But given its prevalence, jQuery is probably essential to know,
It's clear enough that they're talking about web UI development, but when do you not hear someone complaining about assumptions made in the summary?
Then how does one go about finding such a friend willing to offer such charity? Perhaps it appears easy to you, but a lot of people remain homeless because they lack certain social skills. This could result from autism spectrum disorder, schizophrenia, past abuse, or any of several other conditions.
If they're as disabled as you're describing, they're likely to be eligible for state mental health programs. Staying with family or friends would probably be a better option, but if mental issues or circumstance preclude that, then options are limited. These are the people who couldn't have signed lease papers on their own, anyhow.
No one can rely long-term on staying in shelters because it is too likely that on a given night, there are too many people there.
Shelters aren't meant to be a long-term solution. The mentally ill and physically disabled ought to be provided for by the government. In many countries, they are. In the United States, there is some limited level of help (previously mentioned state institutions). Children that fall into homelessness may be forced to enter the foster system, which sucks, but I don't have a better answer, based on the available options that I know about. Physically and mentally able adults should be able to find some kind of work, and will probably qualify for government assistance, besides that.
And I was assuming that the lack of sit/lie laws in those half-dozen nearby cities would not last forever because those half-dozen nearby cities would want to try to shake that perception.
...
Then how should somebody who is already homeless go about researching which nearby cities both A. lack a sit/lie law and B. are highly unlikely to adopt one in the next twelve months?
Isn't the homeless guy hanging out in the library all day a cliche? Information is more available now than it ever has been, and word of mouth is just as powerful as it ever was.
We don't have a perfect system, and there are "holes" that aren't well-handled. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on how to handle homelessness and mental illness, and how we can improve our current system, but I think we've gotten pretty badly off-topic from the statement that you originally made, and which I took exception to:
In cities that have criminalized homelessness, failure to own or rent an enclosed place in which to live lands a person in prison.
I might rephrase my reading of that as "All people who live in cities that criminalize homelessness, and who fail to own or rent shelter, land in prison". I think that I've sufficiently supported my objections to that statement. If you made a weaker claim, like that it "tends to land a person in prison", I probably wouldn't have replied, because I think that's a more reasonable claim, backed up by statistics.
But I think that this isn't even the argument that you're interested in making. I think that the root of the matter is that you're more stuck on the idea of whether sit/lie laws are governmental coercion with the non-choice to sign a rental lease or be thrown in jail, and whether any specific lease entered into under those circumstances could be considered to have been entered into of both parties' free wills. Is that a fair assessment, or have I missed the mark?
Not where subletting is a crime.
This is renting.
You can't tell me that living with a friend would be a crime. I'm not talking about a lease, I'm talking about charity. If the law precludes being homeless and we're excluding the option of renting for the purpose of the discussion, that's about the only option, in one form or another.
Shelters are chronically full.
So, kind of like "no one stays in shelters; there's too many people there."
Relocate where?
Another city where living in a park isn't a crime, if that's what you've been forced to do.
Setting foot in a different country is a crime. Does elsewhere in the same country also criminalize homelessness?
Setting foot in a different country is a crime? You'll need to explain that one a little more. I was assuming, though, that one could find another city with different laws. Where I live, there are sit/lie laws. There are a half-dozen cities in the region that don't have them, and they become known as places with lots of homeless people around.
governments coerce people into renting.
The purpose of government is to coerce certain behaviors out of its populace to maintain an overall higher standard of living for the people under its control, and there are certain categories that I can't help but consider less harmful than others. Then again, I'm convinced that most people have legal alternatives to homelessness or arrangements that include paying someone to stay somewhere. In the U.S. at least, there aren't national laws outlawing being homeless; those are usually left to cities, and those laws vary place-to-place.
failure to own or rent an enclosed place in which to live lands a person in prison.
Strictly speaking, this isn't true. One could live with someone else who rents or owns a space, stay in a shelter, or relocate. There are options aside from renting/owning in that particular place.
More generally speaking, government's business is coercing people to act in ways that they may not have on their own. It's what they do. Most people accept some level of government coercion in their lives because it's better than the alternative of living with other people doing strictly what they please.
You could probably buy a 3 or 4 TB drive.
I think that 2TB is currently the largest 2.5" drive. The system apparently supports up to 6TB, and I guess some people have done it with cable extensions to 3.5" drives, or something.
And the fanbois will drop to their knees and chap their lips all the while singing the praises of both Msoft and Sony for finally giving them the storage they both should have been released with when they debuted.
....Or it'll give less-technical people another purchase option. The new PS4 version is apparently releasing for AUD550, which is what the previous versions launched at. I don't get where the vitriol is coming from.
Don't know of any games that used it.
There were a number of games in North America with HDD support, and a larger list with online support.
There is no reason for "ethics" to cost extra. None. It is a complete fraud.
So, companies employ slave-level labor, irresponsible waste disposal, etc just because they like tenting their fingers and cackling evilly? Doing things properly costs more money, or we wouldn't have so many examples of companies cutting costs in unethical ways. If we somehow forced every company in existence to suddenly fly straight and do right by their employees and the environment, there would be increases in costs to them across the board. If it was just as cheap to do things in a way that would generate good PR, then why wouldn't corporations do that? If you have a way of running businesses in a friendlier way without increasing costs, then I'm sure that you're making a fortune as a business consultant.
What I am saying is that companies that see "ethical" as an avoidable expense are sociopathic
Companies are sociopathic by nature. Their purpose is to seek profit, with any other considerations coming in at a distant second place.
Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.
