Simple answer is you take them to court for not paying but do it now while the merger is in the works.
I really hope that this merger fails like the TMobile AT&T merger did but since the current president does not need to get reelected I have little hope.
He is hoping his legacy will be opening Cuba.
Simple answer is you take them to court for not paying but do it now while the merger is in the works.
Great, let's just redefine "chess program" to mean "any program that anyone on earth could consider a game." There, now we have all possible chess variants covered you annoying pedant.
Well, the real question is if this program was replicating the same rules as the one that was previously accepted and supposedly beat?
Many economic models are possible (including subsistence, gift, exchange, and planned, or a mix). The choice depends what sort of society you want and what your priorities are and what your cultural history is. For example, "Palace Economies" and "Water Empires" have lasted for centuries:
I'm not holding central planning as an ideal though. What I write was that at one extreme, one can imagine a reasonable well-planned society that supplies the necessities of life to everyone for essentially no labor needed, leaving everyone lots of free time to do other stuff (including make more things for themselves, raise children, hang out with friends, participate in politics, whatever). There are societies like the ancient Incas that were modeled around this for centuries (explained in the Palace Economy Wikipedia article). It worked for many people for lots of time.
Even the USSR economy "worked", but with lots of problems, including the USA trying to undermine it. If the USSR had not "worked" for decades, why was the USA so afraid of it?
One question to ask is, for most people, is what we have now as a "free market" (although we don't; it is more corporatism and oligarchy), especially in a place like Greece suffering from economic turmoil, better than this planned model, especially given today's materials and automation and so on?
The fact is, so much of our economy is "planned" in so many ways in advance. How many people are involved in deciding what the next iPhone looks like, for example? Granted, it Apple guesses wrong, it may make less profits -- although Apple is a bit of a monopoly in a sense at this point as a close system of apps and such, so almost anything not terrible will sell to the Apple faithful.
However, there are other models people may like better for various reasons.
Imagine, for example, an economy where everyone used the "like" button on Facebook to control what goods would be produced. Limit the number of "likes" per person and you essentially have an economy directed by individuals with a "basic income".
I also wrote there that at another extreme, "... we could have a freewheeling diverse gift economy of local open manufacturing...".
The internet has many aspects of a gift economy. Coupled with improved 3D printing for local on-demand production, this may totally transform our economy, since even if it is hard for a planned economy to get right how many blue shoes people, it is much easier to plan to ensure everyone has a certain amount of raw materials for their 3D printers and enough electricity to run them (or 3D print solar panels or maybe someday cold fusion devices).
What would you object about, say, a plan to create a FOSS commons of free designs and to put a (futuristic, multi-material) 3D printer in every home with enough material and power to use it to print a wide range of consumer goods from shoes to car parts to solar panels? With food supplied from mostly automated indoor agriculture? What is wrong about that as a a baseline from which people could build from in a troubled Greece? Or, what is wrong with the idea, except, of course, that it might put a lot of current industries out of business and change the balance of power in Greek society (and Europe) back to the average citizen?
The Debian project is a bit like an economy controlled by email and IRC chat messages.
There can be many virtues to the market in delivering goods people think feel want. I say "feel" because of advertising. Some people also get addicted to drugs after a drug pusher gets them to try "free" samples; it's not clear how "free" that is.
Also, a "free market" in practice needs to have regulation and transfer payments. For more ideas on that, see:
"Most importantly for our purposes, markets can be reconstructed to make it possible to plan for a more egalitarian economic future. It turns out it is possible for strong governments to use the market system for planning. Once it is realized that markets can be viewed from a governmental point of view as administrative instruments for planning, it can be seen that with a little reconfiguring they can serve collective purposes as well as the individual consumer preferences trumpeted by conservative free market economists. In this form of planning, the information is supplied by the price system that is so central to the considerable, but far from perfect, efficiency brought about by markets.
It's true planned economies could be done badly. But the same is true of free markets in practice, given monopolies, wealth centralization, regulatory capture, lobbying and (legal) vote buying by the wealthiest, and a host of other potential problems.
When a country runs out of tear gas, isn't that a hint that it is possible for something to go wrong seriously with a market leaving many people unhappy? What went wrong (in a deep way)? How can it be fixed? There are lots of options...
