I would have signed if this wasn't just so badly written. It's written as if by a high schooler. I didn't give it any serious credit.
I suck as a writer. But I'm hoping somebody would create something like this, better written, better backed, and with a lot of good examples of current, and potential abuse if this law goes into affect.
More effective if they just stopped without announcing a date.
When you announce dates, you are basically telling everybody "hey, no security between these days." Instead, just stopping it people will wonder 1) has it stopped? 2) did they fix it? 3) are they somewhere else? But then be able to continue about their day without getting TSAped. Airlines would even see a boost in sales, and probably start running on time for once.
Something has been pawing in the back of my head, and i could be completely out of loop here.
Could the perceived aggressiveness be more related to the number of leaks? Quite frankly, we've seen more leaks in the past year than we had in the last 20 (or more) years. It's nuts! It's like the US government just popped a giant hemroid.
And something that was mentioned in the past, in defense of Bush; the president has little control over several aspects of the government. He's just a figure head. As a matter of fact, this was brought up in defense of McCain, too. Saying it didn't matter who got elected because of that.
I really, really wish our government was more transparent. I'd love to see how much actual interaction, and influence the president really has in these matters. Hell, it could be a positive factor for Bush if you can prove he didn't have control.
In the long term, Nintendo Pres may have a point, kinda.
Right now, the reason why lowering the price works is people are expecting these games to be expensive. So, when the prices take a dramatic cut, they jump on it.
I do agree there are a number of people that wouldn't even consider a game unless the price is below a certain point. There are even people that would get low price games for s&g's just to check them out. But what if every game was always this low?
I'm not advocating high price games; as a gamer, I'd love to see cheaper games. But in hindsight, if games were always just $10, would we see the same revenue boosts? Maybe ... but I'm biased as a gamer; I'd have less trouble buying games at $10 (hell, I'd probably have hundreds if they were just $10). I guess that would answer my own question. lol
Re: How to do the right thing and the wrong thing at the same time.
Oh, they are very much sold here in the US. I've had several since moving here (moved from German to US in '1990). You just have to look in the right spots - real import places, german imports if you have any. Same with some Japanese candy I use to have as a kid.
Unlike US counterparts, these treats are made with real sugar, and taste quite good!
Perfect Onion piece: "Peter King introduces new law making it illegal to shoot people." "Clearly, our existing laws aren't effective enough," King said during the introduction of the new bill. "We need to remind people shooting people is bad."
There's a certain level of security people will accept before they feel Big Brother is poking too much in their business. Look at nude pictures of you, having somebody feeling up your privates are clearly over the line of acceptability.
People just want to get on a plane and get to their next destination. It's no different than getting on a bus, train, or in a taxi.
Ah, but all hearsay. Did they have the actual exam? or were they actually talking about the test-bank questions? Clearly, if you had the test-bank, you had all the answers (you just didn't know which ones would get selected).
Keep in mind, the test-bank questions is the only proof this professor has of actual cheating. He's laying claim that using the test-bank questions was the cheating.
It was mentioned, somewhere, some of the students that came forward claimed to have used the test-bank, but thought it was fine. I'm siding with them.
You're right. It's not "lazy." But I think the real issue here is the professor claiming these were his questions, he made himself. Even to the point where he even said he tends to make questions that don't make sense, so he apologized in advance.
Now, he's clearly saying he used somebody else's questions (after already claiming them to be his original work!). Clearly a double standard here.
Yes. Except, the professor told the students HE made the questions. So the question isn't about the ethics of being able to copy the answers; but about him lying to the student body about creating the test personally. Basically, the professor plagiarized his tests, and now he's trying to blame his students for his laziness because they happened to have located the *publicly available* test questions.
*I should append I happen to be a test learner, too. I tend to remember answers I get wrong better than the answers I get right. However, with answers I get wrong, I find out why I was wrong, not just look at the right answer (meaning: I try to understand why the other answer is right).
Ah, a fair playing field. Outside that is where we find the good students vs the okay ones. Nothing in life is a fairly played field. If one student is more resourceful than another, should we really be blaming the resourceful student?
I agree with SteelWolf; the purpose of the courses is learning the material. If a students can learn it better by using publicly available practice tests, so be it. They are learning, and that's the whole point here.
I hadn't directly paid for cable since, oh, 2003. I hadn't watched cable since the 90s. And the /only/ reason I have cable now is because it's lumped in with my HOA. I prefer to be without it, with cheaper HOA payment.