Slashdot Mirror


Pirate Electrician Supplied Power To 1,500 Homes

fridaynightsmoke writes "A former electrical engineer for utility EDF has been prosecuted for illegally supplying power to some 1,500 homes in north London. Derek Brown, 45, was arrested in 2008 after being seen tampering with the electric grid in a manhole. He specialized in connecting separate supplies to houses that were split into apartments. One landlord involved, Haresh Parmar, was jailed for 9 months for stealing £30,000 worth of electricity for 22 of his apartments. Brown's assets will be seized and he has been sentenced to 8 months suspended, and 150 hours community service."

373 comments

  1. Oh my-- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    What a shocking development

    1. Re:Oh my-- by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      What are all those extension cords for?

    2. Re:Oh my-- by digitalunity · · Score: 1

      I once stole cable from a neighbor.

      1500 homes? That's pretty ambitious. This guy must have nuts of steel, or a rock for a brain.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    3. Re:Oh my-- by ommerson · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Or more likely, a small number of crooked customers who have a vested interest in keeping the whole thing quiet. Note that the a landlord of 22 properties got a longer sentence than the electrician.

    4. Re:Oh my-- by catmistake · · Score: 1

      nobody, like, owns the electrons, man!

    5. Re:Oh my-- by Curate · · Score: 1

      Brown. Out.

  2. freedom by Dionysus · · Score: 5, Funny

    Electricity wants to be free!

    --
    Je ne parle pas francais.
    1. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, electricity wants to be *grounded*.

    2. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, electricity wants to be *grounded*.

      What it really wants is for the first 20 posts to be a bunch of stupid puns! Readers just love scrolling through "crap, crap, crap, crap, crap, crap, yup more crap, crap, crap, lame attempt to be funny, crap, crap, crap, dumbass slashdot meme, crap, crap, crap, crap, crap, stupid puns, crap, crap, crap, crap, hey look an interesting post!"

    3. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I guess everyone can't be like eldavojohn, who spends 15 minutes typing up an essay, to submit it 1 minute after the story hits front page.

    4. Re:freedom by mwvdlee · · Score: 0, Troll

      Dear Anonymous Coward,
      That is why most stupid, crap-spewing dumbasses post as Anonymous Coward.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    5. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dear Anonymous Coward, That is why most stupid, crap-spewing dumbasses post as Anonymous Coward.

      Dear Pseudononymous Coward,
      I am glad to see you personally demonstrate that every rule has an exception.

    6. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Dear mwvdlee,

      Apparently not only the ACs are crap-spewing dumasses...great post. I guess maybe it's a square-rhombus situation...All ACs are crap spewing dumbasses but not all crap-spewing dumasses are ACs? Thanks for providing me with a real thinking for this weak.

      Yours truly,
      Another AC

    7. Re:freedom by mike2R · · Score: 1

      Suggest you change your preferences to sort by highest scores first. By no means perfect, but it improves slashdot readability by an order of magnitude. Really should be the default option IMO.

      --
      This sig all sigs devours
    8. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least the story is about NUTS and VOLTS.

    9. Re:freedom by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      Electricity wants to sail the high seas, wenching and blowing the shit out of pitifully inferior wooden boats with its EMP-cannons.

    10. Re:freedom by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      You must be old here. Anyone new would assume it has always been this way.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    11. Re:freedom by Kvasio · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just look at profits of power supply companies. And electrons don't see a single penny from it. Protest against exploitation of electrons and share the electricity (by connecting to public lighting)

    12. Re:freedom by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Mod parent -1 full of crap.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    13. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you. I browse slashdot both for information and fun. Just hide all funny comments.

    14. Re:freedom by hey! · · Score: 1

      You can't "steal" electricity. After you use it, you have to give it back.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    15. Re:freedom by al.caughey · · Score: 1

      No, electricity wants to be *grounded*.

      What it really wants is for the first 20 posts to be a bunch of stupid puns! Readers just love scrolling through "crap, crap, crap, crap, crap, crap, yup more crap, crap, crap, lame attempt to be funny, crap, crap, crap, dumbass slashdot meme, crap, crap, crap, crap, crap, stupid puns, crap, crap, crap, crap, hey look an interesting post!"

      Spam Spam Spam Spam
      Spam Spam Spam Spam
      Wonderful Spam
      Wonderful Spam
      Spam Spam Spam Spam
      Spam Spam Spam Spam
      etc.

      Bloody Vikings

      (Apologies to John Cleese et al)

    16. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Way to short circuit the thread, asshole.

    17. Re:freedom by Relayman · · Score: 1

      In this case, putting the highest scores first puts the "crap, crap, crap" at the top. But it's a silly story to begin with, so who cares?

      --
      If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
    18. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I, for one, welcome our new voltaic overlords.

    19. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just because you're dull doesn't mean rest of us can't enjoy a bit of fun/crap. i say bring on MORE CRAPS! sorry, I just had to make this CRAPTASTIC post!

    20. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, electricity just wants to return home. And it has no ruby red slippers.

      Please, think of the electrons.

    21. Re:freedom by HolyCrapSCOsux · · Score: 1

      but... How would an EMP affect a wooden ship?

      --
      0xB315AA8D852DCD3F3DCA578FD2E0BF88
    22. Re:freedom by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      The trick is to apply enough current that the sky itself catches fire.

  3. British Power Supply by Cylix · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Can someone explain how the mains circuit is supplied.

    TFA was so light on details its very difficult to understand what he did. I'm not sure how you can actually illegally tap into the power grid without someone noticing. Here an inspector literally reads the meter or in some cases a digital meter supplies information automatically. In fact, my gas is apparently wireless and merely requires someone to drive by to meter the usage. It would seem like something that would be very difficult to subvert in a suburban environment.

    --
    "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    1. Re:British Power Supply by mysidia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      TFA was so light on details its very difficult to understand what he did. I'm not sure how you can actually illegally tap into the power grid without someone noticing.

      We're reading about it, and the article wasn't written by the person, so obviously someone noticed (even though they were apparently slow about it... perhaps they wanted to let the charges rack up, so they could make an example of the person)

    2. Re:British Power Supply by davester666 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Um, he can do all kinds of things.

      Just tap into power and run it to a new building. Meter reader isn't expecting to go to the building to read the meter, so nothing is missed.

      Or run electricity into building, through a box that looks like a meter, only gives out a faulty reading.

      As for wireless and/or internet-connected meters, it wouldn't surprise me if the company isn't particularly on the clue train and may not, say, have a very good system in place for authenticating the data from the device [so you could replicate the signal and put out whatever reading you want]. However, the company probably does require a semi-regular physical meter reading, to check that the physical meter has the same reading as the broadcast one, and the system doesn't appear to be tampered with].

      Electricity may be more complicated to wire up correctly to bypass the meter [so x% goes through the meter and y% goes around the meter], but gas and water are really straightforward to do the plumbing and to get a reasonable percentage through the meter, and people have been really imaginative in disguising/hiding the modifications.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    3. Re:British Power Supply by Malc · · Score: 1

      Where's here? Everywhere I've lived, it's possible to hook up to the grid illicitly. For example, when I lived in Canada, a lot of the pot grow houses were discovered by unusually high power consumption in an area. Clearly in N. America, it can be possible to get steal electricity too.

    4. Re:British Power Supply by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Informative
      There are three ways to steal power. The easy way, the hard way, and the insane way.
      - The easy way: Vamp the cables before they go into the meter. Carefully poke needles into them, solder cable to the needles. Careful not to draw too much current, or they get hot - but British power is 230V, so a little current goes a long way. There is a risk of a meter reader noticing, but if you have a remotely-monitored smart-meter then this is an option. Popular with intensive pot-growers - not to avoid the fee, but because a house that suddenly spikes by several kilowatts and stays there will raise a suspicion notice at the utility, and may result in police going around to see if someone is operating hundreds of day-bulbs.

      - The hard way: Find a cable someone else has paid for and splice in. Good targets are outbuildings. If your garage is next to theirs, a little breaking-and-entering is all you need.

      - The insane way: Tap into the actual mains distribution cables under the roads or on utility poles. I think this is what he was doing. High effort, high risk of detection, high risk of electrocution. Only a real electrician could do this, like the person of the article. Allows access to great amounts of power, for running large buildings.

    5. Re:British Power Supply by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Meter readers only read the meters they know about. There is nothing to stop me climbing up the power pole outside my house and clamping my own cables on to the mains supply. I would need to know what I was doing (this guy did, and I probably do to a smaller degree) and I would have to live with the possibility of death by electrocution. Somebody might notice the connection one day, most likely a repair crew working on a different job. It would be hard to hide because they would just follow the cable.

      But say I had an electric vehicle with cleverly designed arms (like the gear on the top of a tram) which could reach up to the power lines, charge up, then fold up again. I could probably get away with doing that for years in the middle of the night, especially if I had signs on my vehicle suggesting some official status.

    6. Re:British Power Supply by David+Off · · Score: 3, Informative

      Fourth way, if you live near high voltage cables run cables beneath to tap of electricity by induction. People have been prosecuted in the UK for doing this.

      The electric company meters the supply upstream of the domestic supplies so they have an idea if someone is drawing electricity illegally as all the individual readings should add up to the global reading minus losses.

    7. Re:British Power Supply by turing_m · · Score: 1

      Missing option: the inductive way. Requires land under high tension power lines. AFAIK, there is still a good chance that you will get caught.

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
    8. Re:British Power Supply by Qubit · · Score: 3, Interesting

      if you live near high voltage cables run cables beneath to tap of electricity by induction. People have been prosecuted in the UK for doing this.

      How in the world do you prosecute someone for using an induction loop?

      I mean, sure, you could prosecute them for trespass or something if you move your stuff onto their property/airspace, but if it's all on your own land, it's just EM waves flowing through the air. If the land owner has to put up with the radiation they didn't ask for, who is to say that they can't use it to induce a current?

      Anyhow, I figure you might be trollin' seeing as how you'd have to get really close to get any measurable power via induction, but it is an interesting question in any case...

      --

      coding is life /* the rest is */
    9. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many of the high tension lines are DC now, won't work any longer

    10. Re:British Power Supply by Chrisq · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Or run electricity into building, through a box that looks like a meter, only gives out a faulty reading.

      The article talks about buildings that are split into apartments. In the UK sometimes the landlord pays the electric company, and then has private meters for each apartment - all going through the main meter. (This is much less common than it was because there are strict limits on markup and additional charges. Most new flats now have electric company meters). The safest way to fiddle the bill would be to have one or two flats going through the main meter and the rest using an illegal collection. The landlord of course collects money from all the tenants!

    11. Re:British Power Supply by SharpFang · · Score: 2, Informative
      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    12. Re:British Power Supply by dbIII · · Score: 1

      There is a risk of a meter reader noticing, but if you have a remotely-monitored smart-meter then this is an option. Popular with intensive pot-growers

      The other side of that coin is that a pot grower in Australia with a lot of plants very well hidden in several large fibreglass water tanks was caught only because the meter reader noticed several cables going from the back of the meter box to the tanks.

    13. Re:British Power Supply by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Fourth way, if you live near high voltage cables run cables beneath to tap of electricity by induction. People have been prosecuted in the UK for doing this.

      Citation needed. I am sure that the loss would be insignificant compared to the total power in HV transmission lines.

    14. Re:British Power Supply by turing_m · · Score: 4, Informative

      How in the world do you prosecute someone for using an induction loop?

      It is theft of power. If it wasn't able to be prosecuted, you'd have people buying up tracts of land under high tension power lines and erecting commercial or industrial scale induction loops. The government/courts would then say to themselves - we either side with modern civilization as we know it, or a pack of free-loading bullshit artists. Hmmm, tough choice.

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
    15. Re:British Power Supply by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I think it comes under sabotage since it mucks up the power factor, but I'm thinking it would have to be a lot of cable very close to the high voltage lines unless you just want to run one or two flouro tubes and have something else to start them.

    16. Re:British Power Supply by abigsmurf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They almost certainly check how the power gets drained between certain stretches of cabling for maintenance purposes. If, for example, they notice a stretch of cable is losing 2KW of power more than they'd expect it could indicate damaged cable or that that the power is getting partially grounded somehow.

    17. Re:British Power Supply by Barefoot+Monkey · · Score: 4, Informative

      if you live near high voltage cables run cables beneath to tap of electricity by induction. People have been prosecuted in the UK for doing this.

      How in the world do you prosecute someone for using an induction loop?

      I mean, sure, you could prosecute them for trespass or something if you move your stuff onto their property/airspace, but if it's all on your own land, it's just EM waves flowing through the air. If the land owner has to put up with the radiation they didn't ask for, who is to say that they can't use it to induce a current?

      Anyhow, I figure you might be trollin' seeing as how you'd have to get really close to get any measurable power via induction, but it is an interesting question in any case...

      Those are good questions. Firstly, when you draw power using induction you are actually creating a load on the power supply. It's more-or-less the same as if you had spliced into the cable, but easier to hide and less likely to kill you. Secondly, building and using a coil for this purpose is a very deliberate theft of service with physical evidence (a coil, and usually a cable running to the thief's house). So yes, you can definately prosecute for this, even if there was no tresspassing.

      As for distance, if you have a sufficiently large coil on the ground under powerlines then that is close enough to draw power.

      This is actually a very common method to defraud electricity providers, particularly in informal settlements (squatter camps) where coils are easy to conceal.

    18. Re:British Power Supply by rjames13 · · Score: 1

      cleverly designed arms

      Pantographs.

    19. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      if you live near high voltage cables run cables beneath to tap of electricity by induction

      BUSTED: Mythbusters did it.
      You don't get nearly enough power.
      video here

    20. Re:British Power Supply by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2, Interesting

      cleverly designed arms

      Pantographs.

      Yeah thats the word but now I am thinking in terms of jumper cables with hooks on the end and a snare built out of 40mm pipe with a cable running along the inside. If you can bang in your own ground you might just need to snare the active. Design it for a fast charge. Could be the breakthrough that electric vehicles have been waiting for!

    21. Re:British Power Supply by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Here in the UK mains cables run mostly underground. Assuming you are familiar with live working on underground cables it would be pretty easy to add an unauthorised branch and it would be almost impossible for them to find it.

      Metering guys are only going to notice theft if you are retarded enough to do it at the metering position in a property that officially has electricity.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    22. Re:British Power Supply by Copperhamster · · Score: 1

      Another trick we've seen (in fact they sell these things for an insane markup, and there's installation videos on youtube) is to bypass the meter on one phase. Pull your meter, put a shim across one side, (both sides will stop the meter entirely) and put meter back.
      Shims we've seen: Various wires, usually smaller than 20 gauge, soldered directly to the attachment points or meter.
      Plastic with wire wrapped around it
      spoons or knives, steel, tin, and silver.
      The actual shims that we can buy for various purposes; they cost $1.50 a piece. The website (with text lifted verbatim off one of those capacitor 'power factor adjustor' box sites) sells the shims for $199 each, with a video linked of a girl doing the install with high voltage gloves she got off ebay that have little white circles on them, meaning 'failed test here' (shudder).

      If it wasn't for common sense audit type things (hmm there are people living here, lights on at night, but no service at this address) then hooking a house into power without a meter is here and there is actually pretty trivial and not likely to be noticed (22 building apartment on the other hand, much more noticable).

    23. Re:British Power Supply by jandersen · · Score: 2, Informative

      How in the world do you prosecute someone for using an induction loop?

      What do you mean "how"? "How can you succesfully prosecute a case like that": As any other case, collect evidence that there was an intent to do something naughty and take it from there; shouldn't be too hard - big inductors and appliances using the power generated is all that is needed. If you mean "Why is this even reasonable?", then consider that energy is never destroyed or created. To demonstrate the effect of tapping energy by induction, try to measure the power consumption on the input side of a transformer when the output is loaded to when it is unloaded.

      I mean, sure, you could prosecute them for trespass or something if you move your stuff onto their property/airspace, but if it's all on your own land, it's just EM waves flowing through the air. If the land owner has to put up with the radiation they didn't ask for, who is to say that they can't use it to induce a current?

      Trespassing is not necessary. You can tap usable amounts of power from a radio- or tv mast if you put up the right kind of aerial. As I noted above, this can have an impact on the power use of the transmitter, but on top of that, if an unqualified person starts handling serious amounts of electrical power, they may cause serious accidents - houses may burn down as a result, innocent people may get electrocuted because things are not set up properly etc.

    24. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      How in the world do you prosecute someone for using an induction loop?

      By making a law against it beforehand.

      This is what happened in Germany. There was a case in 1899 where someone tapped a power line and was prosecuted for theft, but the court had to throw it out since "theft" was defined in terms of the taking of material objects, which electricity was not. So in 1900, a new law was created specifically for this situation.

      If the land owner has to put up with the radiation they didn't ask for, who is to say that they can't use it to induce a current?

      The legislative?

