I'm a little confused about the question, but if you're asking how many points you need to ask a question, the minimum is 10.
Answer:Technology law scholars have recently started to consider the theories of affordance and technological mediation, imported from the fields of psychology, human-computer interaction (HCI), and science and technology studies (STS). These theories have been used both as a means of explaining how the law has developed, and more recently in attempts to cast the law per se as an affordance. This exploratory paper summarises the two theories, before considering these applications from a critical perspective, noting certain deficiencies with respect to potential normative application and definitional clarity, respectively. It then posits that in applying them in the legal context we should seek to retain the relational user-artefact structure around which they were originally conceived, with the law cast as the user of the artefact, from which it seeks certain features or outcomes. This approach is effective for three reasons. Firstly, it acknowledges the power imbalance between law and architecture, where the former is manifestly subject to the decisions, made by designers, which mediate and transform the substance of the legal norms they instantiate in technological artefacts. Secondly, from an analytical perspective, it can help avoid some of the conceptual and definitional problems evident in the nascent legal literature on affordance. Lastly, approaching designers on their own terms can foster better critical evaluation of their activities during the design process, potentially leading to more effective ‘compliance by design’ where the course of the law’s mediation by technological artefacts can be better anticipated and guided by legislators, regulators, and legal practitioners.
Keywords
Affordance, technological mediation, postphenomenology, legal theory, compliance by design, legal design
The answer to your question is b crowding out effect
I think it's D because it's made out of facts. The other ones are more likely to include bias.
Answer:
cout << setprecision(2)<< fixed << number;
Explanation:
The above statement returns 12.35 as output
Though, the statement can be split to multiple statements; but the question requires the use of a cout statement.
The statement starts by setting precision to 2 using setprecision(2)
This is immediately followed by the fixed manipulator;
The essence of the fixed manipulator is to ensure that the number returns 2 digits after the decimal point;
Using only setprecision(2) in the cout statement will on return the 2 digits (12) before the decimal point.
The fixed manipulator is then followed by the variable to be printed.
See code snippet below
<em>#include <iostream> </em>
<em>#include <iomanip>
</em>
<em>using namespace std; </em>
<em>int main() </em>
<em>{ </em>
<em> // Initializing the double value</em>
<em> double number = 12.3456; </em>
<em> //Print result</em>
<em> cout << setprecision(2)<< fixed << number; </em>
<em> return 0; </em>
<em>} </em>
<em />
