When you have a moronic headline like that, you're begging for corpse jokes.
What the fuck makes you think that nerds didn't always love corpse jokes? You didn't realize how popular Frankenstein is, apparently.
Look, most organ transplants involve moving organs from recently-deceased people, to currently-living people. At least, outside of China this is usually true. And the headlines talk about "first success at [some specific organ] transplant," the headlines don't say, "first deceased heart transplant," "first deceased face transplant," "first deceased penis transplant," etc. They just say first transplant.
If you're worried about things like, "why are people denigrating female parts?" you might want to start with, "why is the media all over the world saying 'deceased womb' in the first place?"
"Head" of INTERPOL as in figurehead, not head as in leader.
And not "missing" as in "missing persons report,"* but "missing" as in, "he's detained in a country that doesn't release public information about detainees."
* A missing persons report was initially filed in another country than his last known location, but it is now known that he is no longer under the personal jurisdiction of that country.
That isn't what that means. That veil protects the investors, not the employees.
The reality is that many legal protections are afforded to the corporation by the presumption that it wants to do the right thing; it isn't a person, it isn't self-aware, so it can't desire to break the law.
So a law that bans a broad action, but where the individual steps are all otherwise-legal, then the crime falls on the corporation, and the individuals are all protected. And the corporation just gets a fine, because it didn't have intent, the sum of the (legal) individual actions simply added up to a crime.
But when the individual actions were themselves illegal, then it is entirely the fault of the employee; the corporation can't intentionally want you to do something wrong, it is just a piece of paper. If you were ordered to commit a crime, that was your boss committing a crime, and you were the accomplice. So the corporation is protected. Still financially responsible, though.
Here, the individual action violates sanctions, so that is an individual crime by the employee. And the resulting trade that the company was intentionally doing also is criminal. So a situation like this, you have a whole bunch of individual employees who committed crimes, but the corporation was aware of the trade and the people who should have stopped it didn't, so those acts land on both the individuals, and the company.
I am not a lawyer. If you don't want to violate sanctions against Iran, don't trade with Iran.
They can't send anybody to gitmo if they enter the US first, and Canada isn't going to extradite somebody "to the US" and then send them somewhere else. The whole legal argument for the Court not shutting down gitmo is that it is rented from Cuba, so it isn't our laws. That argument doesn't work once a detainee is physically present in the US.
If they wanted her in gitmo, the plane would need to have landed somewhere without too many treaties, or in a war zone. Or she would have needed to disappear from the airport, and re-appear in one of those other places right before being captured.
That's way too complicated for Team Trump to pull off. For better or worse, lots of Americans are going to disagree about that part. But we're almost 2 years in. They're not competent enough to attempt any of those conspiracies. They're usually not even competent enough to wield discretion duly granted to them by Congress without blurting out some sort of illegal purpose and having to redo their own discretion over and over again.
It is almost guaranteed to be more, because ownership has a lot of expenses. Landlords of most residential dwellings do not make very much profit from the rental; it mostly pays maintenance and taxes to preserve the investment for when you sell the property. Renting an apartment, you can rent less property than you would have to buy to buy a house; and buying a condo includes so much rent it isn't an investment at all in most cases. So by living in an apartment and saving more money, you're financially ahead of buying and then selling when the job ends.
The big advantages of home ownership are control of your personal territory, and an investment that eventually gives you housing security. When you don't know how long you'll live in a city, having control of your territory is worth less because there is less incentive to make expensive personalizations, and if you're going to move when the job ends then you wouldn't expect to want to live in it for housing security; savings would have more value.
During the.com boom there was a hiring crunch everywhere, including for programmers in small cities.
For people in small cities it was an even bigger boom than for people in big cities, because with an overheated labor market they were making almost the big-city pay.
Most people gladly accept terms that would give them very very little equity in only 4 years.
