Also, since some of your politicians have suggested killing Assange we could not extradite him if there was any danger of this happening. Almost all countries in Europe (UK and Sweden definitely anyway) consider the death penalty to be so barbaric that we refuse to extradite people to face it regardless of the crime they are accused of.
Oh yeah, cause we Swedes care so much about not turning over people to countries where they might be killed or tortured (1). And Sweden will surely stand up to the US when informal requests are made to handle the issue (2).
Can't seem to paste in the links for some reason, but for (1) Google for "extradition egypt torture sweden". As for (2), remember what happened to the Pirate Bay servers here in Sweden?
> The easiest way to protect yourself from Wikileaks is to ensure your
> organization doesn't do anything worth leaking. Simple as that.
Are you trying to say, "If your organization has done nothing wrong, you've nothing to fear from Wikileaks."??
Seems to me that my government has been saying that kind of thing to me, as they extend their surveillance powers.
This has more to do with the power imbalance between the individual and his/her government than the exposition of moral wrongs. Today's societies work by the state holding a monopoly on violence. To make up for this imbalance, the individual person has a much greater right to secrecy than the state does. While there is to a large degree an unfortunate mixing of public and private regarding e.g. politicians not paying taxes for their housekeepers, the government should be held to a higher standard than the individual, because when it steps outside its boundaries, the government can cause much more damage.
It's not rape because he didn't have a condom, it's rape because he had a condom on that broke during intercourse, the woman claims she told him to stop, and he didn't. In my book, if the woman tells you to stop and you don't, then yes, that does qualify as rape. Of course to this date only Assange and the woman in question know what actually happened that night, but there's definitely grounds for the police to suspect him of rape.
In this particular instance, I do believe that this has more to do with his connection to Wikipedia than his connection with these two Swedish women, but rape trials are hard enough on the defendant without that kind of stories being spread around.
The nations that produce the majority of oil are not staunch allies>
Wasn't that why you invaded Iraq?
In the case of fire:
Calmly exit the building
For no reason, re-enter the building until given the OK by emergency responders
This is so that when the fire trucks come, they can be told how many people are still inside. It's not only to not risk your own life, but to make their job easier and safer.
Nice try, but it's fairly common knowledge (ie, taught early in algebra) that the square root breaks equality. Ie, sqrt(x^2) != x but sqrt(x^2) = |x|. Add that to your proof and no contradiction occurs.
>>>the teabaggers would go apeshit if the US-DOJ Antitrust stepped in and forced another set of breakups in telecom
No I wouldn't.
The breakup of AT&T Monopoly was one of the best things to happen, but only because it gave us choice in our telephone services. If the Comcast or Verizon Monopoly are broken apart, what would it achieve? We'd still be stuck with just one cable down the middle of the street.
What we really need is 10-20 cables running down the middle of the street, each one offering a different ISP. Imagine the present: Comcast or Verizon. Imagine the future: Comcast or Cox or Time-Warner or AppleTV or MSN or Verizon or Quest or Mediacom or Google ISP or.....
Of course that won't happen so long as local governments keep insisting upon holding a monopoly.
No, what you really need is one cable running down the street, operated as a government utility like the road itself is. Then you let anyone set up shop as ISP and run traffic over that cable. Individual cables mean it's more expensive to startup a competing business, which in turn gives you as a customer a higher price for less service.
With combustion, you have the same amount of matter you started with. What you are doing is releasing energy tied up in the chemical bonds.
E=mc^2 works both ways, you know. The high-energy bonds in gasoline have a greater mass than the bonds that plop out the other end.
How can anyone say with a straight face that a progressive tax is more fair than a flat tax? All else being equal. (If it's not, then that is what we should focus on fixing)
Easy, when you include the costs of living as well. Someone making $100k a year has a lot less money after rent/housing tax and food than someone making $1m, even if the first person pays 20% tax and the second person pays 40% tax. A roof over your head and food on the table is not an optional expense or some kind of luxury that you can forego when times are lean.
And despite what some people here on
Net effect: people who earn more money would pay more than the original percentage in tax anyway, so why not use a progressive tax rate from the start and at the same time have fewer people dependent on the government for their daily survival?
If a player has the industrial muscle to build one, what whine is that of yours? Build your own stack of doom to counter it, or shut up and lose.
Disclaimer; it's been a while since I hung out on the fan forums, but here's my impression of why SoDs are unpopular: it's the AI handicap.
Sure, on lower levels (noble, prince, monarch) it's not a big issue, cause the AI only gets a small bonus. But when you get up to emperor or immortal, it's very hard to keep up. Not only are the AI armies cheaper to build, they are cheaper to maintain as well. Trying to keep up with Monty or Shaka past the medieval age is a good way to see your economy grind to a halt.
If, on the other hand, you can guess the private crypto keys out of a DRMed PMP just by clipping a 15 dollar device from some shady mod-chip vendor to the recharging port and waiting a few days, heads will roll. There are a lot of devices these days that are designed to keep keys secret from the owners of the hardware. Particularly for common ones, voltage attack devices might well become fairly common advanced hobbyist and/or grey market items...
Worth noticing is that the 100 hours mentioned in TFS was on a 81-box cluster. They estimated it to be about a year on a 2.4GHz CPU. Of course, for the purposes of cracking DRM keys, it is not unreasonable to imagine a distributed network cooperating.
More interesting, in my opinion, was that it has 50% chance to guess the key in O(n * log n) time, and their example needed only 650 faulty messages (extrapolating from a 12% single-bit-error rate, it should work with a bit over 5000 total messages generated).
"reduces the computational complexity[...]by two orders of magnitude[...]
Additionally, the process used just one percent of the energy that would typically be required"
Well, duh, what's so shocking about a computation taking 1% of the time previously needed now only takes 1% of the energy as well?
Modded funny for some reason
[quote]Let's say you and the plumber are both paying 25%. Then, you initially earned $133; the government taxed you 25%, which is $33.33, and now you have $100 left. Now you give that $100 to the plumber, who in turn has to give $25 of that income (25%) to the government. $75 of your $133 has arrived in the plumber's hands, actually paying for the plumbing work. Your actual tax rate here is 75/133 which is about 56% - not the 25% that it initially appears to be.[/quote]
But in that scenario, the plumber is paying 0% tax. You can't count the $25 he sends to the IRS as taxation both for you and him. Your personal tax payment to the government is exactly the 25% they say it is. I'm not a big fan of sales tax either (it's far too heavy a burden for people with low incomes), but since the alternative would be heavier taxation of properties and wealth, you can guess the odds of that happening
Why yes, I _am_ a card-carrying communist!
"Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." -- Vince Lombardi, football coach