1 Ask customers if they agree to get refund&repay you to different merchant. Subtract 180 days from now for paypal orders (there is no deadline for CC? i could refund 1 year 2 months while testing) and start refunding orders after this date. We are losing ability to do this everyday, but we increase our refund rate by doing this so no hurry
3 sounds like the best option - especially if many of the merchants agree to sell to the same lawyer, maybe it will end up owning the company and reform it
The Capability Object Model, AKA, Capability Based Security. It was invented in response to issues discovered during the Viet Nam conflict by the US Military. The Bell-LaPadula model is an example of a policy model that can keep a computer secure while keeping it usable.
The permission flags mess on your smartphone is NOT capability based security. Neither is AppArmour, or SeLinux. Linux is completely incompatible, as are Windows, MacOS, etc.
Interestingly, it's not much change in code for an application to be ported. You take out code for calling file selection dialogs, and file opens, and replace then with a call for a powerbox to select a capability, and use that in place of the file handles, and you're done.
It's more like cash in your wallet... you can easily take out $5 to pay for something, limiting the side effects of the transaction to $5. It's not possible to run code (without gymnastics) and only give it file X on most operating systems.
WASM is as close as we've gotten in a while since they gave up on Multics. Genode is coming, but they seem to have been distracted by smartphones.
It is not Russian but 'Soviets math'. Ironically, Russia introduced analogy of USA's standardized right after Itina emigrated from Russia and now Russian's math is also optimized for memorizing but not for 'emphasizing reasoning and deeper understanding'
I graduated before USE, and my math classes were... mediocre. To graduate, you had to do 10 problems of average difficulty, so our textbooks didn't even have problems harder than that.
I took a look at the entrance exam at the uni I wanted to apply to and was shocked. Thankfully, I had my dad and he went through Skanavi's exercise book with me.
I look at the USE math exam every year and it's much better than my final exam (although I like gaokao more, it has more varied problems that make you combine different areas of math), but I don't know where the cutoff point for "I won't get into trouble for my students' low results" is.
That's a common criticism that mostly relies on emotions and not facts.
These standardized tests are changed little by little every year and are simply meant to a) ensure similar educational standards for smaller and remote cities b) enable kids to apply to any university in Russia.
Although some specific parents and teachers in particular school might want to focus on repetition of the same problems and tasks it doesn't mean everyone will and it certainly didn't affect me that much. In fact, having some definitive rules on how they assess an essay in Russian helped me get 100% for it the first time, since it was objective.
Government regulation solved parts of it - stuff like environmental protections or labor laws. But in general, it's a very hard problem, and I don't think a theoretical solution exists yet. You can read more about it here: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/
This is not true at least in my experience. Price doesn’t tell you about reliability. I have 10% of broken cartridges and 66% of broken tape drives. These devices have mechanical parts and are sensitive to magnetic fields so they could be damaged easily. If you don't believe me then I can send you all this garbage to you
Violence is justified when you are under an oppressive government. See american revolution and similar violent uprisings. That's the reality. The whole non-violent activism only works when your government isn't oppressive and can actually be reformed through non-violent movements.
I agree violence is justified when someone violates rules. China did violate ‘Article 5 of the Basic Law’ before 2047. So it is global problem that we still haven’t developed tools to force countries to comply with their own laws to stop violence. Or is USA trade war kind of punishment for China?
They should grow first as much as possible before considering to fight with much bigger enemy so that the winner would be unknown. To do so they should define a problem as time-space independent one. It is global problem here that we still haven’t developed tools to force countries to comply with their own laws to stop violence. We need worldwide consensus here what everyone should do in this case before he hits the same problem.
Is your argument that the solution to violence is no violence? I believe that assertion is self evidently useless and harmful to the discussion. We would do a lot better to try and raise the tenor of the conversation by discussing interesting viewpoints, not asserting that the solution to something is to simply stop doing it
My answer to violence is to be smarter. It is global problem here that we still haven’t developed tools to force countries to comply with their own laws to stop violence. We need worldwide consensus here what everyone should do in this case before he hits the same problem.
These blanket statements about “violence” are mostly devoid of meaning. What are we defining as violence in this context such that someone could be “smarter” to avoid it? Is the suggestion that someone getting assaulted should be “smarter” to solve their problem? What about protesters that are being attacked by the police? What about a country that is being invaded? I don’t understand how intelligence can fix “violence” or what “violence” even is in this context.
