Also I've seen some shiny travel trailers made out of stainless or nickel plate that's not peeled, but those are small, expensive, and they are meant for more like a desert area to reflect the heat of the Sun.
Reflective coatings work both ways... They also keep heat inside from being radiated out.
I'm currently looking to sell just such a trailer, in good shape. 1950s, 8x36' in Southern California.
Probably the worst part about reverse osmosis is that it eliminates the water "taste" that people are used to because it gets rid of minerals as well.
The loss of minerals is a heath issue. The "taste" is hardly the "worst part" of doing this. And let's not forget that demineraled (RO) water will dissolve metal pipes, coffee machines, pots and pans, etc.
That's why they usually mix it with some other source like lake or ground water before it gets piped out to homes.
So, again, you're getting only a fraction of the minerals you used-to get out of drinking water.
RO should always involve carefully re-adding natural mineral content. Failing to do so is worse than not RO filtering the water in the first place.
Camping out in a nonresidence tent on your lot in the middle of winter to save a few bucks? There is a pill for that too!
There are 4-season tents that are well-insulated and stay nice and warm through mild winters just from body-heat. Active heating can make the colder winters comfortable, too. Heck, a -30F degree sleeping bag isn't that expensive, so you can stay pretty damn warm without any heater.
And is there some regulation forcing only tents on your lot? Most people also consider living in a travel-trailer to be "camping". They are cheap, can be quite comfortable, even in winter, even without direct utility hook-ups. Rain collection, grey water, small septic system, and solar power, can make your trailer camping semi-permanent with only minimal hassle.
I tasted the water in San Diego, Escondido, Ramona, and many MUCH MUCH more rural spots.
"Much more rural" than San Diego... You don't say?! Yeah, San Diego's water has tasted awful for many decades. That's hardly a good test. But they're the worst, not an example of the good stuff.
California water always wins top-honors in water-tasting competitions:
OpenBSD has been designed and built from the ground up to be nearly impervious to malicious intent.
No it hasn't. It gets lots of code audits, which eliminate buffer overflows and the like, but does nothing to prevent properly operating malicious software. You want "trusted" computing for security against internal threats, and OpenBSD doesn't do it. Something like RHEL with SELinux properly configured and working, would offer better resilience to the kinds of attacks in question.
OpenBSD was no more immune to the OpenSSL heartbleed bug than any other platform.
And if you're really paranoid or anal, keyboards are cheap to replace -- or randomly cycle different brands/models/styles of keyboards between a set of PCs at random intervals...
Oh good! Now all I need to do is find a way to insert my hacked keyboard into the bunch from your order, and I can pwn your airgapped network in short order.
Once my malware is in, of course it'll spread over the insecure (no updates for systems on an air-gapped network) private network. From there, it could just cause everything to self-destruct at a prearranged time, or it could start searching for ways to communicate data back to me... be it the disabled wifi on one single machine on the network, or optical, if a machine with a webcam on the internet happens to be facing towards any of the air-gapped systems. Hell, depending on what it controls, you could modulate a tiny amount of information into the power grid output, or similar.
I would have thought some of these should be airgapped for security reasons by design? Is it so hard to go to work these days that you have to hook it up to the outside?
These systems aren't just ignorantly plugged-in to an internet connection. But still, you NEED to be able to input data to them, including software updates, and you NEED to get data out, like real-time status updates sent to grid operators. Having someone typing-in every bit of data won't work, and connecting it to internet-connected systems by any method, such as RS-232 serial or others, or just sneakerneting with USB, DVD-Rs, etc., offers the possibility of hacking.
the CIA once destroyed a gas pipeline in 1982 by hacking malicious controls software into a system purchased by them from canada.
Your summary is just absolutely AWFUL. Obviously, no Canadian pipelines were damaged... Instead the CIA had a Canadian company sabotage their own SCADA software, knowing that the Soviet KGB was going to steal their pipeline control systems, with that software on it.
Secondly, it's a story from a single source, unconfirmed, that has been disputed by others. So it may actually have been shoddy construction, instead of sabotage, which doesn't support your claim:
now the cows have come home. America is finding itself on the receiving end of increasingly sophisticated attacks
Except the attacks were coming in hard and heavy, long before Stuxnet. It's incredibly ridiculous to claim that nobody else would be doing it, if the US didn't participate... It's just too tempting a target for the Chinese and Russians to miss-out on, and the US allowing itself to fall behind would be disastrous and negligent.
