Just a question out of curiosity - how were they able to prove "...she was actively using her facebook account day-to-day." I agree that yes, the account was active, but how could they prove that the ex-wife was the person using the account?
I'd think that proving the person behind the curtain was the wizard would require rather more proof than just seeing the shoes beneath the curtain move...
The whole "reasonableness" test. It's a reasonable assumption, based on all the other circumstances. Besides, this is facebook, home to people who suffer from ISD (Infinite Selfie Disorder).
Curiosity works for a lot of us. We're willing to turn aside from the tools that work for us for a bit, even build up some technical debt in our area of expertise, to explore some new technology that might in the long run prove beneficial, or at least interesting (and if you're a curious person, poking around stuff that's interesting is FUN).
I think the name is probably going to help, not hurt.
It's in the long-standing tradition of weird/funny/pun names in *nix. Less is more, unix is kinda like multics, but with the gonads cut off", etc.
As long as nobody starts calling it "GNU/Useless"
The Fisker Karma is not an "all-electric car." It has an electric drivetrain with a gasoline range extender. The article itself makes this quite clear:
Bad Karma! Bad, bad Karma!!!
Sounds more like some sort of tax credit scam than an actual relaunch, given the current competition.
How many QA engineers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? 2
If legal documents can be sent over Facebook, then shouldn't communications on Facebook be regulated under the FCC telecommunications act?
By extension, shouldn't the FCC regulate the post office, courier services like FedEx, UPS, and DHL, and print newspapers?
Faxing summonses has been common practice for decades. The FCC might regulate the common carrier (the telco), but that doesn't automagically give them jurisdiction over the agency / means used (your individual office's fax machine or computer, your internal office network, you as the user, etc)
Like so many things in life, "it depends." Not just on the country/province/state/territory, but also on the practice of the individual court, which is determined by that courts' procedures and precedents.
So many people try to duck service that the courts are streamlining things in self-defense. Nobody else wants clogged courts, re-re-recalling witneses, etc.
What did this woman in is that they were able to prove that she was actively using her facebook account day-to-day. If it was an account that's been inactive for a year or three, the judge might not have been so ready to innovate.
Though, it seems, as AP reports, that is simply not true...
1) As the United States ramps up its fight against Islamic militants, the public can’t see any of it. News organizations can’t shoot photos or video of bombers as they take off — there are no embeds. In fact, the administration won’t even say what country the S. bombers fly from.
2) The White House once fought to get cameramen, photographers and reporters into meetings the president had with foreign leaders overseas. That access has become much rarer. Think about the message that sends other nations about how the world’s leading democracy deals with the media: Keep them out and let them use handout photos.
3) Guantanamo: The big important 9/11 trial is finally coming up. But we aren’t allowed to see most court filings in real time — even of nonclassified material. So at hearings, we can’t follow what’s happening. We don’t know what prosecutors are asking for, or what defense attorneys are arguing.
4) Information about Guantanamo that was routinely released under President George W. Bush is now kept secret. The military won’t release the number of prisoners on hunger strike or the number of assaults on guards. Photo and video coverage is virtually nonexistent.
5) Day-to-day intimidation of sources is chilling. AP’s transportation reporter’s sources say that if they are caught talking to her, they will be fired. Even if they just give her facts, about safety, for example. Government press officials say their orders are to squelch anything controversial or that makes the administration look bad.
6) One of the media — and public’s — most important legal tools, the Freedom of Information Act, is under siege. Requests for information under FOIA have become slow and expensive. Many federal agencies simply don’t respond at all in a timely manner, forcing news organizations to sue each time to force action.
7) The administration uses FOIAs as a tip service to uncover what news organizations are pursuing. Requests are now routinely forwarded to political appointees. At the agency that oversees the new health care law, for example, political appointees now handle the FOIA requests.
8) The administration is trying to control the information that state and local officials can give out. The FBI has directed local police not to disclose details about surveillance technology the police departments use to sweep up cellphone data. In some cases, federal officials have formally intervened in state open records cases, arguing for secrecy.
