He then handed us a pamphlet detailing the border regulations
Was it the same as this file from the cbp? Changes in sea and land travel documentation requirements
Though that document claims effective January 21, 2008 - so it may even be an inconsistency within the DHS. (a government agency inconsistency? who's ever heard of such a thing?)
last time I came through, I had gone up to Montreal to see Radiohead, sometime in July
I was in Toronto in mid-late July, and came back through Niagara Falls. I had my passport, and was asked for it specifically. I honestly didn't even ask if there was any other way. Though that document does seem to indicate that you could get through with a driver's license and a birth certificate, which is how it used to be (sometimes just one or the other would do back in the good old days).
the pamphlet... didn't say anything about a passport being required
Maybe it was a different pamphlet, then. This one does list a passport as being one option. It is one of very few documents you can use on its own to get through - most other documents listed require something else (with the enhanced driver's license being a notable exception).
At any rate, it sounds like we both cross often from NY to Canada. I prefer not to take too many chance with US CBP - and I see the new license as a win in my situation, since I could use that and not worry about my passport. Of course, YMMV.
But being as that was an obvious question, that was not addressed by the summary, one really should have chosen to RTFA before speculating wildly on it.
Unless they changed that requirement in the past two months, no, they don't require passports for land crossings.
The passport requirement for the US-Canada land crossing is only to get back into the US. The requirements for American entry into Canada by land state that you can enter Canada without a passport, provided you have the required documentation (a driver's license along with a birth certificate will meet that).
I'm afraid you've heard wrong, or you heard the requirements for air or sea entry, which could be different. However, here in upstate New York, it is common to cross into Canada by land, which is how all of my crossings have been into Canada for the past several years.
the residents have the option to get the cheaper RFID-free license? Who's going to choose to willingly pay more
Many people forget how many cities in Upstate New York are close to the border. I cross the border on average 2-3 times per year by car myself. Currently I have to carry my passport to get back in - if I could go back to just carrying my driver's license, I would be much happier. Loosing a driver's license is a pretty minor expense in comparison to loosing a passport - and driver's licenses are generally replaced quite quickly here in NY state.
I live in Upstate New York and cross by land into Canada at least 2-3 times annually. I would much prefer to not have to worry about my passport for those crossings, and this fits that need for me. Regular license + $30 is still quite a bit less than what I paid for my passport (or what I would pay for a replacement if I were to loose it).
They are often in the private impound lots. Some areas (such as Minneapolis, MN) have essentially legalized auto theft, provided it is done by a for-profit impound lot.
and just because something can't be sold, doesn't then make the object "illegal".
You said they couldn't be sold legally. How exactly do you define that as being different from the object being illegal itself?
conspiracy theory-esque delusions
I would love to know how you came to that conclusion. Where exactly did I propose a conspiracy theory?
Oh, yeah. I didn't.
I don't know how exactly I managed to piss you off so badly. I've never seen anyone take a discussion on diesel engines as a personal attack, but I guess you prove yet again that there is a first time for everything.
No wonder someone here on slashdot on my friends list marked you as a foe - you're too high strung to manage a conversation without jumping to wild allegations.
Hell, unless you have something against diesel engines, or wanted to never see one sold here, we probably started off this conversation in agreement.
But you're free to your own opinion, even if it has no basis in reality.
I believe it was circa 2007 there were practically NONE that could be legally sold.
My friend who owns a 2003 Jetta diesel would be stunned to learn that her car is illegal. I suspect her VW dealer and her insurance agent would also find that surprising.
I suspect what you are thinking of is the more recent tightening of emissions standards that came before the requirement of low-sulfur diesel fuel at the pumps. There was a short period - about 3 years - where it was indeed almost impossible to sell a diesel car in the US because of the combination of lousy sulfur-laden diesel and the tightened emissions standards. Once low-sulfur became the norm it became much, much easier to meet the emissions requirements nationwide.
But you can find diesel sedans and coupes from VW and Mercedes that were sold perfectly legal between 1980 and approximately 2004.
. And after a decade without nearly any diesel automobiles sold in the US, makers found there was no existing market and have just barely yet started attempting to build one.
Check with your local VW dealer. They will tell you there have been diesel automobiles sold in the US. For that matter, Mercedes-Benz had diesel sedans through the 80s and 90s (not sure if they are currently available here).
