I agree with most of what you said, but legalizing marijuana is not an idea only supported by "pothead hippies".
I've never smoked _anything_, nor done any illegal drug in my life and I'm in full support of legalizing marijuana. I believe I'm not the only one out there either.
Resources - Hemp is an awesome product all around (Paper, fabric, etc).
Save money - Stop jailing people for negligible amounts of recreational marijuana (read: not for distribution).
Save more money - Stop most of the ridiculous "war on drugs" and the exorbitant spending and manpower on the marijuana aspect of it.
Make money - Taxation on marijuana just like cigarettes.
I hate to bring cars into this (obligatory car analogy?) but it's kind of like saying that it's an opportunity to become a mechanic if the new car you buy needs a lot of "under the hood" tweaking to get to run correctly. Obviously, you can always tweak anything you buy to make it better (aftermarket parts) but the thing should be street worthy straight out of the box.
Some people don't want to be mechanics, they just want the damn thing to work after you pay lots of money for it. If they wanted to put in the effort they would have bought a kit car (newegg or other such a la carte setup) and built it themselves.
I dare say that those who visit a store such as best buy to get a computer (laptops not included, can't do much about those proprietary pieces of *grumble*) generally need a lot of hand holding. You really can't expect the people who fall into that demographic to be the kinds who want to put in a ton of effort.
I'm planning a trip back out east to attend a friends wedding in the spring (It's in MA and I live in OH).
First I thought about driving, it's roughly a 13 hour drive, straight through, not a quick jaunt.
Then I started thinking about flying. Lets see, the airport is 45 minutes away from where I live, plus it's a busy delta hub (Cincinnati) so you want to arrive early to make sure you get through security, so figure 90 minutes before flight. We're talking leaving 2 hours and fifteen minutes before my flight.
Now the flight itself is only a couple hours but in order to keep the fares down connecting flights out of say the Carolinas will probably be necessary. Quick check shows roughly 5 hours to take off from OH and land in RI.
Now, upon landing, it takes time to get off the plane, get your bags and get a ride to the hotel. Figure 20 minutes to get to baggage claim, another 20+ to get the bags and roughly 30 minutes to get to the hotel in northern RI (where my friend lives).
In total now, one way:
2 hours and 15 minutes to get from my house to the plane.
5 hours (roughly) to actually fly with a connecting flight.
1 hour and 10 minutes to get your bags and get to the hotel.
Total time, door to door, roughly 8.5 hours.
This doesn't include flight delays, which, frankly, always seem to follow me around. So all in all, it'll take me what, an extra 4 to 5 hours to drive it and I'll save a few hundred bucks in the process. I'll also be able to see some sights along the way.
It's just not easy to fly. The benefits are few when you're staying inside a quadrant of the country. Sure, if you're going over the ocean, driving might be difficult, but domestic flights just aren't that convenient.
Does a bigger brain necessarily mean they had a higher IQ? Does it really work like that? I get there could be the _potential_ for a higher IQ, but just because someone has more gray matter doesn't necessarily mean they are smarter.
From what I gather, he is just trying to pit the law against itself. He's not out to find a loophole. He merely knows there are two laws at play. One that allows you to make backup copies and another that won't allow you to break the DRM of which _stops_ you from making backup copies.
He doesn't really need a defense, the law is already his defense. Really he's just using himself as a pawn to put one law straight up against another to see which one actually matters.
From the article: Henrik feels that the situation he is trying to draw attention to can only be solved by him going to trial. Hopefully then the Minister for Culture and the Danish parliament will see that the law has to be changed.
Seriously, which mobile provider, at least in the US would support this? Most already don't like you tethering. I can't imagine their reaction to multiple customers pooling their services together to take full advantage of their mobile broadband.
If I'm at work I can't drink, can't go out of state, can't do anything outside of what my boss tells me I can do (basically).
If I'm no longer on the clock, I can do whatever I want (basically).
If I'm asked to be on call, I have to mold my "not on the clock" time to whatever my boss requires. I can't go out of state. I can't go to an amusement park with my kids. I can't go to a movie. Well, not unless I don't mind up and leaving to go home and sign on the laptop.