Its almost like less than 10% of the folks commenting here actually even clicked on the ruling.
But in good old internet style, that doesnt preclude them from commenting and making complete arses of themselves.
I don't blame "the internet", I blame Slashdot. The community used-to be above this kind of thing, and rational arguments, even supporting the unpopular side, would get modded-up and cut-through the noise. No longer.
Years of repeated and endless flamebait stories, with no point nor redeeming value to them, have helped to alienate valuable contributors, and cultivate a pool of noisy and opinionated ignorant flamers. After all, the later probably generate a lot more ad-impressions... Anyone trying to correct the misinformation just adds to the popularity of the flamebait article, and there goes more ad impressions for Dice, who will just keep doing whatever works.
No one is a member of a faith just because they call themselves a member.
In lieu of the organization saying otherwise, yes, self-identification is valid, sufficient, and the only real standard in the west. Unless she gets excommunicated, her self-identification as a Catholic is entirely sufficient.
A core Catholic teaching is that human life begins at conception.
No. "Life begins at conception" is an anti-abortion slogan, not at all Catholic canon, though they do similarly believe abortion is murder. Show me the 15th century tombstones for aborted fetuses...
Not that it's completely different, but the Catholic teaching is more all-encompassing, along the lines of "Sex is only allowed in honest attempts to bear children." If your anti-abortion slogan was canon, then using a condom (or other contraceptive that prevents initial conception) would be perfectly okay... but it is not.
"Thou shalt take the virgin with the fear of the Lord, moved rather for love of children than for lust, that in the seed of Abraham thou mayest obtain a blessing in children."
And while important, I wouldn't call it a "core" belief, on par with, say, monotheism, heaven, hell, etc, Ask a few Catholics what they think of Purgatory, or any of the less significant canon, and you'll always find a point of contention with the church, somewhere, with every believer.
Anybody want some real classic machines that have been in-service since the 80s? I've got about two dozen, and it may be a good time to start unloading them soon.
Pac-man, Ms Pac-Man, Centipede, Choplifter, Galaxian, Street Figher 2, etc.
Anybody got tips on unloading them? With something like eBay, it seems you either limit yourself to a tiny fraction of the audience for local-pickup only, or freight charges can dominate the sale price.
For anyone thinking about it, they're simpler than computers, and not too difficult to repair. The monitor caps seem to be the first thing to go, either suddenly a blank screen or just stretched beyond recognition, but a repair kit brings the picture back to normal.
You need to read what I've explained to you, rather than projecting your misconceptions onto what I've written.
Large scale pumped hydro isn't needed until/unless the world switches to 90%+ solar. Short of that, all is good. The US DoE has said so, and they know vastly more than you. Solar thermal can have several days of storage. Overnight, existing hydro easily provides the low baseload today, and it can be shut off whenever wind power is producing enough.
Solar IS peaking, because demand follows the sun in most of the world. Industry makes up 75% of demand, and they operate predominantly 8am-5pm, while the sun is shining the most. Dense office environments need air conditioning constantly, even through fall and into winter, and that tracks solar supplies quite nicely.
The research is out there. You don't need to imagine that it won't work. You can search the DoE's website for facts and figures for the US power grid. I'm willing to bet the Germans did research on the subject, too.
I know how the grid works, far better than you ever will, and your misreading or making bad assumptions in what I've written is just wasting my time. You are utterly wrong in most all of your assertions.
Fukushima greatest impact was deaths caused by an irrational evacuation
No, the large swaths of valuable land, left uninhabitable by humans for centuries, is the bigger impact.
Solar+wind means lots of natural gas or coal peaking power plants
That's complete nonsense. Solar IS the "peaking power plant".
solar rooftop joins together the two highest risk professions performed in large scale (roofing and electrician).
Both risks are very easily eliminated by proper regulations, forcing contractors to use proper safety equipment.
Solar+wind+hydro+biomass+geothermal can't run the worlds electrical grid without another 30 to 50 years of scientific advancement.
Also nonsense. In fact solar is the ONLY technology that can supply the projected demand a century in the future. It can supply ALL electrical demands, in combination with pumped hydro for extended solar minimums, without issue, just as quickly as the facilities can be built. Solana is a good model: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
The problem isn't having enough panels. Its also not having cheaper/higher efficiency panels.
Baseless crap. The current efficiencies are vastly more than necessary. The numbers have been run by a number of people many times, and only a very small landmass is needed for the entire world's current energy needs.
Its a humongous energy storage problem.
