How much of the water is actually filtered? I know where I live, most all tap water isn't filtered (well, large filters at the intake to stop fish and such), and the bottled water from springs, aquifers and glaciers, I'd assume aren't filtered.
Those 2 litre glass bottles were banned pretty quick as they had a habit of blowing up. As for danger, a friend cut her foot pretty bad wading in a local lake, same with my dog, who needed 3 or 4 stitches on her foot. Of course the real reason glass went away was cost.
You guys should get a legislature, perhaps call it something like Congress, have the people vote for members even. Seems it would be better then having a series of Presidents passing whatever laws they feel will make them rich.
No need to give them any rights at all and they could be useful as a replacement for artificial intelligence if it doesn't work out. Everyone could have their own resurrected brain running their household.
Usually there are exceptions for illegal traffic, much like the highways being neutral doesn't mean you can block the highway and that there are rules about vehicles needing to meet basic requirements. The lack of net neutrality is more like the highway being owned by Amazon and blocking all competitors from even using it or forcing them all into one lane out of the six while Amazon gets 3 lanes to itself.
They can get the vote out. Say some politician is going to take their guns and out come the members. Say some politician is going to allow the wrong people to be armed, out come the members. Many elections are decided on who gets their voters out and guns seem to do it.
It's always political. If allowed, ISP's can easily swing an election. Make the other parties web sites unreachable, make certain neighbourhoods unable to reach the registration website are 2 simple means. Works best with a minimal number of ISP's and if those ISP's goals are in sync, and they usually are as they all want to maximize profits while doing the least work possible.
Exactly, or do you think that a telecommunications company is going to donate to a party with left wing ideology like pushing municipal internet or co-ops? Or one that is going to support the unions over the company? Next you'll be claiming that the Dems are left wing because they supported the out of work coal miners and steel workers.
The AC does have a point though. Voter ID laws on the face of it are a good idea. The problem is that it is easy to manipulate the ID requirements to disenfranchise chunks of the population. Here in Canada, we've had voter ID laws for a long time. Generally they worked well until the last Federal election where the Conservatives were in power and getting coaching from the American Republican party on how to do it right. Used to be that most ID was good enough, perhaps combined with some bills with your address and name on it and the ability to do an affidavit when the ID wasn't good enough. Last election, they limited the type of ID required and did a few other weird things. For example, my wife has always voted under her maiden name, partially due to her ID being in that name, and that is how she was registered. Went to the elections web site and double checked our registration, everything was fine, even the day before the election. Went to vote and mysteriously her registration had changed to my name. As this was expected due to her race, we showed up with marriage license, lots of ID and time. After a couple of hours on the phone to Ottawa, she did manage to vote. Meanwhile, I had no problem voting even though my ID just proved my residency, not my citizenship, unlike hers which was only available to citizens. Voter ID laws are just easy to manipulate. Make it hard and ideally expensive to get ID (need to drive 40 miles here to pay $75 for ID), be really anal about the ID and disenfranchise people, especially the poor, university students who are resident somewhere but don't bother updating their ID, demand actual street addresses to remove those living in places without addresses such as Indian reservations and such and you limit voting to the correct people, including wealthier non-citizens.
Solving it is probably the worst option as it may be unsolvable in a reasonable time frame. Better question is mitigating it, how much effort to put into, eg keeping the sea level raise to a minimum and what would be the drawbacks/benefits to the economy and how much the government should be involved. Think of the last time transportation was creating huge pollution problems. At the turn of the 20th century, it looked like we'd soon be buried in horse shit. The number of horses needed by the economy was fast increasing and each horse produced a bunch of shit. Industry created the automobile (including trucks) and government subsidized a huge amount of road building to make the automobile practical. How much did the automobile help the economy? What about if the buggy whip manufacturers had stopped road construction? I'd argue that the combination of the automobile and good roads ended up being a huge benefit. The economics are complicated, but often the right combination of government help and private industry can be a huge economic stimulus and it is quite possible that switching away from carbon producing fuels could be a net benefit. New industries, more employment and such.
My understanding is that they're targeting important Republican's districts. Politicians don't like going home and having to explain that the local factory laying off people is good.