    25. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously? Fiberglass tanks? I don't doubt that this happened, but how did nobody notice the large glowing water tanks on his property? Unless you put enough paint on it to double the thickness of the fiberglass, light will get through. Light is pretty tough to contain. Even if your money depends on it. And before anyone states the obvious that he only turned them on during the day, let me say that through past firsthand knowledge of the subject, I know that pot needs 18 - 24 hours of light for at least the first few weeks to few months depending on how big you want the plants. After that it is precisely 12 hours on then 12 hours off. No way around that part. Maybe I'm unfamiliar with the daylight situation in Australia, but I thought that most places on earth, during the winter months at least, do not get 12 hours of daylight. But I am sure that they are not close enough to the pole to get 24 hours of daylight. Now maybe he was using natural sunlight filtered through the tank walls, but that seems pretty inefficient. And there again, flowering is triggered by photoperiod, so this would have to be precisely timed to the season and hours of daylight. However I doubt this is the case since you specifically say he was caught by stealing power. Seems like a lot of work when you could just use a basement and foil the windows. Or just do like the illegal aliens/cartels do in California, and grow it in the woods in a national park off the trail where nobody goes unless they have a reason.

    26. Re:British Power Supply by Leebert · · Score: 1

      The insane way: Tap into the actual mains distribution cables under the roads or on utility poles.

      This is how it's done in Haiti. The crazy thing: Something like half of the electrical customers are connected illegally this way.

    27. Re:British Power Supply by jimicus · · Score: 3, Informative

      It is theft of power. If it wasn't able to be prosecuted, you'd have people buying up tracts of land under high tension power lines and erecting commercial or industrial scale induction loops. The government/courts would then say to themselves - we either side with modern civilization as we know it, or a pack of free-loading bullshit artists. Hmmm, tough choice.

      You've been modded funny, but there are actually a few examples where bullshit artists have taken the system to court and lost precisely because if they were to win, the resulting mess would be far more than any sane government would want to contemplate. IANAL, but AFAICT most judges take a fairly dim view of people trying to twist an interpretation of the law in a fashion that would be of great detriment to society.

    28. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How in the world do you prosecute someone for using an induction loop?

      It is theft of power. If it wasn't able to be prosecuted, you'd have people buying up tracts of land under high tension power lines and erecting commercial or industrial scale induction loops. The government/courts would then say to themselves - we either side with modern civilization as we know it, or a pack of free-loading bullshit artists. Hmmm, tough choice.

      Come one. The government/courts side with themselves all the time.

      Ever notice things like insider trading laws don't apply to US Congressmen, Senator, or their employees?

    29. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You can even see this in judgements we would now disagree with.

      The famous "end of slavery" judgement in England is very narrowly written, it holds that slavery is a repugnant institution, and so could only exist in England if it was the law, then it says the law doesn't provide for slavery in England, and so the plaintiff, who is in England, is not a slave and may go free.

      But it carefully says nothing about slavery outside England. There were in practice essentially no slaves in England, which is why this chap (brought there from a colony and unwilling to return) was chosen as a test case. Everything was paid for by anti-slavery advocates. So the intention was to secure a judgement that slavery as a whole was illegal, and the judge did not do that. He didn't want to cause chaos by spontaneously freeing huge numbers of slaves.

      Campaigners still called this an end to slavery, but England continued to operate slave ships, and to control colonies whose commercial viability depended on slavery. The only thing that had changed was a man who found himself in England could be sure he wasn't a slave - though as a servant he might be little better off. It would take many more years before English rulers instructed their colonies to cease buying new slaves and grant their existing slaves freedom.

    30. Re:British Power Supply by vm146j2 · · Score: 1

      Farmers in Minnesota were famous for this as a monkey-wrench technique against power companies, especially in the thirties and the eighties, when times were tough. Also, a lot of times the power companies just pissed them off by running their high voltage lines over good farmland, and this was considered one way to recoup.

      --
      "Lost time is not found again."
    31. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm aware someone who has been running a very energy inefficient home (rotten single paved windows, no cavity wall insulation, 1960's immersion heater, electric oven) on a meter that is bypassed 75% of the time since the 1980's. The power company have never noticed any discrepancy. A few doors down another even more dilapidated home bypasses their key meter in a similar fashion. The power company don't seem to notice even two electricity hogs draining juice on the same line.

    32. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dunno the specifics, but here's a possible approach.

      The supply is transformed down from 11KV to 240V near the consuming property. The metering is in the 240V path, at the property concerned. It's possible to take a new cable from the 11KV->240V transformer into the property and connect it to the internal wiring, cutting out the meter or meters. The only immediate symptom to the supplying company would be zero readings on those meters. (In principle, they could notice that the meter readings drop while there is no reduction in the current to the transformer, but I doubt that they could measure that accurately.)

      The property concerned is apartments. If there is a meter per apartment, then some meters would be expected to read zero when those apartments are empty. If there's one meter for the entire building (i.e. Landlord pays the leccy bill and get his money back in rent) then again the rate of consumption would vary according to the number of tennants.So the supply company has no reliable way of telling a suspect change in meter reading from a faud.

    33. Re:British Power Supply by zippthorne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Conversely, the power company ought to control their emissions. If they're leaking enough power onto a person's property to be usefully collected, they should compensate the property owner for the EM pollution.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    34. Re:British Power Supply by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      There's usually rules/laws about getting too close to high power/high tension lines. Mostly for the protection of stupid people, but also to prevent this kind of thing. In order for an induction loop to be able to pick up enough electricity to be useable, you'd have to get pretty close to the lines, and they can/have prosecuted people under those rules here in Canada, before.

      Remember that the strength of a magnetic field is calculated using an inverse square of the distance from the source. It drops off exponentially the further away you get.

    35. Re:British Power Supply by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I wonder how good they are at detecting it though. Say I had a shed in my garden underneath some power lines and decided to put a fluorescent lamp in there for a bit of free light. The power loss would be pretty small and how would they ever know that the lamp wasn't wired in conventionally?

      I looked for some stats but turned up nothing useful, which suggests that no-one really knows.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    36. Re:British Power Supply by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I found a web page years ago about powering small items like clocks from a TV antenna. Unfortunately it does not appear to be up any more but I can't see why that wouldn't be legal. Mere reception of RF is not a crime, unless perhaps you decode the signals without a TV license.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    37. Re:British Power Supply by tehcyder · · Score: 4, Funny

      The insane way

      No, the truly insane way to steal power would be to nick a nuclear power plant and install it in your garden shed.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    38. Re:British Power Supply by Jainith · · Score: 1

      Somehow I doubt it. But you might find it difficult to buy and build on the rights-of-way maintained by the power distribution companies.

    39. Re:British Power Supply by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      The government/courts would then say to themselves - we either side with modern civilization as we know it, or a pack of free-loading bullshit artists. Hmmm, tough choice.

      Not on libertarian-leaning slashdot, we'd go with the free-loading bullshit artists simply because they are against the evil government.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    40. Re:British Power Supply by internewt · · Score: 1

      Supposedly the electric companies not only have a meter in every property, they also have one per "street", or so. If the houses' meters don't add up to what the street meter says, someone on that street is probably bypassing a meter in their property[1]. Perhaps the guy from TFA was also bypassing the street meter, so as to make the theft of electricity more effective, and harder to detect?

      [1] Supposedly this is how many cannabis factories[2] are found. The press often mentions that power companies help find grows, and I think this is how they find them.

      [2] I hate to use that phrase, what the fuck kind of factory makes plants? It is a loaded propaganda word, and commercial cannabis cultivation wouldn't be happening in houses if it wasn't for the stupid political policy of the prohibition of some drugs.

      --
      Car analogies break down.
    41. Re:British Power Supply by maxume · · Score: 1

      They probably don't need to bother with that stuff to find growers (except for the ones that are smart enough to steal electric), a couple of thousand watts of lighting running all the time is going to show right up on their usage (1 kw running all the time -> 1440 kw-hours each month).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    42. Re:British Power Supply by tibit · · Score: 3, Informative

      Remember that induction reciprocates. If you have a transformer without a secondary winding, or with a mild bulk resistor in the EM field -- like happens around high voltage AC transmission lines, then the transformer runs at some nominal loss that you can't do much about. As soon as you add a secondary winding and load it, the primary winding current increases! So the "leakage" by itself doesn't mean that they are losing as much power as they would if you had an actual secondary winding there, with a load. Ground, even wet ground, and buildings, even with metal in them, are very poor transformer secondaries. Something purpose-designed -- doesn't have to be.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    43. Re:British Power Supply by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      Because the meter only measures amperage at the cable leading into the home. He was taping into the mains cable and leading to apartments that were probably not on the main. So think about it like this, the owner had 1 cable coming in that fed all of the apartments and that cable was measured. The electrician added a second cable that came in another side of the building and ran that to , lets say, 1/3rd of the apartments. The landlord then just claims 1/3 of his apartments are vacant. The cable may have already even been there and the electrician just stumbled upon it while doing rutine work and had the idea. Well, after a few months the utility knows a lot more power is getting used in the general area but they don't know how. They probobly suspected a short of some sort. So they head out and start doing testing. They find this old cable that was supposed to have been disconnected 20 years ago and re-disconnect it. Suspecting foul play, they watch the site and wait. All the power is out to 1/3 of the apartments so the electrician comes back to reattach the illicit cable... viola.

    44. Re:British Power Supply by tibit · · Score: 1

      Be careful with using "strength of a magnetic field" like you propose. When you have a typical AC transmission line, a single phase wire is but a one-half transformer turn. If I remember my electromagnetics correctly, your secondary winding can be as large as you wish, if the current passes through your solenoid. You could have a solenoid that's a kilometer in diameter, and as long as one phase would pass through it, the induced current (given some load) would be same as if the solenoid was not-quite-touching the phase wire. Things change, of course, when your solenoid's plane does not intersect the phase wire. I think I'll run a little experiment later today.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    45. Re:British Power Supply by tibit · · Score: 1

      Not in high voltage transmission. At 100kV+, the losses are such that you can't power the line to measure losses from an "instrument" -- you need something that can provide tens or hundreds of kilowatts, on a dry day without much winds. The cable itself is not insulated, either -- we're talking air lines here. For lines buried in the ground, I'd think you'd have closed hydraulic circuits that are used for line integrity monitoring.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    46. Re:British Power Supply by autocracy · · Score: 1

      You're so going to get a patent on that!

      --
      SIG: HUP
    47. Re:British Power Supply by internewt · · Score: 1

      As long as you are paying the power bill, electricity companies don't mind how much power you use. If anything, the more you use the more they profit. Besides, some houses/families do use a lot of juice perfectly legitimately. Families with kids tend to do quite a bit of laundry, a washing machine being run maybe a couple of times a day, plus a dryer drying the same, pulls quite some juice.

      In the UK, non-ground floor flats cannot have gas kitchen appliances (as I understand - not sure about boilers). Any kitchens created or renovated upstairs in the UK since mumble-years ago has to be leccy, and so will use much more power than an equivalent ground floor flat.

      Also, cannabis growers don't necessarily run their lights 24/7. 18 hours is common for the vegative phase of growth, and 12 hours for flowering. Though commercial grows are indeed more likely to have multiple lights, and so the load is likely to be more across the day than someone with just one 400W or 600W light. Not that most meters do anything more than count kilowatthours, they don't record time of day power is used.

      I have also heard anecdotes of growers contacting their power company and asking if the kiln they have for their pottery hobby will cause problems. The power company will probably say no, but they may note down why a certain address could be using more than average levels of power. If some kind of power usage audit does happen, a flag on an account that customer X has a kiln could mean that place is not suspected of growing a herb.

      And years ago I lived in a house with 2 other geeks. We had at least a dozen computers on 24/7, and the electricity bill was colossal. But it was paid, and there were never any signs that we were suspected of growing pot. Anecdotal info, I know, but it helps illustrate things.

      --
      Car analogies break down.
    48. Re:British Power Supply by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Wait, so using up radiation that is otherwise going to be COMPLETELY WASTED is opposing "modern civilization as we know it"? Wow, hyperbole much? Whats the worst that happens, theres more electricity on the market, the electric company finds some way to bill those people at a lower rate (perhaps an "induction property rent"), and everyone profits?

    49. Re:British Power Supply by kaiser423 · · Score: 1

      lol, interesting?

      This is electricity. Moving it around creates magnetic fields. To protect against radiating magnetic fields, you'd either have to bury every single power line in a steel pipe, or start stringing up steel pipe between power poles. Those power lines carry lots of electricity, which means lots of magnetic field. You're not going to shield that with a little extra shielding on the cable, you need some big shielding.

      Given how expensive buried power lines are for just a neighborhood, pray tell, how in the world would ANYONE pay for that, even a large government? The expense boggles the mind.

      How about if you don't want stray EM radiation on your property, you just don't hook up or use the power? Seems fair to me. Everyone else is fine with having electricity.

    50. Re:British Power Supply by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      You have no idea how inductive loops work. Inductive power collection is a drain; raising the resistance on the secondary side of a transformer reduces the power flowing through that transformer, and the primary side is just a coil of wire connected inline to mains power. When you short the physically-isolated secondary coil, more power runs across the primary coil and it throws the breaker or blows a fuse. If you start sucking power out of the power lines, more power will run to the drain.

    51. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually you're more then correct. The idiots will hook their grow ops up after the meters so hydro can say... whoa somebody's using a lot of power. The smart guys will hook up the before the meter and hydro is non the wiser.

    52. Re:British Power Supply by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Mythbusters sucks. They decided to try to make a gunpowder engine once and all their designs were horribly flawed; I corrected one of their non-working gunpowder engine designs (the hopper was of a severely flawed design) and it worked. They even tried pouring gunpowder directly into the cylinder of a regular petrol engine. These people are incompetent.

    53. Re:British Power Supply by CmdrPorno · · Score: 1

      Using induction loops under high tension power lines is largely an academic exercise. Mythbusters tested it and weren't able to get very much current at all. Additionally, utility companies generally have easements which prohibit the construction of new structures underneath power lines.

      --
      Sent from my iPhone
    54. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on where you live. This has happened in Ontario, Canada and the power company moved the towers off the person's property. I believe here you would need an easement, and it seems not always was the power company smart enough to get them. Without the easement, or outright ownership of the land, the power company has no right to even have the towers there, never mind prosecute for theft of service.

    55. Re:British Power Supply by tophermeyer · · Score: 1

      I can't find any articles to support this, but I believe I read somewhere that the US Military is developing this kind of capability to tap into the local power supply of whichever country we decide to invade next.

      If you have the legal authority to get away with it, that's a great way to charge up electric vehicles or equipment.

    56. Re:British Power Supply by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      Do pot growers use "grow lights" because they're trying to hide their crop? Or because they're trying to grow it faster or better than it would in sunlight?

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    57. Re:British Power Supply by ebuck · · Score: 1

      It sounds nice in theory, but you can't make the power company accountable for the existing laws of physics. Sure, they could insulate more, but they'll still leak power, it is just a fact of nature.

    58. Re:British Power Supply by Hatta · · Score: 1

      we either side with modern civilization as we know it, or a pack of free-loading bullshit artists. Hmmm, tough choice.

      That's no choice at all.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    59. Re:British Power Supply by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      But what if the whole block is on yet another meter, and then the whole suburb, and then the whole city?

      You may be able to tamper with the meters on your premises, but eventually something is not going to add up at a higher level, and then the utility will send out somebody to doublecheck where the missing power goes to.

    60. Re:British Power Supply by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Or just fiddle with the meter.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    61. Re:British Power Supply by maxume · · Score: 1

      Sure, there are people that use lots of power and there are growers that are careful, but any big operation is still going to be one of the biggest residential customers of the power company.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    62. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cleverly designed arms

      Pantographs.

      Yeah thats the word but now I am thinking in terms of jumper cables with hooks on the end and a snare built out of 40mm pipe with a cable running along the inside. If you can bang in your own ground you might just need to snare the active. Design it for a fast charge. Could be the breakthrough that electric vehicles have been waiting for!

      Absolutely, and then you could have said snare hit the wire stretched across a road (a weather experiment, if you will).

      If all of that happens at the precise instant that the old clock tower gets hit by lightning, it will send you and your De Lorean back to 1985... Brilliance incarnate...

    63. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can find out what engine piece of line is expect to loose of what distance. In fact, most engineers have a book on a shelf right behind them that tells them that information.

    64. Re:British Power Supply by RMH101 · · Score: 1

      "the US Military is developing this kind of capability to tap into the local power supply of whichever country we decide to invade next"

      What, you mean by invading then stealing their oil?

    65. Re:British Power Supply by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      To protect against radiating magnetic fields, you'd either have to bury

      I wouldn't recommend either of those methods; instead switch to DC, you would have the same fields but they wouldn't be changing (except when load changes) so theft of power from EMF would become too difficult, or too small and unpredictable to be worth it.

    66. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both.

    67. Re:British Power Supply by Dr.+Ion · · Score: 1

      Would it surprise you to learn that nobody drives by to meter your gas usage? It's wireless to the nearest cellular uplink, usually in a wireless electric meter. Nobody has to come query it, since that would mostly defeat the point.

    68. Re:British Power Supply by imthesponge · · Score: 1

      This is not energy that would have gone wasted. That's not how induction works. Doing this does infact increase the load on the system.

    69. Re:British Power Supply by Elshar · · Score: 1

      Yea, you really should be modded up.

      Mythbusters are NOT scientifically going about replicating experiments to try to reproduce conditions. They're trying to sell entertainment, and as often as not get things half assed or totally wrong.

      Noone should be using Mythbusters as a gauge to tell if something is possible or not.

    70. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why was this rated insightful? Yes, my girlfriend can't put her bicycle in the shed anymore, and so what. Nothing, NOTHING, beats a nuclear power plant in your shed.

