And therein lies the crux of the problem, who is this third party that we can both trust? There are third parties that I trust in some circumstances, but none that I trust as mediators between me and everyone else. Every potential third party has interests that will put them in conflict with my interests at some point. At that point they become untrustworthy.
I have yet to run into a virus that I could not remove from the PC without reformatting. That being said, I really have not thought about how the ISP should respond to those individuals who will not, or cannot, clean the virus off of their system.
Not after no answer for one incident, no answer for repeated incidents. The suspension would be until the user contacted the ISP and said, "Oh yes, I was doing something at that time which would explain that spike in emails/usage." No need to specify what, merely the statement that, yes, the unusual usage pattern that you noticed is the result of something I chose to do. Or the user says, "What do you mean I sent out 5,000 emails?" (Actually, Comcast already shuts off your email if you send out too many emails in 24 hours. I do not remember what that number is anymore, but my previous employer ran into it every now and again before they switched to a business class connection.)
So, I take it you are proposing that the EU go to war with India, the countries of Latin America and Africa? European populations are already declining.
Of course, this rule is completely meaningless, Europe will be under shariah law by 2050.
I love that, you accuse the Tea Party of being manipulated to support corporate profits while you are supporting a law designed to increase corporate profits. The purpose of the "energy efficiency" standards for light bulbs is to eliminate those light bulbs that are no longer encumbered by a patent, so that the owners of patents on "energy efficient" light bulbs can charge more for them.
You know I love how slashdot hates patents, but supports a law that outlaws selling the only lightbulbs that are not covered under a still in force patent. The reason that they introduced the ban on traditional incandescent light bulbs (the ones that are no longer covered by any patents) is so that those who own the patents on energy efficient light bulbs can sell their light bulbs for more money. The law is not about energy efficiency, it is about increasing corporate profits by getting rid of competition.
I would agree. It would be a good idea if the ISP were to contact a user if certain suspicious behavior (sudden massive increase in the number of emails being sent at odd hours, sudden, prolonged increase in amount of traffic) to let them know there might be a problem. If the suspicious behavior continues and after multiple contacts the user fails to contact ISP to confirm that such behavior is due to user action the ISP may suspend the user's access to the Internet (for the purpose of triggering the user contacting the ISP to allow the ISP to inform the user of the problem and how to correct it if it is due to an infection).
On the other side you have a bunch of people so rich, they make the 'liberal' rich look poor,...
So, who are these "super-rich" people? The Kennedy's, no, they are Democrats. Warren Buffet, no, he's a Democrat. Bill Gates, no, he does not appear to have a party affiliation, but his Dad is a Democrat. George Soros, no, he's a Democrat. The Koch brothers, I guess they must be who you mean, they are Republicans. Sorry, if you go down the list of the richest people in America they are pretty evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats. Which is actually new, the last time I did this, they were mostly Democrats.
Either that, or the fact that they've won more Pulitzer Prizes than any other news organization.
And how many of those were for stories that were blatantly false? I know of two off of the top of my head. A Pulitzer prize only means that you told a good story that promoted the agenda shared by most reporters and passed it off as news.
Democrats get more votes in wealthier counties because Democrat policies favor the wealthy being able to keep their wealth and limit the ability of "undesirables" (minorities, the poor, etc) to live in near the wealthy. The person I was replying to implied that the Republican Party actually implements a policy that favors the wealthy and dresses it up, because there are not enough wealthy to get anyone elected. Yet, statistics indicate that the wealthy are more likely to vote for Democrats than for Republicans.
As I said, I truly believe that the Democratic Party loves the poor, that is why they keep implementing policies that make more of them. The Republican Party on the other hand does love the rich, that is why they implement policies that make more of them. On the other hand, the rich, generally prefer the Democratic Party because generally the rich don't want there to be more rich people.
Well, I have considered that theory and there is some merit to it. Certainly, dihydrogen monoxide is worthy of investigation as well. I suspect that if one were to do a thorough analysis, you would discover that it's lethal properties are a result of the oxygen molecule in it. Which means it comes back to exposure to oxygen again.
Absolutely, the way that IP and DNA evidence are used today, they are useful for two purposes. First, take a specific group of suspects and eliminate those that it could not be because of this evidence (more reliable for DNA,than for IP). Second, obtain a potential suspect or two who are worth more in depth investigation. Unfortunately, the press, TV shows and movies make it seem like both IP and DNA evidence identifies someone much more reliably than it actually does.