Thermal storage is well understood and has been in-use for years. Pumped hydro storage is well understood and deployed on a massive scale already.
you just refuse to see what is out of tune with your fundamentalist view of things.
That's funny coming from a nuclear zealot, who jumps on anyone who points out the problems with his preferred technology. And who is outright lying with a straight face, about the capabilities of renewables, since their use is cutting in to poor old nuclear power. Boo hoo.
San Onofre was decommissioned for political pressure.
"both reactors had to be shut down in January 2012 due to premature wear found on over 3,000 tubes in replacement steam generators"
You've got a funny definition of "political pressure".
France did nuclear and it works just fine.
Japan did nuclear, and it worked out just fine... until they had problems. Today, with the benefit of hindsight, nearly everyone would say it didn't work out quite so well.
Worldwide, there are over 400GW worth of nuclear generating capacity, while solar+wind worldwide is what, less than 10% that ?
PV panels didn't exist in the 50s. Solar and wind haven't had remotely as long to scale-up. They are now being installed at a break-neck pace, and will eventually dominate.
Nuclear is expensive upfront, but extremely cheap over the 60-80 years a new nuclear powerplant should operate if properly maintained.
Obviously you can't point to any nuclear power plants that have been operational for 80 years, so that's a BS theoretical figure.
Meanwhile, none of San Onofre's three units have operated for more than 30 years, before decommissioning. That's probably a more accurate figure for the life-span of a reactor. So I'd say you'll have to at least double your lifetime cost figures to be accurate.
Solar is an extremely lousy option for Germany.
Nobody mandated solar, people just decided it would work and be profitable. Germany got a lot of wind power built as well, but apparently solar also works well enough to be worth the investment.
The prices for electricity in Germany are insane, but there's no question that they need to get away from reliance on Russian natural gas as quickly as possible, and if solar helps that process along, so be it.
Depends on location, usage, and interest rates... In many locations (deserts, mostly), consumer rooftop PV solar absolutely is cheaper than buying grid power, after less than 20 years, without even counting the subsidizes.
Frankly, I'm not sure why Aereo thought that an array of tiny antennas was a "magic wand" to let them avoid fees
Arguing on a subject you are ignorant of, isn't a good way to go. Read the law, it specifically talks about shared antennas.
Since they are Supreme Court justices, they can utterly ignore political and corporate pressure and rule any way they damn well please
In theory, everyone else can, too. Reality is that they don't, though, because they all have something to gain. Supreme court justices routinely accept money, accommodations, and gifts from big organizations.
You said: "cable and satellite providers must pay retransmission fees, but Aereo avoided them."
Cable providers can avoid them in the same way Aereo did.
Aereo thought that because they were pulling the feed off of an individual broadcast antenna, they didn't have to pay the same fees
Aereo thought that following the law would keep them safe from the millions of dollars in lawyers the broadcasters would throw at them. Their legal interpretation remains sound. But under enough pressure and money, the courts will make anything legal, or illegal, to suit major multinational corporations, at the expense of startups.
Assuming this means Aereo will have to shut down now.
Actually, it may just mean live streaming of TV is off the table, but DVRing is okay.
Or it could mean you'll have to buy (or rent) an actual DVR and antenna which will be hosted in the data center on your behalf. On the plus side, this could mean the elimination of the geographic restrictions they currently have on the service...
Guess I'll have to figure out a way to get OTA reception, but from all the research I've done, where I live the signal's aren't very strong / reliable.
There are very few places in the US where that's a problem, and I bet Aereo hasn't covered any of them.
The most common problem is people living in multi-story apartments where the landlord can forbid you from installing a rooftop antenna, where reception will be best. Still, if you're above ground level, and have a balcony or just a window facing roughly in the same direction, you've got a hell of a good chance of being able to receive a good TV signal with a proper antenna.
TV Fool is invaluable for finding out if you'll be able to get decent reception:
If it reports signal strength greater than -110dBn at your location and at the height you'll be installing the antenna, there's an extremely good chance a relatively inexpensive antenna system like a Winegard 8800 (UHF) will offer you a good signal with minimal drop-outs.
UHF is easier in some ways, while VHF needs a large antenna that might not fit too well in a high-rise apartment, unless it can be attic or ceiling mounted out of the way, but still doable.
Just realize tvfool and my advice is general is NOT perfect. Co-channel interference can knock some channels out of contention, when they would otherwise be strong enough.
