It is obvious to anyone with two brain cells to rub together.
However, the US government - all three branches - does not do right or wrong, it only does what it can, and it can do a lot. It is an entirely amoral entity.
It seems to me that Uber should be a good indicator of a society's acceptance of change, creative destruction, diversity and growth. In theory, this should correlate with economic growth, prosperity and hence general return on investment in that region.
I appeal for a dismal scientist to study this correlation. I understand that proving my hypothesis may be a multi-year or multi-decade project.
The Executive and Legislative branches (D and/or R) long ago demonstrated that they don't give a shit about the People and the Constitution.
However, many had the naïve belief that a neutral Judiciacy, in particular the SCOTUS, acted as a bulwark against the tyrannical tendencies on the hill and in the White House.
Now the scales have fallen from our eyes, and it is blatantly clear that the judges have totally abdicated their responsibility to protect and keep the Republic. They are as rotten as the politicians and no longer deserve our respect. The ultimate consequences will take many years to play out, but they will and it will not be pretty.
Modify or examine packets? Block ports? Throttle based on destination, content, protocol or port? Gather metadata or otherwise log? Provide data to 3-letter agencies without warrant?
You can make the same argument for streaming audio, video, cloud services, p2p and internet of things. If you can block one, you can block all. No, the problem of email needs more finesse, no brute force.
Unkind people might say that Google is holding his mail hostage until he pays up and gets an account with them. Unkind people might regard this as evil.
Network neutrality demands that things work, without having to pay for extra services that should not be needed, or jumping through hoops.
In the USA the same argument is made regarding showing identification to vote. Why not, you have to have an ID to drive, get on an airplane, etc., etc?
The correct reasoning is that I don't need photo ID to vote, so I don't need ID to fly or to drive. (I can understand when you need to demonstrate competency if public may be put at risk.)
This is why you should not disregard the tinfoil hat slippery-slopers.
Federal prosecutors in February accused two of the biggest US honey processors - Honey Solutions of Texas and Groeb Farms Inc of Michigan - of buying illegal Chinese imports of the product in order to avoid being assessed tens of millions of dollars under the anti-dumping duties. The companies were fined a total of $3 million but, under deferred-prosecution agreements, won't face further penalties if they don't repeat the conduct alleged.
Also charged were five individuals, including four US honey brokers, who prosecutors say took part in a scheme that led to the evasion of more than $180 million in duties and the sale of honey containing an antibiotic not approved in the US.
If only there existed a solution for the problem of trustless transactions! If someone could write a white paper setting out an algorithm, what a boon it would be....
My object all sublime I shall achieve in time — To let the punishment fit the crime — The punishment fit the crime; And make each prisoner pent Unwillingly represent A source of innocent merriment! Of innocent merriment!
The advertising quack who wearies With tales of countless cures, His teeth, I've enacted, Shall all be extracted By terrified amateurs.
The whole purpose of juries is to create the possibility of nullification. However, the government hates this limitation of its preferably unfettered powers and tries to prevent jurors being informed of their right to strike down unjust prosecution.
I have taken to quoting Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis.
To declare that in the administration of criminal law the end justifies the means to declare that the Government may commit crimes in order to secure conviction of a private criminal would bring terrible retribution.
Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent.
Our government... teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.
The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding.
1. The service you provide is Internet. Therefore, no screwing with packets, strict network neutrality, no port blocking, no prohibition on uses such as servers. In short, plain bandwidth at a price that does not discriminate between customers. 2. You do not regulate yourselves. 3. There are no barriers to future entrants to the market that do not apply to you.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you the same guys cheering the disruption of fossilized business models by foreign upstarts?
It is obvious to anyone with two brain cells to rub together.
However, the US government - all three branches - does not do right or wrong, it only does what it can, and it can do a lot. It is an entirely amoral entity.
Why is insurance expensive?
It seems to me that Uber should be a good indicator of a society's acceptance of change, creative destruction, diversity and growth. In theory, this should correlate with economic growth, prosperity and hence general return on investment in that region.
I appeal for a dismal scientist to study this correlation. I understand that proving my hypothesis may be a multi-year or multi-decade project.
TIA
The Executive and Legislative branches (D and/or R) long ago demonstrated that they don't give a shit about the People and the Constitution.