    71. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    72. Re:British Power Supply by Entropy98 · · Score: 1

      Usually when you invade you knock out the enemies power before you go in.

      The airforce was interested in this: mit plane that lands on a wire

      But thats something youd use before the war starts or in the ensuing insurgency.
      --
        windows media codec pack

    73. Re:British Power Supply by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      - The insane way: Tap into the actual mains distribution cables under the roads or on utility poles. I think this is what he was doing. High effort, high risk of detection, high risk of electrocution. Only a real electrician could do this, like the person of the article. Allows access to great amounts of power, for running large buildings.

      I've seen this one done before, the guys get a long wooden pole and attach a hanger to the end, then just hook them over the top of the wires. Then they run these things down the street and over ditches. I'd hate to be walking down that street when it's raining if people are driving over those wires and cracking the insulation.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    74. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here in SA, the preferred way is to simply splice in your own offshoot from a neighbour's mains supply line. Everyone knows about it, the utility (yes only one) hates it, but still over 20% of the population, the poorest, steal their electricity in this way.

      The government at one point noticed, obviously, but they wisely opted to push for a rural / slum electrification program (free), and left existing illegal connections in place.

      Unfortunately now due to chronic and severe underfunding of the state utility, they have opted to push prices up by 30% PER YEAR for many years to come. Many people are angry at the price hikes.

    75. Re:British Power Supply by Sporkinum · · Score: 1
      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    76. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/Many/Very Few/

    77. Re:British Power Supply by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Often they get something to actually work (floating lead balloon). The problem is they completely FAIL at a lot of shit, and then advertise that they've disproven something; even scientists have trouble disproving the existence of things they're rather certain don't exist. If you drink a liter of water and piss yellow, you can't go saying you've debunked the myth that drinking water will make you piss clear.

    78. Re:British Power Supply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    79. Re:British Power Supply by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      I see you can count to zero.

      But your induction coil requires something very important: a time varying current passing through the loop.

      Off of the top of my head I can think of at least two ways to reduce or eliminate that current: The above mentioned DC distribution system (DC-DC isn't nearly as costly and inefficient as it was when Edison lost the format wars), and, wait for it.. balanced feed lines.

      It happens to be cheaper to use a single line and earth return, but you can cut the net instantaneous current to zero with a properly balanced return line.

      In other words, the power companies *could* reduce your exposure to electric potential <grin>, but instead they've chosen to save money at your expense without compensation, and also to bear the increased risk of parasitic loads.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    80. Re:British Power Supply by dbIII · · Score: 1

      It was on a property near Rockhampton, which is near the tropic of Capricorn so does get around 12 hours a day of light year round, but it also may have been far enough away from anyone or screened enough that glowing tanks at night may not have mattered. The police there have been known to fly around looking for weed so I suspect the plan was to hide the stuff from the air in daylight, so they got the cheapest large water tanks they could find.
      Basements don't really exist in that part of the world so a large water tank is the equivalent space hidden from view, and I suppose cheaper than a big shed.
      I saw one entire house that did the trick of blacking out the windows and had a front as computer parts sales to explain all the people turning up with cash, and a friend in the same street that attempted to buy computer parts was turned away. It was hilarously close to where police in training to be police prosecutors went to attend lectures in law. One of those students saw the blacked out windows and a lot of parked cars and organised a raid.

    81. Re:British Power Supply by Dr+Max · · Score: 1

      Clip on current transformers are probably a bit easier to install and less obvious. Although I was told a story by a meter tech that this guy had a shed underneath a high voltage power line, so he installed a lot of rolls of copper in the roof. I don't know how effective it would be, you lose a lot more power the bigger the air gap. 5thly there are gadgets to spin your meter backwards. 6thly you can use a magnet to overpower the spinning disk in the old electromechanical meters (but beware when you take it off you may have ruined the brake magnets, meaning it will spin faster than it should). 7thly drill a small hole on the back of an electromechanical meter and insert a long needle to jam the spinning disk. 8thly if you have a bigger smart meter ct system you could often change the taps to a higher ratio so it looks like less power is going through the system. 9thly set up a fake power box with a fake meter that you control. 10thly with the new smart meter system I’m sure there are some guys in here that could hack the program and feed it new logs. 11thly there are boxes (sometimes called Jesus boxes, don’t ask me why) that reverse any power you use through it effectively cancelling out the use at the meter. Lastly remember kids if you try any of this at home and I don’t recommend you do; always make sure you have some kind of bill (zero usage is a big flag), and always remember to pay it. If you steal power before the meter and you get disconnected, but the tech can still hear your air conditioner you are in big trouble.

      --
      Rocket Surgeon.
    82. Re:British Power Supply by Dr+Max · · Score: 1

      There was a guy that built a nuclear reactor in his back yard I believe he used tritium like they used to put on watches to make it glow. I don't think they let him keep it very long.

      --
      Rocket Surgeon.
    83. Re:British Power Supply by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      How in the world do you prosecute someone for using an induction loop?

      I agree. It's absolutely absurd. The problem is that the law doesn't need to make sense. They are essentially broadcasting power on a frequency that you can pick up for nothing and if you do, you can be prosecuted. It's bullshit. It's like the neighbors having bright floodlights in their backyard but you're not supposed to make use of the light that leaks in through your windows.

      The problem is, making the law make sense would destroy the electric industry.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    84. Re:British Power Supply by Dr+Max · · Score: 1

      No one works on underground live; the phases are too close together, and the insulation quite complicated. You could possible dig one up and clip on current transformers, or wrap lots conductive metal around the line. But you’re still going to have a big spot of freshly dug earth going from the underground line position, all the way to your house possibly through a footpath. How many properties that are close to underground power lines (that you would want to live in) don’t officially have electricity? if they don’t have electricity do they still have water and sewerage? If no you are sacrificing a lot for free power.

      --
      Rocket Surgeon.
    85. Re:British Power Supply by Dr+Max · · Score: 1

      They still get checked every now and then when they play up, and often replaced after 5-10 years. I don’t know much about your system but on ours we would notice a significant drop in average supply over a reasonable period and that gets flagged by the computers (if you only stole a little, less than a 1/4 of your average load we probably wouldn't notice).

      --
      Rocket Surgeon.
    86. Re:British Power Supply by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      I recall reading of one person who did exactly that. Well, almost. He installed it in his basement. One of the old Soviet RTGs - when the country collapsed, most of the military and police suddenly found their pay stopped coming. Faced with a shortage of money and a lot of suddenly abandoned military bases, a great deal of equipment was stolen - including an RTG, which some enterprising soldier snuck home in a truck and put in his basement to provide free lighting for life. He wasn't caught until after he died, and the person to inherit the house tried to put the 'perpetual motion machine' he discovered on eBay.

    87. Re:British Power Supply by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      No one works on underground live
      BS, I don't want to go into too much detail both in case i'm accused of helping people steal electricity and because I belive doing it without proper training would border on suicidal but they live joint underground LV (1000V) all the time in the UK and have developed procedures and materials that let them do it safely.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    88. Re:British Power Supply by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      LV (1000V)
      that should say less than 1000V (nearly always 240/415 three phase)

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    89. Re:British Power Supply by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      I imagine that this is something that an EDF electrical engineer would know about. My guess is that at a city level a flat's worth of electricity won't make much difference.

    90. Re:British Power Supply by Dr+Max · · Score: 1
      Maybe i should have been more specific no one works live on insulated sections of underground. Sure you can add a connection at the termination point or in the cable pit thats what the 'pirate' in the summary was caught doing. I assumed when you said that you could "add an unauthorized branch" and "live working on underground CABLES", that it wouldn't be out of the pit all the connections come out of and actully on the cable itself(i could have assumed wrongly). If thats true then you would expect me to believe that you guys in england (possible dig down above a live line with an excavator) some how shave back the insulation with a metal implement followed by joining on a new section to phases that are less than a centimeter apart; then your crazier than i thought. Especially when its so easy to isolate a small section of the network and still maintain power to everyone. I'll admit i don't know the English procedures i work in the Australian electricity industry but me and the guys at work haven't heard of it. Its kinda of hard to prove something isn't done, but this is from Wikipedia.

      Underground power cables, due to their proximity to earth, cannot be maintained live, whereas overhead power cables can be.[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission

      I understand its not "no one splits live underground lines even in the UK singed Einstein", but i'm happy to be proven wrong if you have some kind of source.

      --
      Rocket Surgeon.
    91. Re:British Power Supply by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Afaict in most of britan we don't tend to have "pits that all the connections come out of", instead we have a big cable down the street and then houses teed off it. They don't want to cut off whole streets so a lot of live working is done.

      They have special connectors that can make connections to live cores without exposing them so only the outer layers need to be stripped off live, still something I wouldn't fancy doing though.

      You can find many oarts of the EON cable jointing manual ( http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&q=eon+cable+jointing+manual&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= picks up some of them, sadly though they don't seem to post up the index anywhere that i've found) on thier website and many of them have mentions of live working on cables.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    92. Re:British Power Supply by Dr+Max · · Score: 1

      Fair enough mate i stand corrected. The PDF still leaves a few questions unanswered but i can see their concept. I still think an inductive solution would be the way to go for stealing underground. Alternatively if you were working on a split core cable you could probably screw into each phase through the insulation with a self tapping screw, and connect on to that. However all this is going to a lot of risk; when 5 grands worth of solar panels would no doubt satisfy all intent and purposes while possibly making money (if you have somewhere to put them).

      --
      Rocket Surgeon.
  4. About his prosecution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    So I guess the charges he was brought up on were negative, am I right?

    1. Re:About his prosecution by sincewhen · · Score: 5, Funny

      I see you have posted AC...not DC.

      --
      -- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
    2. Re:About his prosecution by dattaway · · Score: 1

      The RIAA would have been more Direct. Charged him with each "making available" a potential of 50 times the country's possible generation capacity.

    3. Re:About his prosecution by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Well, if he had managed to copy that energy, I guess he'd soon get a Nobel prize.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    4. Re:About his prosecution by eclectro · · Score: 1

      It doesn't really matter, the news is still current.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    5. Re:About his prosecution by mjwx · · Score: 2, Funny

      I see you have posted AC...not DC.

      Nah nah na nah na... Thunder.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    6. Re:About his prosecution by krazytekn0 · · Score: 1

      they would fine him $17.00 for every time the electrons changed directions, multiplied by every possible outlet/load device.

      --
      Not all life is cyber. Extra Income
  5. steal 30k get jail 30 trillion get nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The UK is just as screwed up as the US. (The citizens are not the problem - we love you UK, but your government ******g bites.)

  6. Easy to do, awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    It's easy to do and totally undetectabe - I've been on pirate power for yea

    1. Re:Easy to do, awesome by KyleJacobson · · Score: 1

      Still in your parent's basement I see...

      --
      I have worse karma than M$.
  7. Picture by Palmsie · · Score: 0

    Nothing suspicious going on in that picture.

    --
    Carl Sagan quotes get you an automatic +5 on all posts.
    1. Re:Picture by unkiereamus · · Score: 1

      The sad part is, since moving to Honduras, that just looks like a power pole to me, I had to go back up to look at it to see what you meant.

      --
      I needed a sig so people would know who I am, but I was too drunk to make something witty, so you get this instead.
  8. Bad puns aside... by xenobyte · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If people were willing to use this scheme to get cheaper electricity, I guess the electricity is too expensive.

    Here in Denmark over 90% of the amount we pay for electricity is various taxes. No wonder people turn to alternative solutions because once you've done yours and switched bulbs, appliances and everything to the most environmentally friendly versions available, you still get a hefty bill and there's nothing (more) you can do about it - except perhaps to steal the electricity that is... ;)

    --
    "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
    1. Re:Bad puns aside... by c0lo · · Score: 1

      ... you still get a hefty bill and there's nothing (more) you can do about it - except perhaps to steal the electricity that is... ;)

      Produce it? (PV, methane fuell-cell... even riding your exercise bike while your spouse irons the cloths? ;) )

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    2. Re:Bad puns aside... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know. Is electricity in London made up of 90% taxes? That it is stolen is certainly evidence that people will try to avoid paying for something if they are able.

      Many grow ops are busted for theft of power. Higher end grow ops are able to afford to run off the grid (diesel generators or what-have-you) but it is cheaper to steal power. Until you get caught of course. :)

    3. Re:Bad puns aside... by drsquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I believe it was the landlord doing this, not the tenants who probably paid the landlord for utilities. And people will always want free stuff.

    4. Re:Bad puns aside... by cappp · · Score: 1
      It's closer to 5% than 90%. Scottish power notes that

      standard VAT charge which runs at 5% for domestic energy, the government has introduced several obligations that all energy suppliers are required to deliver. The cost of meeting these obligations is included within your energy prices.

      . Ofgem, the electricity and gas market regulators, support that claim in their 2008 report (pdf). There's also an 8% environmental levy which some would lump in with tax. It's interesting to note that the UK has the 3rd highest domestic energy prices before tax out of a selection of EU states but is one of the cheapest in terms of domestic gas.

    5. Re:Bad puns aside... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      ... you still get a hefty bill and there's nothing (more) you can do about it - except perhaps to steal the electricity that is... ;)

      Produce it? (PV,

      Not in the UK!

    6. Re:Bad puns aside... by srothroc · · Score: 1

      Either it was expensive or people love to make "easy" money. I'm guessing it was the latter, really; there are no mass electricity thefts that I know of.

    7. Re:Bad puns aside... by guyminuslife · · Score: 1

      Just out of curiosity, how much do you pay over there?

      For comparison: I'm in a major city in Texas. On my last electric bill, I was billed for about 589 kWh of electricity, and paid $78.28, including taxes and all fees. That number includes a $17.10 installation fee (first month), so if I use roughly the same amount of electricity on the next bill, it might be a little over $60.

      Of the total, $2.07 is listed as "sales tax." That would be somewhere just over 2% of the total amount. Now, maybe there are other taxes that I don't see on the bill---I've never bothered to look into it---but you can bet Texas law is pretty friendly to the energy sector. Assuming there aren't, and assuming that you pay the electric company $60/month, and that 90% of the total amount you'd pay is in taxes....you would be paying $600/month (~430 EUR) for the amount of electricity that I use. Which, incidentally, is more than my rent.

      Please tell me that isn't the case, or I'll run off screaming into the night about the evils of Scandinavian socialism.

      --
      I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
    8. Re:Bad puns aside... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... you still get a hefty bill and there's nothing (more) you can do about it - except perhaps to steal the electricity that is... ;)

      Produce it? (PV,

      Not in the UK!

      Yeah, rain and fog and all that. I reckon the poms will need to stick to "riding the exercise bike" solution, isn't it?
      (btw, OP mentions Denmark. You know, the only country to have an Australian princess... at least for the moment).

    9. Re:Bad puns aside... by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Considering what "pleasure" it is to deal with some London landlords, and the perpetrator here might well be one of them, it's not too improbable that many people actually didn't know they were stealing.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    10. Re:Bad puns aside... by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Though considering most of that comes from coal/etc., it might as well be that the price doesn't quite cover all the costs...

      (surely the differences in vehicle fuel prices are quite close to what you ask about)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    11. Re:Bad puns aside... by sa1lnr · · Score: 1

      Last winter I was averaging £100 ($150 approx) a month on electricity and the same again on gas.

      That is in a 3 storey, 3 bedroom modern town-house in London. The rent is £400 a month
      with a housing association. The rent would be at least double or probably triple that
      if it was with a private landlord. To buy a similar property in my current area I would
      need to find somewhere in the region of £400,000.

      Property prices in London are mental.

    12. Re:Bad puns aside... by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      Not sure about the UK but in australia I'm getting electricity bills of about $200/month, with only the usual tv/computer/lights on each evening.

    13. Re:Bad puns aside... by The+Grassy+Knoll · · Score: 1
      --
      They will never know the simple pleasure of a monkey knife fight
    14. Re:Bad puns aside... by Zumbs · · Score: 1

      I live in Copenhagen, Denmark and my last bill were some $148 for 304 kWh all included - or some 49 cents per kWh compared to your 13 cents. Some 43% of the bill comes from various taxes and public commitments, so the non-taxed price is 28 cents per kWh. However, it should be noted that some if this is flat rate subscriptions, which has a larger influence on my low power consumption. Taking these into account, your usage of 589 kWh would cost some $247 in Denmark or 42 cents per kWh. So, it would be resonable to assume a x3 price increase in power bill going from Texas to Denmark. Give or take a bit.

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
    15. Re:Bad puns aside... by jimicus · · Score: 1

      A number of people have replied giving their typical electricity bill.

      The problem with this is that you can't compare on the basis of what a person's electricity bill is, because there are all sorts of lifestyle factors that impact the bill but aren't included when you hear "I pay £N/month". For instance, if you're in Texas, I'll assume you probably have air conditioning in your house and it frequently runs during the summer months? Not really necessary in the UK, since it seldom goes above 30 Celsius (about 86 Fahrenheit) and that's a very hot day for most of us.

      Now, onto the useful stuff: price per kilowatt hour. My energy supplier is EDF, their current price chart is here (warning: PDF). Ignore the "excluding VAT" prices on the first page, every individual pays VAT.

    16. Re:Bad puns aside... by Zumbs · · Score: 1

      I think you need to reread your electricity bill. I live in Denmark as well, and on my bill taxes amount to some 43% of the price.