If your boss expects you to do x or y while you're not on the clock, you _are_ on the clock and deserve pay for it. The only time I allow my boss to dictate what I can and can't do is when he's paying me to allow him to boss me around.
You might want to actually _read_ the post you replied to. Nowhere did they say the government doesn't allow fixed rate cards. Quite the opposite, really.
I agree, however, in a true hunter-gatherer lifestyle the population would be entirely determined on the availability of food and water. Once too many humans are in an area, the population will balance itself through starvation, etc.
I'm not advocating that's how humans should _start_ living again. I'm merely pointing out that that is how life works in every other animal on this planet. It simply works.
I don't think it's overpopulation, per se. I think it is simply a matter of how much energy each human uses over their lifetime.
Think about it. Tribes in the forest use next to zero energy. They use rudimentary tools and what little carbon they create/release (breathing/fires) is easily absorbed by the environment.
The issue really is when you look to "civilized" society where we have cars (and all the manufacturing to make/sustain them), houses, "things", and simple energy usage to power tv's and other electronics.
Humans in the forest live just fine. At least in the sense of being born, living a happy contributing life (at least to their tribe), procreating and then passing on. The rest of us basically do the same thing, but we fill every gap in between with "things" to make life "better".
I'm no tree hugger and frankly I love my computer, tv, house, car, etc, etc, etc. I don't want to give up those things for a loincloth and a hut in the Amazon. But that is our basic problem as a species. We soak up so much more than we need to survive.
What can we do about it? Well, now we can't shut the box we've opened for ourselves. We can't just ask everyone to turn off everything, stop manufacturing anything besides huts/basic tools and start living as the natives do. We just can't go back now.
So now we're stuck finding a technological solution to a technological problem. We have things and we now need more things to fix the damage our current things are doing. Is this possible? I have no idea. Frankly, if we find some technological, easy, cheap way to create energy to reduce our footprint, I'd argue we'll just take advantage of it and make more things for ourselves and use more energy. No matter how much energy we make, I can guarantee you we'll, as a species, find a way to use it until we need more.
I have a feeling, we'll never "fix" our basic issues. We will never have a clean planet. We'll find a way to fix the current problem enough to keep living and then we'll do it again, and again. I hope I'm wrong, however.
Honestly, I was considering getting a Tivo and being done with the cable box. Then I researched it a bit. The problem ended up being that I would have had to rent a cable card for the Tivo from them anyways. The savings just wasn't there anymore.
I've done the same. However, I did actually build a HTPC with a dual QAM tuner for Boxee and OTA HD stations. Although, I did keep the $13 a month cable plan just so I don't have to fiddle with antennas. They pipe the OTA/QAM HD stations with this basic basic package.
I've rediscovered the simple pleasures of PBS, etc. I know I've had them all along, but the ability to just put reruns on was so great that I'd never actually watch PBS. Now I enjoy it again!
Why did I switch? Internet TV is so much easier. No, the quality, in general, isn't there yet, but it's so convenient to watch day old shows on Hulu and other sources. Come to find out, I was paying about $75 a month to pretty much watch NBC, CBS, etc. The only channels I miss now are Discovery and Disc Science. Other than that, screw it. Paying $75 a month for a bunch of channels I don't watch, no thanks.
The funniest part, the cableco was charging me $9+ for the DVR/Cable box and an ADDITIONAL $7 for the DVR _function_. $16/mo just for a metal box that sucks up electricity. Now I pay them $13 a month for the convenience of not needing an antenna.
Hah, I went to Schalmont! I suppose I should be mad at you seeing as we're sworn enemies and all!
Nice to hear they have done _something_ with downtown. Admittedly I haven't been through that area in probably over a decade now (moved in the mid 90's). It was once a nice place to walk around and I'm glad it is at least attempting to make a comeback!
Old resident here (I lived in Rotterdam, a town in Schenectady).
Schenectady was a booming place many years ago (~30) due to ALCO (American Locomotive) and GE (General Electric) being major companies that not only paid a lot in taxes but also brought other businesses to the area.
Downtown Schenectady, while small, was always alive with shops, stores, etc. Heck, my favorite as a child was a small two story hardware store that had one of those old school ceiling mounted "trolly" systems for moving orders/payments around the building. It was fun as a child to watch it zoom around.