We are all going to die. Of course, I can't tell you how, since we will die in many different ways. However, I can tell you this, 200 years from now, everyone who is alive today will be dead. There are several theories as to why this is the case, but personally, I blame it on breathing oxygen. I don't know if you have noticed, but everyone who breathes oxygen, dies sooner or later.
Actually, current DNA identification isn't all that good either. Most DNA identifications are "1 in 100,000", those that I have seen claiming higher reliability have proven to be hyperbole. This does not mean that higher reliability is not possible, just that current techniques that I have heard referenced are not very reliable identifiers.
Of course that relies on those price changes being "swings". Since currently all evidence suggests that energy and food prices are rising for the longhaul (or at least the duration of the current economic situation), any calculation of inflation that does not consider them is meaningless. Additionally, the fact that an Ipad2 is more powerful than an original Ipad is not evidence that prices are dropping, since I can no longer buy a new original Ipad.
NO, implicit in my response is that there is greater ongoing danger from the chemicals released from chemical plants than there is from the nuclear plant.
The tsunami happened either way, but with the chemical plants addiitional loss of life has resulted and will continue to for decaeds to come...in greater numbers than from the Fukushima reactors.
From what little I read of the article and the somewhat more I know about the impact of reduced bone density, it is probable that you would not note the difference until you are well into retirement age. Although this might be more significant for women if the same effect holds for women, since some women start experiencing problems with reduced bone density shortly after menopause.
As opposed to the Democratic Party, the Party of the richest people in the country. Look at the voting records of the richest counties in the U.S., they overwhelmingly vote for Democrats. It is obvious that the Democratic Party loves the poor, they are working so hard to make more of them.
Except that it doesn't matter how much money you give the IRS to go after tax dodgers, since legally, GE is not a tax dodger (that would be Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, or Senator Claire McCaskill). GE just used all of the exemptions to which they are entitled.
I am confused as to why the government should spend money tracking corporations using loopholes to avoid taxes. That is why those loopholes are there, so that corporations who take certain actions can avoid taxes (or to word it the way the proponents of those loopholes would, they are there to encourge corporations to take certain actions). There is nothing illegal about what GE has done, so any money to the IRS to track them (or any other company) doing it serves no useful purpose.
The inflation rate is only close to zero because they don't count the price of energy and food in the base inflation rate (have you looked at how much energy and food costs have gone up in the last two years?). Additionally, if a new model of a device is 20% more powerful than the previous model, but costs the same, they count it as having gone down in price by 17% (if the original device cost $1000, a device 20% better should--by their calculations--cost $1200, if the new device only costs $1000, it is 17% less than what it would have cost previously--even though it didn't exist previously. Therefore they calculate that it has had a 17% price drop, even though the new device is replacing a device that cost the same price).
Let us see, Obama has taken over GM, is working hand in glove with Goldman Sachs and GE. That sounds just like the Progressives of the early 1900s. Obama has repeatedly expressed the idea that our economy would run better if the government hired experts to "manage" various aspects of it, another idea of the Progressives of the late 1800s and early 1900s. So, yes, Obama is a Progressive. The original Progressives favored central planning of all aspects of the economy. I think it is very easy to make the case that Obama favors central planning of all aspects of the economy.
You are allowed to make use of the same exemptions that GE uses, if they apply to you. The problem is that they were custom written to apply to GE and are unlikely to apply to anybody else (although I am sure that other companies have modified the way the account for their profits in order to take advantage of some of these). Of course, you also have to be handling billions of dollars in order to take advantage of many of them as well.
This is why the flat tax is a good idea to discuss. One tax rate that applies to everybody with a single deduction of something like 125% of the poverty line (the amount of that deduction and how it is calculated is something that could be debated, but the key would be that there is only a single deduction available to everybody). We need to stop using our tax code to do social engineering.
An interesting note is that when they were debating passing the constitutional amendment to implement income tax, the biggest objection was that if it was passed it would become a progressive tax. Those who supported the amendment argued that it would not become a progressive tax (which it has) because that would violate Constitutional provision that all taxes must be uniform (they get around this by making it that the tax rate on the first $20,000--for example--is the same whether you only earn $25,000 a year or you make $1 million. The increased tax rate only applies to the money you earn in excess of each tax bracket).
Not wanting to take the severe risks that nuclear power inescapably brings with it is rational.
What severe risks? If you are talking about the reactor in Japan, more people suffered negative health issues as a result of the damage the tsunami did to other industrial sites than they have from the damage to the nuclear plant.
Slashdot Mirror
A third party we both trust is required,...