A lot of the old rentals were purpose built as rentals due to tax breaks that used to be offered. Those incentives are long gone though. Now, it's not the building of condos that has slowed the market down to 15-16% annual increases here (Vancouver, actually I'm about 50 miles outside town where prices are going up about 33% a year, has a 0.5% vacancy rate and they're building like crazy) but things like the foreign buyers tax, harsher rules for qualifying for a mortgage, mortgages going up in price and such.
I can't see how we can keep at this trajectory as our whole system revolves around consumption. Most of the practical solutions I can think of are not pleasant.
That's exactly what is happening here, replacing the old 2-3 story apartments with 10-20 story condo units. Still leaves a lot of people without a home as those condos are not rentals and much more expensive as they make good investments, investments by people who can easily afford to leave them empty or spend a couple of months a year in one.
They do help sell the mission and the next mission to the public who are paying for it. It's probably worthwhile doing a bit less science in exchange for pretty pictures to make financing the next mission more likely.
Yep, build more housing, tear down those cheap apartments that were built back in the '60's for renters by giving tax breaks for building rentals and replace them with nice expensive condos. the poor can move further out and spend 3 hours commuting each way. If you start having problems hiring people cheaply, import some from somewhere where $8 an hour sounds really good, bonus points for using illegals as they'll be even more desperate and even easier to get rid off if they get demanding.
No, what those owners of restaurants will do is lobby to bring in foreign workers. Workers from someplace where $10 an hour sounds really good. Workers will be stuck paying off the fees for moving and once they've paid them off, get shipped back and replaced with new suckers. As a bonus, you can cram 10 people into a 1 bedroom apartment, charge them each a thousand bucks rent and profit even more.
Yep, tear down all the cheap housing, build nice profitable condos, get around that pesky rent control (only allowed to raise rents 10% a year here) and getting that vacancy rate down to less then.1% will solve the housing problems.
Some days I'm a great driver, usually when I'm well rested and have no stress. Other days I'm a crappy driver, overtired, stressed out or such. If I ignore the bad days, I'm a great driver and people are good at ignoring the bad days.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, there's comp.misc which has refugees from the beta. For the parts of usenet I use, there's hardly even any spam now.
How much of the water is actually filtered? I know where I live, most all tap water isn't filtered (well, large filters at the intake to stop fish and such), and the bottled water from springs, aquifers and glaciers, I'd assume aren't filtered.
Those 2 litre glass bottles were banned pretty quick as they had a habit of blowing up. As for danger, a friend cut her foot pretty bad wading in a local lake, same with my dog, who needed 3 or 4 stitches on her foot. Of course the real reason glass went away was cost.
You guys should get a legislature, perhaps call it something like Congress, have the people vote for members even. Seems it would be better then having a series of Presidents passing whatever laws they feel will make them rich.
Why not just use the FM radio in your phone?
No need to give them any rights at all and they could be useful as a replacement for artificial intelligence if it doesn't work out. Everyone could have their own resurrected brain running their household.
Usually there are exceptions for illegal traffic, much like the highways being neutral doesn't mean you can block the highway and that there are rules about vehicles needing to meet basic requirements.
The lack of net neutrality is more like the highway being owned by Amazon and blocking all competitors from even using it or forcing them all into one lane out of the six while Amazon gets 3 lanes to itself.
They can get the vote out. Say some politician is going to take their guns and out come the members. Say some politician is going to allow the wrong people to be armed, out come the members.
Many elections are decided on who gets their voters out and guns seem to do it.
of the Internet.
Vs the internet providers controlling the government?
It's always political. If allowed, ISP's can easily swing an election. Make the other parties web sites unreachable, make certain neighbourhoods unable to reach the registration website are 2 simple means. Works best with a minimal number of ISP's and if those ISP's goals are in sync, and they usually are as they all want to maximize profits while doing the least work possible.
That's how it is in Canada. Only flesh and blood humans allowed to donate and those donations limited to about $1100 (it's tied to inflation).
Exactly, or do you think that a telecommunications company is going to donate to a party with left wing ideology like pushing municipal internet or co-ops? Or one that is going to support the unions over the company?
Next you'll be claiming that the Dems are left wing because they supported the out of work coal miners and steel workers.
The AC does have a point though. Voter ID laws on the face of it are a good idea. The problem is that it is easy to manipulate the ID requirements to disenfranchise chunks of the population.
Here in Canada, we've had voter ID laws for a long time. Generally they worked well until the last Federal election where the Conservatives were in power and getting coaching from the American Republican party on how to do it right.
