Also the realization that perfect understanding will never be achieved. It is easy to predict that something will go down hill, predicting the exact course on varied terrain, not so much, especially when some of that terrain is not in sight. This is just part of the process of learning the terrain.
More like uneducated people who had never left the valley they were born in or met anyone who had traveled thought the Earth was flat if they ever bothered thinking about it.
Most of them were not scientific theory and some have been shown to be partially correct, eg you can measure things like fetal alcohol syndrome by measuring the face and leeches are still used in medicine for those cases where it is useful. The aether is a good example of a scientific theory that made sense (light is a wave and waves need a substance to travel through) and made predictions (the aether would have wind like properties that could be measured). Once the instruments got accurate enough to measure light accurately enough to measure the wind of the Earth traveling through the aether and it was found not to exist, after repeated measurements to make sure it wasn't instrument failure, the theory was thrown out and the search was on for a good theory that explained why light was always measured at the same speed (in vacuum). Eventually new theory was accepted that explained the shortcomings of the aether theory. That's how science works. Note that new theory still has problems and scientists continue to search for a better theory, but just like relativity didn't stop Newtons laws from being useful in some cases, a new theory won't mean that relativity does not make accurate predictions.
It's more complicated. The light bulb is simple. The monitor, how much energy does it take to dispose of all that lead impregnated glass? For the car, it has been stated that half the energy that the car uses in its lifetime is used in manufacture. If true, using that gas guzzler for longer might be a net win, especially considering disposal again.
There's also the panspermia hypothesis where life has colonized the planets of the solar system (or further) and all the life is related, eg life originating on Venus and colonizing the Earth (and Mars) through meteors or such, in which case it may very well use the same amino acids. There's also the science fictional idea of a former civilization seeding the galaxy with life. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Not too long ago, stopped at an intersection with dedicated left turn lights, the guy besides me pulled into traffic when the person beside him started their left turn. Seen similar a few times and the only reason for no accident was that everyone was moving slow enough to stop. Still fucks up traffic and if they're so unaware that they can't tell the difference between a green light and a green left turn light, they're a danger on the road.
Facebook is more like a pick pocket, a smart one who removes your wallet, copies your credit card numbers or just takes one bill and returns it without you even noticing (usually). No guns need to be involved.
Did you read the article you linked to? First there is nothing about passing a law, such as legalizing pot and retroactively remove the criminal status of offenders and the idea that it is against the Constitution to undo an unjust law seems like a pretty large infringement on the rights of those who are being punished by an unjust law. What the article does show is how the Supreme court reinterprets the Constitution and reality. First, it now only applies to criminal law where the Constitution just says "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed. and then how the Supreme Court has ruled that things like being put on a sex offender list and having to post your personal information on the internet is not a punishment and I guess the ruling implied it is not a Bill of Attainder either (in my country, a Judge has to put you on the list as part of sentencing). There's also the example of the child molester who had finished his sentence and being committed due to a law being retroactively applied was not a punishment so fine. I'd think it would take a Judge, on the advise of experts to commit someone rather then a broad law, so once again touching on both parts of "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed." There's also the "Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban" which besides obviously going against the 2nd amendment, the Supreme Court considered the possibility of 10 years in jail for your previous legal gun and the fact that 10 years in jail is not a punishment but rather regulatory. In my country, where firearms aren't even a right, it once again takes a Judge to ban someone from owning firearms and is usually part of sentencing though I'd think it could be in the form of a restraining order.
So there you have it, at least according to the Wiki article, that part of the Constitution only applies to criminal law that is punitive and the punitive part is pretty flexible. It's amazing how your Supreme Court can interpret pretty clear language, especially if it means punishing someone that everyone hates. This discussion is about a lawsuit against a company that isn't facing jail time so Article 1 Section 9 doesn't even enter into it according to precedent.
The last sentence in your link shows some limitations in private bills,
In the United States Constitution, the concept of a private law, when applied punitively, is covered by the term bill of attainder. Such punitive private laws are therefore unconstitutional.[7]
So passing a private law to punish Kaspersky is unconstitutional.