And therein lies the crux of the problem, who is this third party that we can both trust? There are third parties that I trust in some circumstances, but none that I trust as mediators between me and everyone else. Every potential third party has interests that will put them in conflict with my interests at some point. At that point they become untrustworthy.
I have yet to run into a virus that I could not remove from the PC without reformatting. That being said, I really have not thought about how the ISP should respond to those individuals who will not, or cannot, clean the virus off of their system.
Not after no answer for one incident, no answer for repeated incidents. The suspension would be until the user contacted the ISP and said, "Oh yes, I was doing something at that time which would explain that spike in emails/usage." No need to specify what, merely the statement that, yes, the unusual usage pattern that you noticed is the result of something I chose to do. Or the user says, "What do you mean I sent out 5,000 emails?" (Actually, Comcast already shuts off your email if you send out too many emails in 24 hours. I do not remember what that number is anymore, but my previous employer ran into it every now and again before they switched to a business class connection.)
So, I take it you are proposing that the EU go to war with India, the countries of Latin America and Africa? European populations are already declining.
Of course, this rule is completely meaningless, Europe will be under shariah law by 2050.
I love that, you accuse the Tea Party of being manipulated to support corporate profits while you are supporting a law designed to increase corporate profits. The purpose of the "energy efficiency" standards for light bulbs is to eliminate those light bulbs that are no longer encumbered by a patent, so that the owners of patents on "energy efficient" light bulbs can charge more for them.
You know I love how slashdot hates patents, but supports a law that outlaws selling the only lightbulbs that are not covered under a still in force patent. The reason that they introduced the ban on traditional incandescent light bulbs (the ones that are no longer covered by any patents) is so that those who own the patents on energy efficient light bulbs can sell their light bulbs for more money. The law is not about energy efficiency, it is about increasing corporate profits by getting rid of competition.
I would agree. It would be a good idea if the ISP were to contact a user if certain suspicious behavior (sudden massive increase in the number of emails being sent at odd hours, sudden, prolonged increase in amount of traffic) to let them know there might be a problem. If the suspicious behavior continues and after multiple contacts the user fails to contact ISP to confirm that such behavior is due to user action the ISP may suspend the user's access to the Internet (for the purpose of triggering the user contacting the ISP to allow the ISP to inform the user of the problem and how to correct it if it is due to an infection).
On the other side you have a bunch of people so rich, they make the 'liberal' rich look poor,...
So, who are these "super-rich" people? The Kennedy's, no, they are Democrats. Warren Buffet, no, he's a Democrat. Bill Gates, no, he does not appear to have a party affiliation, but his Dad is a Democrat. George Soros, no, he's a Democrat. The Koch brothers, I guess they must be who you mean, they are Republicans. Sorry, if you go down the list of the richest people in America they are pretty evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats. Which is actually new, the last time I did this, they were mostly Democrats.
Either that, or the fact that they've won more Pulitzer Prizes than any other news organization.
And how many of those were for stories that were blatantly false? I know of two off of the top of my head. A Pulitzer prize only means that you told a good story that promoted the agenda shared by most reporters and passed it off as news.
Democrats get more votes in wealthier counties because Democrat policies favor the wealthy being able to keep their wealth and limit the ability of "undesirables" (minorities, the poor, etc) to live in near the wealthy. The person I was replying to implied that the Republican Party actually implements a policy that favors the wealthy and dresses it up, because there are not enough wealthy to get anyone elected. Yet, statistics indicate that the wealthy are more likely to vote for Democrats than for Republicans.
As I said, I truly believe that the Democratic Party loves the poor, that is why they keep implementing policies that make more of them. The Republican Party on the other hand does love the rich, that is why they implement policies that make more of them. On the other hand, the rich, generally prefer the Democratic Party because generally the rich don't want there to be more rich people.
Well, check back with me in 200 years or so and I will revise my theory.
Well, I have considered that theory and there is some merit to it. Certainly, dihydrogen monoxide is worthy of investigation as well. I suspect that if one were to do a thorough analysis, you would discover that it's lethal properties are a result of the oxygen molecule in it. Which means it comes back to exposure to oxygen again.
Absolutely, the way that IP and DNA evidence are used today, they are useful for two purposes. First, take a specific group of suspects and eliminate those that it could not be because of this evidence (more reliable for DNA,than for IP). Second, obtain a potential suspect or two who are worth more in depth investigation. Unfortunately, the press, TV shows and movies make it seem like both IP and DNA evidence identifies someone much more reliably than it actually does.