People do not typically choose the mortgage that they can afford that has the lowest total long-term cost; they usually choose whatever scheme is still legal that gives them the worst possible terms with the lowest monthly payment. And that means most of your equity comes at the end of a very long loan payback period.
A condo owner has some equity, but they also pay a lot of rent. But they're not likely to have a lot of equity after 4 years, because if they could afford monthly payments that high they would have just bought a house with a slightly longer mortgage. The reason people buy condos is because they don't want to have take care of house; it is the most ownership you can get with the least responsibilities attached.
And of course, it all depends where you want to move. You can easily buy land with a house on it for under $2000 in lots of places. About a quarter of the country has prices like that available.
The reality is, if you're moving to a comparable place, then it is no different than moving across town. And if the new place is more expensive, it means you're trying to move up in the world! If it is less expensive, it means you're downsizing. Both options are broadly available.
The word "anyway" only tells you that the action has been questioned. It is your own judgmental nature that you've detected, not any external threshold.
It acknowledges that a decision included a trade-off, and that the actual decision made was not to stop the action involved in the trade-off.
You're making a lot of presumptions about whatever was or wasn't done to measure the risk, but the public information doesn't actually tell us about that. So it is a lie to imply that it is important, and somehow precludes honest acknowledgment of the facts. They considered the risk to be very high, and they still did the thing. That is "anyway" territory no matter which side of that decision you're on.
You have to figure out how to live in the world, knowing this fundamental truth and the truth that follows - even if you leave Facebook, there will always be another Facebook like milking of your privacy, because it doesn't bother most people.
Horseshit. That's no fundamental truth.
You're saying: Some Foos are also Bars. If Bar ceases to exist, it will be replaced by a Baz that is similar. Foos who were also Bars will likely then become Bazes. Therefore, All Foos are Bars or Bazes.
But that is False. Bar being replaced by Baz does not change that while some Foos are Bars, others are not. And those others that are not Bars will often still not be Bazes even after Bar disappears.
This is not a difficult matter of logic. Learning "how to live in the world" is redundant; if you're still alive, you'll still be telling others how to live, but it does not imply anything about the "in the world" part. You're alive, and the world still exists. That is all that is proven.
Naw, I don't think a sheet of glass can celebrate anything, and surely any alcohol will have evaporated.
Likely a few people at remote listening stations will have a few days or weeks to drink a last toast to Planet Earth. But if you have internet access and are allowed to post on slashdot, you're not gonna be one of those.
Also, if you experience physical revulsion at being interrogated for things they don't have any reason to suspect you of, (which is itself a type of lie!) then you'll fail the test too.
So people who dislike lying but are lying anyways will be detected, as will people who are more honest than average! I personally suspect it is the latter group that they actually are trying to exclude, for similar reasons that they want to exclude the people bad at lying. If you're good at lying, you pass; that is probably by design. If you're not bothered by deceptive situations, but are generally honest yourself, that is also acceptable to them.
Or, as in this case, even when you can't do that, it might still be used by the government in some other way that gives them leverage; like using it as a personality detector to choose which sort of people the government hires, when doing so honestly wouldn't be allowed.
In that sense, it does detect lies; find a place where the machine is in use, and you've found a place where people are lying about what the machine does! 100% success rate AFAICT!
The problem is that you don't have some sort of special organ in your body for lying, or some sort of hardware lie blocker in your brain that requires you to set a hardware flag before lying.
It doesn't exist, and so you're not going to be able to test for it.
It is like trying to test why a person is drinking a beverage by measuring the properties of the beverage as they drink it. It is Apples and Oranges. And the thing that is desired to test doesn't even have its own physical mechanism; it is an externality.
Then means that the action is happening after the something else that was discussed immediately prior.
Going means to move.
Ahead is a direction, the meaning is similar to forwards.
Anyway means that the thing that happened was not prevented by some downside or problem that was already discussed.
So, "Then going ahead anyway" means that they knew there was something problematic with their actions, and they still tried to complete those actions.
