jcd11235

We can only go with your words, and attempt to guess as to why you have such inconsistencies. I would actually be very impressed if you started to "only go with your words" instead of making up some BS claim about my motivations or thoughts, claims that are wholly unjustified by my posts. Let me know if you decide to start. I'm on the side of freedom, also. I just don't buy into all of the misinterpretations of proposed legislation that the fear mongers try to pass as accurate information. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

That's pretty important, don't you think? Basically, this says warrantless wiretaps. We need the information and forget about laws, rules, etc. No, it's not like warrantless wiretaps. Data about a network is far different from data on a network. It's like knowing the dimensions and design of your filing cabinet, not like knowing the contents of your filing cabinet. The bill does NOT make that distinction - you are making a false conclusion. "All relevant data" could VERY easily include data contained on servers within the network - such as webpages, emails, etc etc etc. It's a big stretch to interpret "all relevant data concerning such networks" as data residing on the network. No. Your interpretation of the bill's wording is not consistent with the definitions of the words used and, more importantly, not used. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

More than you might think, judging from your posts. Believe it or not, you're not the only person in these forums with some life experience. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Thanks for taking the time to give that analysis.

On that topic, my own opinion is the most informed. No claim to the contrary could be considered remotely objective. How would anyone else know what or why I think what I think? Of course, when one has no factual basis to support their assertions, it not surprising to see them make meritless claims in an attempt to discredit those on the opposing side of the discussion. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

That's pretty important, don't you think? Basically, this says warrantless wiretaps. We need the information and forget about laws, rules, etc. No, it's not like warrantless wiretaps. Data about a network is far different from data on a network. It's like knowing the dimensions and design of your filing cabinet, not like knowing the contents of your filing cabinet. So they must show "appropriate" protection for civil liberties within a year. That sounds reasonable, without any cause for alarm w/r/t being unConstitutional. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

I can't think of a single research professor that I've met that fits that description. I've met lots of students that are unable to apply theory to real world applications, but that's typically because they memorized the theory instead of learning it, so they lacked any real understanding of it. I've found professors with real working experience to be more likely to rely on "the sanitary and controlled conditions of a … computer," since that's what they relied on when working outside of academia. When outside the comfort zone of their favorite software, they're like fish out of water. As an example, a few months ago I posed a probability problem to a professor who was an actuarial fellow with plenty of experience in his field. I was looking for a closed-form solution, and every method I could think of was unsuitable for one reason or another. The professor suggested that I write a short program to simulate and analyze all 2^100 (approximately equal to 1.27 x 10^30) possible outcomes. Although the program would be easy enough to write, assuming each processing core of my computer could analyze one outcome per clock cycle (highly unlikely), it would require over seven trillion years for the program to run to completion. That's hardly a practical solution, and certainly would not work in the real world. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Because I think for myself instead of listening to and parroting politicians. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

If those are the specific examples, I fail to see how they are problematic w/r/t the First or Fourth Amendments. Then you are either being deliberately obtuse, or your postings in regards to the abuses of civil liberties inherent in the Patriot Act is bullshit - which one is it? The only way I can see a First Amendment violation would be if writing and distributing code for execution of a cyber attack is protected as free speech/press. I seriously doubt such a claim would be considered valid by a judge. Your examples also offer no violation of Fourth Amendment rights. Having access to data about the structure of a network is far different from having access to the data on that network, something of which I'm sure you are well aware. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Considering the subject in the video was not being noncompliant, your scenario is quite the red herring. Nonetheless, you seem to overestimate the ease of which someone can effectively evade restraint from a face down, arm & legs spread position. Could some people do it? A few, perhaps. Could the average person do it? Not likely. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

There's the fundamental difference. I don't believe in relative, subjective standards for cops; I believe in concrete, objective standards for them. The cop in the video failed to meet such a standard. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Hardly. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

If those are the specific examples, I fail to see how they are problematic w/r/t the First or Fourth Amendments. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

I disagree. I've encountered many professors that have "been there" and "done that," that have next to zero capability teaching anyone what they know; they don't know how to teach. I've encountered some of those same professors that lacked sufficient understanding of the theory behind the material to be able to apply the knowledge to a different problem. That's not to say that professors with working experience are uniformly incompetent teachers, or even that research professors are uniformly competent professors. My own experience has been that professors at community colleges (two year colleges that tend to offer, among other degree programs, the first two years of a four year degree, e.g. B.S or B.A.) are generally far superior, w/r/t teaching, to four year university professors because they are there because they want to teach, not to do research and not to build up their resumé. Thus, I'm inclined to believe that a desire to teach is just as, perhaps more, important than whether or not professors have "been there" and "done that." Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Other than increased violation of the First and Fourth Amendments, you mean? I'm guessing now that there's a Democrat in the Oval Office, you're not having a problem with that anymore, hm? There's a reason I asked (and am still waiting for) for specific examples from the bill regarding what you don't like about it. I don't see the First and Fourth Amendment violations you imply exist. Maybe, with your forthcoming examples, they will be self evident. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

On a tangent, approximately what percentage of SCOTUS Justices tend to have opinions different from what was expected by the Presidents that appointed them (i.e. a Justice appointed by a conservative President who surprisingly ends up giving mostly liberal opinions and vice versa)? I ask because it seems the strategy you mentioned, while being both plausible and probable, could result in biting some of those groups in the ass. With a few exceptions, I'm of the opinion that anyone who counts on partisanship by the SCOTUS Justices in order to be successful in their case is setting themselves up for failure. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

I'm pretty sure that's what you meant. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Not directly, no. However, people often have legally binding financial obligations that must be met. If very high interest loans are the only means available to meet those obligations, then there is often little choice in the matter. If those loans result in economic problems for more people than just those who gave or accepted the loans, then yes, the government should be involved. I suspect that, in most cases, simplifying existing laws to eliminate loopholes and disreputable practices that take advantage of those loopholes (e.g. counting fees separate from interest when obtaining APR's in order to claim that loans have a lower finance charges than the actually have) would be sufficient. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Why should anyone oppose this bill? What, specifically, don't you like about it? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

I don't believe that particular law would withstand the scrutiny of the SCOTUS if challenged. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

That sounds quite reasonable. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

It would appear that you don't understand what socialism is. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Exiting the window isn't the point of the shortcut. Closing the window is. There's no need to close the window if all you want to do is exit it. That can be done with command-m (minimize current window), command-h (hide current application), command-q (quit current application), or even clicking on a different window, among other methods. Personally, I find keyboard "shortcuts" to typically be more time consuming than using my track pad, no matter what OS I'm using. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

they don't even dress the same Which one doesn't put his pants on one leg at a time? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Yes, if only slightly so, since window begins with a w. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!