Not anymore however. Schenectady decided it would be a great idea to raise taxes and grab more cash. GE and I'm assuming ALCO (can't remember when they pulled out) both decided taxes were too high and they pulled most of their operations out of Schenectady. This has pretty much killed the local economy as all the other small businesses that relied on the employee (residents and commuters) patronage have closed up shop. Schenectady shot itself in the foot really bad.
The article seems to state this is a temporary situation as they are paying $20k to get this on the web for everyone (assuming for free). But at first glance it looked like a misguided cash grab. Maybe it is, I'm not sure. Will be interesting to see how quickly they get a free version out there, if the web version does indeed end up being free. If not, *sigh*, Schenectady will be doing something stupid, again, to make a buck.
To add to that, this is a story by kdawson. Most of the stories from said poster usually include conspiracy-esque summaries. kdawson either likes drama or they really want to believe in these highly polarizing stories.
Not saying this story isn't true, but I'm not certain anyone really knows outside of the acronyms in question.
1: Develop System to detect when someone is "afraid"
2: Let citizens know that those who are "afraid" will be detected, detained and questioned for "citizen safety".
3: Citizens are now afraid to go through on the idea that maybe they will somehow set off the alarm.
Tons of false positives. After the first story of a false positive, some people become afraid of being a false positive as well. As more and more stories of false positives arise, more and more people become afraid and become more false positives.
You should know: To include the web pages you visit in your web history, you need to install Toolbar with PageRank enabled. PageRank will send information about these pages to Google and associate it with your Google Account. See our Web History and Toolbar Privacy Policies. Learn more.
Exactly, or simply a redirect to a "safe page" containing a warning with a link to the site you're trying to access. Maybe a government backed blacklist of sites to have ISP's redirect off of.
Warning!
The site [url] has been known to host scam/phishing web pages. Pages on this site may appear legitimate but may in fact be fakes. These fakes have been known to steal your personal and/or banking information.
If you click the link below you will be taken to the site you were trying to reach. Visit at your own risk!
If I'm actually genetically predisposed to violence, keeping me in society might not be the best course of action.
Seems to me, those that are _not_ predisposed to violence have a better chance of rehabilitating than those that aren't. Shouldn't they need less time in the slammer to rehabilitate?
It seems to me that the point of these exercises is to get the civilian programs up to speed and with their own technology.
If a civilian company can duplicate or even best NASA at these "rudimentary" tasks, said company may be in a better position to be entirely self dependent.
If we can encourage these companies to "reinvent the wheel" now, they will be in a really good position to _not_ need NASA as a crutch on issues in the future.
I don't think so. Frankly, I enjoy having a phone that is small-ish and clam shell design.
But even if I liked having an iPhone size screen on my phone, I still want something easily readable. As it stands, the iPhone has what, a 3.5" screen? I prefer my 4.3" Garmin when it's sitting a few feet away and I still need it to be easily readable.
Yes, phones can be bigger, but do you really want huge phones just so they have the ability for dual use dash GPS use?
Standalone GPS will survive for those that want standalone GPS. Phones may come with it and take a bite out of the standalone market, no doubt, but it won't kill it anymore than TV's with DVD players built in killed the standalone DVD player market (or phones with games killed the hand held game market).
Ignoring your political views, how does cutting "quality of life" government programs entice our populace to purchase American goods over Chinese?
Yes, I get it, companies pay less, people pay less, somehow that equates to American goods being more affordable and thus more attractive than Chinese goods? Seriously? That's the slant here?
Realize this, you will have to cut our quality of life down to equal or _less_ than China's in order to bring our products down to their prices. Is this something you're seriously willing to propose? Because cutting a few "socialist" programs here and there won't do squat to change the current manufacturing climate at all.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with most of what you said, but legalizing marijuana is not an idea only supported by "pothead hippies".
I've never smoked _anything_, nor done any illegal drug in my life and I'm in full support of legalizing marijuana. I believe I'm not the only one out there either.
Resources - Hemp is an awesome product all around (Paper, fabric, etc).
Save money - Stop jailing people for negligible amounts of recreational marijuana (read: not for distribution).
Save more money - Stop most of the ridiculous "war on drugs" and the exorbitant spending and manpower on the marijuana aspect of it.