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
    17. Re:Bad puns aside... by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 1

      Here in .au my last bill was $114.90 for 384 kWh. AUD is roughly equivalent to USD at the moment: 113.21 USD.

      That includes 10% GST ($10.44), a 75c fee for credit card payment of my last bill, and $21.27 for 'Natural Power Premium' where they allegedly source equivalent of my energy usage from renewable resources, and a $9.73 'supply charge' which I assume is a fixed price for being connected to the grid. That leaves $72.70 as being for the energy usage itself.

    18. Re:Bad puns aside... by mlush · · Score: 1

      How much do you pay? in the UK its ~ 13p kW h

    19. Re:Bad puns aside... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in Norway so I guess I pay roughly the same as the guy in Denmark and we have the same BS about taxes and so on. You are paying roughly US 10cent (60/589) per kWh (including taxes). I pay around US17cent pr kWh (including taxes). The argument for all the taxes and so on is that given that 90% of our energy comes from clean and cheap sources (waterfalls and it costs something like .0003 cent per kWh to produce) and electricity is sold on a nordic market, the government wants to take in taxes what the private companies would otherwise take in profit. But it's more complicated than that. As I believe a lot of the power companies are owned by the various municipalities. A few years back for various reasons (supply /demand) the price of electricity went so high during a really cold winter, some old people knew they coudn't afford to pay the bill so they ended up freezing to death. But why are you paying 10 cent per kWh? Is it that electricity coss cost 9cent to make and they make a 1 cent profit or are you paying what the market is willing to pay? Is the electricity market in the US really a free market?

      When it comes to scandinavian socialism, we are socialist when it comes to social welfare, school, hospital, police, fire, old age care etc but capitalist otherwise. Even in Norway there is respect for the free market. For example, we would never see subsides for green technology for our homes as that would be interfering with the market. From what I see in the US, you have much more subsidies. Also, industries that don't have the ability to make money die easily in Norway and people accept it easier than in other european countries. I think the biggest difference between US and say a country like Norway is that in the US you get screwed by corporations, in Norway you get screwed by the government. But I firmly believe (today) we have a good goverment that *try* to make sure everyone has an equal chance at suceeding in life (from birth). We're far from perfect and there is so much more that could be done.

    20. Re:Bad puns aside... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously? You only pay for installation and sales tax? I live in Kansas and only 50 to 60% of my bill is actually for the electricity I used. We have a fuel charge, (which I don't understand cause we use hydroelectric power) a transmission charge, an environmental charge, a franchise fee, a property tax surcharge and a charge for being their customer. Literally. its called a customer charge. On my last bill, which was only for 14 days since I moved last month, I used 521 kwh of energy, which should have cost me 28.89. Not after all the bs charges were added. My bill was 51.36. My customer charge was $4.00. Maybe someone can explain to me how is this not a monopoly again? We have no other energy provider here and apparently, they can add any charge they damn well please, as long as they don't raise the rate they charge for the actual electricity.

    21. Re:Bad puns aside... by atisss · · Score: 1

      What's an electricity bill? You mean you have to pay for electricity?

      In Soviet Russia electricity meters you!

    22. Re:Bad puns aside... by lazybeam · · Score: 1

      What?! My bills are around $150-200 a quarter. Before the PV cells and solar hot water was installed it was always less than $350, even with air con.

      --
      --
      no sig for you. come back one year.
    23. Re:Bad puns aside... by aiht · · Score: 1

      Ofgem

      I thought that was some variation on OMFG at first.

    24. Re:Bad puns aside... by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      That's a bit excessive. During last winter (bitterly cold here, just a few miles north of Glasgow and well inland with -20C most nights over December) I was spending about £40 on electricity and about £100 on heating oil, with the boiler running full chat most of the day and turn down to about 3 at night. I've just bought half a tank of oil, but I've used well under 300 litres since March - about £130 for seven months. Obviously the oil heating means I don't need to run electric heaters or a water heater.

    25. Re:Bad puns aside... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Belgium, 600 kWh of electricity will cost you 150€ (or 210$); that includes all taxes.

      Slightly related to the subject: in Belgium, every family is entitled to 100kWh of 'free' electricity plus 100 kWh for each member. (So that's 200 kWh free electricity if you're single.)

    26. Re:Bad puns aside... by stdarg · · Score: 1

      What does a housing association do in England?

      I know that sounds like the setup for a joke but I'm really asking.

    27. Re:Bad puns aside... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I pay aprox 2.5 danish crowns pr kWh, which is aprox 50-60 cents. So your bill would be aprox $300. That includes sales tax which is 25% (no . missing). Start your screaming (actually I like what get for my tax money so the high taxes are ok with me)

    28. Re:Bad puns aside... by radish · · Score: 1

      It's essentially a non-profit setup to provide affordable housing.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_association

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    29. Re:Bad puns aside... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in Czech republic (in EU), and I would pay about $164 for same amount of electricity as you drained (0.589 MWh). In Europe Union electricity is fu**in' expensive due to the ecologists :-(

    30. Re:Bad puns aside... by mangu · · Score: 1

      I live in Brazil and paid $44.23 for 169 kWh, that would be $154.15 against your $78.28 for 589 kWh. Sales tax (state) here is 18% of the total, federal tax is 23.6%, then there's the city tax of 6.5%, and 8.5% "sectorial charge" tax, whatever that might be.

      Cost of energy alone is R$0.31143 / kWh according to what's printed on the bill, at R$1.66 / US$ that would be 18.76 cents / kWh before taxes. In a country where some 90% of all electricity comes from hydro power that's pretty much, compared to what you pay in Texas where, presumably, utilities have to pay a heavier fuel cost.

      Run off into the night screaming about the evils of third world socialism. If, at least, we had the benefits of Scandinavian socialism...

    31. Re:Bad puns aside... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      In this case, greedy landlords. I think they where charging the tenants while they where getting power for free.

      Electricity, at least in the US, is cheap. People bitch about utility costs, but then they will plop down 50 dollars a month on the lottery.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    32. Re:Bad puns aside... by swb · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there's more stolen power than we're aware of, especially in urban areas or industrial areas.

      It gets reported on when people steal it to run pot grow houses, but it probably doesn't even get noticed in high density urban areas with old, legacy wiring and many connections. A pizzeria oven run off electricity has to cost thousands of dollars a year (it'd be run, what, 7 days a week, 12 hours a day?).

      The same is true for high-density industrial areas -- lots of power supplies and a great temptation to power that arc welder for free.

      And possibly even rural areas -- how hard would it be for a farmer to have a tap ahead of the meter? Even if it was a semi-annual, short-term setup for running a corn dryer or some other high-energy application? The savings could run into the thousands of dollars and it could be easily removed when the need for power was done.

    33. Re:Bad puns aside... by new500 · · Score: 1

      Property prices in London are mental. that, matey, is because 60% of the housing stock isn't on the market, because of subsidised housing.

    34. Re:Bad puns aside... by olau · · Score: 1

      2.50 sounds like a lot to me. Have you tried switch.dk?

    35. Re:Bad puns aside... by olau · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up!

      You can actually produce energy yourself, ship it off to the grid, and the the kWhs will be deducted from your bill (in Denmark). As long as you produce less than you consume, this amounts to a pretty good price for the power. With PV panels you can break even in 10-14 years. Poul-Henning Kamp did the investment recently:

      http://ing.dk/artikel/109566-solstroem-for-40229

    36. Re:Bad puns aside... by sa1lnr · · Score: 1

      I reckon having three overclocked Core 2 Duo's running folding@home 24/7
      didn't help on the electricity front. :)

    37. Re:Bad puns aside... by guyminuslife · · Score: 1

      I don't see why you're complaining, I live in a competitive market and you pay less than I do, and we both pay way less than the Europeans on this thread.

      --
      I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
    38. Re:Bad puns aside... by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 1

      I can relate to that. During the summer it was consistently hot enough that I just turned the gas off to the furnace - not even a pilot light burning. There are no other gas powered devices in the house. My monthly bill was still about $18... consisting of various levies, taxes on the levies, environmental fees, and fixed fees from the utility for the physical plant. 0 consumption, $18 bill.

      We also pay more per KwH once we exceed a monthly threshold. Meanwhile government and business buildings run their lights all night long without stepping to a higher rate. In fact the more individuals use the higher the rate they pay while the more big business uses the lower the rate they pay. And the street lights are so bright and so closely spaced that I could walk all the way around my block in the middle of the night and be able to read a book without any trouble at all - really I'm not exaggerating in the least.

      --
      The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
  9. Re:Oblahgatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cool story bro

  10. Harry Tuttle? by forkazoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Tuttle, or was it Buttle? Anyhow, clearly a rogue handyman on the loose. Better arrest somebody.

    1. Re:Harry Tuttle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We'll get the police with long billed baseball caps right on it.

    2. Re:Harry Tuttle? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, Lint and Kurtzzman are busy dealing hotels in breach with the ISP laws for the moment.
      Can this wait for a while? Or maybe you should check if he wasn't dormanted already?

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    3. Re:Harry Tuttle? by Zumbs · · Score: 1

      Do you have the correct form, mr. Forkazoo? Oh, you do. Unfortunately it isn't stamped correctly. Please proceed to the Ministry of Information to get the correct stamps ...

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
    4. Re:Harry Tuttle? by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

      Harry Tuttle: Bloody paperwork. Huh!
      Sam Lowry: I suppose one has to expect a certain amount.
      Harry Tuttle: Why? I came into this game for the action, the excitement. Go anywhere, travel light, get in, get out, wherever there's trouble, a man alone. Now they got the whole country sectioned off, you can't make a move without a form.

      Harry Tuttle: Listen, kid, we're all in it together.

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  11. 150 Hours of Community Service by Krittick · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sounds like he already did the community service.

  12. Actually, it's even more screwed up. by gweilo8888 · · Score: 1

    The guy who stole GBP30k of energy for 22 apartments gets nine months in jail. The guy who helped him and many, many other people steal power for 1,500 homes gets...basically nothing, if the article is to be believed. An eight month suspended sentence (so all he has to do is not commit crimes for eight months), plus a little under 19 days of community service.

    To put this in perspective, assuming that the remaining 1,478 properties that he provided stolen power to used only 1/4 as much as the 22 apartments did (unlikely they used this little), that's still a little over half a million pounds, on top of the 30k that put another man away for nine months. More likely, it was closer to two million quid's worth of electricity whose theft he facilitated -- 67 times more crime, and he serves no time at all if he's a good boy for a few months.

    Pretty pathetic.

    1. Re:Actually, it's even more screwed up. by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Well TFA doesn't have any details, but the the guy that got 22 months was a landlord. I'm assuming he wasn't exactly passing the savings along to his tenants....

    2. Re:Actually, it's even more screwed up. by Custard+Horse · · Score: 1

      It looks like he got 9 months and under UK law will serve half of that if he keeps his nose clean and resists the urge to shank somebody whilst in the big house. More details below.

      None too happy

    3. Re:Actually, it's even more screwed up. by pudro · · Score: 1

      An eight month suspended sentence (so all he has to do is not commit crimes for eight months)

      That's not how that works. He needs to not commit crimes for the duration of his probation, which is likely significantly longer than eight months, under the threat of having to serve those eight months.

      --
      Freedom is assumed. Then they try to take it away. The degree to which you resist is the degree to which you are free.
    4. Re:Actually, it's even more screwed up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He might have been. I've been looking at flats in London, and was surprised to see a few offered lower rents than others, but with things like "power bill included" with unlimited usage. I actually asked them, and they said that it was totally unlimited, use as much as you want situation. Fair enough, but the rents were lower than others who didn't offer such a deal.

      There is currently more places for rent then there is demand, so things like this probably help landlords get tenants.

    5. Re:Actually, it's even more screwed up. by Dr+Max · · Score: 1

      Yeah this pirate electrician spent a couple of hours hooking up apartments (maybe paid a grand or two for his trouble) but the landlord spent however long lying to tenants and most likely profiting from the theft. We had a similar case in Australia where a shopping centre had the current transformers connected to a higher ratio tap thus looking like less power was going through. If it truly was a mistake how come they were charging all the shop keepers the full amount. We didn’t sent any one to jail we just gave them a giant bill.

      --
      Rocket Surgeon.
  13. Oh? by RepugnantJohn · · Score: 1

    Quite shocking, I'd say.

  14. Buttle, anyone? by c0lo · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    ...errr, I mean Archibald "Harry" Tuttle.
    Don't know why, but I don't find surprising at all the guy is from the same country as the The Pythons.

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    1. Re:Buttle, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do The Pythons have to do with it?

    2. Re:Buttle, anyone? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      They do have in common one person, his name starts with G... And the same type of black humor.
      Do you think is ironic, rather?

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    3. Re:Buttle, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      #!/usr/bin/python
      import electricity
      #????
      print 'profit'

    4. Re:Buttle, anyone? by lxs · · Score: 1

      Michael Palin was in that one as well.

    5. Re:Buttle, anyone? by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      I was waiting for the Brazil post!

    6. Re:Buttle, anyone? by djdanlib · · Score: 1

      Now you just need some batteries or a neighbor's outlet to bootstrap it, and there you go.

      As usual, though, perl proves more efficient ;)

      use less 'energy';

  15. Snap! by hipwah · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I've got the power...

  16. Power should be free anyway by shawn443 · · Score: 1

    Of course one way or another you pay for everything but power should be lumped into the library, schools, and roads category. If without it people freeze to death then any worthwhile government should see that nobody gets a monthly bill for it. I don't feel sorry for these so called public utility companies.

    1. Re:Power should be free anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone skipped Economics 101.

    2. Re:Power should be free anyway by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      No point having free power if you can't afford a home so everybody should have a free house too.

      (apologies to R.A.H who covered this at the end of The Moon is a Harsh Mistress).

    3. Re:Power should be free anyway by pookemon · · Score: 1

      And how would they pay for it? More income tax? More VAT/GST etc.? So then people can't afford the house that the power is supplied to.

      Of course people would starve to death without food.

      Or die of thirst without water.

      Roads/Schools/Libraries (WTF?) are not free in any country. Sure, you may not walk up and pay on the day, but you pay for it through a multitude of taxes. Where do you think the goverment gets the money from to be able to provide these facilities? Oh I know, they print it... Right?

      --
      dnuof eruc rof aixelsid
    4. Re:Power should be free anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nationalisation of the electric utilities would be a good start. Higher (progressive) income taxes could pay for any shortfalls.

      Free housing, food, and water would also be a good thing. After all, people will be homeless, starving, and dying of thirst without them.

      I'm glad you're on the correct (socialist) side of the important issues.

    5. Re:Power should be free anyway by sznupi · · Score: 1

      I almost remember how the central heating was used when there was just one metering device for each stairway (which would one for 30 apartments where I am). People... just don't possess the sense of moderation in such background utilities (which of course ended either with over-engineered heating plant, or every radiator being at most lukewarm)

      And I don't know about Michigan / I won't read the link obviously - but where I live there are also places to keep oneself warm; and vast majority of freezing deaths are due to drunkenness.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    6. Re:Power should be free anyway by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 0, Troll

      The problem with this is that low users of energy will be subsidising the heavy users of energy. That's not just "unfair", but it also would cause some messed up flow-on effects in terms of behaviour and economics, that we want to avoid due to the real cost of producing this energy. It removes any incentives for people to use more energy-efficient appliances, and removes the incentive from manufacturers to invest in creating more energy-efficient appliances.

      You could alleviate some of those problems with more government interference, but these tend to be kind of hamfisted and ineffective when compared to economic incentives. Not to mention they cost more money to maintain/enforce.

      Much better to use a "user pays" system and provide some kind of subsidy to those who need it.

    7. Re:Power should be free anyway by lxs · · Score: 1

      Either that or their class wasn't taught by a rabid Randroid.

    8. Re:Power should be free anyway by justinlee37 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Roads/Schools/Libraries are classified as public goods, which the free market does not allocate very efficiently. That's why we use taxes to pay for them and provide them for everyone. I think the parent understands that they aren't "free" in the sense that you mean.

      Go take an introductory macroeconomics class and then get back to us when you're slightly more educated. We really don't have the time or patience to deal with you until then.

    9. Re:Power should be free anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      go suck a dick, commie scum

    10. Re:Power should be free anyway by mangu · · Score: 1

      Higher (progressive) income taxes could pay for any shortfalls.

      Two problems with that scheme:

      1) If everybody got all their necessities for free, then who would have any need to get an income?

      2) If everybody got all their necessities for free, then who would be able to sell anything in order to get an income?

      What you proposed was tried in Soviet Russia and quickly abandoned

    11. Re:Power should be free anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the way is it done now in Estonia (and possibly other ex-soviet states). Even in my quite modern apartment there is a huge boiler somewhere in the building, and the bill is split between the residents based on the size of the apartment.

      It means I am subsidizing my neighbours heating when I go away in the middle of winter for 2 weeks. And there is no incentive to save power.

    12. Re:Power should be free anyway by smallfries · · Score: 1

      If only there were some class of goods that people desired, but which were not necessary. Then the market that you describe could co-exist with a world in which people were not homeless, starving or dying of thirst.

      It is arguable that NEP was similar to such a system, although it is not obvious that they are the same. One important difference is that the percentage of the economy devoted to producing necessities is much smaller in a modern industrial society than it was in Russia immediately after the war.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    13. Re:Power should be free anyway by mangu · · Score: 1

      It is arguable that NEP was similar to such a system, although it is not obvious that they are the same

      No, NEP was neo-capitalism, it was introduced when the fully communist economic system collapsed. The state of things the GP suggested was classical socialism, where everybody gets what they need and everybody contributes with what they can.