We are all going to die. Of course, I can't tell you how, since we will die in many different ways. However, I can tell you this, 200 years from now, everyone who is alive today will be dead. There are several theories as to why this is the case, but personally, I blame it on breathing oxygen. I don't know if you have noticed, but everyone who breathes oxygen, dies sooner or later.
Actually, current DNA identification isn't all that good either. Most DNA identifications are "1 in 100,000", those that I have seen claiming higher reliability have proven to be hyperbole. This does not mean that higher reliability is not possible, just that current techniques that I have heard referenced are not very reliable identifiers.
Of course that relies on those price changes being "swings". Since currently all evidence suggests that energy and food prices are rising for the longhaul (or at least the duration of the current economic situation), any calculation of inflation that does not consider them is meaningless. Additionally, the fact that an Ipad2 is more powerful than an original Ipad is not evidence that prices are dropping, since I can no longer buy a new original Ipad.
NO, implicit in my response is that there is greater ongoing danger from the chemicals released from chemical plants than there is from the nuclear plant.
The tsunami happened either way, but with the chemical plants addiitional loss of life has resulted and will continue to for decaeds to come...in greater numbers than from the Fukushima reactors.
From what little I read of the article and the somewhat more I know about the impact of reduced bone density, it is probable that you would not note the difference until you are well into retirement age. Although this might be more significant for women if the same effect holds for women, since some women start experiencing problems with reduced bone density shortly after menopause.
As opposed to the Democratic Party, the Party of the richest people in the country. Look at the voting records of the richest counties in the U.S., they overwhelmingly vote for Democrats. It is obvious that the Democratic Party loves the poor, they are working so hard to make more of them.
Except that it doesn't matter how much money you give the IRS to go after tax dodgers, since legally, GE is not a tax dodger (that would be Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, or Senator Claire McCaskill). GE just used all of the exemptions to which they are entitled.
I am confused as to why the government should spend money tracking corporations using loopholes to avoid taxes. That is why those loopholes are there, so that corporations who take certain actions can avoid taxes (or to word it the way the proponents of those loopholes would, they are there to encourge corporations to take certain actions). There is nothing illegal about what GE has done, so any money to the IRS to track them (or any other company) doing it serves no useful purpose.
The inflation rate is only close to zero because they don't count the price of energy and food in the base inflation rate (have you looked at how much energy and food costs have gone up in the last two years?). Additionally, if a new model of a device is 20% more powerful than the previous model, but costs the same, they count it as having gone down in price by 17% (if the original device cost $1000, a device 20% better should--by their calculations--cost $1200, if the new device only costs $1000, it is 17% less than what it would have cost previously--even though it didn't exist previously. Therefore they calculate that it has had a 17% price drop, even though the new device is replacing a device that cost the same price).
Let us see, Obama has taken over GM, is working hand in glove with Goldman Sachs and GE. That sounds just like the Progressives of the early 1900s. Obama has repeatedly expressed the idea that our economy would run better if the government hired experts to "manage" various aspects of it, another idea of the Progressives of the late 1800s and early 1900s. So, yes, Obama is a Progressive. The original Progressives favored central planning of all aspects of the economy. I think it is very easy to make the case that Obama favors central planning of all aspects of the economy.
You are allowed to make use of the same exemptions that GE uses, if they apply to you. The problem is that they were custom written to apply to GE and are unlikely to apply to anybody else (although I am sure that other companies have modified the way the account for their profits in order to take advantage of some of these). Of course, you also have to be handling billions of dollars in order to take advantage of many of them as well.
This is why the flat tax is a good idea to discuss. One tax rate that applies to everybody with a single deduction of something like 125% of the poverty line (the amount of that deduction and how it is calculated is something that could be debated, but the key would be that there is only a single deduction available to everybody). We need to stop using our tax code to do social engineering.
An interesting note is that when they were debating passing the constitutional amendment to implement income tax, the biggest objection was that if it was passed it would become a progressive tax. Those who supported the amendment argued that it would not become a progressive tax (which it has) because that would violate Constitutional provision that all taxes must be uniform (they get around this by making it that the tax rate on the first $20,000--for example--is the same whether you only earn $25,000 a year or you make $1 million. The increased tax rate only applies to the money you earn in excess of each tax bracket).
Not wanting to take the severe risks that nuclear power inescapably brings with it is rational.
What severe risks? If you are talking about the reactor in Japan, more people suffered negative health issues as a result of the damage the tsunami did to other industrial sites than they have from the damage to the nuclear plant.