Make money - Taxation on marijuana just like cigarettes.
Those are just a few tangible benefits.
Only hippies support it indeed.
I hate to bring cars into this (obligatory car analogy?) but it's kind of like saying that it's an opportunity to become a mechanic if the new car you buy needs a lot of "under the hood" tweaking to get to run correctly. Obviously, you can always tweak anything you buy to make it better (aftermarket parts) but the thing should be street worthy straight out of the box.
Some people don't want to be mechanics, they just want the damn thing to work after you pay lots of money for it. If they wanted to put in the effort they would have bought a kit car (newegg or other such a la carte setup) and built it themselves.
I dare say that those who visit a store such as best buy to get a computer (laptops not included, can't do much about those proprietary pieces of *grumble*) generally need a lot of hand holding. You really can't expect the people who fall into that demographic to be the kinds who want to put in a ton of effort.
I'm planning a trip back out east to attend a friends wedding in the spring (It's in MA and I live in OH).
First I thought about driving, it's roughly a 13 hour drive, straight through, not a quick jaunt.
Then I started thinking about flying. Lets see, the airport is 45 minutes away from where I live, plus it's a busy delta hub (Cincinnati) so you want to arrive early to make sure you get through security, so figure 90 minutes before flight. We're talking leaving 2 hours and fifteen minutes before my flight.
Now the flight itself is only a couple hours but in order to keep the fares down connecting flights out of say the Carolinas will probably be necessary. Quick check shows roughly 5 hours to take off from OH and land in RI.
Now, upon landing, it takes time to get off the plane, get your bags and get a ride to the hotel. Figure 20 minutes to get to baggage claim, another 20+ to get the bags and roughly 30 minutes to get to the hotel in northern RI (where my friend lives).
In total now, one way:
2 hours and 15 minutes to get from my house to the plane.
5 hours (roughly) to actually fly with a connecting flight.
1 hour and 10 minutes to get your bags and get to the hotel.
Total time, door to door, roughly 8.5 hours.
This doesn't include flight delays, which, frankly, always seem to follow me around. So all in all, it'll take me what, an extra 4 to 5 hours to drive it and I'll save a few hundred bucks in the process. I'll also be able to see some sights along the way.
It's just not easy to fly. The benefits are few when you're staying inside a quadrant of the country. Sure, if you're going over the ocean, driving might be difficult, but domestic flights just aren't that convenient.
Does a bigger brain necessarily mean they had a higher IQ? Does it really work like that? I get there could be the _potential_ for a higher IQ, but just because someone has more gray matter doesn't necessarily mean they are smarter.
While this was staged for demonstration purposes, it demonstrates the power Lithium Ion batteries can expel when they fail.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeWq6rWzChw
Pretty sure I don't want a huge one of these in my basement...
Exactly, embrace your mistakes as learning experiences. Take your faults and use them to shore up your strengths.
Everyone has done things they aren't proud of, but the goal is to become better because you've learned from them!
As another poster said, find ways to take your past faults and turn them into personal assets.
From what I gather, he is just trying to pit the law against itself. He's not out to find a loophole. He merely knows there are two laws at play. One that allows you to make backup copies and another that won't allow you to break the DRM of which _stops_ you from making backup copies.
He doesn't really need a defense, the law is already his defense. Really he's just using himself as a pawn to put one law straight up against another to see which one actually matters.
From the article: Henrik feels that the situation he is trying to draw attention to can only be solved by him going to trial. Hopefully then the Minister for Culture and the Danish parliament will see that the law has to be changed.
Seriously, which mobile provider, at least in the US would support this? Most already don't like you tethering. I can't imagine their reaction to multiple customers pooling their services together to take full advantage of their mobile broadband.
If I'm at work I can't drink, can't go out of state, can't do anything outside of what my boss tells me I can do (basically).
If I'm no longer on the clock, I can do whatever I want (basically).
If I'm asked to be on call, I have to mold my "not on the clock" time to whatever my boss requires. I can't go out of state. I can't go to an amusement park with my kids. I can't go to a movie. Well, not unless I don't mind up and leaving to go home and sign on the laptop.