I'm willing to agree that there was plenty wrong with the diesel fuel sold in the US not-so-long ago. But there certainly was a market for diesel cars; just one that was ignored by many auto manufacturers.
Right now some VW dealers are reporting wait lists several months long for diesel Jettas.
If the Vista kernel was all that people were running, would people be so disappointed with Vista?
I would say no. Because there is a lot more expected of an OS than just the kernel, in most cases. And that is doubly true when the name of your operating system includes the word "windows", since then the operating system includes the kernel, the gui, and several other things that wouldn't be considered as integral to the operating system in other camps.
Unfortunately, many people aren't aware of the progress that diesel engines have made in the past 30 years. And it would seem some of those uninformed people are working for the big 3 automakers.
What?
The "big 3" are in fact very successfully selling numerous diesel vehicles around the world. They just never introduce them to the American market.
Indeed, they are selling a lot of diesels in countries outside of North America.
However, the big 3 anticipate that consumers in the US will have a negative predisposition towards diesel, and hence don't even try.
Although if you look at what the automakers - both domestic and foreign - offer, you'll see that it is an opinion that has permeated more than just the big 3. When is the last time you saw a BMW or Jaguar in the US with a diesel? How about a Toyota or a Nissan? Or a motorcycle? Those are all available as diesel in other countries.
But yet the manufacturers chose not to sell them here. And if you've noticed the Smart cars (sold by Mercedes in North America) you may notice that they are available as diesels everywhere but the US. There are even numerous Smarts running around in Canada with diesels. Chrysler has made similar moves with the Liberty and the Caliber, to name just two.
I would say it appears that the marketing trolls in the automobile companies (around the world) have it set in their minds that Americans don't want diesel. They still seem stuck in the mindset from 5 or more years ago that the only vehicles that sell well in the states weigh 6,000 pounds or more and get no more than 10 mpg.
If you live in a city or small town where diesel costs more than gasoline, you're getting SCREWED.
I suspect that might have a lot to do with the fact that the US government subsidizes the hell out of the gasoline industry to (try to) bring us extra-cheap gasoline.
After all, we have two oil men in the white house right now. If they can't keep the prices down, well, we might actually do something in this country. (ignoring the fact that prices have tripled since they took office)
I still miss my smog belching 6.9l. All kinds of fun when some punk in a Honda pulls along side you and fires up the boomity boom music.
No such thing as too powerful of a retaliation in that kind of situation.
There's no way their sewing machine motor can beat 400 ft/lbs off the line.
I've always thought the hon-duhs were more like chainsaws, myself. Alternatively, considering the prevalence of lawnmowers from the same company, I've often wondered if some of the slow-crawling sedans have the lawnmower engines instead...
Since they wanted me to listen to their music so badly, I used to blow smoke at them. Usually in the driver's window and out the passenger's window.:-)
That may be the single most hilarious automotive comment I've ever seen. Images in my head of annoying kids with spiky hair, listening to crappy music while choking on sulfur... you made my day!
1985 Ford Escort diesel (U.S., not the European Escort) that claimed ~50MPG
I knew a guy who worked in Florida who used to own an Escort diesel wagon. He said it was a pretty damned good car - 50mpg and he did somewhere over 200,000 miles on it before getting rid of it.
We use to own a BMW diesel and had to plug it in for the heater every winter.
What year was the BMW diesel? And where on earth do you live?
I knew multiple people who owned VW diesels (Jettas and Golfs) in Minnesota and they never had problems with them in Minnesota winters, even storing them outside.
Plus I might add here diesel is more expensive than regular gas.
True, diesel is more expensive. But it can actually be less expensive per mile to run on diesel. For example, where I am now I can buy unleaded gas for around $3.60 per gallon. Diesel goes for $4.30 per gallon. My wife drives a Jetta with a gas engine, it gets 30mpg. This works out to $.12 per mile on fuel costs. The Jetta is also available with a diesel, it gets 40mpg. This makes for $.1075 per mile for fuel.
And of course with a little ingenuity, you could run on used cooking oil for a lot less.
Some people may remember that in the 70s and 80s, the big three were making several diesel-powered sedans for the American market. Some of these vehicles are still operating, because the diesel engines have very good longevity.