Used to be that most ID was good enough, perhaps combined with some bills with your address and name on it and the ability to do an affidavit when the ID wasn't good enough. Last election, they limited the type of ID required and did a few other weird things. For example, my wife has always voted under her maiden name, partially due to her ID being in that name, and that is how she was registered. Went to the elections web site and double checked our registration, everything was fine, even the day before the election. Went to vote and mysteriously her registration had changed to my name. As this was expected due to her race, we showed up with marriage license, lots of ID and time. After a couple of hours on the phone to Ottawa, she did manage to vote. Meanwhile, I had no problem voting even though my ID just proved my residency, not my citizenship, unlike hers which was only available to citizens.
Voter ID laws are just easy to manipulate. Make it hard and ideally expensive to get ID (need to drive 40 miles here to pay $75 for ID), be really anal about the ID and disenfranchise people, especially the poor, university students who are resident somewhere but don't bother updating their ID, demand actual street addresses to remove those living in places without addresses such as Indian reservations and such and you limit voting to the correct people, including wealthier non-citizens.
Solving it is probably the worst option as it may be unsolvable in a reasonable time frame.
Better question is mitigating it, how much effort to put into, eg keeping the sea level raise to a minimum and what would be the drawbacks/benefits to the economy and how much the government should be involved.
Think of the last time transportation was creating huge pollution problems. At the turn of the 20th century, it looked like we'd soon be buried in horse shit. The number of horses needed by the economy was fast increasing and each horse produced a bunch of shit.
Industry created the automobile (including trucks) and government subsidized a huge amount of road building to make the automobile practical. How much did the automobile help the economy? What about if the buggy whip manufacturers had stopped road construction? I'd argue that the combination of the automobile and good roads ended up being a huge benefit.
The economics are complicated, but often the right combination of government help and private industry can be a huge economic stimulus and it is quite possible that switching away from carbon producing fuels could be a net benefit. New industries, more employment and such.
My understanding is that they're targeting important Republican's districts. Politicians don't like going home and having to explain that the local factory laying off people is good.
Actually I was talking about Vancouver and surroundings, which is more expensive then NYC, but the same idea.
A lot of the old rentals were purpose built as rentals due to tax breaks that used to be offered. Those incentives are long gone though.
Now, it's not the building of condos that has slowed the market down to 15-16% annual increases here (Vancouver, actually I'm about 50 miles outside town where prices are going up about 33% a year, has a 0.5% vacancy rate and they're building like crazy) but things like the foreign buyers tax, harsher rules for qualifying for a mortgage, mortgages going up in price and such.
I can't see how we can keep at this trajectory as our whole system revolves around consumption. Most of the practical solutions I can think of are not pleasant.
That's exactly what is happening here, replacing the old 2-3 story apartments with 10-20 story condo units. Still leaves a lot of people without a home as those condos are not rentals and much more expensive as they make good investments, investments by people who can easily afford to leave them empty or spend a couple of months a year in one.
They do help sell the mission and the next mission to the public who are paying for it. It's probably worthwhile doing a bit less science in exchange for pretty pictures to make financing the next mission more likely.
Yep, build more housing, tear down those cheap apartments that were built back in the '60's for renters by giving tax breaks for building rentals and replace them with nice expensive condos. the poor can move further out and spend 3 hours commuting each way.
If you start having problems hiring people cheaply, import some from somewhere where $8 an hour sounds really good, bonus points for using illegals as they'll be even more desperate and even easier to get rid off if they get demanding.
No, what those owners of restaurants will do is lobby to bring in foreign workers. Workers from someplace where $10 an hour sounds really good. Workers will be stuck paying off the fees for moving and once they've paid them off, get shipped back and replaced with new suckers. As a bonus, you can cram 10 people into a 1 bedroom apartment, charge them each a thousand bucks rent and profit even more.
Yep, tear down all the cheap housing, build nice profitable condos, get around that pesky rent control (only allowed to raise rents 10% a year here) and getting that vacancy rate down to less then .1% will solve the housing problems.
Some days I'm a great driver, usually when I'm well rested and have no stress. Other days I'm a crappy driver, overtired, stressed out or such. If I ignore the bad days, I'm a great driver and people are good at ignoring the bad days.
And here, where I have LTE internet, I'm lucky to get 1 Mb/s down during the evening. The telco loves overselling.