UK & Greece: no porn and no money.

Austerity doesn't work. Instead of giving money to incompetent self serving bankers, it would be far better to spend directly on productive economic projects: infrastructure, education, health care. In fact, significantly increased spending on unemployment payments would be better then stock buybacks for the general economy. People on unemployment spend the money immediately which generates immediate real economic demand, a driver of growth.

The reason I did not say this in my post was that I was trying not let it become too long and I wanted to avoid detail that would make things overly complicated.

As long as I'm going into detail, the ideology that you refer to is the F-word: fascism. I hate to use it, because it's just become a meaningless curse word, but it is a term of art in politics. In theory fascism combines the interests of the state, capitalists and workers into a single unified organization. In practice there are a lot of ways to do this, although they share some common patterns. One is that they are authoritarian to a great degree, and suppress (or eliminate) democracy. Another is they foster a demand economy, which is far away from free market capitalism.

Demand economies replace market forces with central decision making. Left wing regimes do this as well. Demand economies fail in one way or another, because you can only ignore market forces for so long before things go bad. An extreme current example is Venezuela, which is suffering a collapse because of ridiculous left wing policies.

In the US and Great Brittan, the right wing demand economy is run for the benefit of the wealthy elites. As I described earlier, that's how low interest rate siphon wealth from the general economy into the hands of the Wall Street elites. It's also why corporate tax rates are at an historic low, and why the 1% have so many tax avoidance opportunities.

The Avengers had an official game on the Super NES and Game Gear, and Nice Code has produced a Titanic game for Famicom.

From the article: "The Cinefix channel says copyright is not an issue because the creations fall under the umbrella of 'parody' which is included in the 'fair use' clause of US copyright law." But how long until YouTube gets OCILLA takedown orders from Disney (Frozen, The Avengers, and Spirited Away) and Fox and Paramount (Titanic) anyway, on the basis that the studio disagrees with the fair use claim?

I intended to ask whether "the system-provided WebKit" could be extended with additional application-provided behaviors for elements and attributes that "the system-provided WebKit" alone does not provide.

I disagree. "Lisp syntax" is almost a misnomer, as there's so little of it. Pretty much the only thing you're guaranteed is that () are for grouping, and spaces are separators (and even that is not necessarily true in CL). Everything beyond that is up to the DSL in question, and people can and do get overly "creative" with the syntax such that it's not simple or obvious to read at all.

Pressure cookers have actually made a comeback among foodies. The difference from grandma's pressure cooking style is that times for anything but pot roast are *extremely* short. For example if you're cooking broccoli it's done after two minutes at pressure. Grandma would have kept the broccoli in the pressure cooker for five minutes and removed it as a pale gelatinous goo.

A pressure cooker is a good acquisition when you're setting up a kitchen because even though you might use it only a couple of times a month, if you don't lock down the lid what you have is just a nice, heavy pot. Slow cooked is still the way to go for chili, but if you don't have eight hours you can get passable results in well under an hour with a pressure cooker.

Are "alternate webkit-based browsers" capable of adding support for HTML5 elements and attributes that Apple chose to leave out of WebKit for iOS? Are they allowed to associate themselves with the http: and https: schemes? I didn't think so.

So have cars.

In some states and possibly in D.C., ordinary traffic tickets require a police to witness you "doing the deed," but more serious crimes like DWI, reckless driving, and possibly driving with a revoked license do not. Yes, they require proof beyond a reasonable doubt to result in a conviction (assuming a fair trial *cough*), but that can be achieved legally through non-police witnesses, surveillance cameras (the cops can subpoena the ATM across the street or the toll-road cameras, and D.C. is littered with government-run security cameras), or even a non-coerced admission.

Assuming the cops had good cause to check his license, assuming there is little or no doubt about him driving with an expired license (maybe he foolishly admitted it, or maybe he was caught on camera), and assuming the offense is one that routinely results in arrest (vs. a ticket-and-tow as some jurisdictions do) then it's a good arrest.

Without evidence that a motorist with a revoked license would typically only be ticketed (and towed), or lack of evidence that he was the driver, it's premature to claim that the arrest was done to cover up the other issue. The only legal tie between the two is that the suspicious car - or perhaps the driver's claim that the car was his car - gave the cops probable cause to check his license for validity. Other than that, they are separate and should be treated as such.

Now, does there need to be an independent investigation to determine if these cops used prudent judgment (vs. "looking for trouble" "judgement") - yes. If they were not acting prudently, does the police dept. need to issue an apology and pay damages? Yes.

Memo to self:

If I drive a car without a license and park it, and I see police activity around my car, call a lawyer and have HIM arrange to recover the car.

Memo to self #2:
If my license is revoked, call a cab.

True, advertising is not the only way to fund the creation of articles and operation of a website. It's just that

Subscribers can read the full text of all comments posted by tepples.
[ Log in ] [ Buy a subscription with PayPal ] [ See other ways to gain access ]

But are there 10" laptops that aren't touch-enabled, like the netbooks of 2008-2012? Or should I just buy an ASUS Transformer Book (a 10" tablet with a snap-on keyboard) and live with getting fingerprints all over it?