Okay well we'll continue to disagree. I see it like the ihtoit stated. If the people's representatives made those laws, then violations of them are arguably offenses against the people. It's probably a bit pedantic though, and I certainly don't disagree that some laws are bullshit. But then those who wrote them will disagree with us, and we've come full circle. I'm gonna go have a couple beers and philosophize about it some more :-P

I couldn't have said it better.

You're welcome to call bullshit, but then you're wrong. I got out of software, and into management years ago, so I haven't kept up. Have I heard of Gnome, absolutely. Do I know or care what it is currently, no. What I do know is that companies who write code don't necessarily stick to a single area. The one I work for has written products for everything from cyber security, to networking, to environmental products. So, yeah, when Apple records got into it with Apple Computers, it was pretty obvious. Not so much in this case.

If you're okay with that, then you should be okay with giving that free pass to every other nation. Oh, and was the playing field uneven back when the US was a developing nation? Why was China unable to go through the process at that time?

Yes, the US should clean up it's portion of the mess, but China should in no way get a free pass to piss in the commons.

Why do you feel that there should be a per capita comparison? Your comparing apples and oranges, so the amount of "sacrifice" isn't as you claim.

In general, I'll agree. But, exceptions for certain periods, like donuts and potty breaks need to be allowed.

How about we make it so these are only releasable upon a conviction? People get charged all the time, that doesn't mean they've done squat.

Then for those of us who weren't familiar with either, it could easily be confusing, and thus the Gnome foundation did have a valid point.

Gnobody Gnows.

http://www.the-scientist.com/?...
Despite a lack of evidence that peer review works, most scientists (by nature a skeptical lot) appear to believe in peer review. It's something that's held "absolutely sacred" in a field where people rarely accept anything with "blind faith," says Richard Smith, former editor of the BMJ and now CEO of UnitedHealth Europe and board member of PLoS. "It's very unscientific, really."

http://www.ecnmag.com/blogs/20...
As soon as we receive a paper, we publish it," after a cursory quality check. Peer review happens after publication, and in the light of day.

http://www.economist.com/news/...
The hallowed process of peer review is not all it is cracked up to be, either. When a prominent medical journal ran research past other experts in the field, it found that most of the reviewers failed to spot mistakes it had deliberately inserted into papers, even after being told they were being tested.

The people (or more accurately their representatives) made those laws. We can argue all day about the rational for any of them, but it's their choice as to what they want to permit or not in their state. Some would argue that legalized pot, or prostitution is victimless. Others would can counter, and claim both are not...society being the victim, or the young ladies. It mostly depends upon which side of the issue you stand.

Because it's not applied to all jobs. Certainly licensing is appropriately necessary for some positions. The argument here is that there's no reasonable reason for it in this case.

Isn't that a bit like saying that there's only a correlation between head shops and pot use?...Not that I'm against that, or strip clubs, mind you.

Really? You've got no more creativity than that? The problem you mentioned isn't even a problem for the vast majority of FB members. And in spite of allowing us to change settings to "Most Recent", FB continually switches itself back. Pure jackass move on their part.

No shit!