      NEP was introduced when the Soviet leaders realized that the average person's vision of their needs and capabilities does not add up in the end. Too many people feel they should get more than what they are contributing to the system.

    14. Re:Power should be free anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In theory I would agree with you, but in practice it causes far more problems. If electricity is free then no one would feel the need to conserve it, causing power usage to balloon beyond control. And there are people who would find some way to game the system to live without even trying to contribute to society (work, art, etc). It reminds me somewhat of the current abuses of the welfare system, there are stories in our area (SE Michigan) of run down communities with 3 or more kids per house where almost everyone lives off of welfare, but drive cars that cost more then the rundown shacks they call homes. They do this to extract the largest possible amount of money from the system (the cars don't count towards their payment). Unfortunately I have a personal experience with someone of this mindset. I knew a girl in high school who's plans for after graduation included getting a small apartment in town & getting knocked up every couple of years so she could live off the child assistance welfare. I don't know if she actually did it, but that she was even considering it was disturbing. I'm not saying that we should dump destitute people on the butts as soon as they can't pay, especially when their lives would be in jeopardy. But there needs to be some mechanism to "encourage" them to become contributing members to society, not just useless leaches.

    15. Re:Power should be free anyway by smallfries · · Score: 1

      No, what the GP said was that essentials should be free. This is not the same as classical communism. As you've said in classical communism everyone gets what they need (so that part is the same) and contributes what they can. The second part is not necessarily what the GP said, although it is one possible interpretation.

      The other interpretation is that everyone contributes what they must. And this leave no restriction on the stuff left over (that does not form the basic necessities). As far as I know that is not an economic system that has been tried, although some of the socialist states in Europe approach it.

      To be clear: what the GP suggested could be achieved by a dual-economic system. A communist model at the bottom for those goods deemed to be necessities, with another system (e.g a capitalist free market) over the remaining "luxuries". I'm not suggesting that it would work, although I think it would be interesting to see exactly how it did function.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    16. Re:Power should be free anyway by ebuck · · Score: 1

      Do you think that power outlets are only available on the inside of houses? Might take a look at the external outlets sometimes. The only thing that keeps the homeless from using them is people chasing them off premises.

    17. Re:Power should be free anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for a city water utility. I write software, implement software. I do it for every part of the Bureau. Maintenance, finance, construction, HR, and so on.

      Water is pretty cheap here in Portland, and it's some of the highest quality water in the world. In term of purity.

      I'm going to let you in on a secret. One that would freak out the locals. If it was paid out of taxes, the water would be even cheaper for them. A lot cheaper. One you remove billing, collections and support the cost frps about 40%. In reality, you would one drop 25% and the remaining 'extra' money should sit in a fund to pay for improvements. Like the federal mandated treatment there just starting to put in.

      I have talked to several of the experienced accounts about this, and they all agree it would be cheaper. All but one thinks it would be best for the consumer. One doesn't like it because it involved the word 'taxes'; which is good enough to pay their salary, but still bad. bad I tell you, bad.

    18. Re:Power should be free anyway by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1
      Wrong. And ironic, mr. Go Back To Class.

      A public good is nonrival and nonexcludable... like national defense. Your examples may suffer from free-rider problems, but they're definitely rival (omg silicon valley traffic) and reasonably excludable.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    19. Re:Power should be free anyway by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 1

      We really don't have the time or patience to deal with you until then.

      Apparently you do. =P

    20. Re:Power should be free anyway by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Yeah I have two. One for the heater and one for the hot water system. There are many in public places too, often the heavy 15A type. Many are locked but some are not.

    21. Re:Power should be free anyway by lee1026 · · Score: 1

      Stuff like public goods are part of a microecon class, not macro.

    22. Re:Power should be free anyway by istartedi · · Score: 1

      If electricity is free then no one would feel the need to conserve it, causing power usage to balloon beyond control

      When I went to school, the dorms were un-metered. We used to joke about starting an electroplating business. Strangely, the idea of growing pot never came up. I don't seem to recall hearing much about indoor grows in the 80s anyway. It must have become more popular as the DEA started flying over remote areas...

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  17. No Pirate, a Thief by Grismar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since I think the distinction between thieves and pirates can be a useful one in the debate on software piracy, I'd say we're dealing with a thief here - not a pirate.

    1. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by mjwx · · Score: 1

      This guy could very well have a peg leg and eye patch for all you know, that would definitely qualify him as a pirate.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    2. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but, but it's only electrons....

    3. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting how the term pirate has been diluted.

    4. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by DrInequality · · Score: 1

      No, no, no! Neither type of "piracy" is theft.

    5. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      Wait, what? Pirates with parrots and peg legs weren't theives?

    6. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Yep, moderate headling -1, Troll (or +$$$, Pagehits if you're a slashdot editor).

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    7. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No sane, unbiased tech person would have put the word "Pirate" in the title relating to this story. Even the linked Reg story calls him a "Rogue Engineer" and we all know Orlowski is first to bash any "freetards".

      Does that minus sign next to the story title do anything? I'm going to press it anyway.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    8. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pirate or thief depends on how many of his victims walked the plank....

    9. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by wargod667 · · Score: 1

      I believe the word for pirating starts before internet, thus making it the right term to use here, and was when you were getting pirated cable tv and whatnot in the same manner as tapping in to the electrical lines, which was done here, and you can therefore term it as pirating electricity as they did.

    10. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Data are just electrical impulses. All he was doing was sharing those impulses without the permission of the person that created them. Fight- I mean, share the power!

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    11. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Clearly this was theft. Power is not infinitely replaceable at negligible marginal cost.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    12. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Nope. People who steal electricity have been called pirates for as long as there has been electricity. It's a perfectly acceptable term. As is Rogue engineer.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    13. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Are you telling me that when a seafaring pirate boards another vessel (off the coast of Africa for example) to steal property, that's not theft??!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    14. Re:No Pirate, a Thief by Andrewkov · · Score: 1

      Although the wooden leg would be a good insulator.

  18. More power to him! by blankoboy · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Get it?

    1. Re:More power to him! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Shut up.

    2. Re:More power to him! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get what?

  19. Not stolen, just borrored! by noidentity · · Score: 3, Funny

    He didn't steal the power, he just borrowed it. For every electron that went into his wires, he sent one right back to the electric company. So he just copied them. Or something.

    1. Re:Not stolen, just borrored! by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      The electrons were kidnapped, imprisoned and for all we know used for immoral purposes by being forced to download 4chan. Thats no way to treat a bunch of 14 billion year old atomic particles. The UN should so something about this. Please, won't anybody think about the fermions?

    2. Re:Not stolen, just borrored! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      The electrons were kidnapped, imprisoned and for all we know used for immoral purposes by being forced to download 4chan. Thats no way to treat a bunch of 14 billion year old atomic particles. The UN should so something about this. Please, won't anybody think about the fermions?

      No kidding. One of those apartment (pardon me, "flat") dwellers might very well have been viewing child porn.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:Not stolen, just borrored! by Liquid+Len · · Score: 1

      - Oh no, someone stole my electrons !
      - You sure about that ?
      - I'm positive...

    4. Re:Not stolen, just borrored! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, he robbed the electrons of their precious bodily potential.

    5. Re:Not stolen, just borrored! by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Actually, with AC power, the electrons just move back and forth a bit, they don't make round trips between the power company and the customer premise. When all is said and done, most of the electrons will be right back where they were to start with.

      DC power would be an exchange of the power companies input electrons for the users output electrons.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    6. Re:Not stolen, just borrored! by noidentity · · Score: 1

      At short invervals, AC can be treated as DC of one or the other polarity. During each of these, electrons are flowing from the power company to your wiriting, and the opposite direction through ground. So you are accepting electrons from them, and giving some back. This reverses 15-20 milliseconds later, of course, but since electrons have no identity, you can't really say that they're giving you back the same electrons.

    7. Re:Not stolen, just borrored! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the UK the crime of using electricity that isn't yours, isn't Burglary or Theft, but is the crime of Abstracting Electricity. Pretty much for the reason you say, stealing energy is a difficult crime to define.

      Strange crime, often seen in cannabis growing houses.

      A bit of the law here - http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/abstracting_electricity/

  20. Article short on faces by David+Off · · Score: 1

    The article doesn't give any useful information about what was actually going on and doesn't mention dodgy landlord Haresh Parmar cited in the summary.

  21. Anyone have his number??? by hipwah · · Score: 1

    I would _really_ like to hook up with him...

  22. genius! by Qubit · · Score: 2, Funny

    But say I had an electric vehicle with cleverly designed arms (like the gear on the top of a tram) which could reach up to the power lines, charge up, then fold up again. I could probably get away with doing that for years in the middle of the night, especially if I had signs on my vehicle suggesting some official status.

    Wait, so let me get this straight: You design an electric vehicle with special arms whose sole purpose is to reach up its arms at night to recharge, then sit there during the day as the battery drains out, then reach up again a night or so later and recharge again.

    And you do this for years...

    Brilliant!

    --

    coding is life /* the rest is */
    1. Re:genius! by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, during the day you drive it around. Then stop where you can steal power during the night.

  23. Logical disjunction? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those usually go hand in hand!

    1. Re:Logical disjunction? by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 3, Funny

      And yet it enabled him to supply more power than the average renewable power government project. I say we need more nuts and rocks !

    2. Re:Logical disjunction? by aurispector · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd like to point out that this sort of thing is very common in third world countries. When it happens, it drives up prices for actual paying customers by making it exponentially more difficult for utilities to provide service and maintain infrastructure due to the uncompensated stress put on their systems. As the increased taxes and regulations of the modern socialist nanny state crushes entrepreneurship and throws ever larger numbers of people out of work and onto welfare, expect to see more of this as a harbinger of things to come.

      Remember, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    3. Re:Logical disjunction? by fredrated · · Score: 1

      "the increased taxes and regulations of the modern socialist nanny state crushes entrepreneurship and throws ever larger numbers of people out of work"
      And yet the Scandinavian do just that and maintain the highest level of happiness in the world. The god of Capitalism thinks nothing of you, stop worshiping it.

    4. Re:Logical disjunction? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, you are really reaching. I don't see how this was modded insightful, as it sounds like Glenn Beck drivel. It's the government's fault that people are stealing electricity? Especially in third world countries which don't have a lot of the social services you're railing against? I don't see how you can make the connection.

    5. Re:Logical disjunction? by fritsd · · Score: 1

      Do you happen to work for Trafigura, by any chance?
      They could have paid a disposal fee of € 500 000 in Amsterdam, instead they opted to make 30 000 West-Africans sick and still ended up having to pay US$ 198 000 000 cleanup fee.
      Sounds like exactly the same attitude towards reality, environment regulations and profits that you display here.
      TANSTAAFL indeed.

      --
      To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
    6. Re:Logical disjunction? by Dishevel · · Score: 1
      OMG! Are you saying that if you take a position to the extreme it dose not work as well as if it was handled sanely?

      Defending one position by taking the other to an extreme proves nothing.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    7. Re:Logical disjunction? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      isn't that a fallacy? telling that "in a third world country in contrass to our first world country etc", that isn't an appeal to fear/supperiority or kind of?

      i'm from chile, which btw is considered a third world country, you comment is also valid for the opposite scenario.

      considerate a Free economy where the electrics companies owns the wires and the lampposts because if the goverment to do that is Socialism, right? , if the company own even the lamppost they could limitate the wires that cross thru it, difficulting competition because it would requiered to every other company to put their own lampposts ,( which requires a high amount of initial capital, doesn't free economy encourage competition mantaining a low initial capital amounts?), this could lead to a monopoly in some places, and as we know a monopoly in a single industry affect the production of the rest, causing poverty

      well, it seems that you are trying to push your own agenda/idea/phylosophy thru a impartial fact, amirite?

    8. Re:Logical disjunction? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the increased taxes and regulations of the modern socialist nanny state crushes entrepreneurship and throws ever larger numbers of people out of work and onto welfare, expect to see more of this as a harbinger of things to come.

      I don't understand your logic. You mean that this electrician-entrepreneur, who was "crushed" by the regulations of the "socialist nanny state" will somehow lead to more entrepreneurs who will then be crushed by the socialist nanny state?

      Does this mean you suggest that we eliminate the "taxes and regulations of the modern socialist nanny state" so that such "entrepreneurship" runs rampant and free?

      I'm all for everyone's right to free enterprise, but just like there are laws that govern your behavior as a member of society to prevent you from running around raping and pillaging, there are laws that govern business practices to prevent such electro-pirate entrepreneurs from running around unregulated making a fire hazard out of our electrical infrastructure. There are enough examples of the sorts of things that happen when enterprises that grow into gigantic corporations are allowed to operate under flimsy regulations (i.e. sweatshops and telcos)

    9. Re:Logical disjunction? by raedeon · · Score: 1

      'Remember, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.' there is not no such thing as a free lunch? ain't = is not

    10. Re:Logical disjunction? by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      While its true, the words do not make logical sense as written, you know the meaning. In fact, this is a very very common idiomatic expression. Feel free to read up on the topic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiom

      If it were not for such things, we wouldn't have such gems as "fuck you", which, I might need to point out, is not a suggestion that we have sex.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    11. Re:Logical disjunction? by bandmassa · · Score: 1

      Regulation is as important for safety (and prevention of this kind of theft) as competition is important for encouraging better pricing and services. Only a complete wanker would believe you can completely deregulate reticulated infrastructures. It's not the socialists who are unrealistic loonie anachists, it's clearly the capaitalists.

      --
      "I hope you like Guinness, Sir. I find it a refreshing substitute for, er... food." Col. Jack O'Neil, SG-1
  24. An electrical pirate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hope he doesn't get any arrrrrcing!

  25. In 22 of HIS appartments... by santax · · Score: 1

    And yet I believed my parents when they told me I should get a nice office-job because I would earn better than an electrician.

  26. I submitted the article; by fridaynightsmoke · · Score: 1

    I got the details about the landlord being prosecuted from here: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:4m7ouHfb-GwJ:findarticles.com/p/news-articles/people-the-london-uk/mi_8046/is_20100919/revolting-behaviour/ai_n55280555/+derek+brown+Haresh+Parmar&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

    I figured that a Google cache link wasn't quite worthy of being linked in the submission so I just included some details from that article.

    There is nothing online with much detail about how exactly the connections were made or how the end users/landlords were charged for them (eg one-off payment for connection to free juice, or some kind of billing) other than a police spokesman saying "OMG dangerous" which they can be relied upon to say about anything.

    --
    This is a substitute for a clever sig that fits within the maximum number of characters.
  27. My bill, let me show you it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the Netherlands I pay:

    Euro 1.99 per month tax, plus
    Euro 0.08496 per kWh for electricity, plus
    Euro 0.11140 per kWh energy tax, plus
    Euro 0.03731 per kWh sales tax/VAT.

    For a typical monthly bill (300 kWh), this works out to:

    Energy usage = 300 * 0.08496 = 25.49
    Tax = 1.99 + 300 * (0.11140 + 0.03731) = 46.60

    For a total of 25.49 + 46.60 = 72.09 Euro.

    As you can see, tax is 65% of my montly bill.

    Don't start about my water bill, that's even worse.

  28. This is not piracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is not piracy, its actual theft.

    If you pirate a song, a computer program or a movie, you are merely making an unauthorized copy. You can't do that with electricity. It still has to be generated by burning fossil fuels and adding to the CO2 in the atmosphere.

    1. Re:This is not piracy by lxs · · Score: 1, Funny

      He was merely following Joule's first law. It can't be illegal to follow the law.

    2. Re:This is not piracy by HikingStick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you forget that the term "piracy" had its origins before the digital age? When the ship with the Jolly Roger approached a vessel, overtook it, and stole the cargo, it was called "piracy". While originally describing theft at sea, its (vernacular) meaning can include any act of theft from a merchant or carrier before the "cargo" reaches the intended customer or destination.

      --
      I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
    3. Re:This is not piracy by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      So why not make the sentence that he either needs to return the electricity to the grid, or pay for it at the cost the power company has to pay for it?

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    4. Re:This is not piracy by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      How come nobody makes this argument in the intellectual property discussions, where we get the reverse "it's not actually theft, it's just piracy" comments?

  29. All you say are lies. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know of a degreed Electrical Engineer from Japan with a house in southern California that put an induction loop along his backyard wall at over 100 yards from where the Power Lines run by Tower above Railroad Tracks. 2-years later, a TEAM of Power Company Service men arrived at his front-door with COPS on a conclusion that the extra load in their circuit was coming from something on his property and they decided this because he was Off-Grid and his Credentials and Housing arraingments suggested he wasn't Solar and Wind.

    Electrical Service Providers are providing after the Power company causes regulative estoppel to Natural Resources. Nobody is being robbed, because the Power company is a middleman that produces no power only channels it from a convertible source; they are entitled to lost labor to bring power, and not allowed to put any cost on the actual Powers because they don't make shit unless they hire men to turn wheels theirselves rather than hinder moving rain and sunlight and wind and combustion.