However, it is the negative publicity that those old diesels attained that keeps diesel relegated so low in the US. Those cars in the 70s and 80s made terrible mileage (they were most if not all 8cyl diesels). They spewed noxious exhaust enough to make coal power plants look clean. And they accelerated like Mack trucks propelled by hamsters.
Unfortunately, many people aren't aware of the progress that diesel engines have made in the past 30 years. And it would seem some of those uninformed people are working for the big 3 automakers.
Then perhaps the page would have withstood being slashdotted. Instead their poor server is a smoldering pile of nothingness - but hey their gaming laptops are 5up3r 1337 ! woot!
I remember when I worked a CompUSA, back when they were the exclusive retailer for Apple. We generally tried to keep one Apple specialist on staff at all times.
However, he was usually outnumbered by Apple fanboys that came in to the store to spread the good word of Apple, for no pay at all. Apparently local Apple owners were so in love with their Apples that they were willing to come in and preach the word of how much they loved their Apple, just for the fun of it.
And yes, of course the fanboys sometimes new more than our Apple specialist on staff.
But now Microsoft is going to pay fanboys to go in to retailers and preach the gospel. That really says something when the product from Microsoft cannot build the fandom that Apple had 10 or more years ago.
Disclaimer - I use neither Apple nor Microsoft products in my own personal use.
Slashdot Mirror
He then handed us a pamphlet detailing the border regulations
Was it the same as this file from the cbp?
Changes in sea and land travel documentation requirements
Though that document claims effective January 21, 2008 - so it may even be an inconsistency within the DHS. (a government agency inconsistency? who's ever heard of such a thing?)
last time I came through, I had gone up to Montreal to see Radiohead, sometime in July
I was in Toronto in mid-late July, and came back through Niagara Falls. I had my passport, and was asked for it specifically. I honestly didn't even ask if there was any other way. Though that document does seem to indicate that you could get through with a driver's license and a birth certificate, which is how it used to be (sometimes just one or the other would do back in the good old days).
the pamphlet ... didn't say anything about a passport being required
Maybe it was a different pamphlet, then. This one does list a passport as being one option. It is one of very few documents you can use on its own to get through - most other documents listed require something else (with the enhanced driver's license being a notable exception).
At any rate, it sounds like we both cross often from NY to Canada. I prefer not to take too many chance with US CBP - and I see the new license as a win in my situation, since I could use that and not worry about my passport. Of course, YMMV.
It's just 4 meaningless letters now.
Does that mean that we can rearrange them any way we like? XBMC == XMBC == XCBM == XCMB == MBCX == CXMB == CMXB == BMXC ad naseum?
They just wanted to see if you were paying attention.
I was paying attention only enough to try to figure out wtf the product was. But when the product name changes every other line, its hard to do that.
XBMC 'Atlantis' Beta 1 Released, Now Cross-Platform
First line:
last year's promise of XMBC
Then later:
XBMC Media Center
And finally:
through the XMBC Media Center site
I guess someone was so excited about the product that they couldn't take the time to ensure they spelled it consistently.
I post on /. its a given that I don't RTFA
Naturally
But being as that was an obvious question, that was not addressed by the summary, one really should have chosen to RTFA before speculating wildly on it.
10 courses cant get you a degree, just a bunch of credits you'll probably never use. Guess I'm still stuck shelling out 16k a year to go to UB.
If you RTFA, you'll see that you don't receive Stanford credit for taking courses this way (even though you can access the exams).
Last I heard Canada is now requiring passports.
Unless they changed that requirement in the past two months, no, they don't require passports for land crossings.
The passport requirement for the US-Canada land crossing is only to get back into the US. The requirements for American entry into Canada by land state that you can enter Canada without a passport, provided you have the required documentation (a driver's license along with a birth certificate will meet that).
I'm afraid you've heard wrong, or you heard the requirements for air or sea entry, which could be different. However, here in upstate New York, it is common to cross into Canada by land, which is how all of my crossings have been into Canada for the past several years.
the residents have the option to get the cheaper RFID-free license? Who's going to choose to willingly pay more
Many people forget how many cities in Upstate New York are close to the border. I cross the border on average 2-3 times per year by car myself. Currently I have to carry my passport to get back in - if I could go back to just carrying my driver's license, I would be much happier. Loosing a driver's license is a pretty minor expense in comparison to loosing a passport - and driver's licenses are generally replaced quite quickly here in NY state.
