine, they can't accuse her of unauthorized use of the machine; the law doesn't establish gray areas of partial authorization, it only punishes use of a computer system that was not authorized. Clearly, misuse while authorized is still authorized use, even if it violates laws related to paying for things you walk out of a store with.
Very few prisoners in Oregon are in private institutions, so probably not.
You gotta know your head from a hole in the ground before you can decide who the "masters" are, unless you're just going to point in the shadows all the time.
This is a typical case for Oregon. Our cops and prosecutors suck the same as everywhere, but we have pretty good laws and pretty good courts.
Perhaps that is how it works in the US, that I don't know. In my country we don't have the legions of Lawyers that you have in the US
So you probably don't even know if we have "legions of lawyers" or if you just were overly credulous. Doesn't "don't know" mean you get to make it up, or just that you don't know? Why not stop typing at "I don't know," since you're clearly not asking any useful question?
Maybe, how many lawyers we have has nothing at all to do with what is a good advertising strategy for a service industry? Why are you letting all these stereotypes about my country interfere with understanding the very very very basic claim that people in service industries tend to claim their service is important?
And BTW, a "personal trainer" is not a trainer that trains people to compete at anything. That is an "athletic trainer." The "personal" in "personal trainer" means that they're just training one person at a time. So if you go to a gym, and there is an employee that can teach you how to use the weight machine, or help you decide how many reps to do of a particular weight, that is a personal trainer. If you're competing at something, you want a something-trainer. Personal trainer means their specialty is helping people that don't know how to train. The idea that a personal trainer would need a personal trainer is laughable, but they will still say it. Very consistently. Because small business people have usually read at least the "101-level" stuff about marketing a service, and that is what they're told is good to say.
If you're still alive, the upper bound is unknown and flexible.
Yes, yes, but that says nothing about the science, which is promising. A bunch of self-appointed guardians of all things sciencey apparently didn't read the stories about it and are blathering, that's the issue.
Why should the 1% worry that they're the ones who would benefit? What sort of argument is that? How do you know you have the moral high ground? Maybe the science fiction future of living a bit longer is good?
Apps don't app people, appers do.
I thought she was sidelined for 2 years? Seriously, what blessed lives these people lead to be taken seriously after screwing up so terribly. If I messed up half that bad at my job I'd be out on the street.
Yes, but it didn't start yet and will be on hold if she appeals. The company so far hasn't admitted that it has to shut the Arizona lab unless she resigns or appeals. She controls the company, so at this point she can steer it in for any sort of crash vector she wants.
Interestingly, other media are not reporting this the way slashdot is, with her having finally released the data people want. Ars is running it as, she didn't release the data at all, she just launched a new product instead and left everybody scratching their heads. The new product isn't anything new, either, it competes with a lot of similar products from established companies.
If you think you found a conspiracy theory, I guess you're reading something other than what I wrote.
Lets just clarify right here that I only meant the words I said. Words I didn't say are not to be assumed, most of the potential words that you could imagine me saying that I didn't say are words I would not in fact have ever said.
Pretend you took a business class at the local community college, and the whole class was about PR for your small business. Right, that's the knowledge level for understanding what I said. Everything I said or implied is consistent with what you would learn in that class. There is absolutely no conspiracy involved. Most, but not all, small business owners will give you a "what I think is going to help my business" type of answer for any question about major topics for their industry. And most of them also read magazines targeted at people who provide the same service as them. And those magazines will have articles like, "Why Every Personal Trainer Has a Personal Trainer (Even If They Don't Really)." It is not a conspiracy. It is just the way business works. Service industries are populated by businesses who take a public position that their service is important to buy, even if you think you can do it yourself instead of hiring them. Is that really a surprise? Do you really need to seek out a conspiracy for that to be true?
The headline for the same data could read, "JS is the hardest programming language" lol
Just because people on stack overflow need help, doesn't automatically mean it is popular; or that the people whose questions are being counted as popularity even like it.
Github is perhaps a better data source, but still problematic. I know in my case, most of code that goes to github is in different languages than most of my code overall. Very little of my C goes there, for example.
You think this because you don't understand how things change with the chip. I used to agree; fraud was visa's problem, in my case. But check the liability changes attached to chip use.