Come back tomorrow and we can discuss There, Their, and They're. But only if you stop saying that rude thing at the end. Be nice, Ivan. And show up sober.
Yes, they do. You're being an idiot-pedant, where you introduce a false pedanticism that tries to be correct by playing a word game.
The laws that regulate taxis regulate both taxis and limos, generally as separate things, because the use cases and regulatory needs are slightly different.
Don't be a dumbass who pretends to have a point, go out and find a point, and have one.
Well get a clue. This isn't podunkville where all the politicians are corrupt. Many of our politicians are like Governor Brown or Senator Wyden, and they don't even have a lot of personal wealth. So waving your hands presumptively as if "politician = corrupt" is just stupid shit you brought with you from wherever you came from. Their pay is actually quite good and if they're not greedy jerks there is no reason for the corruption you're so ready to presume that we would accept here. But we have a long history of not doing that, and our politicians reflect it.
Presumably you're in some political party that likes corrupt candidates, and that's why you just presume that politicians are corrupt.
Look at what Kitzhaber resigned over; in most States that wouldn't even have been a scandal, much less something that ends a political career. His gf got caught peddling her relationship for a boost to her business, without even actually having any access to sell, and he resigned. Just over his gf running her mouth. Because it gave the appearance of corruption. That appearance will sink a politician in Oregon; even with their own party!
3 times in history the Oregon Legislature passed a law that the People of Oregon repealed by popular vote. All three times, every member of the Legislature that had voted Yes on the repealed law was primaried out. Both parties. 100% removal rate. If something is controversial among the People, the legislature refuses to vote on it; they vote instead to refer such issues to popular vote. There is no punishment given out if they ask us, and we say No. Direct Democracy and Representative Democracy are both real things here; things we have in practice.
Oregon politicians are trained by this, over the past 100 years. They Represent the People, or they get run out of office. This is expected from both parties. When we had US Senators from both parties, they often voted together; and at times they voted together against both of their own parties. Because they were voting on things that Oregonians care about.
You can wave your hands and say there is "no good reason" but the reality is that people who frequently use the Fn key expect it to be in that group of keys. It isn't on a desktop keyboard, and I don't want an extra row of keys at the top.
As somebody who uses the Fn key only a couple times a month, I don't really see a better place for it. If it was somewhere else and they moved it, probably lots of other people agree. Some people probably want fast access to the mute button. I just use the hardware feature that mutes sound if headphones are unplugged.
Laptop keyboards will not be optimal. There will be extra context switching when using a new one. Just as, when using a new computer at all there will a little bit of OS fiddling before you get rid of some extra set of context switches.
Also, the Fn key is programmable; you can set it so that it acts like control or alt, and since all the functions are on the F-keys, it simply doesn't do anything. That makes it pretty painless to learn where to put your fingers. If somebody has complaints about the keyboard, the more reasonable ones would seem to be the location of the pageup/pagedown/home/end keys.
The Dell Precision looks pretty good. If I couldn't have a Thinkpad, I might choose that. But the Thinkpad will probably last a lot longer. And I have like 12 hours of battery life.
Machine Shop is the place that makes a custom part to fix a commercial truck or trailer. They also have the press that is needed to replace wheel bearings. A Machinist is a person who operates the specific machines in Machine Shops.
All the mechanics with commercial customers either have a machinist on staff, or are the customer of a machine shop.
Taxi companies have their own auto mechanic shops. And independent drivers are often associated with an auto shop, and they may have the same owner.
You're not actually taking the internet to your destination, though. There is nothing new here other than a company got a bunch of cities to ignore that they're breaking the taxi laws.
Slashdot Mirror
emails!
3.14 years solitary confinement.
That's sad. That's just sad.
When you have a moronic headline like that, you're begging for corpse jokes.
What the fuck makes you think that nerds didn't always love corpse jokes? You didn't realize how popular Frankenstein is, apparently.