It is pretty general. The State is probably split up in such a way that any given area has one to two options and looking at that page, most of those options are pretty crappy for 2018. 3Mbps is pretty low and the minimum that my government is aiming for in the high arctic.
I'm not an American but from the outside looking in, it looks like your whole system needs overhauling, especially the corruption that seems to pervade American politics. Both teams seem more interested in pleasing their donors then their constituents.
I guess it comes down to the best return on investment, expanding or trying to sign up the few who don't have internet yet as it sounds like they have a monopoly on wired internet.
Climate is a general term. Long range climate, as you say, about a 30 year average. It is also accurate to say the local climate here is Aug is the hottest driest month, Dec is the wettest and Jan is the coldest. The IPC definition,
Climate in a narrow sense is usually defined as the "average weather," or more rigorously, as the statistical description in terms of the mean and variability of relevant quantities over a period ranging from months to thousands or millions of years. The classical period is 30 years, as defined by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). These quantities are most often surface variables such as temperature, precipitation, and wind. Climate in a wider sense is the state, including a statistical description, of the climate system.[9]
Note climate can be measured from months to aeons.
Perhaps only pay $389 million rather then $400 million for the stadium naming rights? All over N. America the communications companies seem to have endless money for advertising but no money for customer support or expanding infrastructure.
BC and various other Provinces here. They're a holdover from prohibition. Pot is going to be the same, mix of public and private here, some Provinces pure private and some pure public.One of the selling points of getting rid of prohibition is making it harder for kids to acquire substances and testing (sending young people in to buy) consistently shows the government run stores as being more likely to check ID.
Just thinking that $400 million is a tax write off, so more of redirected money. One city I know off, they bought both the naming rights and broadcast rights. The broadcast rights are a money maker rather then just advertising.
If the airports are operating at capacity, there won't be much competition, same if they're too spread out. Roads and bridges would probably be private/public partnerships. Private business gets its loans guaranteed by the government as well as guaranteed income. Looks good on paper, the government doesn't actually borrow money or raise taxes and the business gets a guaranteed profit. In reality, it turns out that people avoid tolls if they can and the government still has to subsidize the bridge to make up for the shortfall and the next election, the other party runs on a platform of eliminating the tolls, wins and has to pay off the bridge and the private company. Taxpayers lose.
Depends on the accounting. Is it just an advertising write-off and your city ends up with an expensive stadium instead of fixing the potholes, maybe not so much of a deal, especially if you're not into sports. If they're buying various broadcast rights or such, maybe a good deal.
Airports are generally even more of a natural monopoly then internet. They take up a lot of land, usually prime land that is in short supply in many cities, and cost a fuck of a lot to build from scratch. You are right that they (international, small regional can be left to the locals to decide) should have minimal or no subsidies, with the users paying for the upkeep and upgrades. Whether a private bureaucracy mostly run by people interested in a quick profit before they cash out is the best way is arguable. Here the government turned over the running of them while maintaining ownership and therefore still having a say and presumably making it easy to regulate. The partnership seems to be working well with the airport often voted best in N. America and in the top 10 worldwide. The airport authority has also expanded to managing various other airports including LaGuardia's terminal B.
There's 3 internet companies where I live, they all charge the same. There are 3 main cell companies here, they all charge the same, even the other month when #4 tried to enter the market and they all offered the same cheap deal. There's over a dozen gas stations owned by about 6 companies, they almost all charge the same price including going up and down together. The exception is far enough out of town that they can charge more. There are 3 grocery stores and they got caught fixing the price of bread. The government started privatizing the government run liquor stores a few years back, but had to stop due to the outrage. The government liquor stores are generally profitably, putting a lot of money into the treasury, subsidizing the stores in the middle of nowhere and paying their workers fairly decently. The private stores charge 10-20% more, pay their workers minimum wage (but they do hire cute girls). I avoid them, but others seem to use them due to location and of course, the lack of ID checking.
