I don't agree. The panel is pointless without investingating the scientists they claim to have bias and determining the validity of the accusation.
I never said the panel had merit. I'm simply saying these panels are designed to be soapboxes for those on the panel, nothing more.
Whose primary fans are bored housewives looking for a bodice-ripper novel, or LARP geeks who giggle at the idea of "smallclothes" or "moons blood". And tits. Can't have an HBO miniseries w/o tits.
"From the Earth to the Moon" and "Band of Brothers" suggest you can have an HBO mini-series with little, or no, exposure.
Band of Brothers had one scene of toplessness. I think The Pacific had maybe 3-4.
One thing is for sure, some poor Uber driver's life will be destroyed the first time there is an accident causing injury with another uninsured driver. Uber won't be standing behind them.
So? It's not like someone put a gun to their head and said "you will drive for Uber or else!"
For crying out loud folks...grow the fuck up and take some responsibility for your own actions. If you don't want the risk, don't take the job.
No, but if you work for a company (and these drivers are working for Uber, as much as they try to claim otherwise) that company should be liable for any injuries that occur to their employee (workers comp) as well and any injuries and damages caused to a third party by their employee (insurance). If they want to claim the drivers are contractors, then they have a duty to ensure their contractors are fully certified and insured(that is, commercial car insurance with higher liability) before they pick up a single passenger.
So where do you draw the line then? Let's say I drive to work - 60+mi each way (I really do, sometimes). If I give someone a lift from their place
Because you and he are going the same direction, and you aren't making a profit from them, just something to offset the cost of driving you were mostly going to be doing anyway. Uber drivers are sitting around until they are effectively dispatched by the app(they can pick who they want to pick up, but it's the same idea) to a person to take them to a place that the driver was not (in all likelihood) already going to, and getting paid to do it. If you can't see a clear distinction in that you are either rather dense or going through some major cognitive dissonance.
Or, he filed the patent years ago, and then filed a series of updates to it. Each update delays the final "approval date" and allows him to modify the patent. Over time, he can craft a vague sounding patent and/or one that covers existing technology. Then, his "prior art date" is from a year before when he INITIALLY filed the patent. So while the final patent might have been considered innovative if filed as-is on the initial filing date, patent trolls abuse the "update" system to draw their patents out until they are hard to beat via prior art.
Simple fix for that would be that any time an update is submitted that date becomes the new intial filing date of the patent. The better fix would be to get patent examiners who actually do their jobs and investigate and think about whether a patent should really be granted instead of jsut spending 5 minutes on it.
On the other hand...
It would be impossible to overstress the tenacity with which the Japanese clung to their prepared positions (in the Buna area). Ordinary grenades, gun, and mortar fire were completely ineffective. There were many instances where dugouts were grenaded inside, covered with gasoline and burned, and then sealed with dirt and sand, only to yield--two or three days later—Japanese, who came out fighting. One souvenir hunter, entering a dugout that had been sealed for 4 days, was chased out by a Japanese officer armed with a sword.
There were also numerous cases (I believe they were first encountered starting around Tarawa) where Japanese soldiers would kill themselves almost at the first sight of an American, blowing themselves up with grenades with a loaded rifle sitting next to them, not even trying to engage them. And don't forget, especially in the early days of the war, the officers usually got the soldiers drunk before banzai attacks too.
Range and stealth when you need to to launch an aircraft rather than a cruise missile, with the advantage of his enemy staying with little way to know where the aircraft came from.
Uh, cruise missiles have greater ranges than aircraft and, except for stealth aircraft, have lower radar signatures. Also, a sub would have to surface to launch aircraft but can launch missiles while submerged.
In the beginning, Barbarossa was launched with the assumption that the Soviet Union would collapse quickly. This did not happen, for various military, economic and political reasons.
Its easy to tell why it happened: HItler got distracted. Hitler pulled resources from the drive on Moscow and diverted them to the attack in the Caucasus for the oil fields. Had he continued the drive on Moscow they would have more than likely made it before winter, Stalin would have had to abandon the city, and most Soviet resistance would have collapsed. HIs insistance on personally controlling the war cost him the war and eventually his life.
I always found it interesting that, in the waning months of the war, many in the German high command clung to the hope that they would ally with the Americans and fight the Russians. Reading histories with 1st hand accounts and personal war diaries of the Wehrmacht can really change how you look at the war and really humanizes them.
FORTRAN is not a flower but a weed -- it is hardy, occasionally blooms, and grows in every computer. -- A.J. Perlis
