That barrier down the middle of Rte 9 has been there for over a quarter century, long enough for it to develop visible rust spots.
Oh, well, maybe next the graph theorists will start working on the problem of finding a route through a graph when the mapmakers lied to you about some of the connectivity details.
This may be a different problem, more akin to watermarking as an approach to DRM.
In order to prove that a map was created by a particular cartographer, cartographers add little "mistakes" in random places. Then if those mistakes start to appear in map data that they didn't specifically license, they know who to sue. There are numerous problems with this approach, and what you described may be one.
The solution exists too, in the form of the Open Street Map project which aims to create a completely open database of map data.
It seems to me that it would be easy enough to do this for consumer-grade devices shortly after the move to all-electric cars. Just have a separate motor per wheel so you don't need a complicated power train.
Toss in a fraction of the automated control that they're talking about, and you have the ultimate off-road vehicle and the ride can be as smooth as you want.
After reviewing the summaries of the whole list, the only way I can see you justifying your claim of "whack-nuttery" is if you believe that government exists to allow you to force others to pay for your personal agendas or punish them for doing things that you don't like.
A big problem with that point of view is that it makes the government a puppet for whoever screams most loudly, at the expense of everybody else. And since the loudest voice is constantly changing, we end up with the worst of all worlds, more tangled laws and regulations than a reasonable person will ever read, and a rapidly growing government.
"Ron Paul's Congressional whack-nuttery" is the first real chance to break away from that in a very long time, and his claims are only further backed up by your link. I could run through that list of proposed bills one by one, if you like, but this really isn't the forum for that.
If you have another reason for believing that the misrepresentations on the page linked are evidence of a real problem with Ron Paul's record, I'd love to hear them.
That would be a temporary miscalculation. It's only a matter of time before someone at the federal level realizes the mistake and steals the money from the states (or the people) to pay for the changes first, then dangles it back in front of the states.
It's practically standard procedure by now, so it's amazing this one slipped through the cracks.
And there's such flexibility in means of theft that there's a lot of room for creativity. Increase the money supply, tax the states, tax the individuals, issue bonds (taxing our descendants),...
... but I still get this idea of a box strapped to a horse, chasing down Ichabod Crane.
Then it may interest you to know that somewhere in Idaho, there's a headless box running as a server that has been named Horseman for the last five years and on its second physical box.
It was the best I could come up with at the time, and I haven't had a better name idea yet.:-)
I'd have rather just modded the parent up, because it makes a point that I think more persons on Slashdot, and more importantly everywhere else need to understand:
If you want to have rights, you must relinquish the "right" to force others to do what you want. Conversely, if you force others to do what you want, you will eventually lose all your rights, because they will expect to be able to do the same.
How would things be different if everybody understood this? I would expect a drastic reduction in wars, an instant unclogging of the court system, no more debate about all these political non-issues, an increase in all forms of respect for fellow citizens, and a reduction of the number and type of laws to the point that an average 10-year-old could recite them with full understanding of what they mean and how they are applied.
The only alternative brings the exact opposite, sooner or later.
An issue with this point of view is that there is no intrinsic difference between code and data, as code is just data that has semantic meaning in the context of a physical or virtual machine.
In order to protect against exploits in "data", the data format must be defined in such a way that it can contain no actions, the operating system and/or hardware must provide a mechanism for quarantining blocks of memory from execution (check out Data Execution Prevention or DEP), and the applications must be written in to allow the protections to work.
The latter is one of the issues with DEP adoption, as some applications use programming tricks for performance or other reasons that blur the distinction, such as self-modifying code.
The process of securing computer systems against malformed data is happening, but like many things, it won't be without its trade-offs.
The parent isn't flamebait. It's tongue-in-cheek humor followed by a reasonable comment. If it were flamebait, an hour wouldn't pass without a single knee-jerk flame.
In that case, the right answer would be to lock the start of the homeward commute (12:00 or 13:00) to sunrise. We'd be required to change our clocks every day, but then few will have trouble with driving home in the dark.
Honestly, wouldn't we be better off to just forget about time zones and deciding whether to be hungry or tired because of numbers that have little relation either to "sun time" or our bodies' natural rhythms?
You can try it yourself: Start measuring your personal time based on GMT, regardless of where you live. It makes every bit as much sense as these random fluctuations (you can bet that the reckoning will change again), and you won't have to worry about the hour that is measured twice (in the fall) or the hour that is never measured (in the spring).
And slightly off-topic, why aren't we using a calendar with thirteen months of exactly 28 days? You get an extra bonus day every year and two in leap year. Suddenly those who are paid twice a month see the same pay periods as those who are paid every two weeks. Wouldn't there be enough of a saving in payroll costs and calendar printing to cover the change?
There are some formatting and spelling issues in it, as it looks like it came out of the tail end of an OCR program. I can't vouch for the accuracy or usefulness of the information, whether past, present, or future.
Also, do players actually own the virtual assets? Because aas far as I can tell it's the game operator that actually owns them since they can always take those assets away from the player (for example by cancelling their account).
This is the same degree of ownership that we currently have for all forms of "real" assets. If you don't pay whatever rents in the form of taxation your government levies, they revoke your ownership.
As for me, living in a place where we are told we are free, but having to pay 1/3 of my income (averaged across the population, which is the net effect regardless of the up-front distribution) as rent on my income and property, I would truly like to see more of my government funded through transparent fees based on the usage of government services. By tying a government's income directly to its expenditures, this holds the government more accountable for its use/misuse of funds, keeps the real cost of government in the minds of the public, and erases most of the possibilities for waste, corruption, and misuse of government power.
