Testify的問題，透過圖書和論文來找解法和答案更準確安心。 我們找到下列線上看、影評和彩蛋懶人包

The Battle of Magersfontein: Victory and Defeat on the South African Veld, 10-12 December 1899

為了解決Testify的問題，作者Benneyworth, Garth 這樣論述：

Magersfontein is an iconic battle, fought during the South African War of 1899-1902, also known as the Anglo Boer War.Over 30 years of research informs this book, the first ever source referenced history about Magersfontein and other actions, fought in the lead up to this monumental clash between Br

itish and Boer forces. It details the Kimberly Siege and the intensity of combat fought at Belmont, Graspan and, in particular Modder River, an understated yet key battle during the opening months of the war. The history of the Belmont battle is completely re-written, as too Modder River and especia

lly Magersfontein, the focus of this work.No shortage of publications exists on the South African War and Magersfontein. Visits to offline or online bookshops testify, yet myths perpetuate, legends, ideologies, hand down errors, fabrications and sloppy research by self-appointed experts. Contemporar

y sources regurgitate without analysis, and many recent publications offer no references to sources, some proudly so. None consult the rich and extensive archives in the Kimberley and Bloemfontein museums, mostly mimicking each other, using stock standard sources, while ignoring Dutch and Afrikaans

language survivor accounts, resulting in lopsided narratives.To address this historical hole, the author used primary sources, never before published diaries, letters, photographs, maps, battle orders, official histories and reports, personal reflections, regimental histories of the war and survivor

interviews, collected over 30 years. The originals being lodged in archives, libraries, museums and private collections in the United Kingdom, South Africa and Australia.The archive of physical landscape weaves through the written archive. Having walked the killing grounds for over three decades, t

he author’s insights into the archaeology and tangible record speak. Original artillery positions, British infantry, cavalry and Boer commando positions identified by the detritus of battle, as too, forgotten burial sites of human casualties, from all sides.Original findings emerge. At Magersfontein

the Boer forces never excavated a trench from unbroken ground, a mythology debunked. Rather, they adapted a rain water gulley to form a decisive defensive position. Areas of action, which existing narratives glide over, nor mention, include the almost successful British outflanking of Magersfontein

Hill, attacking through the Boer horse lines, the three Boer Defensive Clusters and, importantly, the two Boer counter attacks which broke the Highland Brigade. The Boer forces were mobile participants in winning their victory, not passively parked in trenches, as most narratives present.Insights i

nto military commanders emerge, never before published. Importantly, the war between the Generals, which this work uncovers, relying on unpublished recollections of conversations between senior officers from both sides. The loathing between two prominent Boer generals emerge, as too the incompetence

of the leading British General, glossed over for 122 years. Captured in this infighting, were loyal, efficient and brave British and Boer commanders and ordinary soldiers from both sides. Many of whose voices speak through this narrative for the first time, doing justice and testimony to their uniq

ue, yet terrifying experiences and observations of warfare, in Victory and Defeat on the South African Veld.

Testify進入發燒排行的影片

區塊鏈於交通事故數位證據保全之應用

為了解決Testify的問題，作者王逸嵐 這樣論述：

警察核心工作為治安與交通兩項，將資訊科技運用於交通事故，可有效提升警察工作效能，加速交通事故現場之偵查與重建。發生交通事故之機率，與車輛普及率提高有高度正相關，凸顯出交通事故數位證據保全之重要性提升，但目前卻甚少人著重於此。隨著時代技進步，Deepfake 技術可能被有心人士利用於交通事故之數位證據中，可能使證據喪失其證據能力，造成警方製作後續文件之不正確，嚴重影響民眾權益。依照錯誤的證據所製作的道路交通事故初步分析研判表，仍舊是不正確的，即使後續申請鑑定意見書，被隱藏的真相仍無法被發現。為了解決上述的困境，本研究將區塊鏈技術應用於交通事故數位證據之保全並結合雲端技術進行數位證據即時保存，開