    1. Re:All you say are lies. by tibit · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think it's partially BS. An induction loop that provides useful power (enough to run a house) at a distance of 100 yards to the AC transmission line must be coupling to a big-scale high voltage line -- I'd presume something above 100kV. AFAIK, in those lines, change in losses due to changes in something as trivial as air humidity beats whatever consumption a house would have, by orders of magnitude. I doubt they would be able to measure whatever this man did. Now it's true that he did increase the load on their line, but the instantaneous power transmitted by such lines is such that one house's worth of load is below the capability of typical industrial measurement systems. So it's true that he was stealing power, but I doubt they came to him due to "extra load in their circuit". Besides, such lines are costly to maintain, so I presume it's rare that you would run such a line without normal loads attached to it. I'd think that leakage measurements with disconnected loads are rare: idling a big transmission line wastes lots of money.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    2. Re:All you say are lies. by haxot · · Score: 1

      Actually, they can measure some pretty nifty things about electrical current from down at the powerhouse.
      Go to your local one and ask when/if they schedule tours.

      I and my family got in to our local town's power plant and the got a huge earful.

      Basically, from what the electrician said, if you're drawing enough power to do 0.25 horsepower of work, they can detect it.

      Good fellow; he was a lineman on the huge lines that go between towns before he settled down in my town with his wife.

      Also, as far as humidity causing loss of power in the lines..
      Dude.
      There's a HUGE difference between electricity being impeded by an induction coil (causing resistance on the line in order to move the charge) and the air being wet and mucking with the line.
      Wet air doesn't cause electrical resistance - wet air in theory can cause a short.
      On the big lines like you're talking, they've been designed to handle big rains and wee tornadoes - a bit heavier duty for line shorting than your 'air humidity'

      Get it?
      Induction coil (resister-like device used to transfer power and scale it) is a 'resistance' thing.
      Wet air is an 'electrical short' thing.
      Apples, Oranges.

      --
      What? Me worry?
    3. Re:All you say are lies. by tibit · · Score: 1

      Wet air causes corona discharges. Their effect, in bulk, is same as if you'd attach a resistor between each phase pair, and one between each phase and ground. Wet air is not 'an electrical short thing' anymore than a transformer with a resistive load would be.

      Let's see if you're right about 0.25hp it in terms of resolution of measuring instruments. Assume you're doing power measurements using a 6.5 decimal digit instrument, with p-p noise of one least significant digit. That lets you measure 0.3ppm, or 0.3W in a MW. Assuming you have a transmission line with a 500MW load, then yes -- you could detect adding ~160W of load.

      Now there are several problems that I see:

      0. Do they actually have that sort of resolution available for power measurements on HV transmission lines. We're talking 1ppm. You can't exactly attach an electrician's power meter to a 100kV line -- those instruments probably cost ~ 10k USD, and are few and between. You need an isolated current transformer with isolation rated for, say, line voltage * 1.5, and a voltage divider stack, similarly rated, with accuracy, say, an order of magnitude or two away from your resolution -- so that the results will have any real-life meaning.

      From what I know, making a 100+kV divider that maintains accuracy down to say 10ppm over industrial temp range is no small feat; those aren't exactly instruments that you can throw ate every which large substation.

      1. How much does it fluctuate due to changes in load -- the value is not steady, so you can't exactly see anyone in particular doing anything. I don't know what is, say the typical p-p power change in one second on a large line (>10MW load). This would be important.

      2. How much does the load fluctuate on a large (say ~500kV) line with no loads attached -- merely due to corona discharges and such. And, moreover, what is this baseline load.

      3. How often do they run the line with all loads disconnected (no transformers, no nothing, all switches open).

      4. If they run tests with large substation transformers in the circuit, but with load sides of those transformers open, what's the magnitude of load presented by unloaded transformers (they have radiators for a reason), and how much does it change due to weather conditions (temperature, humidity) -- say you measure on Monday, then Joe Schmoe starts stealing on Tuesday, can you see the difference on Wednesday?

      5. Transmission systems are dynamical things, sometimes to a point of becoming runaway-unstable, there are plenty of Ph.D.s on the topic. From what I recall from reading about powerplant commissioning, sometimes just maintaining the power flow going in the correct direction so that your generators don't absorb all of it can be something that get to brag about in the evening over beer. I don't think you can measure any effects of a couple, or even dozes, of hp of loading in a large transmission system that's operating normally. And that's what we're talking about here: someone "stealing" from a multi-100kV line, not from a small local substation where arguably it'd be comparatively trivial to detect.

      And so on. All I see are real metrological problems, and the overall accuracy and sensitivity of the measurements you call for is more to be found in a lab than in the field.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  30. New Labour by dugeen · · Score: 1

    Note the use of the New Labour asset seizure law, which allows the police to seize the whole of a person's assets on the assumption that they all derive from illegal acts. The victim then has to prove that they came by the assets legally in order to get them back... The concept of being prosecuted for stealing electricity is laughable when you recall how private companies got control of electricity generation and distribution in the UK in the first place.

    1. Re:New Labour by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      "The victim then has to prove that they came by the assets legally in order to get them back"

      Well, yeah! Guilty until proven innocent is clearly the most intelligent way to go about things.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  31. Arctic pot? by mangu · · Score: 1

    And before anyone states the obvious that he only turned them on during the day, let me say that through past firsthand knowledge of the subject, I know that pot needs 18 - 24 hours of light for at least the first few weeks to few months depending on how big you want the plants

    Funny, I didn't know hemp was a plant that came originally from the Arctic regions. That's the only way I know to get 18 -24 hours of light in nature.

    1. Re:Arctic pot? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Funny, I didn't know hemp was a plant that came originally from the Arctic regions. That's the only way I know to get 18 -24 hours of light in nature.

      Nature? Yeah, I fucked her. When we do salad starts we do them inside under cool whites now because they like that better than being outside under real light. Humans have never been satisfied with the natural state of plants.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Arctic pot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why Alaska Thunderfuck was such good weed!

    3. Re:Arctic pot? by RMH101 · · Score: 1

      But they aren't being grown in a natural setting. The aim is to get them as big and bushy as possible, as quickly as possible. See also: raising cattle for meat in intensive farming.

    4. Re:Arctic pot? by koona · · Score: 1

      Alaska Thunderfuck Infringement of my copyright, circa 1976. My original Kootnay ThunderFuck is well documented in High Times. The Original Kootnay ThunderFuckErr... Desist

  32. Another story about Pirates on Slashdot by titanium93 · · Score: 1

    But what I want to know is how he get the pirate ship down the manhole?

    --
    Sigs are for losers
    1. Re:Another story about Pirates on Slashdot by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      But what I want to know is how he get the pirate ship down the manhole?

      Cable pulling lube for the win!

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  33. See ? Another good use of DRM! by freaker_TuC · · Score: 2, Insightful

    .. They wouldn't have stolen it that fast when it had DRM!

    (I can't believe I've said pro-DRM crap; my low-uid must be tarnished for life now!)

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
    1. Re:See ? Another good use of DRM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, if you are old enough to have a low user ID that means you'll probably die soon anyway.

  34. You know what they say... by bratwiz · · Score: 1

    Power to the people, man!

  35. I did it by fridaynightsmoke · · Score: 1

    It just seemed like the 'right' word to use at the time, it is not in any way intended to make any kind of statement whatsoever about the ever-popular Slashdot intellectual property debate.

    I do not however make any claim to be 'unbiased' or in any way 'sane'. :P

    --
    This is a substitute for a clever sig that fits within the maximum number of characters.
  36. Wrong Location... by Space · · Score: 1

    Are they sure this wasn't in Brazil?

    --
    I Don't Work Here
  37. Pirate? by slim · · Score: 1

    I hope he installed an Aaaaaaaarr! CD.

  38. reminds me of a funny story by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 1

    Years ago when I was a kid our neighbour was a sparky working on a site building new residentials. He had a huge fight with his foreman over something that wasn;t his fault, he got so pissed that he cross-wired the meters for each pair of houses on the site he was working on that day so house A would be paying for house B's electrons and vice-versa.(easy to do in our brick built "semi-detatched" houses in the UK where each pair of houses is one physical building)

    --
    And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
  39. Tuttle by Klync · · Score: 1

    I wish I could give mod points to whoever tagged this story "tuttle". That was the first thought that popped into my head. If you're on /. you should already know, but for the youngun's out there:

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088846/

    --

    ----
    Not to be confused with Col.
  40. Libertarian fantasy wank. by the_raptor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah I hate how high taxes and over regulation created those third world countries... oh wait they are almost universally libertarian fantasies in which even local policing is "outsourced" to "entrepreneurs".

    This sort of Libertarian fantasy wank gets modded insightful?

    P.S. The freedom crushing is being done at the behest of under-regulated corporate behemoths that can buy laws. Which is the end result of Libertarian fantasy wank.

    --

    ========
    CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
    1. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by SteveFoerster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nothing you just said there made any sense. The guy wasn't connecting taxes and regulation with third world countries, he was just remarking that in developing countries many people steal electricity, cable TV, and so forth. And it's true.

      P.S. There's nothing libertarian about "buying laws". In a libertarian society, those with wealth wouldn't have the same opportunity to use it to buy coercive legislation over others that they do in the real world. A strong state tends to amplify the influence of the wealthy, not mitigate it.

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    2. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by mangu · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah I hate how high taxes and over regulation created those third world countries...

      Have you actually ever visited a third world country?

      I live in Brazil where sales tax is around 25% for food, for "luxury" items it could reach 70% of the final price. In order to dock at a Brazilian harbor, a ship has to fill over 140 different documents with a total of over 900 different questions.

      In other words, you are absolutely correct. High taxes and over regulation are, basically, the cause of many countries being poor.

    3. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by brian0918 · · Score: 1

      In your fantasy world, "freedom" involves laws that violate individual rights.

    4. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by operagost · · Score: 1

      The GP was a troll; regardless, in general you're wrong about every third-world country being a libertarian paradise. In some heavily socialist countries, this is also a problem because the bureaucracy takes months or YEARS-- and several bribes-- to fulfill requests for utility hookups.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    5. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Moryath · · Score: 1

      Yes, but having regulations too low can be just as bad - it allows certain bad actors to get away with amazingly destructive behavior because it's "legal" while at the same time being horrible.

      Likewise, everyone should have to pay taxes. More to the point, what we in the US really should do is end the ridiculous payroll tax-deduction system so that everyone could really, truly SEE how much they were paying in taxes.

      The joke today is that half of the US receives a net income from the government the way our fucked-up taxation system works (you get an "income tax refund" even if you didn't work a day all year, WTF?) and another 40% or so think that sometime between January 1st and April 15th they get a "refund" that counts as some "fun money" from the government. Most of these idiots never look at their actual pay stub to realize precisely how much of their money is going straight into government pockets, or worse yet, providing an interest-free loan to the government for most of the year.

      A sane way to handle government would be to decide what services are actually needed, what regulations are actually needed (clean air, water, worker safety, etc), and then tally up what it costs to provide services, emergency response, policing, etc. Instead, what we have today is the "throw it on the pile, another couple billion doesn't matter" spending from the dummycraps and repukicunts.

      The US wastes amazing amounts of money - government funds get spent on lobbying efforts (WTF? The government spending money on groups to lobby for policy issues? YEP!). Government funds get wasted on "foreign aid", which is a fancy way of saying we pay off dictators and assholes to keep their anti-America rhetoric just below a dull roar while anally raping the people in their home countries. Government funds get wasted on giving free educations and meals to the kids of people who broke into the country illegally, get wasted on propping up stupidly overproduced commodities like corn while putting tariffs on items like sugar, get wasted buying out businesses (all hail our new overlords from Government Motors...), and of course on programs like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

      High taxes are bad. So is overregulation. But so too is overgrowth of government programs and ridiculous amounts of government waste and make-work.

      The Soviets used to call their system "pointless work for pointless pay." How long till the bread lines hit us here in the USA?

    6. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by KillAllNazis · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What version of money would this be that you cannot buy power with?

    7. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Those are not bribe, those are just people with money getting to the front of the line; which according to libertarians is how it should be.

      \
      Yeah, by default, 3rd world countries become the end result of libertarian bullshit. The people with money get what ever they want, regardless of the harm to others, and people without become slaves and live in a hell hole. Naturally people with money want to stay being the people with money, so they do what ever they can to ensure they stay on top. As has been shown for hundreds of year, this includes bulling possible competitor, making laws that favor you, and a variety of other uncivilized actions.

      Look about to the turn of last century and the beginning of the industrial revolution. Yeah, not a lot of regulations. Basically a libertarian wet dream. Libertarian is only endorsed by corporation who stand to gain from less to no regulation and ignorant middle class people.

      We did the ;ibertarian experiment, it failed as a reasonable choice for civilized people.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Dishevel · · Score: 1
      You sir are an idiot. So this must be Flamebait. Whatever. Why is it that you can not see that Big Business, Big Labor AND Big Government are ALL enemies of the people. The politicians do not give a shit about you. NONE of them. To think that one side or the other has "Got your Back" is an idea that is proven wrong everyday in every country.

      Stop wasting your time attacking the other side and attack all sides.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    9. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, this is slashdot, where Space Nutter fantasy wank is worshiped and unscientific non-engineering ideas from whacked-out lunatics are regarded as serious. The only difference is that Space Nuttery is not even able to get to the point of doing anything at all, while Libertarian crank stuff does sometimes, like in Chile.

    10. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You obviously are more inclined to want more regulation until every facet of your life if regimented, say like China or North Korea.

      No, there is no flaw in your slippery slope argument /sarcasm.

      The only thing you fail to mention is that the "libertarian" examples you provided aren't libertarian at all. They are anarchistic. And if that is your view of LIBERTY than you shouldn't comment on ideals you have no concept of.

      The function of government is to secure the liberties of the people. Most of the third world countries that are often touted by the leftwing anti liberty crowd (such as yourself), is that they DO NOT HAVE a functioning governance.

      And while you're at it, why not admit that corporations are nothing more than collectives, like unions? When you realize that collectivization of politics leads to tyranny, then you'll be able to realize that you've been an idiot, and the end of your leftwing fantasy wank.

      I'm not against "unions" or "corporations", I'm just against collectives of any sort infringing upon the liberties of anyone, even if I'm affected directly. Because even if I'm not personally affected by anti libertarian tyrants, I will be, eventually.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    11. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      They can raise taxes or lower them. They can make everyone pay the same or make the rich pay it all. I do not give a shit. I care about 2 things. Never allow anyone to make a career in politics and Government Spending should be cut in half.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    12. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Likewise, everyone should have to pay taxes. More to the point, what we in the US really should do is end the ridiculous payroll tax-deduction system so that everyone could really, truly SEE how much they were paying in taxes.

      You mean, like when you get your W2 and fill out that pesky 1040? Yeah, I already know what I pay in taxes.

    13. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Moryath · · Score: 1

      "Payroll Deduction" makes it feel painless to people, though.

      Ever had to fill out your taxes quarterly, and actually mail the check off and wait for it to clear? Had to account for having enough money on hand to pay it? Ensure that you knew, really understood, how much was taken out and why?

      MOST PEOPLE IN THE US DON'T GET THIS. They see their "take-home pay" by direct deposit or in a check. They don't even realize how much was already taken out. Then, come around April 15th, they go pay some shyster accountant to "do their taxes", and he tells them they have a $500-600 "refund check" coming, so they think "woohoo the government is giving me money."

      This is the Idiocracy principle at work. They never see the money, never realize how much it is that they get soaked for in taxes, and then they think they're being "given money."

    14. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      The parent poster isn't saying that money delivering power does not exist in libertarian economies.

      The crucial difference is simpler. Who has money (and power) :

      a) socialist society : whomever has the biggest guns (hopefully - but not necessarily - the government and it's cronies)
      b) libertarian society : the people producing value for other people

      Given the source of the money you can be DAMN sure what the money's going to be used for :

      a) socialist society : more control, more guns, more interference, more cronies, more crime, more war (after a while war becomes the only viable way for the cronies to increase income), and above all : more corruption
      b) libertarian society : more, bigger, better (the companies that make the country actually do something decide what gets done)

    15. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      You actually know BEFOREHAND how much taxes you'll pay ?

      Could you teach those tricks to a few European governments ? That'd be great.

    16. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by operagost · · Score: 1

      Those are not bribe, those are just people with money getting to the front of the line; which according to libertarians is how it should be.

      No, it's NOT. Libertarianism doesn't preclude ethics in business, and being for small government it certainly does NOT encourage a BIG GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACY that requires bribes to get anything done. Again, we're talking about SOCIALIST countries where the utilities are run by the GOVERNMENT.

      Perhaps you should find out what libertarianism really is instead of just assigning it to straw men of your own creation.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    17. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, by default, 3rd world countries become the end result of libertarian bullshit.

      Your an asshole. Your one of the reasons I can't wait for civil war. I want to put a bullet in your fucking head.

    18. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      So, according to you, making the government refuse all requests for service until bribes are provided ...

      And ... get this ... this is to be considered CAPITALIST behavior ... when every 3-year old knows perfectly well that this is the consequence of socialism ...

      Do you seriously expect people to believe this ? The capitalist way is to maximize return. That means that the electric utility company will, in general, attempt to fulfill ALL reasonable requests for service as soon as possible. Obviously.

      Political approval for service delivery is (obviously) a VERY socialist attitude. Even outright communist (if you consider electrical power a "means of production").

      Is this the new socialist tactic ? Take the faults of socialist and communist systems and then just flat-out lie that they're capitalist problems ? And then obviously count on people being stupid enough not to see through the lie ...