However, many had the naïve belief that a neutral Judiciacy, in particular the SCOTUS, acted as a bulwark against the tyrannical tendencies on the hill and in the White House.
Now the scales have fallen from our eyes, and it is blatantly clear that the judges have totally abdicated their responsibility to protect and keep the Republic. They are as rotten as the politicians and no longer deserve our respect. The ultimate consequences will take many years to play out, but they will and it will not be pretty.
This will be the real test.
Modify or examine packets?
Block ports?
Throttle based on destination, content, protocol or port?
Gather metadata or otherwise log?
Provide data to 3-letter agencies without warrant?
Mine was kind enough to help me punch myself before giving him my lunch money.
Why support a racist and misandric bunch of SJWs? This ends up perpetuating stereotypes, while creating resentment all around.
Six comments so far, and all very nice to AT&T. I would have expected more hating.
I'll try: fuck 'em.
You can make the same argument for streaming audio, video, cloud services, p2p and internet of things. If you can block one, you can block all. No, the problem of email needs more finesse, no brute force.
Unkind people might say that Google is holding his mail hostage until he pays up and gets an account with them. Unkind people might regard this as evil.
Network neutrality demands that things work, without having to pay for extra services that should not be needed, or jumping through hoops.
So I take it you are not in favor of net neutrality?
Ok with things costing more simply because corporations fear no consequences for their actions?
Weiners!
In the USA the same argument is made regarding showing identification to vote. Why not, you have to have an ID to drive, get on an airplane, etc., etc?
The correct reasoning is that I don't need photo ID to vote, so I don't need ID to fly or to drive. (I can understand when you need to demonstrate competency if public may be put at risk.)
This is why you should not disregard the tinfoil hat slippery-slopers.
Federal prosecutors in February accused two of the biggest US honey processors - Honey Solutions of Texas and Groeb Farms Inc of Michigan - of buying illegal Chinese imports of the product in order to avoid being assessed tens of millions of dollars under the anti-dumping duties. The companies were fined a total of $3 million but, under deferred-prosecution agreements, won't face further penalties if they don't repeat the conduct alleged.
Also charged were five individuals, including four US honey brokers, who prosecutors say took part in a scheme that led to the evasion of more than $180 million in duties and the sale of honey containing an antibiotic not approved in the US.
China Daily USA 07/01/2013
If only there existed a solution for the problem of trustless transactions! If someone could write a white paper setting out an algorithm, what a boon it would be....
My object all sublime
I shall achieve in time —
To let the punishment fit the crime —
The punishment fit the crime;
And make each prisoner pent
Unwillingly represent
A source of innocent merriment!
Of innocent merriment!
The advertising quack who wearies
With tales of countless cures,
His teeth, I've enacted,
Shall all be extracted
By terrified amateurs.
The whole purpose of juries is to create the possibility of nullification. However, the government hates this limitation of its preferably unfettered powers and tries to prevent jurors being informed of their right to strike down unjust prosecution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...
http://reason.com/blog/2014/10...
Listen, if you are not even allowed to pump your own gas, your state deserves to be the pits.
Oops sorry, I take that back. Americans are too stupid to use them - stop at the entrance, don't indicate, panic when the exit nears.
So you are placing the presumption of innocence on the city?
I have taken to quoting Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis.
To declare that in the administration of criminal law the end justifies the means to declare that the Government may commit crimes in order to secure conviction of a private criminal would bring terrible retribution.
Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent.
Our government... teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.
The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding.
1. The service you provide is Internet. Therefore, no screwing with packets, strict network neutrality, no port blocking, no prohibition on uses such as servers. In short, plain bandwidth at a price that does not discriminate between customers.
2. You do not regulate yourselves.
3. There are no barriers to future entrants to the market that do not apply to you.
I was not aware that teledildonics was that far advanced.
What weight can a woman lift? I guess 50 kg (on earth, yes I know the difference between mass and weight).
What weight can a man lift? I guess 100 kg.
What is the range of 90% of weights that could need lifting in an emergency? Anything from 1 to 1000 kg - guessing again.
So men are only useful for a range between 50 and 100 kg, which is (100 - 50) / 1000 = 5% of the time.
Not worth taking a man, I say.