Silicon Valley "Vultures", given their ultra intellect, should know better than anyone that can't sustain a viable economy without people who have money to spend on their services.
It is the drone owners who are forcing this on all of us, so the costs should be totally placed on them with licensing fees and fines for violating property and privacy rights. Really, none of this would be necessary if drone operators would just fly under the conditions you specify. So many though seem to think that they are entitled to fly their toys wherever they like.
Which is why in many jurisdictions owners of unlicensed dogs are fined many times more when there animals are out of control than owners of those that are licensed. This idea that idiots can fly their drones wherever they want really needs to be nipped in the bud now. And, from the gist of the comments here, the punishments for violations should be extremely harsh if their attitude of entitlement to the skies is to be curtailed.
How does it benefit you not to have regulations that prevent devices from buzzing about over your head? In my mind there should be no weight minimums. I simply do not want these things flying around without well enforced rules.
No, it is not madness. The overriding goal of business is to make money, and producing products at a lower cost does much to further that goal. Combine this with the overriding goal of consumers, which is to acquire the products that they want at the lowest price possible and you get the race to the bottom others in this thread have discussed. Only regulation can protect prices and wages. I hold internet access up as a shining example of this. If it weren't for government intervention we would be paying pennies and not dollars to participate in this debate.
When it comes to corporations and cost, there is much evidence suggests that it does. By the way, how many Apple products are manufactured in the U.S. again?
Free markets work by encouraging competition. It makes no sense for companies to pay exuberant salaries to U.S. workers when similar results can be had for far less by outsourcing to countries whose citizens expect a standard of living far more meager than Americans. The Prophets promise to trickle upon those who worship at their alters.
...are going to mourn the loss of those who hate them. My understanding, which may be wrong, is that fundamentalists of every religion hate all those who don't follow their beliefs. I can't recall any religion that proclaims that no matter what you believe, I expect you to get past the pearly gates.
People aren't saying that "XXX" doesn't benefit from high speed internet. It is well known that, after all, that the demand for porn has been a boon for increasing internet bandwidth. Crop futures on the other hand, maybe not so much.
I don't watch TV, can't get any reception here in the mountains and cable isn't out this far anyway:^)
I can assure you aren't missing much when it comes to TV. The advertisers got so upset with their commercials being interrupted by programming they decided to popup ads during the shows that were drawing the viewers as well.
The human race would get along just fine without it. Eventually males will be totally removed from the equation and human kind can progress without their weaknesses.
How is removing "Y" totally from the equation off topic? If a variable is unnecessary, it is unnecessary! Almost every expression of the male chromosome has led to weakness in the human genome.
Breeding out the "Y" chromosome can only help strengthen mankind. Just look at how many weaknesses such as autism have continued due to its continuance. What good does having males stuck in the basement dreaming of Amy do for the preservation of the species?
....life. I can see how females understand they are in charge after all. All it takes is synthesis of one chromosone to render half of humanity redundant. Perhaps in the end the worst parts of species will be breed out?
...for legacy applications, especially true in the closed source world where simple recompiles are not possible to do lack of source. Still one would think that Microsoft would have provided protection against holes that exist in its legacy systems. Perhaps even a simple walled chroot would suffice? Very few if any honest user applications really need access to system level permissions.
...try try again! It often takes many failures to achieve success. Edison experienced many disappointments before who chanced on a practical light bulb design.
Slashdot Mirror
Silicon Valley "Vultures", given their ultra intellect, should know better than anyone that can't sustain a viable economy without people who have money to spend on their services.
...everything they need to do their. jobs.
It is the drone owners who are forcing this on all of us, so the costs should be totally placed on them with licensing fees and fines for violating property and privacy rights. Really, none of this would be necessary if drone operators would just fly under the conditions you specify. So many though seem to think that they are entitled to fly their toys wherever they like.
Companies can fire people for such absurd behavior, regular homeowners can not.
You just might be one the good guys, so you should have no problems with registering to distinguish from the bad guys.
So we can all grab as much spectrum as we need, or lay fiber wherever we please?
Which is why in many jurisdictions owners of unlicensed dogs are fined many times more when there animals are out of control than owners of those that are licensed. This idea that idiots can fly their drones wherever they want really needs to be nipped in the bud now. And, from the gist of the comments here, the punishments for violations should be extremely harsh if their attitude of entitlement to the skies is to be curtailed.
How does it benefit you not to have regulations that prevent devices from buzzing about over your head? In my mind there should be no weight minimums. I simply do not want these things flying around without well enforced rules.
No, it is not madness. The overriding goal of business is to make money, and producing products at a lower cost does much to further that goal. Combine this with the overriding goal of consumers, which is to acquire the products that they want at the lowest price possible and you get the race to the bottom others in this thread have discussed. Only regulation can protect prices and wages. I hold internet access up as a shining example of this. If it weren't for government intervention we would be paying pennies and not dollars to participate in this debate.
Simple answer is those positions are cheaper outsourced as well. Who hasn't been desensitized to foreign accents by now?
Define "well distributed" please. The wealthy tend to define as 99% for them, 1% for everyone else.
When it comes to corporations and cost, there is much evidence suggests that it does. By the way, how many Apple products are manufactured in the U.S. again?
Free markets work by encouraging competition. It makes no sense for companies to pay exuberant salaries to U.S. workers when similar results can be had for far less by outsourcing to countries whose citizens expect a standard of living far more meager than Americans. The Prophets promise to trickle upon those who worship at their alters.
...are going to mourn the loss of those who hate them. My understanding, which may be wrong, is that fundamentalists of every religion hate all those who don't follow their beliefs. I can't recall any religion that proclaims that no matter what you believe, I expect you to get past the pearly gates.
People aren't saying that "XXX" doesn't benefit from high speed internet. It is well known that, after all, that the demand for porn has been a boon for increasing internet bandwidth. Crop futures on the other hand, maybe not so much.
I don't watch TV, can't get any reception here in the mountains and cable isn't out this far anyway :^)
I can assure you aren't missing much when it comes to TV. The advertisers got so upset with their commercials being interrupted by programming they decided to popup ads during the shows that were drawing the viewers as well.
So you deny that without the "Y" the human race would be far better off?
The human race would get along just fine without it. Eventually males will be totally removed from the equation and human kind can progress without their weaknesses.
How is removing "Y" totally from the equation off topic? If a variable is unnecessary, it is unnecessary! Almost every expression of the male chromosome has led to weakness in the human genome.
Breeding out the "Y" chromosome can only help strengthen mankind. Just look at how many weaknesses such as autism have continued due to its continuance. What good does having males stuck in the basement dreaming of Amy do for the preservation of the species?
....life. I can see how females understand they are in charge after all. All it takes is synthesis of one chromosone to render half of humanity redundant. Perhaps in the end the worst parts of species will be breed out?
The "Three Laws" will protect us, just ask VIKI :-)
Pretty damn close to spot on. Though nobody's budget is unlimited, the bigger and more affluent the society the more financial risks it can afford.
...for legacy applications, especially true in the closed source world where simple recompiles are not possible to do lack of source. Still one would think that Microsoft would have provided protection against holes that exist in its legacy systems. Perhaps even a simple walled chroot would suffice? Very few if any honest user applications really need access to system level permissions.
...try try again! It often takes many failures to achieve success. Edison experienced many disappointments before who chanced on a practical light bulb design.