It's called reverse discrimination, and it's wrong.
Doing so in education teaches by action (and thus re-affirms) that somehow women can't compete. And yet, the majority of people graduating degree programs are women.
You can't reduce gender bias by introducing even more gender bias. And since we're talking about education, what better place to practice / teach non-bias?
Link to Original Source
In 2005, work began on a project headed by Andrei Zmievski to bring native Unicode support to PHP by embedding the International Components for Unicode (ICU) library and internally representing strings as UTF-16. Because this project would lead to major internal and user-affecting changes, it was planned to be the next major PHP version (i.e. PHP 6) along with a few other features.
By using UTF-16 as default encoding, developers would need to convert the code and all input (e.g. data from requests, database, etc.) from one encoding to UTF-16 and back again. This conversion takes a lot of CPU time, memory (to store the much larger strings), and creates a higher complexity in the implementation due to the increased need to detect the proper encoding for the situation. In light of all of this and the relatively small gain, many contributors became unwilling to use "trunk" as their main development branch and instead either using the stable 5.2/5.3 branches or refusing to do development at all. This shortage of developers led to delays in the project.
After a vote in July of 2014, it was officially decided that the next major release would be called PHP 7. The primary reason for even considering the name is the widely-known existence of the previous failed attempt of a new major release, and the existence of numerous books and other resources which already referred to the previous PHP 6. To address potential confusion, there was an RFC (i.e. request for comments) and a vote on whether or not to reuse this name.
In the end it was decided to release PHP 7 as the next major version, arguing that the worst case scenario is that they needlessly skipped a version as opposed to the worst case of releasing it as PHP 6 which is widespread confusion in the community.
Read the full story here: Valhalla News — From PHP 5 to 7"
Link to Original Source
Well, since you FINALLY asked how you are absurd:
1st definition of absurd from google: Ab-surd: (of a person or a person's behavior or actions) foolish; unreasonable.
Going through every post I make in every thread, posting multiple responses (up to 100 posts a day) attacking me based on my gender (including in a thread about sexual harassment) - I think that most people would qualify your behaviour as both foolish and unreasonable.
Getting all bent out of shape when someone exposes your bullying tactics and then tells other people how to do the same to you - both your original bullying and your response when you get it thrown right back at you are foolish, unreasonable, and just plain childish.
Saying I'm stalking you when it's obvious you're the one doing the stalking - foolish, unreasonable, and more than a bit delusional. Oh, and your paranoia is showing.
Thinking that attacking me because I'm transsexual is going to get you anywhere on a tech site, when tech attracts a higher-than-average number of people in the LGBT community, as well as sympathizers, is foolish. Continuing it day after day when it doesn't work is not just unreasonable, it's stupid and/or insane.
Clinging to arguments for your HOSTS file that are completely orthogonal to today's reality, and that obviously the vast majority don't care about and don't need because they have found better ways to solve their own problems, is foolish on it's face and unreasonable to those looking on, who use their computers just fine without your "solution."
Going on about how "taking estrogen is rotting your brain", that "you're crazy to have cut your balls off" (btw - I'm not a surgeon, and I don't pretend to be one on the innnertubes), when I'm following expert medical advice that has a proven track record of success, well, that's both foolish and ridiculous.
The problem isn't your hosts file - it's your behaviour, which certainly is absurd, and probably disturbed as well.
That leads to another question - why? What is it about me in particular that sets you off worse than anyone else? Is it me, or do you have a problem with women in general (I seem to recall some attacks you made on other women who have challenged you that would indicate that this may be the case)? Do you think that men are superior to women, and that anyone who willingly "trades in" to become a woman is stupid because you have a low opinion of women?
And that, of course, brings us back on-topic - the "science has a sexual assault problem. You don't seem to be capable of the introspection necessary to realize how absurd your behaviour is. How many other women have you felt it's your right to attack, and still continue years later, about their sex, gender, or sexual identity, just because you disagreed with their opinion on a technical issue of absolutely no import to anyone but you?
Link to Original Source