    19. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by danlip · · Score: 1

      Which is why those "socialist" western European countries have engage in so many more wars that the US since 1945, right? Oh, wait ...

    20. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by ncc74656 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What version of money would this be that you cannot buy power with?

      If there's no significant accumulation of power in the government to begin with, all the money in the world will do you no good here. You can't buy that which doesn't exist.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    21. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      you mean right after the "national" socialists started a really big one ?

      Oh, and obviously discounting the whole of eastern europe, the middle east, latin america, and asia which has experienced quite a bit of war since 1945 (the "cold" war wasn't all that cold there), also, of course, at the hands of socialists (and other totalitarian governments).

      But I'm sure all that hasn't happened (and it won't once you get your hands on the history books right ?)

      Has it ever occured to you that
      a) totalitarian governments are necessarily socialist (they control everything, so they also control the means of production)
      b) socialist governments are necessarily totalitarian in almost all respects (socialist government controls - by definition - everything that involves either money, labour or land. And every socialist government has repressed opinions as well)

      That would be enough, mathematically speaking, to say that socialist policies ARE IDENTICAL TO totalitarian policies (ie. the collection of socialist policies contains all the same elements as the collection of totalitarian policies).

      And the real world, as only the most willfully blind can even contemplate doubting, confirms this further.

      Quite frankly, when one looks at exactly what kinds of power the "benevolent" socialist advocates want, this is further confirmed. You want healthcare ? Sure, but there'll be laws against damaging yourself ... meaning what you eat will be regulated. What you use to wash your ass will be regulated. What you use to climb your roof and repair something will be regulated ... And if you don't do this, healthcare will, for obvious reasons, become (even more) unpayable.

      Quite frankly, for people who decry "unsustainable" policies all the time, democrats sure have strange ideas about taxmoney supply.

    22. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Kjella · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A strong state tends to amplify the influence of the wealthy, not mitigate it.

      [reality check needed]

      Let's take a case study:
      US: A "weak" state in terms of taxes and regulation
      Europe: Mostly "strong" states with more taxes and regulation

      Where does wealth buy the most influence? The US. Sure, money talks in Europe too but not nearly as strongly. In fact, I would suggest that most of things that cause Americans to shout "Socialists!" are good for the masses, not the wealthy like universal health care, better unemployment/disability/retirement/whatever benefits, stronger consumer protection laws, stronger worker protection laws and so on. The wealthy could afford to buy it on their own and it'd probably be cheaper for them than the taxes they pay instead.

      All of us have to deal with megacorporations even if we're not employed at them, many things have to be driven at a large industrial scale to be profitable today. They are the people that can and will screw you over because they're often a little oligarchy, sure they may push the customers around a little but in the end they can't leave the handful of companies that supply it. So you got burned by Intel and go AMD or burned by AMD and go Intel. And if you get burned by both? I suppose you might find a VIA board somewhere, but that's it.

      They also supply many enough jobs that people will jump at them in a poor economy or even a not so poor one. The wealthy never have to deal with being a peon of an employee, the corporations run wild on behalf of their masters which are the wealthy ones we are talking about. You can pretend that "at will" is an equally strong tool in both directions but it's a lie, most companies can easily absorb losing an employee. Not so many employees can easily absorb losing their one and only job. Not to mention that in the US, your work is tied to your company health insurance.

      The reason it seems like more laws means more laws written for the wealthy is because in the US the wealthy write the laws. Just FYI, that's not how it should work.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    23. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      The only thing you fail to mention is that the "libertarian" examples you provided aren't libertarian at all. They are anarchistic.

      You are trying very hard to argue that two shades of the same color are completely opposite. Not that wikipedia is that authoritative, but this seems quite well supported by citations:

      Also identified is a large faction advocating minarchism, though libertarianism has also long been associated with anarchism (and sometimes is used as a synonym for such), especially outside of the United States. Anarchism remains one of the significant branches of libertarianism.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    24. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by tibman · · Score: 1

      I have to ask though, you say "Libertarianism doesn't preclude ethics in business". Does that mean there would be laws to enforce those ethics?

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    25. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      If US people don't get it, they must be massively dense. I know my salary, of course I do and what I get paid out doesn't come close at all. How could people not realize there's a huge chunk missing? This sounds like an urban legend to me...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    26. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the contrary, the libertarian experiment can be credited with creating much of what you enjoy in your life today. The profit motive and profits themselves acting as a signal for the direction of resources is remarkably effective at increasing social welfare in total.

    27. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

      Let's take a case study:
      US: A "weak" state in terms of taxes and regulation
      Europe: Mostly "strong" states with more taxes and regulation

      It's not so that the U.S. is a weak state on either of these. Between federal and state corporate income tax, the rate usually approaches 40%. And many industries here have a byzantine regulatory environment.

      I'll skip the rest of it, since neither of us is likely to persuade the other.

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    28. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by milkasing · · Score: 1

      The fallacy here is to assume that governments are the only entities that have power. Everyone has some power, sometimes a little, sometimes a lot. As long as money has value (which it has to have, by definition), money will be able to buy power. And power will be able to attract money. So without an already powerful body to provide checks and balances, money and power will tend to get concentrated -- and morality or social worth does not enter the picture one way or the other.
      Libertarian fantasy wank is apt for the GP

    29. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      You obviously are more inclined to want more regulation until every facet of your life if regimented, say like China or North Korea.

      And you're arguing against a strawman, yet it's somehow +5 insightful.

      touted by the leftwing anti liberty crowd

      Ooh, and some name calling to boot.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
    30. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Beyond_GoodandEvil · · Score: 1

      You are trying very hard to argue that two shades of the same color are completely opposite. Not that wikipedia is that authoritative, but this seems quite well supported by citations:

      Also identified is a large faction advocating minarchism, though libertarianism has also long been associated with anarchism (and sometimes is used as a synonym for such), especially outside of the United States. Anarchism remains one of the significant branches of libertarianism.

      Not really, the parent uses libertarianism in the classic US sense(and how it was understood at /. before it became KosDot circa 2004)as freedom to be left alone. Unfortunately(esp. at /. and left leaning blogs), libertarianism has become conflated w/ Mad Max beyond Thunderdome anarchy. If on the other hand someone says, "Hey, unions tend to punish the hard worker and reward the average worker and that feels like socialism" someone will scream McCarthyism and promptly down mod into oblivion. It's truly sad the way liberty and libertarianism have become perjoratives

      --
      I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
    31. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bravo!

    32. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      High taxes and over regulation are, basically, the cause of many countries being poor.

      You may be able to assert correctly that taxation is high in Brazil. You may be able to assert that Brazil is poor. But you have failed to connect the two.

      Please correct your argument.

    33. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If there's no accumulation of power above you, and you have an accumulation of money, you *are* the power already. Instead of both buying the people below you to do things and paying off the people above you to not stop you, you'll only have to buy the people below.

      I don't really see a legitimate reason for Libertarians to expect that by removing a specific power center, they think they're permanently removed *all* power centers. It only makes sense if the honest Libertarians are naive, and the rest have ulterior motives (aren't Libertarians at all, just want restrictions on themselves removed and are using the party as a pawn to that end).

    34. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, good old slashdot. Where daring to actually consider the ramifications of a drastic change in a real world scenario can be dismissed in two words. "slippery slope!".

      > And while you're at it, why not admit that corporations are nothing more than collectives, like unions? When you realize that collectivization of politics leads to tyranny, then you'll be able to realize that you've been an idiot, and the end of your leftwing fantasy wank.

      Really? So a government collective is bad, but you think that in the absent of government checks on a corporate collective, the corporate collective won't do anything bad?

      > I'm not against "unions" or "corporations", I'm just against collectives of any sort infringing upon the liberties of anyone, even if I'm affected directly. Because even if I'm not personally affected by anti libertarian tyrants, I will be, eventually.

      You've spewed this same garbage in multiple threads in the past few days. It's either a major critical thinking failure on your part, or a very weak appeasement attempt - you keep advocating some obviously bad ideas, and then when people complain you throw in that "oh I'm against corporations too", even though it doesn't follow from your arguments at all.

      If you truly, honestly, disliked both, you'd be advocating either bloody revolution or something very close to the status quo. (Either eliminate both directly, or keep them balanced in the present political dance that keeps either from fucking everyone else over as much as they would if they were the sole authority). Because lately all you've really been doing is being vehemently anti-any-effective-government. A nice power vacuum that the non-government rich and powerful - who are already in position as such - will LOVE. And you repeatedly, completely fail to offer any solution to that scenario.

    35. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Duradin · · Score: 1

      They'll be ethical as long as it serves their self interest. Libertarians, after all, are enlightened.

    36. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, here's my question to you then. Which kind of collectives infringe upon liberties more: Unions or Corporations? This is an honest question I have, because it seems like everyone who says they're libertarian is also all for allowing corporations to do whatever they want while wanting to destroy unions because they are seen as anti-... I'm not even sure, business I guess? Either way, that doesn't seem fair if both are simply collectives with equal capability of infringing liberties.

      So, given a choice, where should one's fighting energies be places more upon: Unions or Corporations?

    37. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>Could you teach those tricks to a few European governments ? That'd be great.

      Doesn't the UK have a Pay As You Earn system in place?

    38. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      If you truly, honestly, disliked both, you'd be advocating either bloody revolution

      In order to have revolution, one must be willing to die. Dying alone for a cause is pointless, but recruiting others to your point of view before rushing off to die is noble (and/or treasonous).

      I'm not against the collectives, of any type. I'm against collectives that are designed to remove liberties from one collective, in order to secure something else entirely for another.

      If you've read my posts, you'll quickly find that I've been consistent with my views for a while now, calling for things like the "corporate death penalty", and saying that corporations are creations of the state, and thus not entitled to the same liberties as individuals. Even going so far as to say that corporations as non-person entities shouldn't be given the same set of liberties (ie speech) as an individual.

      But I'm at least consistent in saying the exact same thing about other collectives, like Unions.

      And my thinking isn't faulty as you may suggest. Perhaps your understanding of what I believe is misshapen by your own prejudices.

      People on the (D) side of the fence seem to equate "corporations" with "fascism" but fully embrace Union Thuggery. People on the (R) side of things do the exact opposite. What I'm saying is that both Corps and Unions are the same, because both are collectives of "people" who have banded together to leverage gain.

      Why do I have to support the union I belong to, when it subverts my views every step of the way? Why do Corporations commit crimes and the boards and chief officers never spend a day in jail?

      I'm not against governance, but when government is against the will of the people then we live in a tyranny.

      And most people don't care about tyranny when it only affects others. I happen to realize that tyranny will eventually catch up to me.

      So, yeah, I'm for Libertarian governance of limited but cohesive laws; where liberty and justice is for all, not just the few in a powerful collective.

      I have a solution, it just doesn't fit with many (R) and most (D). Get the government out of my life, quit telling me how to live, what to eat and which car I'm supposed to drive.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    39. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      I don't know. In Brussels, they've changed the rules halfway through the year on me twice, resulting in surprise tax bills ("somehow" this never resulted in me getting money back).

      And that's ignoring the forest of different taxes that you pay under normal circumstances.

      We're talking :
      (34% -at least- paid on company profits)
      20% company pays on top of your take-home pay
      45% you pay to the government from your pay (more if you're not married)
      ~ 10% (?) "personal tax"
      21% VAT (6% for "basic" foodstuff)

      So from what a company pays to employ you (ignoring any fringe benefits and even things like a desk), you get to spend ...

      0.8*0.55*0.9*0.79 = 31%

      That makes a tax level of :

      1-(0.8*0.55*0.9*0.79) = 69%

      If you own something instead of renting, you pay more. If you do stuff on the side, you pay more. If you drive a car, you pay more. If you smoke, you pay more. If you ...

    40. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by lee1026 · · Score: 1

      That is when you hire people and do it yourself instead. Look at the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The government was small to the point of not existing. The rich and powerful promptly opposed everyone else by simply doing it themselves. Long story made short, life sucked in the PLC, and they ended up partitioned by three other nations.

    41. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by istartedi · · Score: 1

      There's nothing libertarian about "buying laws". In a libertarian society...

      The best rebuttal I ever heard to this was posted here on Slashdot, and it went something like this:

      "If the Libertarians get their way, something worse than the state will replace it; but the intervening 10 seconds of anarcho-capitalism will be pure bliss"

      Wish I had the orignila quote. It was more eloquent and perhaps more concise.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    42. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Obviously I meant it relative to each other, and you'd have to work pretty hard to convince me the US is even to or worse than Europe. Of course neither is "perfectly" anarchist or totalitarian which would be the extremes of a weak and strong state. But you would expect to see a tendency, the more they lean in one direction the stronger the effect should be. If the effect doesn't kick in until you have a ideologically "pure" state then it is highly unlikely it will ever exist in the real world.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    43. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by Synonymous+Homonym · · Score: 1

      His was not a slippery slope argument. Yours is.

      You also failed to specify which of his examples of libertarianism are really anarchistic.
      I assume you meant those about personal liberty. Those are indeed liberal and anarchistic, not libertarian. I still think you should be more specific in your critique. One could get the impression that you meant to say libertarians are anarchists, (which is obviously nonsense.)

      That libertarian countries don't have a functioning government is his point; how is that anti-liberty?

      Lastly, when you say corporations are "nothing more than collectives," do you mean they are something less than collectives? Indeed they are rarely run collectively, but that fact was at the base of his critizism, why would he need to admit it?

    44. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

      Okay, interesting. I would say that the U.S. is probably a little better than most places in the EU and worse than one or two. In other words, the U.S. may be better overall, but in any case we're within shouting distance of each other, and just as you say, that's why we don't see much effect, as we do when we compare extremes like the Koreas; China vs. Hong Kong or Taiwan (in previous decades), Cuba vs. the Dominican Republic, etc.

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    45. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by yuje · · Score: 1

      Right. So that's why the rich in libertarian governments that don't interfere with the free market and lack anti-trust, anti-cartel, and anti-monopoly laws will never amass power and abuse it.

    46. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by yuje · · Score: 1

      And which are the poorest countries in the world? Take Somolia and Afghanistan, for example. Absolutely zero government regulation, no government tax collection, completely lassaiz-faire free market, no environment or safety laws, and all services (such that exist) are completely privatized. The little government spending that likely does exist, is on the military. Oh, and as close to 100% male gun ownership as any country you're likely to see. In other words, the ultimate libertarian fantasy fulfilled.

    47. Re:Libertarian fantasy wank. by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

      There are no libertarian governments. What we have isn't capitalism, it's corporatism, where big business and politicians cooperate for mutual gain at the expense of everyone else. Yes, often some of those politicians talk about a "free market". News flash: politicians lie.

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
  41. pirate ship/power plant by scarface71795 · · Score: 1

    Pirate ships have electricity now?

    1. Re:pirate ship/power plant by geekoid · · Score: 1

      well, they do but that's besides the point.

      It's a perfectly reasonable term. People like you need to stop whining about the term, and focus that energy on changing things.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  42. freedom to not get caught by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The first was marked as a funny but only because there's a kernel of truth to it. A lot of people do believe that digital goods should be free. Should we expect their attitude to be any different towards electricity? The main story is also a good example of what people will attempt if they believe they will not be caught.

    1. Re:freedom to not get caught by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps now is a good time to introduce your technological breakthrough that lets information power an electric car.

  43. Re:Libertard wank by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The problem isn't that the 'corportate behemoths' are under-regulated. The problem is that any competition from smaller businesses are over-regulated. The government gets to pass laws and gets seen as 'doing something', while the big guys eat the cost of that regulation and make it up with all the additional business they squeeze out from the competition. Even worse, companies like GE and BP get to look at heroes for pushing legislation for things that sound good like 'Green Energy' while doing so simply to benefit themselves and harm the competition.

    If government was smaller, and not as easily bought (as as wise man said, "When bying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things bought and sold are legislators"), you wouldn't have this incestuous relationship. It's a form of rent seeking, and you wouldn't have it as bad if the upper eschelon of both govt. and business weren't tag-teaming to screw the little guys.

  44. No they did not by geekoid · · Score: 3, Informative

    They showed the coils of bailing wire didn't work with specific PG&E transmission lines to 'power a house'.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  45. it is a renegade HVAC tech in Brazil... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    buttle or was it tuttle, damn that typewriter....

  46. Wrong... and stupid. by geekoid · · Score: 1

    1) People want more then there necessities. It's a false premise that people only want to survive.

    2) Most things most people buy are not necessities. NO one is saying tax paid iPods. It's also a false premise in that you discount the fact that poeple will still be paid to do the work. Paid from taxes.

    No, it's not what was proposed in the Soviet Union. You used false premises to make it seem like that.

    You are either ignorant, or a bastard who lies in order to hide problems with his ideological belief.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Wrong... and stupid. by mangu · · Score: 1

      Most things most people buy are not necessities

      That's true only where there there aren't any truly needy people to start with.

      The "homeless" people in the USA or Western Europe are those who chose that way of life. They chose not to have to respond to pesky bosses or wives, so they can live freely. They could flip burgers or wash cars instead, but they would have to give up on their perceived liberty.

      People who are really starving to death do not live in the USA. Those are the people you'll find somewhere in Africa, where no one has iPods.

  47. Voila, not viola by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The word you want is voila.

    A viola is a stringed instrument slightly larger than a violin.