I live in Upstate New York and cross by land into Canada at least 2-3 times annually. I would much prefer to not have to worry about my passport for those crossings, and this fits that need for me. Regular license + $30 is still quite a bit less than what I paid for my passport (or what I would pay for a replacement if I were to loose it).
They are often in the private impound lots. Some areas (such as Minneapolis, MN) have essentially legalized auto theft, provided it is done by a for-profit impound lot.
and just because something can't be sold, doesn't then make the object "illegal".
You said they couldn't be sold legally. How exactly do you define that as being different from the object being illegal itself?
conspiracy theory-esque delusions
I would love to know how you came to that conclusion. Where exactly did I propose a conspiracy theory?
Oh, yeah. I didn't.
I don't know how exactly I managed to piss you off so badly. I've never seen anyone take a discussion on diesel engines as a personal attack, but I guess you prove yet again that there is a first time for everything.
No wonder someone here on slashdot on my friends list marked you as a foe - you're too high strung to manage a conversation without jumping to wild allegations.
Hell, unless you have something against diesel engines, or wanted to never see one sold here, we probably started off this conversation in agreement.
But you're free to your own opinion, even if it has no basis in reality.
I believe it was circa 2007 there were practically NONE that could be legally sold.
My friend who owns a 2003 Jetta diesel would be stunned to learn that her car is illegal. I suspect her VW dealer and her insurance agent would also find that surprising.
I suspect what you are thinking of is the more recent tightening of emissions standards that came before the requirement of low-sulfur diesel fuel at the pumps. There was a short period - about 3 years - where it was indeed almost impossible to sell a diesel car in the US because of the combination of lousy sulfur-laden diesel and the tightened emissions standards. Once low-sulfur became the norm it became much, much easier to meet the emissions requirements nationwide.
But you can find diesel sedans and coupes from VW and Mercedes that were sold perfectly legal between 1980 and approximately 2004.
. And after a decade without nearly any diesel automobiles sold in the US, makers found there was no existing market and have just barely yet started attempting to build one.
Check with your local VW dealer. They will tell you there have been diesel automobiles sold in the US. For that matter, Mercedes-Benz had diesel sedans through the 80s and 90s (not sure if they are currently available here).
I'm willing to agree that there was plenty wrong with the diesel fuel sold in the US not-so-long ago. But there certainly was a market for diesel cars; just one that was ignored by many auto manufacturers.
Right now some VW dealers are reporting wait lists several months long for diesel Jettas.
Server 2008 is the same kernel as Vista.
If the Vista kernel was all that people were running, would people be so disappointed with Vista?
I would say no. Because there is a lot more expected of an OS than just the kernel, in most cases. And that is doubly true when the name of your operating system includes the word "windows", since then the operating system includes the kernel, the gui, and several other things that wouldn't be considered as integral to the operating system in other camps.
Cray CX1, a compact supercomputer running Windows HPC Server 2008.
Apparently even a Cray can't run Vista?
Unfortunately, many people aren't aware of the progress that diesel engines have made in the past 30 years. And it would seem some of those uninformed people are working for the big 3 automakers.
What? The "big 3" are in fact very successfully selling numerous diesel vehicles around the world. They just never introduce them to the American market.
Indeed, they are selling a lot of diesels in countries outside of North America.
However, the big 3 anticipate that consumers in the US will have a negative predisposition towards diesel, and hence don't even try.
Although if you look at what the automakers - both domestic and foreign - offer, you'll see that it is an opinion that has permeated more than just the big 3. When is the last time you saw a BMW or Jaguar in the US with a diesel? How about a Toyota or a Nissan? Or a motorcycle? Those are all available as diesel in other countries.
But yet the manufacturers chose not to sell them here. And if you've noticed the Smart cars (sold by Mercedes in North America) you may notice that they are available as diesels everywhere but the US. There are even numerous Smarts running around in Canada with diesels. Chrysler has made similar moves with the Liberty and the Caliber, to name just two.
I would say it appears that the marketing trolls in the automobile companies (around the world) have it set in their minds that Americans don't want diesel. They still seem stuck in the mindset from 5 or more years ago that the only vehicles that sell well in the states weigh 6,000 pounds or more and get no more than 10 mpg.
