It has always been a battle. Here are some topics to Google: Gen. Smedley Butler, the Business Plot of 1933, Eisenhower, and the Military-Industrial Complex. Most people do not realize that one of the political hot topics of Roosevelt's day was fascism and our governments succeptability to its vile influence. Mussolini ended up as a dangling lamp post ornament for a reason. Roosevelt and the New Deal (along with other events, like the passage of the now ill-applied Sherman Act) went a long way to slowing fascism in America. So have labor unions back when they were unions and not just another lobby spreading money (after siphoning out as much as they can for union leadership). This is not a new fight. Fascism began to rise again in the post-WWII era when American industry realized how profitable war can be if you are just unethical enough to not care that people die so you can drive a Maibach and live on Martha's Vineyard. It is, however, a battle that was lost the day Bush was appointed President against the popular vote. In the past 8 years you have seen the fruition of both Regan's deregulation legacy and the perpetuation of the clearly fascist Project for a New American Century's agenda. Really want your blood to boil? Read up on that group of weasels. At least the Nazis and the Fasci Italiani di Combattimento didn't have a website.
Rights may exist separate from technology, but when technology allows others to usurp your rights, there is a most certain impact on the legal system. For example, you have a right to life. You also have a right to bear arms. Guns can take that right to life from you, either at your own hands or at the hands of others. When the 2nd Amendment was drafted we relied as a nation on civilian militia and the dominant weapon was the flintlock. It was fine for the period in which it was drafted. I am sure they would have drafted that Amendment differently if they knew about the MP-5 and.50 caliber sniper rifles with UV/IR scopes that most anyone can buy today.
Wrong. Corporate rights have gotten out of control and only a blind man would assert otherwise. Enron. Global Crossing. Halliburton. Blackwater. Countrywide. SCO. No, defending corporate rights at this point is only for those unable to see the damage being done to our political systems by allowing a legal fiction to have rights that are in any way comparable to a living being. Or you have a vested interest in letting corporations control the government instead of citizens. There is a fundamental flaw in the concept of corporations and that is in that the stronger you create a shield against liability, the more you encourage sociopathic behavior in those shielded. When they ask themselves "should I do this? It's unethical and possibly illegal, but very profitable", why would they respond with anything but "who cares as long as it turns a profit" when there are no appreciable consequences? There are no appreciable consequences because corporations have paid lobbyists to get the legislation they want to avoid punishment. In many cases, lobbyists and industry insiders are writing the legislation themselves. Or they have someone on the inside already. Retroactive immunity for telecoms? Please! Thomas Jefferson is spinning in his grave. Is there a need for a structure that limits some types of corporate liability in order to foster R&D? Absolutely. However, the current system that allows corporations superior access to the Right to Petition, either explicitly or by their fundamental structure, are enabling fascism. So tell me, Paul, do you have enough money to hire a high power lobby firm to ply your Senator and Representatives with money and favors or do you have enough cash about to handle spreading the graft on your own like the other big money individual "campaign contributors"? If not, you are just as voiceless as any other citizen. The only difference being is that you don't seem to mind that "We the People" has been replaced with "We the Corporate".
I would think the most obvious application would be as a lining for highway and rail beds, maybe even sidewalks and streets in some places. True, the variations in traffic load would determine your capacity for a C/B analysis to decide where to install the systems but if the carbon cost to manufacture the material is offset by the by the "carbon-less" power generated (discounting vehicle consumption), then why not take advantage of all that free vibration? I can see where this might be able to generate substantial amounts of power in major metropolitan areas either for direct consumer consumption or to run latent and ubiquitous powered infrastructure like traffic signals (with a grid back up, natch).
Slashdot Mirror
the audacity of bullshit.
It has always been a battle. Here are some topics to Google: Gen. Smedley Butler, the Business Plot of 1933, Eisenhower, and the Military-Industrial Complex. Most people do not realize that one of the political hot topics of Roosevelt's day was fascism and our governments succeptability to its vile influence. Mussolini ended up as a dangling lamp post ornament for a reason. Roosevelt and the New Deal (along with other events, like the passage of the now ill-applied Sherman Act) went a long way to slowing fascism in America. So have labor unions back when they were unions and not just another lobby spreading money (after siphoning out as much as they can for union leadership). This is not a new fight. Fascism began to rise again in the post-WWII era when American industry realized how profitable war can be if you are just unethical enough to not care that people die so you can drive a Maibach and live on Martha's Vineyard. It is, however, a battle that was lost the day Bush was appointed President against the popular vote. In the past 8 years you have seen the fruition of both Regan's deregulation legacy and the perpetuation of the clearly fascist Project for a New American Century's agenda. Really want your blood to boil? Read up on that group of weasels. At least the Nazis and the Fasci Italiani di Combattimento didn't have a website.
Rights may exist separate from technology, but when technology allows others to usurp your rights, there is a most certain impact on the legal system. For example, you have a right to life. You also have a right to bear arms. Guns can take that right to life from you, either at your own hands or at the hands of others. When the 2nd Amendment was drafted we relied as a nation on civilian militia and the dominant weapon was the flintlock. It was fine for the period in which it was drafted. I am sure they would have drafted that Amendment differently if they knew about the MP-5 and .50 caliber sniper rifles with UV/IR scopes that most anyone can buy today.
Wrong. Corporate rights have gotten out of control and only a blind man would assert otherwise. Enron. Global Crossing. Halliburton. Blackwater. Countrywide. SCO. No, defending corporate rights at this point is only for those unable to see the damage being done to our political systems by allowing a legal fiction to have rights that are in any way comparable to a living being. Or you have a vested interest in letting corporations control the government instead of citizens. There is a fundamental flaw in the concept of corporations and that is in that the stronger you create a shield against liability, the more you encourage sociopathic behavior in those shielded. When they ask themselves "should I do this? It's unethical and possibly illegal, but very profitable", why would they respond with anything but "who cares as long as it turns a profit" when there are no appreciable consequences? There are no appreciable consequences because corporations have paid lobbyists to get the legislation they want to avoid punishment. In many cases, lobbyists and industry insiders are writing the legislation themselves. Or they have someone on the inside already. Retroactive immunity for telecoms? Please! Thomas Jefferson is spinning in his grave. Is there a need for a structure that limits some types of corporate liability in order to foster R&D? Absolutely. However, the current system that allows corporations superior access to the Right to Petition, either explicitly or by their fundamental structure, are enabling fascism. So tell me, Paul, do you have enough money to hire a high power lobby firm to ply your Senator and Representatives with money and favors or do you have enough cash about to handle spreading the graft on your own like the other big money individual "campaign contributors"? If not, you are just as voiceless as any other citizen. The only difference being is that you don't seem to mind that "We the People" has been replaced with "We the Corporate".
"You're" in that last reply. GAH! Does anyone have a schematic for a self-brewing auto-administrating coffee machine?
Paul, supporting corporate rights over civil rights has a name. Fascism. Look it up, Benito.
Like I said, if the C/B analysis passes muster. Snicker. Here's a hint. Don't reply like a smartass and I won't treat you like one.
I would think the most obvious application would be as a lining for highway and rail beds, maybe even sidewalks and streets in some places. True, the variations in traffic load would determine your capacity for a C/B analysis to decide where to install the systems but if the carbon cost to manufacture the material is offset by the by the "carbon-less" power generated (discounting vehicle consumption), then why not take advantage of all that free vibration? I can see where this might be able to generate substantial amounts of power in major metropolitan areas either for direct consumer consumption or to run latent and ubiquitous powered infrastructure like traffic signals (with a grid back up, natch).