It also reduces the scope of government, and having seen government abuse firsthand, I think this is a wonderful thing.
Slashdot Mirror
This may be a different problem, more akin to watermarking as an approach to DRM.
In order to prove that a map was created by a particular cartographer, cartographers add little "mistakes" in random places. Then if those mistakes start to appear in map data that they didn't specifically license, they know who to sue. There are numerous problems with this approach, and what you described may be one.
The solution exists too, in the form of the Open Street Map project which aims to create a completely open database of map data.
It seems to me that it would be easy enough to do this for consumer-grade devices shortly after the move to all-electric cars. Just have a separate motor per wheel so you don't need a complicated power train.
Toss in a fraction of the automated control that they're talking about, and you have the ultimate off-road vehicle and the ride can be as smooth as you want.
After reviewing the summaries of the whole list, the only way I can see you justifying your claim of "whack-nuttery" is if you believe that government exists to allow you to force others to pay for your personal agendas or punish them for doing things that you don't like.
A big problem with that point of view is that it makes the government a puppet for whoever screams most loudly, at the expense of everybody else. And since the loudest voice is constantly changing, we end up with the worst of all worlds, more tangled laws and regulations than a reasonable person will ever read, and a rapidly growing government.
"Ron Paul's Congressional whack-nuttery" is the first real chance to break away from that in a very long time, and his claims are only further backed up by your link. I could run through that list of proposed bills one by one, if you like, but this really isn't the forum for that.
If you have another reason for believing that the misrepresentations on the page linked are evidence of a real problem with Ron Paul's record, I'd love to hear them.
That would be a temporary miscalculation. It's only a matter of time before someone at the federal level realizes the mistake and steals the money from the states (or the people) to pay for the changes first, then dangles it back in front of the states.
It's practically standard procedure by now, so it's amazing this one slipped through the cracks.
And there's such flexibility in means of theft that there's a lot of room for creativity. Increase the money supply, tax the states, tax the individuals, issue bonds (taxing our descendants), ...
Then it may interest you to know that somewhere in Idaho, there's a headless box running as a server that has been named Horseman for the last five years and on its second physical box.
It was the best I could come up with at the time, and I haven't had a better name idea yet. :-)
I'd have rather just modded the parent up, because it makes a point that I think more persons on Slashdot, and more importantly everywhere else need to understand:
If you want to have rights, you must relinquish the "right" to force others to do what you want. Conversely, if you force others to do what you want, you will eventually lose all your rights, because they will expect to be able to do the same.
How would things be different if everybody understood this? I would expect a drastic reduction in wars, an instant unclogging of the court system, no more debate about all these political non-issues, an increase in all forms of respect for fellow citizens, and a reduction of the number and type of laws to the point that an average 10-year-old could recite them with full understanding of what they mean and how they are applied.
The only alternative brings the exact opposite, sooner or later.
An issue with this point of view is that there is no intrinsic difference between code and data, as code is just data that has semantic meaning in the context of a physical or virtual machine.
In order to protect against exploits in "data", the data format must be defined in such a way that it can contain no actions, the operating system and/or hardware must provide a mechanism for quarantining blocks of memory from execution (check out Data Execution Prevention or DEP), and the applications must be written in to allow the protections to work.
The latter is one of the issues with DEP adoption, as some applications use programming tricks for performance or other reasons that blur the distinction, such as self-modifying code.
The process of securing computer systems against malformed data is happening, but like many things, it won't be without its trade-offs.
The parent isn't flamebait. It's tongue-in-cheek humor followed by a reasonable comment. If it were flamebait, an hour wouldn't pass without a single knee-jerk flame.
In that case, the right answer would be to lock the start of the homeward commute (12:00 or 13:00) to sunrise. We'd be required to change our clocks every day, but then few will have trouble with driving home in the dark.
Honestly, wouldn't we be better off to just forget about time zones and deciding whether to be hungry or tired because of numbers that have little relation either to "sun time" or our bodies' natural rhythms?
You can try it yourself: Start measuring your personal time based on GMT, regardless of where you live. It makes every bit as much sense as these random fluctuations (you can bet that the reckoning will change again), and you won't have to worry about the hour that is measured twice (in the fall) or the hour that is never measured (in the spring).
And slightly off-topic, why aren't we using a calendar with thirteen months of exactly 28 days? You get an extra bonus day every year and two in leap year. Suddenly those who are paid twice a month see the same pay periods as those who are paid every two weeks. Wouldn't there be enough of a saving in payroll costs and calendar printing to cover the change?
You may be reffering to http://www.textfiles.com/anarchy/SCAMS/stoppow.txt .
There are some formatting and spelling issues in it, as it looks like it came out of the tail end of an OCR program. I can't vouch for the accuracy or usefulness of the information, whether past, present, or future.
This is the same degree of ownership that we currently have for all forms of "real" assets. If you don't pay whatever rents in the form of taxation your government levies, they revoke your ownership.
As for me, living in a place where we are told we are free, but having to pay 1/3 of my income (averaged across the population, which is the net effect regardless of the up-front distribution) as rent on my income and property, I would truly like to see more of my government funded through transparent fees based on the usage of government services. By tying a government's income directly to its expenditures, this holds the government more accountable for its use/misuse of funds, keeps the real cost of government in the minds of the public, and erases most of the possibilities for waste, corruption, and misuse of government power.
It also reduces the scope of government, and having seen government abuse firsthand, I think this is a wonderful thing.