Slashdot Mirror
Never heard of an eclipse?
We'll just retcon some thrusters and for good measure, a laser propulsion for the Sun, I mean Earth.
Also the realization that perfect understanding will never be achieved. It is easy to predict that something will go down hill, predicting the exact course on varied terrain, not so much, especially when some of that terrain is not in sight. This is just part of the process of learning the terrain.
More like uneducated people who had never left the valley they were born in or met anyone who had traveled thought the Earth was flat if they ever bothered thinking about it.
Most of them were not scientific theory and some have been shown to be partially correct, eg you can measure things like fetal alcohol syndrome by measuring the face and leeches are still used in medicine for those cases where it is useful.
The aether is a good example of a scientific theory that made sense (light is a wave and waves need a substance to travel through) and made predictions (the aether would have wind like properties that could be measured). Once the instruments got accurate enough to measure light accurately enough to measure the wind of the Earth traveling through the aether and it was found not to exist, after repeated measurements to make sure it wasn't instrument failure, the theory was thrown out and the search was on for a good theory that explained why light was always measured at the same speed (in vacuum). Eventually new theory was accepted that explained the shortcomings of the aether theory. That's how science works.
Note that new theory still has problems and scientists continue to search for a better theory, but just like relativity didn't stop Newtons laws from being useful in some cases, a new theory won't mean that relativity does not make accurate predictions.
It's more complicated. The light bulb is simple. The monitor, how much energy does it take to dispose of all that lead impregnated glass? For the car, it has been stated that half the energy that the car uses in its lifetime is used in manufacture. If true, using that gas guzzler for longer might be a net win, especially considering disposal again.
There's also the panspermia hypothesis where life has colonized the planets of the solar system (or further) and all the life is related, eg life originating on Venus and colonizing the Earth (and Mars) through meteors or such, in which case it may very well use the same amino acids. There's also the science fictional idea of a former civilization seeding the galaxy with life.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Not too long ago, stopped at an intersection with dedicated left turn lights, the guy besides me pulled into traffic when the person beside him started their left turn. Seen similar a few times and the only reason for no accident was that everyone was moving slow enough to stop. Still fucks up traffic and if they're so unaware that they can't tell the difference between a green light and a green left turn light, they're a danger on the road.
Facebook is more like a pick pocket, a smart one who removes your wallet, copies your credit card numbers or just takes one bill and returns it without you even noticing (usually). No guns need to be involved.
Did you read the article you linked to? First there is nothing about passing a law, such as legalizing pot and retroactively remove the criminal status of offenders and the idea that it is against the Constitution to undo an unjust law seems like a pretty large infringement on the rights of those who are being punished by an unjust law.
What the article does show is how the Supreme court reinterprets the Constitution and reality. First, it now only applies to criminal law where the Constitution just says "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed. and then how the Supreme Court has ruled that things like being put on a sex offender list and having to post your personal information on the internet is not a punishment and I guess the ruling implied it is not a Bill of Attainder either (in my country, a Judge has to put you on the list as part of sentencing).
There's also the example of the child molester who had finished his sentence and being committed due to a law being retroactively applied was not a punishment so fine. I'd think it would take a Judge, on the advise of experts to commit someone rather then a broad law, so once again touching on both parts of "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."
There's also the "Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban" which besides obviously going against the 2nd amendment, the Supreme Court considered the possibility of 10 years in jail for your previous legal gun and the fact that 10 years in jail is not a punishment but rather regulatory. In my country, where firearms aren't even a right, it once again takes a Judge to ban someone from owning firearms and is usually part of sentencing though I'd think it could be in the form of a restraining order.
So there you have it, at least according to the Wiki article, that part of the Constitution only applies to criminal law that is punitive and the punitive part is pretty flexible. It's amazing how your Supreme Court can interpret pretty clear language, especially if it means punishing someone that everyone hates.
This discussion is about a lawsuit against a company that isn't facing jail time so Article 1 Section 9 doesn't even enter into it according to precedent.
