But the debate here is not if a city should decide whether or not to offer wifi paid by the taxpayers, it's if the government has the right to ban it altogether.
well.. they aren't banning it, they are banning themselves from providing it. The county and municipal government's authority is derived, at least in Texas, from the state. The cities have a bit more breathing room than counties, but still usually cannot do anything unless the state approves.
And if it passes, and the government service sucks as badly as you think it will, private companies will come along and offer better service and make tons of money.
No company can compete via price against a government monopoly. Whether it ends up a failure or not, the private wi-fi providers will only be competing over the wealthy customers. It's a bit like schools; when was the last time you saw a private school compete over price?
Everyone who isn't wealthy will end up with sub-par government controlled and outdated technology because it's "free".
The problem with legally proving what you say is either true, or "fair comment", is that it ignores legal expenses. Untrue or unfair speech should be countered with public argument, not lawyers. Government cannot solve what is ultimately the root problem.. that people shouldn't immediately trust what they hear. Defamation laws will only serve to worsen that problem by teaching the public to be gullible.
As a Libertarian Texan, I must say that I respect Ron Paul for staying level headed after 9/11.
Do you really think that the whole Senate and House voted on something no one had seen?
Do you really think they often read the bills they vote on? Remember, they voted for the PATRIOT act in the hysteria a bit over a month after 9/11. The sponsor/cosponsor of the bill and the party leaders probably read it.
"It's my understanding the bill wasn't printed before the vote -- at least I couldn't get it. They played all kinds of games, kept the House in session all night, and it was a very complicated bill. Maybe a handful of staffers actually read it, but the bill definitely was not available to members before the vote." -- Ron Paul R(TX)
> The government is not intrinsically evil.
> The perversion of the government by corporations is.
If the government didn't have the power that it does, then corporations wouldn't pervert it... there would be no reason to. exactly like the quote said:
"the problem isn't the abuse of power, it's the power to abuse"
The government will always be corrupt, because the corporations will always be more involved with it.
yea, all the autotools were tough for me to get into, but the documentation isn't bad. There is a whole book available online to help: The Goat Book (GNU Autoconf, Automake, & Libtool)
Re:Where the checkpoints are - magic explained
on
Business Under Fire
·
· Score: 1
you can see the same thing in the U.S.
along I-10 by the Mexico border they have the entire highway diverted to a checkpoint where some guy asks you a few questions... like where you are going, whether you are a citizen, etc. I think I ran into 3 or 4 of them on my way from Texas to California.
I've been using it to browse linux source code lately: here
from the site: A general purpose source code indexer and cross-referencer that provides web-based browsing of source code with links to the definition and usage of any identifier. Supports multiple languages.
except for lack of syntax hilighting, it works well.
they don't know who the terrorists are.
In order to find out that you aren't a terrorist, they have to monitor your communications.
I'd rather they not assume that I'm a terrorist.
Does the word "terrorist" legally mean anything anyway?
It's probably yet another case of them using ambiguity to assume more power.
For example:
"Expressions of views that do not involve a "clear and present danger of serious substantive evil" come under the protection of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of the press."
Is that legal?? Your Honor, my client pleads Not Guilty of all serious substantive evil.
The grandparent poster's sig, I believe, was in response to Libertarians recent stance against the war in Iraq. Which, in my opinion, was offense. My whole point was that stoping a panzer division requires defense, not offense.
Q:How many libertarians does it take to stop a Panzer division? A:None, obviously market forces will take care of it.
Libertarians believe in a stong national defence.. not offence. I'm aware a strong offence makes for a stronger defence, but experience shows that we can't trust politicians with deadly force.
At a bit less than 40% of the precincts reporting in Ohio, I saw David Cobb's votes go from around 10,000 down to ZERO. After that, I started taking screenshots of the Ohio state departments website.
Slashdot Mirror
But the debate here is not if a city should decide whether or not to offer wifi paid by the taxpayers, it's if the government has the right to ban it altogether.
well.. they aren't banning it, they are banning themselves from providing it. The county and municipal government's authority is derived, at least in Texas, from the state. The cities have a bit more breathing room than counties, but still usually cannot do anything unless the state approves.
-metric
And if it passes, and the government service sucks as badly as you think it will, private companies will come along and offer better service and make tons of money.
No company can compete via price against a government monopoly. Whether it ends up a failure or not, the private wi-fi providers will only be competing over the wealthy customers. It's a bit like schools; when was the last time you saw a private school compete over price?
Everyone who isn't wealthy will end up with sub-par government controlled and outdated technology because it's "free".