Moreover, asserting that we need “world wide consensus” strikes me as an incredibly naïve point. Is there anything that everyone agrees on? Are we stuck with violence until everyone agrees? Grand statements about getting along don’t seem to chip away at the problem at all. In fact, I would assert that they are fiercely counterproductive; one can say we all need to get along and until then we have no culpability.
What I mean is to fight back with your brain but not with your body. Someone getting assaulted should be “smarter” to not fight back physically with much bigger opponent. You should look how Edward Snowden or Julian Assange fight back.
“world wide consensus” means to create big enough entity who is ready to act when law is violated anywhere in the world so that its actions can hurt violator. Imagine the world where open-source is replaced by such entity.
? Now consider that's just the tip of the iceberg, the result of a few minutes of searching and scrolling. I know there's instances of protesters being violent, but it's
a.) not possible for 30% of a city to be on the streets at the same time, without even more supporting them, and it's not possible for all these brave, peaceful, beautiful people to be singing songs like they do, for a protest that's just instigated by a bunch of hooligans or Western intelligence agencies, or however the attempts to smear them go.
b.) not possible to explain most of the police brutality by any action on behalf of the protesters. Which some police apparently call "cockroaches", instances of that being caught on video, too.
You can "print" unlimited amount of money but Earth resources are limited, moreover its usage is overshot (Earth Overshoot Day is 29 July 2019). So the problem is how the money is spent. We should tax money that spent to decrease Overshoot Day.
Earth's resources are limited over a given timespan, but most of these resources are not exhaustible, particularly not hydrocarbons.
Given that all human populations that have reached a certain standard of living so far have ceased to grow beyond replacement levels, overpopulation is likely not going to be a long-term concern either.
It is therefore not a problem to overshoot for a while, assuming that we eventually reach a level of technology that lets us maintain our standard of living in a sustainable fashion.
Earth's resources are decreasing over a given timespan because we both spent exhaustible resources and produce wastes for future generations. It can’t be sustainable system.
There is no evidence that overpopulation is not long-term concern. Look at Africa, India, China
New technologies are not guaranteed. You can’t simultaneously give less and less time and resources to your children and ask them to be better than you. They will choose to continue your tactic until civilization collapse as future generations can't vote
> Earth's resources are decreasing over a given timespan because we both spent exhaustible resources and produce wastes for future generations.
To my awareness, there is no critical resource that is both exhaustible and non-substitutable. Waste is not a fundamental issue, it can be stockpiled and possibly recycled with future technology. Most of it can also simply be burned with relatively low environmental impact, at least in modern incinerators [1].
> There is no evidence that overpopulation is not long-term concern. Look at Africa, India, China.
Yes, do look at these countries:
Chinese fertility today is well below replacement, despite giving up the disastrous "one child policy".
Indian fertility rates are at 2.2, very near replacement levels.
African fertility rates vary wildly with countries, but here as well you can see that fertility is inversely correlated with standard of living. Moreover, a low standard of living also implies relatively low resource usage.
> New technologies are not guaranteed.
New technology isn't strictly required, it just implies a lower standard of living.
> You can’t simultaneously give less and less time and resources to your children and ask them to be better than you.
Of course you can. The more pressure there is, the more likely it is that new solutions are developed.
Imagine if there wasn't any petrol left, we'd put a lot more effort into renewables. They wouldn't even need subsidies.
> They will choose to continue your tactic until civilization collapse as future generations can't vote
Well, sometimes civilizations do collapse. We may well enter an age of decline again. We also may launch a global thermonuclear war. I'm not saying a rosy future is guaranteed, I'm saying resource exhaustion and overpopulation are not as big a concern as people believe.
Hydrocarbons didn't form themselves. An energy source is required to remove the oxygen from CO2. If it is possible to tap that energy source directly, then depending on energy from hydrocarbons is incredibly irresponsible because high concentrations of CO2 make the planet less habitable for most life including humans.
1 Ask customers if they agree to get refund&repay you to different merchant. Subtract 180 days from now for paypal orders (there is no deadline for CC? i could refund 1 year 2 months while testing) and start refunding orders after this date. We are losing ability to do this everyday, but we increase our refund rate by doing this so no hurry
2 Ask users w/ lawyers to fill class action lawsuit or at least to share their contacts/lawsuit+claim interest rate for unpaid amount https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=8979590#p8979...
3 subrogation: sell our accounts to lawyers