rabanne

This is just a glorified wrapper around existing solutions. Can’t understand that this is worth doctoral dissertation.

No, it definitely won’t. In fact our card payment system has been updated to think alternative os and browsers are high-risk and even decline payment. We didn’t have any revenue loss.

I've seen so many videos of cops being beat up. These statistics are facts. By the way, I was being sarcastic.

You know you're comparing people fully armed and cautious people versus the general population, right? Also it's a biased comparison because the 2,116 could have been shot where the rate of "could have been shot" is much lower in the general public because obvious reasons.

I know simple math, thank you. As I pointed out in the other reply, the rate of assult to US police, who are armed and more hostile to you is only about 25% lower than UK police where the majority of them don't carry a firearm. Actually we don't know the proseuction rate so we don't even know it's that lower.

I wanted to point out that the rate of assult to US police, who are armed and more hostile to you is only about 25% lower than UK police where the majority of them don't carry a firearm.

Even accounting for that rate, police faces 5x "prosecutable assults" more than a "reported assult" on a normal person. We don't know what "prosecutable assult" statistics on a normal person so we can't compare them directly, but the rate is approx. 67%[1]. Clearance rate is 52%, so it shows that while policing in US, you get approx. 15x more chance of facing "prosecutable assult".

[1] https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/scpdvc.txt

In 2018 and 2019, there were over 30,000 assaults on police officers in UK.[1] In 2017 and 2018, there were over 110,000 assults on police officers in US. You can't just adopt this in the US, policing is more dangerous in the US.

[1] https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2017 https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2018

[2] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

I'm seriously wondering whether this is a form of sarcasm or a bait. 10.8% of sworn officers faced assult in 2018[1], while armed. Cops threatened by people with or without firearm is not that rare. In 2018, 2,116 sworn officers were not only threatened but actually got shot(!) by a firearm.[1]

[1] https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2018

Can't believe people are citing this data. Comparing homicide statistics of people armed with guns being killed vs armed or unarmed regular people and thinking cops are safer than armed or unarmed regular people? Come on.

How about we account assults? In 2018, 10.8% of sworn officers faced assult. Of them, 30.6% sustained injuries. In 13.2% of the incident, the attacker was prosecuted.[1] But the rate of aggravated assult against regular people is 0.2%. Clearance rate is 52.5%. Prosecution rate is much lower.[2] I really don't care about your ideology or anything, but saying police is a safe job is just stupid. 10.8% of sworn officers faced assult while armed. Let's see how things changes when police is forced not to be armed.

[1] https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2018

[2] https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018

"Let's encrypt DNS queries but send them to the ISP which can associate the query with subscriber info!"

Hmmn, I always thought "communications for the purpose of securing legal advice" was recognized more broadly.

If I send a copy of a document which can incriminate myself and was created before hiring a lawyer, to a lawyer for legal advice, can the government seize it? If so, if I outline a document after hiring a lawyer and then send it for legal advice, can the government seize it?

>Austin, Texas, where the average annual bill rose from $566 in 2010 to $1,435 in 2018

How can anyone justify people paying more than $110 for water and sewers? I pay $20 and even that seems a lot to me.

Breaking News: Weather glitch confirms climate change came 80 years faster than expected!

Taxing sugary drinks can lead to more consumption of proven-safe sugar subsitutes like saccharin and erythritol. And that's a good thing. It will definitely boost sales of all-subsitute drinks such as diet coke, and regular sugar drinks will try to use low sugar and more sugar subsitutes.

We've already seen producers lowering on sugars due to the trend of avoiding sugar. People won't buy cheaper cuts of meat. Producers will try to dodge the tax by using sugar substitutes, and it will result to overall positive effect to the public health. Also, Bacon does not have bad influence on your body. Fat does not cause cardiovascular problems, diabetes or other accusations of diseases it faced in the 70s.

Fruit juices are bad for you because of, you guessed it, sugar. Creating an incentive to swap out juices for real fruits? Or an incentive to drive producers to extract sugar and replace them with sugar substitutes? I'm in.

>high sodium

Normal people have ability to filter out sodium from the bloodstream on high intakes without any problem. They might develop problems with the kidney but kidney problems due to sodium is doubtful. I'd say tea is more dangerous for kidney than sodium. But same does not apply for sugar. If you eat excess sugar it will turn into blood sugar, and it will cause insulin to spike. The body eventually stores the excess in fat, but the process is so harsh for the body that it will definitely cause cardiovascular problems and diabetes.

Sodium is problematic because it makes us easy to eat carbs (i.e. sugar) more. Try to eat excess sodium by itself or with protein or fat. You really can't. But with carb you can. Sodium isn't toxic per se. Carb is the problem. Thus the sugar tax.

Lots of innocent food ingredients have been blamed for cardiovascular disease and diabetes. Fat's been exonerated. But I really dobut that sodium is bad for those two. Fat and sodium have the same thing in common. They make carb taste good.

>frozen prepared foods

As long as they use good quality ingredients it's OK. Taxing them would make them less profitable and result to using worse ingredients.