Personally I think we should have the UK model with a TV license. The programming is far superior and enriching to the minds of the citizenry.
PBS provides vastly superior content to anything you'll find in the UK. Frontline is probably the most "enriching" show available to anyone, anywhere in the world. Throw in Nova, American Experience, Secrets of the Dead, Nature, This Old House, Charlie Rose, History Detectives, etc., etc. Not to mention the absolute inundation of educational childrens programming, from the venerable Sesame Street to the more recent hours of educational cartoon shows.
You don't NEED commercial television, and can get your entire viewing time filled by PBS. So if you want the UK model so badly, why aren't you watching PBS? The answer will no-doubt be why the UK model won't work so well in the US. And that's not to mention that the UK is quickly adopting the US model with for-pay satellite television becoming pervasive.
The 30 minute nightly world news reports on the big 3 networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) are far superior to BBC or anything else, with BBC News having the standards of a tabloid, by comparison.
And don't get me started on all the TV license collection horror stories.
Aereo's workaround creates an inherently inequitable situation where cable and satellite providers must pay retransmission fees, but Aereo avoided them.
No, Cable companies could use their "OnDemand" capabilities to copy, precisely, what Aereo is doing. It just wouldn't be "Channel 7" on the dial anymore... Which really doesn't matter as most cable providers have switched to encrypted QAM, so older TVs can't receive it without a cable box in any case.
Hell, cable providers could even just include DOCSIS capabilities in their set-top boxes, and perform EXACTLY like Aereo, over the network.
Satellite providers have some technical limitations which would prevent doing the same thing as Aereo or cable, but they still have the right to negotiate pricing, and might be better off if local channel refused to offer them a decent license, and they just took local channels off the table, like they tried to do in the beginning before the Clinton-era government forced them to carry local channels.
Bullshit. It's a direct response to GP's stated claims.
I do not care if the entire world disagrees with me
Yeah, that's a common hallmark of just simply being wrong, and unwilling to accept it...
You're clearly arguing out of gross ignorance of the subject, asserting how things work in your fantasy world is the way things are supposed to work elsewhere. It's nonsense, and a waste of time.
It matters not how many judges or people (including the founders) agree with the violations
Yes it does. That's how it works. Laws are to be interpreted. They cannot be treated as a rigid computer program, mindlessly applied. How the founders MEANT something to be applied matters infinitely more than the particular wording.
The government only has the powers that the constitution grants it.
The government wrote the constitution, and has unlimited power to amend it. You're saying "the government only has the powers the government says it has". Besides, it's ridiculous to claim a piece of paper grants anyone any power.
When I said "the government," I obviously meant the US government.
Yes you did. You extremely narrowly construed your incorrect statement. Widening the scope of your claim just makes it patently obvious how ridiculous it really is.
The violation of the constitution and people's fundamental liberties is indeed nothing new, but that doesn't mean it's justified.
Claiming this particular violation is going to spell the end of the Union (while all previous ones did not) is utter nonsense.
The constitution is a suicide pact.
Damn near everyone disagrees with you.... Including the founders, who offered tools to amend it as needed for changing times.
Also notice that fundamental rights like freedom of speech are not limitless, despite those limits not being enumerated in the constitution. It's a framework, not a how-to.
It's the very document that grants the government any power
There are plenty of governments around the world, which do not have a constitution to speak of.
Slashdot Mirror
Silver is also popular, and there are camo tarps:
http://www.harborfreight.com/2...
http://www.harborfreight.com/1...
Reflective coatings work both ways... They also keep heat inside from being radiated out.
I'm currently looking to sell just such a trailer, in good shape. 1950s, 8x36' in Southern California.
The loss of minerals is a heath issue. The "taste" is hardly the "worst part" of doing this. And let's not forget that demineraled (RO) water will dissolve metal pipes, coffee machines, pots and pans, etc.
So, again, you're getting only a fraction of the minerals you used-to get out of drinking water.
RO should always involve carefully re-adding natural mineral content. Failing to do so is worse than not RO filtering the water in the first place.
There are 4-season tents that are well-insulated and stay nice and warm through mild winters just from body-heat. Active heating can make the colder winters comfortable, too. Heck, a -30F degree sleeping bag isn't that expensive, so you can stay pretty damn warm without any heater.
And is there some regulation forcing only tents on your lot? Most people also consider living in a travel-trailer to be "camping". They are cheap, can be quite comfortable, even in winter, even without direct utility hook-ups. Rain collection, grey water, small septic system, and solar power, can make your trailer camping semi-permanent with only minimal hassle.
