jakobsen
Isn't mass psychology part of "public information"?? I know little about stock markets, but from the outside I would say that "how I think people will feel about a company" is pretty much what I would base my "bet" on whether a stock will go up or down.
I just feel that too often we are putting professional services and sharing on the same bag, which I find a bit alarming.
Every written letter must be opened and read, possibly with an horrible script which takes time to "decipher". Besides, I don't know if they keep copies of all the mail in case something happens, but it would be orders of magnitude harder to index and search than email anyway. Phone calls are even worse, since you need at least as much time to monitor the conversation as the conversation lasts.
Maybe introducing email would shift some of the friends and family to use this cheaper means of communication, reducing costs. Or maybe Jevons paradox applies here and the number of emails would go up to such an extent that the improved efficiency would not make up for the increased traffic.
P.S.: just to make it clear, I'm not advocating for the inmates to have their phone calls replaced for emails.
I am just now in a place where free camping is not allowed, but the local authorities interpret the law as: "no tents between dawn and dusk". I wish that was put into a written law.
That being said, there's a lot more that could be done, such as allowing kayaks into rivers and lakes without so many unreasonable limitations and/or paperwork.
On the contrary, the scam you describe look much more elaborated than current ones since they got your real peraonal info. Besides technical professionals seem like a great target for scams, since they likely have more money than the average and they are probably not as hard to scam as you might think, given that even a harvard professor fell victim to a 419er http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/03/31/harvard_prof_scams/
I hear this from time to time, but data paints a radically different picture. What you describe is only the case for sub-Saharan immigrants who are just a tiny, tiny minority of the inmigrants coming to Spain. Most inmigrants come from:
1-Romania (for which Spain is obviously not in the path to any other country)
2-Morocco (the vast majority of whom arrive legally since the late 90s)
3-UK (and contrary to popular belief, only 21% of them are over 65 years old)
Then, the largest component of immigration is from the former colonies, due to the shared language (so, again, not being used as a vector)
All of this data is available online on the INE (national institute of statistics)
That's absolutely not the case in other places of the world. In some cases, even the opposite problem arises (that is, discriminating against your own country/culture and favouring a foreign one)
Anyone can help me there?
You make it look that these two are the only alternatives when they are not (e.g. people could also be studying or actively searching for a job). Pretty much the definition of false dichotomy isn't it?
You are describing the imposing of traditional roles based on gender (in your case, that of boys on a girl) which is exactly what feminism is against.
It's the user password of an admin user. What other password can it possibly ask for? a global su password?
The USA has a lower than average life expectancy at age 65, and the life expectancy has also grown less than average for that group, according to the OECD[1]
EDIT: >But is life expectancy the end all and be all I agree there. The same document includes a "healthy life years at age 65" (only for European countries though), but it is arguably a much less objective measurement and hence less useful.
[1] http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/8111101ec066...
[1] http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/03/spain-leads-the-eu-in-gm-crop...
If p(x) means 'x is an integer', you could use the regex /^1$/ since it matches integers only (in particular, the integer 1). That's not sufficient, you need to match all integers.
edited:format
He says the clause doesn't violate the First Amendment because he is freely agreeing to "forfeit his right to speak freely".
Are constitutional rights not inalienable in the USA then? In my country, in case of conflict laws of "greater range" take precedence over laws of "lower range", and contracts are at the bottom of this hierarchy. That means that a clause as the one being discussed here would be void, since you can't give up your right to speak freely even if you wanted¹ Isn't there a similar concept in the USA??
¹ That also means that if laws mandate 3 weeks of holidays, you can't take only 2 weeks in exchange for a bigger pay even if you wanted (happened to me once).
it would be cool to make group pictures, though.