-metric
The problem with legally proving what you say is either true, or "fair comment", is that it ignores legal expenses. Untrue or unfair speech should be countered with public argument, not lawyers. Government cannot solve what is ultimately the root problem.. that people shouldn't immediately trust what they hear. Defamation laws will only serve to worsen that problem by teaching the public to be gullible.
thanks for the links, btw.
-metric
But a better question is, how would they enforce it?
they don't need to enforce it everywhere.
the value is in their ability to enforce it when they or their friends are being slandered.
sedition laws reborn.
-metric
Do you really think they often read the bills they vote on?
Remember, they voted for the PATRIOT act in the hysteria a bit over a month after 9/11.
The sponsor/cosponsor of the bill and the party leaders probably read it.
Representatives vote the way their party votes.
-metric
in regards to the patriot act:
-metric
You are making very good arguments, and it is a shame this is so deep in some unknown thread on slashdot that nobody will read.
Rather than replying to your post here, I'm going to move my arguments to a more appropriate forum for debate:
government is worse than corporations
-metric
wikitrivia anyone?
-metric
> The government is not intrinsically evil.
> The perversion of the government by corporations is.
If the government didn't have the power that it does, then corporations wouldn't pervert it... there would be no reason to. exactly like the quote said:
"the problem isn't the abuse of power, it's the power to abuse"
The government will always be corrupt, because the corporations will always be more involved with it.
-metric
the Green Party?
So you are saying the government is screwing up, and I agree, and you want the government to have more power?
"the problem isn't the abuse of power, it's the power to abuse."
they can't screw up so royally if they don't have the power to do so.
I say vote for the constitution and a smaller federal government...
-metric
yea, all the autotools were tough for me to get into, but the documentation isn't bad.
There is a whole book available online to help:
The Goat Book (GNU Autoconf, Automake, & Libtool)
It's just macros anyway..
-metric
Those high tech Japanese Toilets...
now that is innovation.
-metric
you can see the same thing in the U.S.
along I-10 by the Mexico border they have the entire highway diverted to a checkpoint where some guy asks you a few questions...
like where you are going, whether you are a citizen, etc. I think I ran into 3 or 4 of them on my way from Texas to California.
-metric
THEY AREN'T STEALING!
are you new here or something?
-metric
how about LXR?
I've been using it to browse linux source code lately: here
from the site:
A general purpose source code indexer and cross-referencer that provides web-based browsing of source code with links to the definition and usage of any identifier. Supports multiple languages.
except for lack of syntax hilighting, it works well.
-metric
I think you are the second user, besides me.
thanks btw, I guess I should start advertising soon.
-metric
Slashdot: Constitutional Democracy
Wikipedia: Anarchy
CNN: Corporate Monarchy
-metric
how could you setup something akin to a formal debate in the form of a web forum?
I didn't want to release it yet,
so please don't kill it:
example:'The "two party" system is bad for the US.'
it really isn't ready, but I'm actively working on it.
-metric
they don't know who the terrorists are.
In order to find out that you aren't a terrorist,
they have to monitor your communications.
I'd rather they not assume that I'm a terrorist.
Does the word "terrorist" legally mean anything anyway?
It's probably yet another case of them using ambiguity to assume more power.
For example:
"Expressions of views that do not involve a "clear and present danger of serious substantive evil" come under the protection of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of the press."
Is that legal??
Your Honor, my client pleads Not Guilty of all serious substantive evil.
-metric
The grandparent poster's sig, I believe, was in response to Libertarians recent stance against the war in Iraq. Which, in my opinion, was offense. My whole point was that stoping a panzer division requires defense, not offense.
-metric
Q:How many libertarians does it take to stop a Panzer division? A:None, obviously market forces will take care of it.
Libertarians believe in a stong national defence.. not offence. I'm aware a strong offence makes for a stronger defence, but experience shows that we can't trust politicians with deadly force.
-metric
At a bit less than 40% of the precincts reporting in Ohio, I saw David Cobb's votes go from around 10,000 down to ZERO. After that, I started taking screenshots of the Ohio state departments website.
you can see a few of them here: http://64.71.168.78/
Was Cobb a write-in in Ohio? Maybe that explains it. The ohio state department's website still only shows Cobb with 24 votes
-metric
to early vote for Badnarik. (Houston, TX)
-metric
Anyone know of other Virtual Linux hosting sites besides Redwood Virtual?
-metric
using SDL to draw 2D bitmaps on top of my OpenGL window.
don't use SDL's method for blitting SDL_Surface's over OpenGL.. it's too slow.
do your 2D with OpenGL (textured polys).
-metric