- If the punishments for crime are severe enough, the nastiest criminals have a greater incentive to murder their victims, to prevent them from ever reporting the crime.
- If the punishments for crime are severe enough, even innocent people may be tempted to do unethical things such as bribing witnesses, to avoid the possibility of being convicted.
- The death penalty – and this is an undeniable fact – has resulted in the execution of completely innocent people.
- Studies show that a stay in prison, without rehabilitation programs, is one of the least effective ways of preventing a person from committing crime again, and even with rehabilitation it's not necessarily very helpful, because prison can be a school for crime – and even, somewhat surprisingly, a drug-takers paradise! There is an argument that we need to rely less on prison and more on community-based punishments, and we need to emphasise more on rehabilitation, and treatment for drug addicts, so that they don't need to steal or prostitute themselves to feed their habits.
- If police officers always carry guns and are very aggressive and quick to react aggressively, this may scare some criminals – but it may also have a corrosive effect on community relations, especially if the majority of police officers are white and the community is mainly non-white. In Britain most police officers do not carry guns, and we don't seem to have such a big problem with abuse of tasers by police officers as America has, either.
- There are ways to be "tough on crime" that are just totally unacceptable. Having a huge secret police and cameras in every home would probably be very effective at reducing crime – but at what cost? Freedom and human rights are important.
- Being "tough on crime" in the ways usually proposed, fails to tackle one of the key drivers of crime – illegal drugs. How long is the war on drugs going to continue before politicians realise that it's unwinnable?
1) SpyFu Keyword Research Tools
2) SEMRush – service for competitors research, shows organic and Ads keywords for any site or domain
1) You can also figure out Primary keyword they target by checking particular page’s title tag(and sometime meta description and keyword tags).
2) Explore their internal and external backlinks to find out anchor texts(as keywords) they’ve used to build links.
I hope this helps.
According to wikipedia No.
While at Dartmouth, Geisel was caught drinking gin with nine friends in his room, violating national Prohibition laws of the time. As a result, Dean Craven Laycock insisted that he resign from all extracurricular activities, including the college humor magazine. To continue work on the Jack-O-Lantern without the administration's knowledge, Geisel began signing his work with the pen name "Seuss." His first work signed as "Dr. Seuss" appeared after he graduated, six months into his work for humor magazine The Judge where his weekly feature Birdsies and Beasties appeared.
After Dartmouth, he entered Lincoln College, Oxford, intending to earn a Doctor of Philosophy in English literature. At Oxford, he met his future wife Helen Palmer; he married her in 1927, and returned to the United States without earning a degree.
This has actually already been achieved in research projects:
Brain-to-brain interfaces have arrived, and they are absolutely mindblowing
Researcher controls colleague’s motions in 1st human brain-to-brain interface
Facebook created ads so they are tied to your Personal account, this means that you will be the only one able to see the numbers for those ads.
You can how ever go to "Ads & Pages" -> Settings->Permissions and add more users to view the same account.
In order to meaningfully talk about probabilities you need to deal with the element of skill. You can deal with the number of power chips by splitting the problem into 3 (you get 2, 3, or 4 power chips, at least in season 4, except for a few games where you get Burger King power chips instead of regular ones, but there's really no difference). You can deal with the choice of when to stop by insisting that players go for $25,000 (no stopping). Dealing with skill at placing the cards in hands / using or not using power chips is harder. There are conflicting goals of maximizing the chance of 21 on the next card and keeping an unbustable hand.
You can run stats on the individual games. Since they play out the games you can tell the percentage who would have won if they had to go for $25,000. The sample I took gives an answer of 6 wins / 53 games = 11% (1 actual $25,000 win; 5 "would haves"). Broken down by power chips: 2: 1/12 = 8%, 3: 0/26 = 0%, 4: 5/15 = 33%. This says I really need more data, and I'm not sure enough games have been played to get enough data.
I did a computer simulation with a stop strategy of never stop, and a card placement strategy of maximizing the number of cards in the deck that will get you a 21 on the next draw – ties between placing a card and using a chip are broken in favor of playing a card (this is likely not optimal, but I'm not sure what is. Anyway, it's something that is fairly easy for a person to compute on the fly, and the host talks about the number of cards in the deck a lot). I ran 100,000 games for each case. The results for each number of power chips are 2: 13%, 3: 18%, and 4: 24%. Considering $ won / game, an extra power chip is worth maybe $1,300 on average.
Incidentally, the distribution of power chips for my sample of 53 games is 2: 23%, 3: 49%, 4: 28% with the average number of chips 3.06 . The prize won is $0: 21%, $1000: 25%, $5000: 53%, and $25000: 2% (totals do not add to 100% due to rounding).
The model is a model proposed by Daniel Dennett is in the (1991) book 'consciousness explained.'
I am more than a little nervous of attempting to summarise the book, but the broad thrust, at least as I understood it, is that the brain generates different 'explanations' of events, which are affected by subsequent events… and that the brain then continuously re-interprets these 'explanations' in a way that may affect what we believe we believed!
In terms of what we believe at any given time, the multiple drafts model postulates, for want of a better explanation, the idea that the brain is not a 'top-down' device, but instead more akin to a plethora of different subsystems, with may each have different interpretations… and that the prevailing belief is the 'majority opinion' of such subsystems.
By Dennett's own admission, the model is incomplete, but represented, ~1990 his understanding of conciousness in the light of evidence available at the time.
I'm sorry, but I can't get this down to Quora-sized answer, and strongly recommend a read of the book if you are interested.
Check out http://pagefreezer.com, it is a cloud solution that captures everything online: RSS, websites, blogs, forums and social media.
PageFreezer captures changes on your website in real-time – so you won't miss any intra-day change – and is able to accurately replay and browse any archived RSS/website/blog/social media. It provides features to jump through time using a timeline or full-text search all archived data. PageFreezer archives online assets in a way that it complies with industry regulations (SEC, FINRA, FDA, SOX) and litigation requirements (FRE 901).
PageFreezer is currently in use by a broad range of Fortune 500 companies (Finance, Pharma, Food, Retail, Technology) and government agencies.
The linked whygeo.com answer (Cai's) provides a pretty great high-level overview of the differences.
In more low-level terms, OpenLayers is an older library that is pretty heavy (http://openlayers.org/dev/OpenLa… is 854kb), but is pretty cross platform, while Polymaps is extremely light (http://polymaps.org/polymaps.min.js is 30kb).
OpenLayers also supports IE, while Polymaps, due to being reliant on SVG, does not (until IE9). OpenLayers supports OpenGIS formats while Polymaps leverages GeoJSON quite heavilty. Which is to say, OpenLayers is the older workhorse, and Polymaps is the younger, faster, meaner entry.
http://www.pixar.com/companyinfo… always has the current list of openings. In general, the non-technical creative people tend to be in the story department (they can draw well, quickly), art department (everything in our movies has to be designed!), and editorial department (cutting's creative!).
Within the various technical departments, there are also a number of people whose jobs are more creative/less-technical but still involve a small (and varying) bit of technical ability. For example, matte painters, set dressers, shading technical directors (called surfacing at some studios), lighters, and camera & staging (layout) artists.
Animation is also more of a creative department than a technical one, but there are some basic technical skills animators need to know, as 3D animation's a bit more technical than just drawing frame to frame!
There are also non-direct-production creative jobs such as in the marketing department.