Argue the evidence.
Argue the evidence.
This is a country where family members might, and occasionally do, bribe the local clerk to have you declared dead of natural causes, so they can take over your land and other belongings. Biometrics can't solve that...
WTF? That's the problem biometrics were designed to solve. Say my family asserts I'm dead and goes to court to claim their rightful inheritance. I turn up, press a grimy thumb on the judges notepad and say "match that", case closed! The idea that better identification makes it easier for someone to steal your identity is pure nonsense. The reason your example scenario doesn't happen regularly in the west is precisely because we already have well established systems to uniquely identify individuals, a practice that goes at least as far back as William the Conquer and his Doomsday book
If you don't have a reliable way to identify property owners then you can't have reliable property law. If you don't have reliable property law then you can't have capitalism. Of course, outside the west the unwashed masses often do not have any officially recognised ownership of the land they have lived on for centuries/millennia. That lack of legal recognition is the reason multi-nationals can and do buy/lease huge chunks of land from third world governments and then hire mercenaries to rid "their property" of "lawless vandals and trespassers".
A paper should stand or fall on its own merits.
Yep, and quality papers is what they should be competing for. The journal ranking systems used by univisities (not just in Norway) are designed to give more weight to journals that have a long track record of doing that. This is why the Nature and Science journals at at the top of the list, their long publishing history and track record of quality papers speaks for itself. A low ranked journal will stay a low ranked until it's track record is such that it can be deemed a reliable source. If it does nothing to improve it's record then it follows it will never be respected.
A good article that pushes science forward, even if published in a minor journal, should weigh significantly in your favor for tenure, and a lousy article, even if published in a major journal, should not.
The "impact factor" of individual papers is generally weighed by the number of citations, not the name of the journal.
The more they get paid, the easier they are to bribe. Money becomes less of a thought, they don't see the problem with getting a trivial sum from someone, it isn't helping them much.
Mate, read the logic in what you wrote - how the hell do you bribe someone with something you say they don't want? Having said that I actually agree that most politicians don't care about money, they care about power. Money is a powerful tool but political power trumps it.
TimBL should hang his head in shame - then send his OBE/KBE back to the Queen, like Lennon did.
Fucking gongs. The Brits beg for these baubles, too - like puppies, on their hindmost.
Maybe approving something doom to fail, is a way to get it off your agenda, and cease endless persistent lobbying by media companies.
"Yes. Why don't you start work on the perpetual motion machine - here we've provided you a framework."
Or maybe Tim Berners-Lee is Hitler.
Just the power to distract. It's like stage magic.
Quantum Mechanics is a lovely introduction to Hilbert Spaces! -- Overheard at last year's Archimedeans' Garden Party