Modern Chess is not now a variant called Mad Queen. It is a standardized game referred to as Chess and understood world-wide.
Ya! Just like football!
Did you see that ludicrous display last night?
Yeah, except that doesn't work well for a service. If they have people abusing it, they fire them, and/or prosecute them. And that is what needs discussion.
Its more like if an adult got some DWIs and they took their license away. Yeah, they can't be trusted with a car, but they still need to get to work because it isn't a matter of not getting their allowance money, they need to do their job to support their family and even their job place will suffer if they can't work.
In that case, the solution is public transit, or taxis, or someone driving them. Or in lesser cases, they still let you drive with an interlock device.
You really can't just say the law enforcement can't do something like this and take it away for awhile. Otherwise, you can't enforce laws and regulations. And when that happens, people get hurt, physically and financially. They either need it or not. If they need it, they can abuse it just as well later as they can now. We need a real solution other than taking it away.
If you think of the children all the time, you are probably a pedo.
It's from their enemies, not their friends, that people learn to build walls.
This reminds me of an old tale.
Sun and Wind were arguing who was more powerful. Both argued at length and neither would accept the other one's arguments, so they decided for a competition. They saw a man walking across the land and Wind suggested that whoever gets the coat off him should be considered the most powerful one.
Sun agreed and Wind prepared for the worst. He started to blow and the winds picked up, he put more and more power behind it and soon a veritable hurricane was ripping at the poor man in his quest to pry that coat off him. But the more Wind blew, the tighter the man grabbed his coat and didn't want to let go, growing only more determined at staying warm and sheltered within his only protection from the elements that threw him about.
Soon Wind sat down, exhausted and wheezing. He laughed at Sun who was still sitting there, knowing that she could never succeed where he could not with all his might.
Sun did what Sun did best. She shone. She brightened up the day and warmth filled the air, her beams heating up the ground the man walked on and giving him warmth as well. She just sat there, waiting, providing the warmth every being needs.
And the man eventually decided it's too hot to wear a coat and took it off.
I leave the interpretation to the reader. It's not hard, but maybe we should still explain it to the DOJ, I doubt they'll get it.
Freedom of speech > four horsemen of the infocalypse.
Next strawman please.
“When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.”
And yes, it's of course Jefferson.
It's funny how the very own people who founded your country would probably be the ones that would rebel again against the way you fuck it up today!
Well, everyone IS guilty. I can't remember (someone please help me with a link) that there was a study that showed that everyone breaks the law a couple times every day, without even noticing.
We get more and more fucked up and entirely unenforceable laws. The only reason being that IF, cancel that, AS SOON AS we need something to nail you down with, we'll find something.
And with a 3 meter dish at 300mhz you are have a several degree beam. At 300 meters that is a big stinking beam. At the 4 db contour your at around 25degs beam.
It is simply too dangerous and impractical of a solution.
Flexible configuration: LSM elevators can propel a vehicle in any direction, and cabs can be switched from hoistway to hoistway, enabling the creation of “one-way” hoistways with multiple cabs in each. Modular stators allow the height of the elevator to be customized at installation and extended in the future with minimal disruption. LSM elevators can also accommodate inclined layouts, providing an alternative to stairways or escalators.
Sounds like a Wonkavator.
Why is this considered acceptable? Get physical access to my iPhone (for example - Android is probably the same?), good luck getting in.
Sure, with a PC there's a few things that are a lot more difficult to secure (e.g., the boot process) but throwing hands up in the air and giving up because of physical access is a cop out.
You download a program that appears legit (and may be mostly legit, or be a hacked version of a legit program), and are running it.
But why would I do that? Almost all the programs I use come from the repository, and to get me to download one they'd have to compromise the repository first (which is possible, but not nearly as easy as just advertising a program for download). The rest are again ones I download from known sources, usually the developers' own official site, and again it's not trivial to compromise those sites.
The situation you propose only happens in the world of Windows where downloading random software from untrusted/unknown sources is routine. And if you're routinely doing that, you've got more problems than just a way to bypass the screen lock. The best way to avoid shooting yourself in the foot is to not blithely follow instructions but to stop and ask "Wait a minute, why are they asking me to aim a loaded gun at my foot and pull the trigger?". And if after pondering that question you still think following the instructions is a good idea, please report to HR for reassignment as reactor shielding.