Look, most organ transplants involve moving organs from recently-deceased people, to currently-living people. At least, outside of China this is usually true. And the headlines talk about "first success at [some specific organ] transplant," the headlines don't say, "first deceased heart transplant," "first deceased face transplant," "first deceased penis transplant," etc. They just say first transplant.
If you're worried about things like, "why are people denigrating female parts?" you might want to start with, "why is the media all over the world saying 'deceased womb' in the first place?"
"Head" of INTERPOL as in figurehead, not head as in leader.
And not "missing" as in "missing persons report,"* but "missing" as in, "he's detained in a country that doesn't release public information about detainees."
* A missing persons report was initially filed in another country than his last known location, but it is now known that he is no longer under the personal jurisdiction of that country.
Yes, and then you find out that a dragon is just a smallish salamander with bright colors.
And easily eaten by an eagle.
That isn't what that means. That veil protects the investors, not the employees.
The reality is that many legal protections are afforded to the corporation by the presumption that it wants to do the right thing; it isn't a person, it isn't self-aware, so it can't desire to break the law.
So a law that bans a broad action, but where the individual steps are all otherwise-legal, then the crime falls on the corporation, and the individuals are all protected. And the corporation just gets a fine, because it didn't have intent, the sum of the (legal) individual actions simply added up to a crime.
But when the individual actions were themselves illegal, then it is entirely the fault of the employee; the corporation can't intentionally want you to do something wrong, it is just a piece of paper. If you were ordered to commit a crime, that was your boss committing a crime, and you were the accomplice. So the corporation is protected. Still financially responsible, though.
Here, the individual action violates sanctions, so that is an individual crime by the employee. And the resulting trade that the company was intentionally doing also is criminal. So a situation like this, you have a whole bunch of individual employees who committed crimes, but the corporation was aware of the trade and the people who should have stopped it didn't, so those acts land on both the individuals, and the company.
I am not a lawyer. If you don't want to violate sanctions against Iran, don't trade with Iran.
They can't send anybody to gitmo if they enter the US first, and Canada isn't going to extradite somebody "to the US" and then send them somewhere else. The whole legal argument for the Court not shutting down gitmo is that it is rented from Cuba, so it isn't our laws. That argument doesn't work once a detainee is physically present in the US.
If they wanted her in gitmo, the plane would need to have landed somewhere without too many treaties, or in a war zone. Or she would have needed to disappear from the airport, and re-appear in one of those other places right before being captured.
That's way too complicated for Team Trump to pull off. For better or worse, lots of Americans are going to disagree about that part. But we're almost 2 years in. They're not competent enough to attempt any of those conspiracies. They're usually not even competent enough to wield discretion duly granted to them by Congress without blurting out some sort of illegal purpose and having to redo their own discretion over and over again.
How deplorable.
It is almost guaranteed to be more, because ownership has a lot of expenses. Landlords of most residential dwellings do not make very much profit from the rental; it mostly pays maintenance and taxes to preserve the investment for when you sell the property. Renting an apartment, you can rent less property than you would have to buy to buy a house; and buying a condo includes so much rent it isn't an investment at all in most cases. So by living in an apartment and saving more money, you're financially ahead of buying and then selling when the job ends.
The big advantages of home ownership are control of your personal territory, and an investment that eventually gives you housing security. When you don't know how long you'll live in a city, having control of your territory is worth less because there is less incentive to make expensive personalizations, and if you're going to move when the job ends then you wouldn't expect to want to live in it for housing security; savings would have more value.
During the .com boom there was a hiring crunch everywhere, including for programmers in small cities.
For people in small cities it was an even bigger boom than for people in big cities, because with an overheated labor market they were making almost the big-city pay.
Slashdot didn't come from a big coastal city.
Most people gladly accept terms that would give them very very little equity in only 4 years.