If your boss expects you to do x or y while you're not on the clock, you _are_ on the clock and deserve pay for it. The only time I allow my boss to dictate what I can and can't do is when he's paying me to allow him to boss me around.
You might want to actually _read_ the post you replied to. Nowhere did they say the government doesn't allow fixed rate cards. Quite the opposite, really.
While I don't totally disagree with you in principle, is "stolen" data still considered "stolen" if it is posted to Wiki Leaks and linked from there?
Basically, if this data set was pushed to Wiki Leaks first and SD linked to their version, would you have posted in protest?
Leaked data is leaked data is leaked data.
I agree, however, in a true hunter-gatherer lifestyle the population would be entirely determined on the availability of food and water. Once too many humans are in an area, the population will balance itself through starvation, etc.
I'm not advocating that's how humans should _start_ living again. I'm merely pointing out that that is how life works in every other animal on this planet. It simply works.
I don't think it's overpopulation, per se. I think it is simply a matter of how much energy each human uses over their lifetime.
Think about it. Tribes in the forest use next to zero energy. They use rudimentary tools and what little carbon they create/release (breathing/fires) is easily absorbed by the environment.
The issue really is when you look to "civilized" society where we have cars (and all the manufacturing to make/sustain them), houses, "things", and simple energy usage to power tv's and other electronics.
Humans in the forest live just fine. At least in the sense of being born, living a happy contributing life (at least to their tribe), procreating and then passing on. The rest of us basically do the same thing, but we fill every gap in between with "things" to make life "better".
I'm no tree hugger and frankly I love my computer, tv, house, car, etc, etc, etc. I don't want to give up those things for a loincloth and a hut in the Amazon. But that is our basic problem as a species. We soak up so much more than we need to survive.
What can we do about it? Well, now we can't shut the box we've opened for ourselves. We can't just ask everyone to turn off everything, stop manufacturing anything besides huts/basic tools and start living as the natives do. We just can't go back now.
So now we're stuck finding a technological solution to a technological problem. We have things and we now need more things to fix the damage our current things are doing. Is this possible? I have no idea. Frankly, if we find some technological, easy, cheap way to create energy to reduce our footprint, I'd argue we'll just take advantage of it and make more things for ourselves and use more energy. No matter how much energy we make, I can guarantee you we'll, as a species, find a way to use it until we need more.
I have a feeling, we'll never "fix" our basic issues. We will never have a clean planet. We'll find a way to fix the current problem enough to keep living and then we'll do it again, and again. I hope I'm wrong, however.
Honestly, I was considering getting a Tivo and being done with the cable box. Then I researched it a bit. The problem ended up being that I would have had to rent a cable card for the Tivo from them anyways. The savings just wasn't there anymore.
I've done the same. However, I did actually build a HTPC with a dual QAM tuner for Boxee and OTA HD stations. Although, I did keep the $13 a month cable plan just so I don't have to fiddle with antennas. They pipe the OTA/QAM HD stations with this basic basic package.
I've rediscovered the simple pleasures of PBS, etc. I know I've had them all along, but the ability to just put reruns on was so great that I'd never actually watch PBS. Now I enjoy it again!
Why did I switch? Internet TV is so much easier. No, the quality, in general, isn't there yet, but it's so convenient to watch day old shows on Hulu and other sources. Come to find out, I was paying about $75 a month to pretty much watch NBC, CBS, etc. The only channels I miss now are Discovery and Disc Science. Other than that, screw it. Paying $75 a month for a bunch of channels I don't watch, no thanks.
The funniest part, the cableco was charging me $9+ for the DVR/Cable box and an ADDITIONAL $7 for the DVR _function_. $16/mo just for a metal box that sucks up electricity. Now I pay them $13 a month for the convenience of not needing an antenna.
Hah, I went to Schalmont! I suppose I should be mad at you seeing as we're sworn enemies and all!
Nice to hear they have done _something_ with downtown. Admittedly I haven't been through that area in probably over a decade now (moved in the mid 90's). It was once a nice place to walk around and I'm glad it is at least attempting to make a comeback!
Or should I say is pretty much dead.
Old resident here (I lived in Rotterdam, a town in Schenectady).
Schenectady was a booming place many years ago (~30) due to ALCO (American Locomotive) and GE (General Electric) being major companies that not only paid a lot in taxes but also brought other businesses to the area.
