Do you know if anyone has ever sued to either not pay taxes while not allowed to vote, or to be allowed to vote? Ye olde "no taxation without representation"?
1. Declaration of Independence versus Constitution. Not the same in terms of legal weight.
2. You're implicitly combining "representation" with "voting." The writers of the Declaration of Independence believed (even if we dislike it today) that those are separate. You can tell because all their wives and daughters were still prohibited from voting for generations.
3. If what you're suggesting applied, then wouldn't that mean everybody who hasn't registered to vote, or noncitizens and those under 18--are all exempt from sales tax and income tax?
Why would they sue to not pay taxes? They make no money that would qualify as taxable, so they would owe no taxes on income not earned. Even people working part time on very low wages can make so little they do not owe. They still have to file though. Never considered if inmates have to file each year or not
someone serving time is going to be worried about vehicle registration and insurance? just claim it as "off road" with the state since it's obvious you will not be driving it. no need for insurance on a car that's not being driven. property tax might be an issue, but I seriously doubt it's a large percentage of inmates that need to consider it. all in all, nice stretch, but off topic really
Huh. I wonder if part of this is that, when you make a globe, you’ll pretty much always look “down” on it. And as another poster said, most of the land (and thus peoples and nations) are in the north. So it makes sense it’d end up on top?
…and you usually find out they’re shitty because of how they handle (or don’t) “political” conversations.
Pro tip: You don’t get to decide for someone else what’s “just” politics. If someone else says it’s important, while you’re interacting with them, it’s important.
>Pro tip: You don’t get to decide for someone else what’s “just” politics. If someone else says it’s important, while you’re interacting with them, it’s important.
It's rarely, if ever, important to any concerned party's day to day life. It's bullshit partisanship instilled into idiotic brains by the media and social media.
Just because they say it's important, doesn't make it so.
Eh. While that might be true in the course of say, governance - where IMO it’s important and worthwhile to use scientific methodology (statistics, etc) to establish “importance” -
…your family around the notional holiday dinner table? The personal is what’s important, kinda by definition. The point is the subjective and emotional.
The package file (whatever your system) is communication to other humans about what you know about the versions you need.
The lockfile is the communication to other computers about the versions you are using.
What you shouldn't have needed is fully defined versions in your package files (but you do need it, in case some package or another doesn't do a good enough job following semver)
So, this:
package1: latest
# We're stuck on an old version b/c of X, Y, Z
package2: ~1.2
(Related: npm/yarn should use a JSON variant (or YAML, regular or simplified) that allows for comments for precisely this reason)
With deterministic version control, library authors are supposed to document the exact version that a library was tested with. (Or the oldest version that they tested with and still works.)
People who use a library might use newer versions (via diamond dependencies or because they use latest), but it will result in a combination of dependencies that wasn't tested by the library's authors. Often that's okay because libraries try to maintain backward compatibility.
Old libraries that haven't had a new release in a while are going to specify older dependencies and you just have to deal with that. The authors aren't expected to guess which future versions will work. They don't know about security bugs or broken versions of dependencies that haven't been released yet. There are other mechanisms for communicating about that.
I've seen four "in person", one very public (just purely IRL public).
I didn't see anyone (with one exception) pick sides immediately; although most people's "picked" side was "not involved". (The one exception was a community organizer who definitely has Been Through This Before).
For three of those, I did my own homework - a lot of asking around, and then a lot of conversations with both people. In the end, most of that didn't matter: the accused ended up damning themselves (or not!) pretty immediately when I talked to them about it.
Haha. No. I spent hours before hand talking with involved other people, and then I spent hours talking with these people, and then hours more processing the conversations (on my own and with advisors).
It’s just that in the end, it turned out that the things that decided it one way or the other had come up pretty early in the conversations with the accused.
Yeah, most people are really bad liars or don't really lie a lot, so in many cases its just obvious. But some people lie as easily as they breathe, those are much harder to understand, and other people get really nervous when accused of stuff they didn't do and sound as if they lie even when they don't, so in those cases its hard.
And this is extra important in nerd communities, since in general we are biased to believe nerds are creeps so when women accuse a socially clumsy nerd of something people will mostly believe the woman. Popular guys aren't affected much by a cancellation, but they totally destroy awkward guys.
Even more important for people on the autism spectrum. They might say "I touched her" when she touched him, since technically you touch someone if they touch you so its autistically correct. So a woman making advances on an autistic guy and then accuses him, the autistic guy will likely damn himself with statements like that since he doesn't understand how those statements will make people misunderstand the situation.
It's worth noting, when looking at these kinds of situations, that we do not have effective systems of addressing intimate / domestic crimes and accusations.
Near as I figure, it comes down to this: Our legal tradition was developed to mediate and resolve conflicts between groups; not within them, which is where this kind of thing happens.
This looks interesting! Is there a way to reach out more directly? (It’s my understanding that regular submission systems as getting pummeled by bots..)
I'm surprised that's the case, I'll ask hiring team to take a look based on your username. If it's the same username on github, then that'll help. Sorry that happened.
reply