He admitted the failings, instead of brushing them under the carpet and thereby impacted future earning by limiting their opportunities to exploit their assets, FB users.
Robert Peel's 9 principles for policing by consent
To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour, and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary, of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.
Hoare logic is apparent off-topic, so is advocating declarative BDD over imperative BDD, quoting JUnit's documentation on Assume semantic 'proves nothing', getter and setter are not evil and 'tell don't ask' is claptrap and the java language specification is not an authoritative on parameter semantics, or even just fixing poor English grammar.
Those are all examples where I've reference recognised experts in the respective fields and had unwarranted locks and restrictions at the hands of moderation who've own profiles show they game their reputation by camping trivial questions.
So this is lies just like all the other leaver arguments, millions of turks flooding the UK - lie, hundreds of new trade deals - lie, £350 million per week extra for the NHS - lie, bent bananas, etc. all lies.
Given the maximum sentence he faces for absconding is 1 year in prison.
He will likely receive a sentence at upper end because his actions were wilful, he's shown no remorse and resisted his arrest once the Ecuadorians threw him out.
This is not a charitable donation, it is an investment, a loan for affordable housing. Smart investment considers intangible benefits from the obvious 'good publicity' from corporate responsibility to increasing their own value by increasing the value of the environs. It is not a bad thing, but let's see this for what it is, a smart business move.
You make a good point, but I can see a potential future space for genuinely useful proof of work based crypto.
An example would be protein folding which was done for free like the SETI analysis, similar scientific tasks could have been wrapped up as useful proof of work. They were not, they were done for free. The work done on protein folding has value to society. Similar productives proof of work tasks could be rewarded by the value tied up in the work. The a share of the revenues from the application of the work could be paid as dividends just like conventional stocks.
The exchanges could exist to trade a full range of these like conventional stocks.
Wasted energy crypto is doomed, this is why bitcoin has always been a huge pyramid scheme, there is no fundamental value in it.
How much more evidence is required to conclude Trump is not the brilliant 'deal' strategist he thinks he is. He's failed with North Korea, his attempt to sabotage NAFTA also failed, he failed to intimidate the EU and now he's failed to get a better deal from China, which despite his bluster is pretty much the status quo with tweeks that regular diplomats could achieve in a heartbeat without any drama.
Slashdot Mirror
I worked on similar fraud prevention system over a decade ago for one of the first major UK ecommerce businesses.
An important point missed in the write up is that these systems are evaluating the transaction, not the person.
.. how that situation can possible even be legal.
He admitted the failings, instead of brushing them under the carpet and thereby impacted future earning by limiting their opportunities to exploit their assets, FB users.
Robert Peel's 9 principles for policing by consent
To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour, and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary, of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.
Hoare logic is apparent off-topic, so is advocating declarative BDD over imperative BDD, quoting JUnit's documentation on Assume semantic 'proves nothing', getter and setter are not evil and 'tell don't ask' is claptrap and the java language specification is not an authoritative on parameter semantics, or even just fixing poor English grammar.
Those are all examples where I've reference recognised experts in the respective fields and had unwarranted locks and restrictions at the hands of moderation who've own profiles show they game their reputation by camping trivial questions.
The root problem is that SO gamification system rewards the lowest common denominator not the highest or even just professional level
The emails sender was spoofed.
So this is lies just like all the other leaver arguments, millions of turks flooding the UK - lie, hundreds of new trade deals - lie, £350 million per week extra for the NHS - lie, bent bananas, etc. all lies.
The Internet Archive should be expected to have the technical competence to detect emails spoofing before publishing what amounts to fake news.
I really cannot decide, but the propensity of his apologists to just make shit up is quite staggering and very amusing.
Keep it up you're adding to his world of hurt.
Do you really believe that shit or are you deliberately gaslighting?
Frankly he has proven himself a liar at every stage of this and his supporters repeatedly prove themself fools for parroting his nonsense.
His narcissism and ego have do far more damage to the cause of whistleblowing than anybody ever.
He was arrested for jumping bail.
He fought extradition all the way to the UK supreme court and lost at every stage.
Given the maximum sentence he faces for absconding is 1 year in prison.
He will likely receive a sentence at upper end because his actions were wilful, he's shown no remorse and resisted his arrest once the Ecuadorians threw him out.
Nice to see the Huawei apologies are still running wild /sigh
"Huawei caught spying on Pakistan's CCTV network"
An exposure by the BBC's flagship current affair documentary, but hey, let the idiocracy run rampant.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/...
I've been doing this for two years with Google Authenticator.
https://play.google.com/store/...
https://slashdot.org/submissio...
This doesn't prove time reversal, it show a quantum computer can unreliably implement the Undo-Redo pattern.
About the worst possible store of value you could conceive.
Far too many are prepared to up play, down play, blame the victim for short term political advantage.
When will people wise up and recognise that Putin is one of world's biggest threats to the freedom we enjoy in the west?
This is not a charitable donation, it is an investment, a loan for affordable housing. Smart investment considers intangible benefits from the obvious 'good publicity' from corporate responsibility to increasing their own value by increasing the value of the environs. It is not a bad thing, but let's see this for what it is, a smart business move.
I'm British, I get my independent news internationally.
You make a good point, but I can see a potential future space for genuinely useful proof of work based crypto.
An example would be protein folding which was done for free like the SETI analysis, similar scientific tasks could have been wrapped up as useful proof of work. They were not, they were done for free. The work done on protein folding has value to society. Similar productives proof of work tasks could be rewarded by the value tied up in the work. The a share of the revenues from the application of the work could be paid as dividends just like conventional stocks.
The exchanges could exist to trade a full range of these like conventional stocks.
Wasted energy crypto is doomed, this is why bitcoin has always been a huge pyramid scheme, there is no fundamental value in it.
I think he needs a Hug.
Theme Park ride. This owns more to 'ride in a Ferrari with a race driver experience or attraction than Ferrari's Formula 1 racing team.
This is not really space travel, it is riding the shirt tails of the real innovators in this space.
How much more evidence is required to conclude Trump is not the brilliant 'deal' strategist he thinks he is. He's failed with North Korea, his attempt to sabotage NAFTA also failed, he failed to intimidate the EU and now he's failed to get a better deal from China, which despite his bluster is pretty much the status quo with tweeks that regular diplomats could achieve in a heartbeat without any drama.