Downtown Schenectady, while small, was always alive with shops, stores, etc. Heck, my favorite as a child was a small two story hardware store that had one of those old school ceiling mounted "trolly" systems for moving orders/payments around the building. It was fun as a child to watch it zoom around.
Not anymore however. Schenectady decided it would be a great idea to raise taxes and grab more cash. GE and I'm assuming ALCO (can't remember when they pulled out) both decided taxes were too high and they pulled most of their operations out of Schenectady. This has pretty much killed the local economy as all the other small businesses that relied on the employee (residents and commuters) patronage have closed up shop. Schenectady shot itself in the foot really bad.
The article seems to state this is a temporary situation as they are paying $20k to get this on the web for everyone (assuming for free). But at first glance it looked like a misguided cash grab. Maybe it is, I'm not sure. Will be interesting to see how quickly they get a free version out there, if the web version does indeed end up being free. If not, *sigh*, Schenectady will be doing something stupid, again, to make a buck.
To add to that, this is a story by kdawson. Most of the stories from said poster usually include conspiracy-esque summaries. kdawson either likes drama or they really want to believe in these highly polarizing stories.
Not saying this story isn't true, but I'm not certain anyone really knows outside of the acronyms in question.
1: Develop System to detect when someone is "afraid"
2: Let citizens know that those who are "afraid" will be detected, detained and questioned for "citizen safety".
3: Citizens are now afraid to go through on the idea that maybe they will somehow set off the alarm.
Tons of false positives. After the first story of a false positive, some people become afraid of being a false positive as well. As more and more stories of false positives arise, more and more people become afraid and become more false positives.
From that link after you log in:
You should know: To include the web pages you visit in your web history, you need to install Toolbar with PageRank enabled. PageRank will send information about these pages to Google and associate it with your Google Account. See our Web History and Toolbar Privacy Policies. Learn more.
Exactly, or simply a redirect to a "safe page" containing a warning with a link to the site you're trying to access. Maybe a government backed blacklist of sites to have ISP's redirect off of.
Warning!
The site [url] has been known to host scam/phishing web pages. Pages on this site may appear legitimate but may in fact be fakes. These fakes have been known to steal your personal and/or banking information.
If you click the link below you will be taken to the site you were trying to reach. Visit at your own risk!
[Link to URL you were trying to access]
Seems a little bit backwards there.
If I'm actually genetically predisposed to violence, keeping me in society might not be the best course of action.
Seems to me, those that are _not_ predisposed to violence have a better chance of rehabilitating than those that aren't. Shouldn't they need less time in the slammer to rehabilitate?
Predisposed to violence = more time in?
Not Predisposed = less time in?
It seems to me that the point of these exercises is to get the civilian programs up to speed and with their own technology.
If a civilian company can duplicate or even best NASA at these "rudimentary" tasks, said company may be in a better position to be entirely self dependent.
If we can encourage these companies to "reinvent the wheel" now, they will be in a really good position to _not_ need NASA as a crutch on issues in the future.
Teaching a man to fish vs giving a man a fish..
I don't think so. Frankly, I enjoy having a phone that is small-ish and clam shell design.
But even if I liked having an iPhone size screen on my phone, I still want something easily readable. As it stands, the iPhone has what, a 3.5" screen? I prefer my 4.3" Garmin when it's sitting a few feet away and I still need it to be easily readable.
Yes, phones can be bigger, but do you really want huge phones just so they have the ability for dual use dash GPS use?
Standalone GPS will survive for those that want standalone GPS. Phones may come with it and take a bite out of the standalone market, no doubt, but it won't kill it anymore than TV's with DVD players built in killed the standalone DVD player market (or phones with games killed the hand held game market).
Ignoring your political views, how does cutting "quality of life" government programs entice our populace to purchase American goods over Chinese?
Yes, I get it, companies pay less, people pay less, somehow that equates to American goods being more affordable and thus more attractive than Chinese goods? Seriously? That's the slant here?
Realize this, you will have to cut our quality of life down to equal or _less_ than China's in order to bring our products down to their prices. Is this something you're seriously willing to propose? Because cutting a few "socialist" programs here and there won't do squat to change the current manufacturing climate at all.