發交通事故數位證據監管鏈，並藉由 RBAC 模型設定每一位使用者之權限。因交通事故處理涉及到警方、行車鑑定委員會以及法院等三方，故採聯盟鏈方式，提升警政合作效率，降低當相關交通事故報告之真實性出現爭議時，當事人、專業人員及警察須舟車往返法院當庭作證之法院程序成本。本研究使用區塊鏈技術來接收、儲存、維護和使用所收集的交通事故數位證據，能將每一個數位證據建造一個專屬的數位指紋，因此一個交通事故案件中具備多個數位指紋。透過比對即可了解何處被惡意更改，減少以大海撈針方式尋找，提升警方工作效率。

Colonialism and the Jews in German History: From the Middle Ages to the 20th Century

為了解決Testify的問題，作者 這樣論述：

Colonialism and the Jews in German History brings together new and path-breaking studies on the historical relationship between colonialism and the Jews in Germany. The book considers the mutual influences on the situation of the Jews in Germany, including attitudes towards Jews and anti-Semitism

but also Jewish self-conceptions, and the ideology and politics of German colonialism. The contributors discuss the ways in which colonial ideology and practice have affected the position of the Jews in Germany, and the relationship between anti-Semitism and colonial racism. In doing so, the volume

introduces German colonialism as a relevant context for German-Jewish history, and it expands the perspective on German colonial history significantly by considering Jews both as distinct objects and also as agents within the field of German colonialism. The volume includes studies on the pre-colon

ial era, the phase of active German colonialism since the 1880s, and the time after Germany lost its colonies in the First World War. All these studies testify to the fact that German-Jewish history takes on additional significance if seen as part of a global history of collective relationships.

論新媒體時代於刑事訴訟上對具新聞從業人員身分證人調查之研究

為了解決Testify的問題，作者邱能毅 這樣論述：

在民主國家當中，新聞媒體普遍認為是所謂的「第四權」，除了一般的訊息報導外，監督政府、挑戰弊端也是新聞媒體應該進行的事項，因此新聞自由在不少國家的憲法上亦受憲法之保障，如美國、日本及德國，這已是目前的普世價值。然而正因為新聞媒體具有上述特性，讓訊息提供者不論是出於什麼目的將消息透漏給新聞媒體，他們都應當享有不用擔心洩露其身份的保障，才會有意願進一步提供資訊，所以倘若新聞記者能夠貫徹其職業義務對消息來源的保密，才能確保自由資訊的流通。這是除了讓新聞媒體具有「第四權」的實質功用外，也能夠讓表達意見的自由能夠更加完善的發揮。而在這個逐漸走向網路化的現代社會中，新媒體的應用也越來越廣泛，各種傳統媒體也

紛紛加入新媒體應用的行列當中，然而在以往的傳統媒體年代裡，對於記者保護秘密消息來源的情況並未有任何明文化規定，僅止於「默契」及「尊重」作為依據，因此常陷入是否能夠主張保密而拒絕透漏消息只能淪落到求神問卜的窘境，到了新媒體應用的時代中，現行法規對於新媒體的應用狀況多為見招拆招，走一步算一步的迷霧當中，那新媒體記者在拒絕透漏消息來源的情況下，將不會有太大的改善，甚至是有可能面臨更艱困的情況。本文認為，現代媒體記者當今的困境除了法規不完善以外，對於其素質以及定義分界線亦有越來越模糊的趨勢，最初美國在審查時white大法官就基於「倘若給予拒絕證言權，其範圍不單是媒體記者，就連小說家、學術工作者甚至只是

一般人都有可能成為保障的對象」為由而否定了記者拒絕證言權，足以顯見媒體記者在分界上的困難之處。因此本先就傳統媒體記者的特質以及區別標準應如何區分媒體記者進行闡釋，以此來獲得主張拒絕證言權的正當性，再就其案件樣態來決定，讓程序主體裁量是否應該給予其拒絕證言權，最後再依照上述判定標準來決定新媒體記者是否得之拒絕證言權。