If you live in a city or small town where diesel costs more than gasoline, you're getting SCREWED.
I suspect that might have a lot to do with the fact that the US government subsidizes the hell out of the gasoline industry to (try to) bring us extra-cheap gasoline.
After all, we have two oil men in the white house right now. If they can't keep the prices down, well, we might actually do something in this country. (ignoring the fact that prices have tripled since they took office)
I still miss my smog belching 6.9l. All kinds of fun when some punk in a Honda pulls along side you and fires up the boomity boom music.
No such thing as too powerful of a retaliation in that kind of situation.
There's no way their sewing machine motor can beat 400 ft/lbs off the line.
I've always thought the hon-duhs were more like chainsaws, myself. Alternatively, considering the prevalence of lawnmowers from the same company, I've often wondered if some of the slow-crawling sedans have the lawnmower engines instead...
Since they wanted me to listen to their music so badly, I used to blow smoke at them. Usually in the driver's window and out the passenger's window. :-)
That may be the single most hilarious automotive comment I've ever seen. Images in my head of annoying kids with spiky hair, listening to crappy music while choking on sulfur ... you made my day!
1985 Ford Escort diesel (U.S., not the European Escort) that claimed ~50MPG
I knew a guy who worked in Florida who used to own an Escort diesel wagon. He said it was a pretty damned good car - 50mpg and he did somewhere over 200,000 miles on it before getting rid of it.
Though I've never seen one firsthand...
We use to own a BMW diesel and had to plug it in for the heater every winter.
What year was the BMW diesel? And where on earth do you live?
I knew multiple people who owned VW diesels (Jettas and Golfs) in Minnesota and they never had problems with them in Minnesota winters, even storing them outside.
Plus I might add here diesel is more expensive than regular gas.
True, diesel is more expensive. But it can actually be less expensive per mile to run on diesel. For example, where I am now I can buy unleaded gas for around $3.60 per gallon. Diesel goes for $4.30 per gallon. My wife drives a Jetta with a gas engine, it gets 30mpg. This works out to $.12 per mile on fuel costs. The Jetta is also available with a diesel, it gets 40mpg. This makes for $.1075 per mile for fuel.
And of course with a little ingenuity, you could run on used cooking oil for a lot less.
The main one: The Fiesta ECOnetic runs on diesel.
Some people may remember that in the 70s and 80s, the big three were making several diesel-powered sedans for the American market. Some of these vehicles are still operating, because the diesel engines have very good longevity.
However, it is the negative publicity that those old diesels attained that keeps diesel relegated so low in the US. Those cars in the 70s and 80s made terrible mileage (they were most if not all 8cyl diesels). They spewed noxious exhaust enough to make coal power plants look clean. And they accelerated like Mack trucks propelled by hamsters.
Unfortunately, many people aren't aware of the progress that diesel engines have made in the past 30 years. And it would seem some of those uninformed people are working for the big 3 automakers.
Then perhaps the page would have withstood being slashdotted. Instead their poor server is a smoldering pile of nothingness - but hey their gaming laptops are 5up3r 1337 ! woot!
We've had them for a long, long time.
Oh, wait that was pocket projectors? I'm sorry. I was only off my one consonant.
I remember when I worked a CompUSA, back when they were the exclusive retailer for Apple. We generally tried to keep one Apple specialist on staff at all times.
However, he was usually outnumbered by Apple fanboys that came in to the store to spread the good word of Apple, for no pay at all. Apparently local Apple owners were so in love with their Apples that they were willing to come in and preach the word of how much they loved their Apple, just for the fun of it.
And yes, of course the fanboys sometimes new more than our Apple specialist on staff.
But now Microsoft is going to pay fanboys to go in to retailers and preach the gospel. That really says something when the product from Microsoft cannot build the fandom that Apple had 10 or more years ago.
Disclaimer - I use neither Apple nor Microsoft products in my own personal use.
If a boss I don't entirely trust demanded my password, I'd offer to upgrade his account to the same privileges at mine, but he'd NOT get MY password.
One could also point out to them that
as CEO/CFO/PHB/PITA of this company, you have physical access to the servers
which of course trumps passwords for many operating systems.