The last sentence in your link shows some limitations in private bills,
So passing a private law to punish Kaspersky is unconstitutional.
It is pretty general. The State is probably split up in such a way that any given area has one to two options and looking at that page, most of those options are pretty crappy for 2018. 3Mbps is pretty low and the minimum that my government is aiming for in the high arctic.
How long before Gandhi or anyone else catches up to close to America's military?
I'm not an American but from the outside looking in, it looks like your whole system needs overhauling, especially the corruption that seems to pervade American politics. Both teams seem more interested in pleasing their donors then their constituents.
I guess it comes down to the best return on investment, expanding or trying to sign up the few who don't have internet yet as it sounds like they have a monopoly on wired internet.
Good point. Just amazes me how much the telecommunication companies have to spend on advertising.
Climate is a general term. Long range climate, as you say, about a 30 year average. It is also accurate to say the local climate here is Aug is the hottest driest month, Dec is the wettest and Jan is the coldest.
The IPC definition,
Note climate can be measured from months to aeons.
Perhaps only pay $389 million rather then $400 million for the stadium naming rights? All over N. America the communications companies seem to have endless money for advertising but no money for customer support or expanding infrastructure.
BC and various other Provinces here. They're a holdover from prohibition. Pot is going to be the same, mix of public and private here, some Provinces pure private and some pure public.One of the selling points of getting rid of prohibition is making it harder for kids to acquire substances and testing (sending young people in to buy) consistently shows the government run stores as being more likely to check ID.
I'll add that the gas is the most expensive in N. America and the cell service and internet is some of the most expensive in the world.
Just thinking that $400 million is a tax write off, so more of redirected money. One city I know off, they bought both the naming rights and broadcast rights. The broadcast rights are a money maker rather then just advertising.
If the airports are operating at capacity, there won't be much competition, same if they're too spread out.
Roads and bridges would probably be private/public partnerships. Private business gets its loans guaranteed by the government as well as guaranteed income. Looks good on paper, the government doesn't actually borrow money or raise taxes and the business gets a guaranteed profit.
In reality, it turns out that people avoid tolls if they can and the government still has to subsidize the bridge to make up for the shortfall and the next election, the other party runs on a platform of eliminating the tolls, wins and has to pay off the bridge and the private company. Taxpayers lose.
Depends on the accounting. Is it just an advertising write-off and your city ends up with an expensive stadium instead of fixing the potholes, maybe not so much of a deal, especially if you're not into sports. If they're buying various broadcast rights or such, maybe a good deal.
Airports are generally even more of a natural monopoly then internet. They take up a lot of land, usually prime land that is in short supply in many cities, and cost a fuck of a lot to build from scratch.
You are right that they (international, small regional can be left to the locals to decide) should have minimal or no subsidies, with the users paying for the upkeep and upgrades. Whether a private bureaucracy mostly run by people interested in a quick profit before they cash out is the best way is arguable.
Here the government turned over the running of them while maintaining ownership and therefore still having a say and presumably making it easy to regulate. The partnership seems to be working well with the airport often voted best in N. America and in the top 10 worldwide. The airport authority has also expanded to managing various other airports including LaGuardia's terminal B.
There's 3 internet companies where I live, they all charge the same.
There are 3 main cell companies here, they all charge the same, even the other month when #4 tried to enter the market and they all offered the same cheap deal.
There's over a dozen gas stations owned by about 6 companies, they almost all charge the same price including going up and down together. The exception is far enough out of town that they can charge more.
There are 3 grocery stores and they got caught fixing the price of bread.
The government started privatizing the government run liquor stores a few years back, but had to stop due to the outrage. The government liquor stores are generally profitably, putting a lot of money into the treasury, subsidizing the stores in the middle of nowhere and paying their workers fairly decently. The private stores charge 10-20% more, pay their workers minimum wage (but they do hire cute girls). I avoid them, but others seem to use them due to location and of course, the lack of ID checking.