People do not typically choose the mortgage that they can afford that has the lowest total long-term cost; they usually choose whatever scheme is still legal that gives them the worst possible terms with the lowest monthly payment. And that means most of your equity comes at the end of a very long loan payback period.
A condo owner has some equity, but they also pay a lot of rent. But they're not likely to have a lot of equity after 4 years, because if they could afford monthly payments that high they would have just bought a house with a slightly longer mortgage. The reason people buy condos is because they don't want to have take care of house; it is the most ownership you can get with the least responsibilities attached.
And of course, it all depends where you want to move. You can easily buy land with a house on it for under $2000 in lots of places. About a quarter of the country has prices like that available.
The reality is, if you're moving to a comparable place, then it is no different than moving across town. And if the new place is more expensive, it means you're trying to move up in the world! If it is less expensive, it means you're downsizing. Both options are broadly available.
The word "anyway" only tells you that the action has been questioned. It is your own judgmental nature that you've detected, not any external threshold.
It acknowledges that a decision included a trade-off, and that the actual decision made was not to stop the action involved in the trade-off.
You're making a lot of presumptions about whatever was or wasn't done to measure the risk, but the public information doesn't actually tell us about that. So it is a lie to imply that it is important, and somehow precludes honest acknowledgment of the facts. They considered the risk to be very high, and they still did the thing. That is "anyway" territory no matter which side of that decision you're on.
Yeah, probably. What planet did you say you were from???
You have to figure out how to live in the world, knowing this fundamental truth and the truth that follows - even if you leave Facebook, there will always be another Facebook like milking of your privacy, because it doesn't bother most people.
Horseshit. That's no fundamental truth.
You're saying: Some Foos are also Bars. If Bar ceases to exist, it will be replaced by a Baz that is similar. Foos who were also Bars will likely then become Bazes. Therefore, All Foos are Bars or Bazes.
But that is False. Bar being replaced by Baz does not change that while some Foos are Bars, others are not. And those others that are not Bars will often still not be Bazes even after Bar disappears.
This is not a difficult matter of logic. Learning "how to live in the world" is redundant; if you're still alive, you'll still be telling others how to live, but it does not imply anything about the "in the world" part. You're alive, and the world still exists. That is all that is proven.
Naw, I don't think a sheet of glass can celebrate anything, and surely any alcohol will have evaporated.
Likely a few people at remote listening stations will have a few days or weeks to drink a last toast to Planet Earth. But if you have internet access and are allowed to post on slashdot, you're not gonna be one of those.
Also, if you experience physical revulsion at being interrogated for things they don't have any reason to suspect you of, (which is itself a type of lie!) then you'll fail the test too.
So people who dislike lying but are lying anyways will be detected, as will people who are more honest than average! I personally suspect it is the latter group that they actually are trying to exclude, for similar reasons that they want to exclude the people bad at lying. If you're good at lying, you pass; that is probably by design. If you're not bothered by deceptive situations, but are generally honest yourself, that is also acceptable to them.
Or, as in this case, even when you can't do that, it might still be used by the government in some other way that gives them leverage; like using it as a personality detector to choose which sort of people the government hires, when doing so honestly wouldn't be allowed.
In that sense, it does detect lies; find a place where the machine is in use, and you've found a place where people are lying about what the machine does! 100% success rate AFAICT!
The problem is that you don't have some sort of special organ in your body for lying, or some sort of hardware lie blocker in your brain that requires you to set a hardware flag before lying.
It doesn't exist, and so you're not going to be able to test for it.
It is like trying to test why a person is drinking a beverage by measuring the properties of the beverage as they drink it. It is Apples and Oranges. And the thing that is desired to test doesn't even have its own physical mechanism; it is an externality.
Welcome to the English language, Ivan.
Then means that the action is happening after the something else that was discussed immediately prior.
Going means to move.
Ahead is a direction, the meaning is similar to forwards.
