https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-germany-hongkong/ch...
823 karma · joined May 14, 2020
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-germany-hongkong/ch...
Adding “UPDATE:(date)text” either in the footer - with a brief dip in the header saying there’s an updated in the footer is an easy way to accomplish this.
Second, yes, maybe I was not clear, my advice relates to the average author on a simple straightforward method of write a book that reduces the odds of it not being of use of the audience it seeks.
Lastly, might be wrong, but it appears:
(A) at least on Amazon, your book appears to be rank in the top 20,000 of all books;
(B) you appear to have published a singular book;
(C) as you say, yourself, it does not make enough for someone to live in a major city;
(D) writing books is not your primary means of income;
—- to me, what I hearing does not conflict at all with my analysis and your example, to me is survivor bias: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias
——
Writing multiple best selling books year after year is VERY hard to do as a means of income. There are much easier ways to earn an income and share what you know. If someone wants to do that, awesome, though I do not have advice for doing that, nor do I know of anyone else that does; that would result in publishing 1+ successful books a year. My advice is just no nonsense take on being reducing odds of book being useful, which for the average author is much more of a challenge.
Request for relevant citation(s).
As for the case you cited, it was a civil suit, therefore ruling only covers civil law, not criminal. That said, does not protect "the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law". [1]
All Presidents are fully aware by law their powers are limited, no reasonable official would claim otherwise. No reasonable person or official would claim their actions were legal, hence why they knowingly hid them from FISA & Congress.
[1] Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335, 341 (1986).
Source? As far as I am able to tell, this is false; as in it is not that they are immune from prosecution, but that prosecution has never occurred.
Clearly, if war crimes were ever brought, regardless of the laws, commands, etc - it would have not resulted in being immune from prosecution.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_%26_Tube_Co...
That being, “The President did not have the inherent authority to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress.”
My rewording, “The President [does] not have the inherent authority to [do anything] in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the Constitution or statutory authority conferred on [them] by Congress.”
—
Question then is did Constitution or Congress authorize this, directly or indirectly prior to or retroactively after the fact?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_%26_Tube_Co...
That being, “The President did not have the inherent authority to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress.”
My rewording, “The President [does] not have the inherent authority to [do anything] in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the Constitution or statutory authority conferred on [them] by Congress.”
As is, your comment to me is worth less than having said nothing at all — as it requires time to read your comment, link, and the responses critical of it.
(a) Anyone able to expand on the author’s source for this; (b) what if any US legal guidance at the time enabled this; (c) and if anything between now and then has changed legally.
Do you have an example of an author doing this? (Meaning all they do is self-publish books and have disclosed financials.)
- estimate of reading time - level of knowledge - way to link deeper content
That said, you would need to have a quantifiable definition of done and likely be a good idea to account for absolute failure in case something comes up an “done” is never accomplished. Until it is “done” likely be good idea to escrow the funds, but then you run into issue like paying taxes, transaction fees, etc.
Even better, take just take an hourly rate, 2x it, add three zeros = annual salary; literally takes seconds to do once you know 2000 hours per year is the assumed hours worked per year.
As for it being “only more compact” not a capacity increase, for a comparable single coherent optical fiber line, are existing fibers filled to capacity due to the limits of tech, economies, physics, etc. - if physics, then I assume all fibers are at capacity, right?
If you like writing long form tech guides, do yourself and your audience a favor, figure out how to publish your materials for free digitally and grow an audience you have direct one-on-one access to, then allow people to order paper versions if that’s what they prefer.
Then, writing a book becomes easy: grow audience, provide an outline, get feedback, write more, write testable code, get more feedback, etc.
Anything you write (as in subsection) should have a timestamp of when it was: written, rewritten, last reviewed, test, environment tested, etc.
That’s a pretty bold claim, one which I am not aware of any examples of. High courts of any meaningful definition of such, regardless of country, if truly a legal court with fair rules, generally produce much clearly rules than those create by: general public, elected officials, professional governments employees, interest groups, private parties, etc.
For example, take a few mins, even hours, try drafting what to you would be fair, clear, complete, stand the test of time, etc. — then post it somewhere online, post in to HN, and comment here you have. I’ll review it, post my review online.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/geek-squads-relationsh...