The old maxim "you're right to swing your fist..."
Funniest error ever?
Remember, those who do not vaccinate their children put their children at risk, but these are THEIR children, not 'ours'. If they want the freedom to choose how to raise their children, they need to accept the responsibility for their actions.
Does that responsibility include negligent homicide when their kid who isn't vaccinated infects someone else's kid and kills them?
What I find impressive and baffling is how people assign value to things that have no value for any purpose other than a means of exchange.
What I find baffling is how many people grossly underestimate the value of a standard means of exchange.
If only 5% of businesses refuse service, it probably isn't an issue. If 50% of businesses refuse service, it probably will be an issue. Tyranny of small decisions is not a logical proof, only a potential outcome.
It's obvious to me -- in that it trips my bullshit meter -- that posting a sign at the Circle K on the corner that says, "Sorry, no homos." is wrong - deeply wrong - but I can't make a logical argument against the business that doesn't get into businesses being dependent on roads and police and fire and other government services, and as such, the government can make rules that force you to cater to your enemies. Businesses need licenses, and depend on state services -- after that, I got nothing. Let the shitty businesses out themselves as close-minded bigots.
It's sort of a tragedy of the commons (it looks like tyranny of small decisions is a more accurate name). If you allow discrimination in "private" business, you reduce the availability of some product or service to the group that you're discriminating against. If the availability gets reduced enough, you begin to get a class of people that can't participate in the economy, or even in society at all, because there's simply no way for everyone in that group to get what they're trying to buy, even if they have the money. Obviously this is a much bigger issue when it comes to basic necessities like food and housing, but it can still cause problems for general consumer goods and services.
From the stories I've heard from people that have dealt with psychologists (particularly assigned ones), is that they tend to be fairly dismissive an uncaring in general. Your experience may have been more because it was a psychologist than them being with VA.
Just to provide a little counterargument, can you imagine what it would be like for doctors, especially psychologists and psychiatrists, if they did start caring that much about every patient? After a couple years, they would be the ones needing the full-time care.
Did someone else notice that if the chances for something to happen are exactly a million to one, there is a 1 to ten chance that it actually happens?
Million-to-one chances work nine times out of ten.
Does he have any idea what the world water situation is?
Yeah, 75% of the world is covered with water. If you have unlimited free energy, water purification is not a problem.
I know the Slashdot meme of Apple suing over 'rounded corners' is prevalent. However, the actual design patent Apple were suing over contained numerous clauses (including operational UI elements as rendered by software) that the courts evaluate for infringement as a whole. It had nothing to do with Apple claiming violation of a singular clause of their design patent.
The meme comes directly from the design patent.
And a majority of Americans voted, twice, for W
Not even close. Just over 50% of the people who voted did so for Bush. Voter turnout in the United States isn't even remotely close to 100%.
Of course there is. Apple isn't allowed to distribute copies of Android to the public except under license from Linus Torvalds, Google, and other contributors to Android. If Apple accepts the license of Android (mostly Apache v2 and GPLv2), it has to give the public an implicit or explicit license to patents that Apple holds that Android allegedly infringes. So unless Apple wants to end up dropping lawsuits against Samsung, it has to refrain from making an iDroid.
Is what you said true, though? Does the APL and GPL require granting the public a license to all of Apple's patents, or does it only require granting a license to users of the software when they use the software (i.e. you can't distribute some GPL software and then sue the people that got it from you)?
I haven't read the licenses lately, and I don't care enough to go read them right now, so that is a genuine question.