Anyway means that the thing that happened was not prevented by some downside or problem that was already discussed.
So, "Then going ahead anyway" means that they knew there was something problematic with their actions, and they still tried to complete those actions.
Come back tomorrow and we can discuss There, Their, and They're. But only if you stop saying that rude thing at the end. Be nice, Ivan. And show up sober.
Yes, they do. You're being an idiot-pedant, where you introduce a false pedanticism that tries to be correct by playing a word game.
The laws that regulate taxis regulate both taxis and limos, generally as separate things, because the use cases and regulatory needs are slightly different.
Don't be a dumbass who pretends to have a point, go out and find a point, and have one.
Well get a clue. This isn't podunkville where all the politicians are corrupt. Many of our politicians are like Governor Brown or Senator Wyden, and they don't even have a lot of personal wealth. So waving your hands presumptively as if "politician = corrupt" is just stupid shit you brought with you from wherever you came from. Their pay is actually quite good and if they're not greedy jerks there is no reason for the corruption you're so ready to presume that we would accept here. But we have a long history of not doing that, and our politicians reflect it.
Presumably you're in some political party that likes corrupt candidates, and that's why you just presume that politicians are corrupt.
Look at what Kitzhaber resigned over; in most States that wouldn't even have been a scandal, much less something that ends a political career. His gf got caught peddling her relationship for a boost to her business, without even actually having any access to sell, and he resigned. Just over his gf running her mouth. Because it gave the appearance of corruption. That appearance will sink a politician in Oregon; even with their own party!
3 times in history the Oregon Legislature passed a law that the People of Oregon repealed by popular vote. All three times, every member of the Legislature that had voted Yes on the repealed law was primaried out. Both parties. 100% removal rate. If something is controversial among the People, the legislature refuses to vote on it; they vote instead to refer such issues to popular vote. There is no punishment given out if they ask us, and we say No. Direct Democracy and Representative Democracy are both real things here; things we have in practice.
Oregon politicians are trained by this, over the past 100 years. They Represent the People, or they get run out of office. This is expected from both parties. When we had US Senators from both parties, they often voted together; and at times they voted together against both of their own parties. Because they were voting on things that Oregonians care about.
You can wave your hands and say there is "no good reason" but the reality is that people who frequently use the Fn key expect it to be in that group of keys. It isn't on a desktop keyboard, and I don't want an extra row of keys at the top.
As somebody who uses the Fn key only a couple times a month, I don't really see a better place for it. If it was somewhere else and they moved it, probably lots of other people agree. Some people probably want fast access to the mute button. I just use the hardware feature that mutes sound if headphones are unplugged.
Laptop keyboards will not be optimal. There will be extra context switching when using a new one. Just as, when using a new computer at all there will a little bit of OS fiddling before you get rid of some extra set of context switches.
Also, the Fn key is programmable; you can set it so that it acts like control or alt, and since all the functions are on the F-keys, it simply doesn't do anything. That makes it pretty painless to learn where to put your fingers. If somebody has complaints about the keyboard, the more reasonable ones would seem to be the location of the pageup/pagedown/home/end keys.
The Dell Precision looks pretty good. If I couldn't have a Thinkpad, I might choose that. But the Thinkpad will probably last a lot longer. And I have like 12 hours of battery life.
Hundreds? You don't seem to appreciate the large scale of "China" or the small scale of what a "factory" is there.
Machine Shop is the place that makes a custom part to fix a commercial truck or trailer. They also have the press that is needed to replace wheel bearings. A Machinist is a person who operates the specific machines in Machine Shops.
All the mechanics with commercial customers either have a machinist on staff, or are the customer of a machine shop.
Taxi companies have their own auto mechanic shops. And independent drivers are often associated with an auto shop, and they may have the same owner.
You're not actually taking the internet to your destination, though. There is nothing new here other than a company got a bunch of cities to ignore that they're breaking the taxi laws.