  48. "Community Service" by SomePoorSchmuck · · Score: 1

    Brown's assets will be seized and he has been sentenced to 8 months suspended, and 150 hours community service.

    He supplied free energy to 1,500 members of the community. How much more service do you want? Maybe they should give him credit for "time served" - I bet it took 150 hours to hook up all those power lines.

    --

    Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
  49. Let me explain how it actually works: by fyngyrz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Trickle-down: When an already wealthy entity receives money, it becomes more and more conservative with it. It invests it outside the core business (diversification) or it squirrels it away (hoarding), sometimes in the form of non-cash (art, land, etc.) What it doesn't do is turn around and shower that money on the workers, or the consumers, of the products it is currently selling. This trickle down idea is a myth, a myth started and maintained by those whose only goal is to collect as much of everyone else's money as possible.

    Credit: The function of credit is to expand the gap between the wealthy and the poor, by transferring money from the poor to the wealthy. Here's how it works. At some interest rate, $100 is made available to the poor by the wealthy. The poor pays back $110. That $100 then is actually worth $90 to the poor, but $110 to the wealthy. At the end of the transaction, the wealthy have more money. The poor, however, have less, although they have $100 worth of goods, with a probable resale value of far less, should they try and exchange them for cash. It is worth noting that in general, they goods they purchase they also buy from the wealthy. The result of the credit process is a continuous transfer of money from the poor to the rich - never the other way, unless the debt repayment is defaulted, and even then, statistically speaking, this doesn't slow the process down much.

    This is why the libertarian idea of corporate freedom is bunk. Corporations are not people; if we compare them honestly to persons, they're a lot more like psychopaths. No society that lets them run free can remain healthy; the US is one recent example; when unregulated, jobs are sent overseas, healthcare is not provided, products are not made to last, warranty and service are only given under profound duress, copy protection, software differentiation, IP hoarding and other anti-consumer practices become not just common, but the standard for behavior.

    The libertarian outlook has major value in that area where it recognizes the liberties and freedoms of people, and says that government should have no authority there. When those freedoms are extended to corporations, the libertarian ideal turns immediately into a nightmare, one not all that unlike the one we're currently experiencing. Corporations are not people. They completely lack empathy, sympathy, compassion, courtesy, loyalty, and honor. They are, quite literally, psychopaths. Given the strengths of a legal person, they will act along the same lines of the worst criminals society has ever known. All the while smiling to your face.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    1. Re:Let me explain how it actually works: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So THAT's why people in North Korea are so much richer and better off than us here in the USA.

      You know, I was wondering about that.

      Sarcasm aside: perhaps you're even right (at best partly imho, but hey), but it's still better than a tiny contingent at the top stealing everything, which is the only alternative (or at least, the only alternative that managed to actually exist in the real world).

    2. Re:Let me explain how it actually works: by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, where did I say that a corrosive dictatorship was a better thing?

      Oh, right, right. I didn't.

      perhaps you're even right (at best partly imho, but hey), but it's still better than a tiny contingent at the top stealing everything

      Hmm. Some (not very up to date) data for you: In the US, as of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class, about 3 million people) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers).

      I find these figures to be rather unlikely in terms of mapping to some reasonable metric of fairness, given the general Gaussian nature of most interesting characteristics such as intelligence, creativity, artistic strengths, etc. But that is just my opinion.

      Honestly, I don't think it'll sort itself out until we have robots to do the grunt work and energy costs are effectively zero. So I'm not holding my breath.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    3. Re:Let me explain how it actually works: by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      Hmm. Some (not very up to date) data for you: In the US, as of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class, about 3 million people) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers).

      And when government interferes to make this better ... this happens :

      'nuff said

      What you're saying is perhaps even mostly true. And it's certainly not the case that we're perfect. The problem, of course, is that your supposed "solution" is akin to Obama's healthcare suggestion that pacemakers should be replaced by pain medication. Much cheaper.

      In socialist countries the top echelon of the party controls ALL the wealth. And since organizations, like political parties of every bent, companies, unions and the like, even in the US, basically trust no-one, that means that per 100 square miles ONE individual can afford a car when socialism holds sway.

      The difference between a socialist system and a capitalist one : in a capitalist system the 1% riches control 50% of the wealth (it's not quite that bad yet, but I'm being flexible here). In a socialist system the 0.000000001% richest control 100% of the wealth.

      That is your "solution". It is, almost literally, the suggestion of making Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pott/Mao emergency president in order to fix an outbreak of the flu.

  50. Taxes: not magic, but not obvious, either by fyngyrz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You mean, like when you get your W2 and fill out that pesky 1040? Yeah, I already know what I pay in taxes.

    If that's how you figure it, you're not even close.

    For instance, if you pay $100 for plumbing, but the plumber has to give $30 of that to the feds for his taxes, do you think the plumber is going to do $100 worth of work for you? No. He's only getting $70, and so that is the very MOST he going to do for you -- he'll do less, in fact, because otherwise he will not make a profit.

    So, if you pay 30% taxes, then you had to earn $142.85 to pay the plumber $100, for which you got less than $70 worth of services. In the end, $142 of your dollars bought something less than $70 worth of services.

    People are generally unaware of this, because we don't see the plumber's taxes; that info is hidden. Each purchase we make of goods and service has a significant, but variable, hidden siphon of funds going on to the government, directly affecting how much actual work your money does for us.

    Sometimes they even manage to tax our purchases more than once; for instance, a death tax taxes funds and goods we already bought when we try to pass them on, making them that much more expensive, or, to look at it another way, devaluing your money even further.

    So... perhaps you do know what taxes are doing to you. But most people really don't. It's because it isn't all that obvious. What some tax reformers want is that it be made obvious, generally by consolidating the process (taxation) into one event - for instance, a national sales tax that would replace the other taxes, or other, similarly transparent ideas. The trick to it all is making it fair, and determining what "fair" means in the context of people who are barely making it as compared to those at the other end to whom taxes are irrelevant to them making it, and all those in between, for whom taxes variously affect their lives.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    1. Re:Taxes: not magic, but not obvious, either by StikyPad · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sales taxes are demonstrably regressive; the poorest pay the highest percent of income because they necessarily *spend* the highest percent of their income.

    2. Re:Taxes: not magic, but not obvious, either by trentblase · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So, if you pay 30% taxes, then you had to earn $142.85 to pay the plumber $100, for which you got less than $70 worth of services. In the end, $142 of your dollars bought something less than $70 worth of services.

      But by your logic, I only had to do $100 of work to earn the $142.85 (you say the plumber does $70 of work for the $100). So there's no double dipping.

    3. Re:Taxes: not magic, but not obvious, either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sometimes they even manage to tax our purchases more than once; for instance, a death tax taxes funds and goods we already bought when we try to pass them on, making them that much more expensive, or, to look at it another way, devaluing your money even further.

      Except most people don't pay estate taxes (and by most I mean 90% or more), and much of what is taxed has...never been directly taxed by the government before. Ever. Strange how that works.

      So... perhaps you do know what taxes are doing to you.

      And perhaps you do not know what taxes are doing *for* you?

      What some tax reformers want is that it be made obvious, generally by consolidating the process (taxation) into one event - for instance, a national sales tax that would replace the other taxes, or other, similarly transparent ideas. The trick to it all is making it fair, and determining what "fair" means in the context of people who are barely making it as compared to those at the other end to whom taxes are irrelevant to them making it, and all those in between, for whom taxes variously affect their lives.

      Sales taxes are incredibly unfair, and that's why, despite being a rich guy's dream, it will never replace the income tax. There's just enough honest folks with brains to stop it. That and the folks who know it would never be able to take in enough revenue without being crippling or incredibly complicated.

      But really, you're so concerned about taxes, I don't see much concern about making people aware of how the money is being spent to their well-being. Or even just wasted. Wouldn't it be nice to see that too?

    4. Re:Taxes: not magic, but not obvious, either by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      That's only true if sales taxes apply to everything. If sales taxes do not apply to basic living needs -- food staples, toilet paper, diapers, medicine, X heat, X water, X electric per person, one car per worker, etc. -- then they are not regressive. And that's precisely how they should be structured, if they were to replace the current system, which is also highly regressive (the plumber isn't going to get a tax break because your money is more precious to you.)

      With sales taxes applied sensibly, it should be possible to live, pay almost no taxes, and save, even if you're at the lowest income bracket. If you just make them arbitrary, then it'll be a mess that takes poorer people to the cleaners, just as the current swamp of tax regulations is.

      The technology needed to manage a reasonable sales tax system is here now; it would be a huge boon if we implemented it to replace the rest of tax law, and that includes the IRS. But we won't, and you know why? Because the current system favors the wealthy and the corporate, and they exclusively control the legislatures.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    5. Re:Taxes: not magic, but not obvious, either by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      If sales taxes do not apply to basic living needs -- food staples, toilet paper, diapers, medicine, X heat, X water, X electric per person, one car per worker, etc. -- then they are not regressive.

      Right, that's the standard line. I think it's rather disingenuous, since it presumes that either middle/lower income groups *are* spending a smaller portion of their income on non-essentials than the upper class/wealthy (which I haven't seen any evidence to support) or that they *will* spend a smaller portion (which nobody really wants). People want to have (and can or should be able to afford) cell phones, internet access, trips to visit the family, vacations, etc., and none of that is particularly extravagant by modern standards, yet they all constitute a much larger percent of income for the average Joe than for, say, Warren Buffet. As such, the only progressive step would be from destitute to low income, and *maybe* from low income to middle class, but almost definitely not beyond that. I suspect that, as now, the middle class would continue to be the most heavily burdened group as a percent of income. I'd love to see evidence to the contrary, if any exists.

    6. Re:Taxes: not magic, but not obvious, either by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      No. You see, in your example, you are thinking that it's "fair."

      But it was never a question of "fair" -- it's only a question of what is really happening. Transparency.

      And the answer to that is, generally speaking, you're taxed twice, and your actual tax rate (given the 30% example rates) is about 50%.

      The double dipping is perfectly real. Is it fair? That's a matter of opinion. The aggregate tax rate, however, is not.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    7. Re:Taxes: not magic, but not obvious, either by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      But really, you're so concerned about taxes, I don't see much concern about making people aware of how the money is being spent to their well-being. Or even just wasted. Wouldn't it be nice to see that too?

      Sure. We could talk about the $737 billion wasted on the Iraq war; or the $354 billion wasted on the war in Afghanistan; or the $20 billion or so a year wasted on the war on drugs (of course that's just the feds, local and state account for about another $30 billion.) Or we could talk about the $22 billion in foreign aid we give away. Or the $60 billion a year spent on the prison system, which largely incarcerates people who are only "guilty" of consensual, personal acts. Wait, I know, we could talk about the $16.5 billion in earmark (pork) spending this year; or perhaps you'd like to talk about the 6.4 billion dollars in patent snafus yearly? Hey, here's a fun one: 737 US military bases outside the country, with a (surely low) estimated cost to date to the taxpayers of $127 billion dollars. Or maybe we should talk about "homeland security", you know, the organization that exists to ignore your rights and scare the hell out of the cits, all the while never addressing the actual problem that cropped up in 2001: vulnerable cockpits. Because that's cost about $1 trillion thus far.

      On the other hand, we do have a (falling apart) space program, some of the worst primary and secondary education in the developed world, a population that thinks some magic guy in the sky will take care of them, a government that lies to the citizens as a matter of course, politicians that are strictly tools of the corporations and the wealthy, a constitution that is roundly ignored by the legislature, judiciary, and executive, stone-age marriage laws, and of course instead of the electric cars we should have had long ago, we have a deep layer of petroleum on the bottom of the gulf of Mexico, courtesy of the legislature giving the oil companies pretty much anything they want, no matter how risky it is.

      You want more, right? Well, if you travel with $10 grand or so, they'll take it, they won't give it back, and that's the end of it. No recourse, no recompense, no warrant, no nothing. That little think was 100% stimulated by your tax money, paying for idiots working in our courts. And of course there is eminent domain, where your land can be taken because the other guy will, presumably, pay more taxes than you. Yessir, more tax-funded goodness.

      There's more - and plenty of it - but how about you? What has the government done with my taxes that you think I should know about, but haven't mentioned?

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    8. Re:Taxes: not magic, but not obvious, either by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      I think it's rather disingenuous, since it presumes that either middle/lower income groups *are* spending a smaller portion of their income on non-essentials than the upper class/wealthy

      Ok, Mr. Middle class. Bought a yacht lately? Ferrari? Lambo? 300-acre estate? Diamond over a caret? When's the last time you took the family on a whirlwind tour of Europe? Got a Suzuki Hayabusa in the garage? How many airplanes do you keep in your private hanger? And how many of those are jets? Did you buy that Soviet fighter for your collection? You do pay standard rates for your butler, right? I did notice he wasn't very good. You should upgrade. And the gardener? How is your charity outflow spreadsheet looking these days? The indoor Olympic pool, you solve that mold problem, or are you going to just build a new one? Say, dinner at Ducasse? $145 a plate (w/o wine, of course) for the least expensive thing on the menu... but reservations are a problem. Your 8-core computer has eight 30-inch monitors, right? I know mine does, jeez, that's just basic operating area, after all. (Actually, I have two presently, neither of which reach 30", but hey.) Been skiing this year? Scuba diving? Swimming in Brazil? (I mean, of course, bikini scouting, but nudge-nudge, we call it swimming, of course.) How's that walk-in sized amethyst cathedral in the entryway serving as an icebreaker? Me, I just have a 300 lb single smokey quartz crystal, but sadly, I dug it up locally, didn't have to pay for it. On the plus side, I *was* on vacation at the time, so I do have some bragging rights.) How's the painting collection? Did you win that Monet at auction? it'll go great next to your other impressionist originals. Me, of course, I'm into sculpture. Nothing like a Rodin in the library to set the mood. Oh, I meant to ask, how is your horse stable project getting along? The vet, the trainer, the stable boys, you get all those salaries ironed out? Of course, what was I thinking. So, let's talk about your Rolls. That sure is a pretty car. But I think ZZ top has it right; if you don't have high heels and stockings gracing the passengers... well, it's just a car. Speaking of which, those high end escorts... are they really worth the money? Damn, those women look fine. I wanted to take one out, but the only real gap in the calender was the one where I'd planned to take that ride to space; $200k you know, and they're really, really booked, so I think I'm going to have to put the ladies off a bit. Let me know how they work out for you. If that works out, I think I'll cadge a trip off the Russians to the space station, and see if my supply of anti-emetics is up to the task. I mean, hey, space station... how cool is that. And are you going in with everyone else on the VLA/SETI project? $50 million buy-in, is all, and you get your name on the bottom of a dish! And with that, I have to go... my chartered submarine to Monte Carlo is about to leave, and I don't want to delay it... being late to the tables is so... gauche.

      Yessir, it's good to know that the middle class are the ones buying/doing all that, and that the rich just don't spend more than they do. No evidence, etc.

      Wait, where's my clue-bat?

      People want to have (and can or should be able to afford) cell phones, internet access, trips to visit the family, vacations, etc., and none of that is particularly extravagant by modern standards,

      [stares]

      So, your argument is that lower income people "deserve" the same things as if they were upper income people, regardless of actual income, so exempting their basic costs doesn't help?

      I dunno, brother, I tend to feel that above subsistence, you're entitled to what you can pay for. That's where the incentives to learn up and work hard come from. If there are no such incentives, economically speaking, things go south.

      And frankly, I think that your idea of trips and vacations being "deserved" items isn't

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  51. Like in Brazil? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The first thing that came to my mind is Robert De Niro in Brazil.

  52. 3rd World? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    This was North London, not Yorkshire!

    HARRY TUTTLE!

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  53. Not so much by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

    Snarky straw man quips aren't the same thing as eloquence, even on Slashdot. Besides, it doesn't actually rebut what I was saying, since I wasn't talking about anarcho-capitalism just by pointing out that there's nothing libertarian about buying laws.

    --
    Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    1. Re:Not so much by istartedi · · Score: 1

      OK, it is a bit simplistic. Here's a less simplistic and as you say, "snarky" way of looking at it.

      In a Libertarian society, there would still have to be some government to act as a referee. Anything else is, as you say, anarchy. Of course in this ideal Libertarian society, nobody would buy laws. Nobody. They're all saints. That's the problem. They're not all saints. Libertarianism is very much like communism in this regard. Both systems would work really well if people were all saints.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  54. Ohhhh by Qubit · · Score: 1

    Okay, now I get it.

    But I gotta tell you that in my neighborhood there aren't that many places where I could park under a powerline like this.

    Do you think it would be possible for me to run a couple of wires across my driveway between my house and my garage, and then have the car reach its arms up there?

    That should be a slick way to solve the problem, and I can almost always get into my driveway, except when the guy next door parks his big rig on the street and the end of it blocks the entry to my driveway.

    --

    coding is life /* the rest is */
  55. 150 hours community service? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He got 150 hours community service as part of his sentence? Kinda sounds like he was already providing a service to the community. Too much service.

  56. Shocking Development by Geotopia · · Score: 1

    What a shocking development

    Makes you want to keep up with CURRENT events!

  57. Free power is community service! by locrien · · Score: 1

    Brown's assets will be seized and he has been sentenced to 8 months suspended, and 150 hours community service."

    I consider giving the community free electricity "community service." I'll sign off on those hours if he hooks my house up!