"Much more rural" than San Diego... You don't say?! Yeah, San Diego's water has tasted awful for many decades. That's hardly a good test. But they're the worst, not an example of the good stuff.
California water always wins top-honors in water-tasting competitions:
http://www.nationaldriller.com...
If you can't find good water out west, I suppose you've just become acclimated to the taste of Florida water, and always favor the familiar...
The willful ignorance on display is pretty staggering...
No it hasn't. It gets lots of code audits, which eliminate buffer overflows and the like, but does nothing to prevent properly operating malicious software. You want "trusted" computing for security against internal threats, and OpenBSD doesn't do it. Something like RHEL with SELinux properly configured and working, would offer better resilience to the kinds of attacks in question.
OpenBSD was no more immune to the OpenSSL heartbleed bug than any other platform.
Oh good! Now all I need to do is find a way to insert my hacked keyboard into the bunch from your order, and I can pwn your airgapped network in short order.
Once my malware is in, of course it'll spread over the insecure (no updates for systems on an air-gapped network) private network. From there, it could just cause everything to self-destruct at a prearranged time, or it could start searching for ways to communicate data back to me... be it the disabled wifi on one single machine on the network, or optical, if a machine with a webcam on the internet happens to be facing towards any of the air-gapped systems. Hell, depending on what it controls, you could modulate a tiny amount of information into the power grid output, or similar.
These systems aren't just ignorantly plugged-in to an internet connection. But still, you NEED to be able to input data to them, including software updates, and you NEED to get data out, like real-time status updates sent to grid operators. Having someone typing-in every bit of data won't work, and connecting it to internet-connected systems by any method, such as RS-232 serial or others, or just sneakerneting with USB, DVD-Rs, etc., offers the possibility of hacking.
Your summary is just absolutely AWFUL. Obviously, no Canadian pipelines were damaged... Instead the CIA had a Canadian company sabotage their own SCADA software, knowing that the Soviet KGB was going to steal their pipeline control systems, with that software on it.
Secondly, it's a story from a single source, unconfirmed, that has been disputed by others. So it may actually have been shoddy construction, instead of sabotage, which doesn't support your claim:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Except the attacks were coming in hard and heavy, long before Stuxnet. It's incredibly ridiculous to claim that nobody else would be doing it, if the US didn't participate... It's just too tempting a target for the Chinese and Russians to miss-out on, and the US allowing itself to fall behind would be disastrous and negligent.
http://www.afr.com/p/technolog...
I don't blame "the internet", I blame Slashdot. The community used-to be above this kind of thing, and rational arguments, even supporting the unpopular side, would get modded-up and cut-through the noise. No longer.
Years of repeated and endless flamebait stories, with no point nor redeeming value to them, have helped to alienate valuable contributors, and cultivate a pool of noisy and opinionated ignorant flamers. After all, the later probably generate a lot more ad-impressions... Anyone trying to correct the misinformation just adds to the popularity of the flamebait article, and there goes more ad impressions for Dice, who will just keep doing whatever works.
In lieu of the organization saying otherwise, yes, self-identification is valid, sufficient, and the only real standard in the west. Unless she gets excommunicated, her self-identification as a Catholic is entirely sufficient.
No. "Life begins at conception" is an anti-abortion slogan, not at all Catholic canon, though they do similarly believe abortion is murder. Show me the 15th century tombstones for aborted fetuses...
Not that it's completely different, but the Catholic teaching is more all-encompassing, along the lines of "Sex is only allowed in honest attempts to bear children." If your anti-abortion slogan was canon, then using a condom (or other contraceptive that prevents initial conception) would be perfectly okay... but it is not.
"Thou shalt take the virgin with the fear of the Lord, moved rather for love of children than for lust, that in the seed of Abraham thou mayest obtain a blessing in children."
And while important, I wouldn't call it a "core" belief, on par with, say, monotheism, heaven, hell, etc, Ask a few Catholics what they think of Purgatory, or any of the less significant canon, and you'll always find a point of contention with the church, somewhere, with every believer.
Anybody want some real classic machines that have been in-service since the 80s? I've got about two dozen, and it may be a good time to start unloading them soon.
Pac-man, Ms Pac-Man, Centipede, Choplifter, Galaxian, Street Figher 2, etc.
Anybody got tips on unloading them? With something like eBay, it seems you either limit yourself to a tiny fraction of the audience for local-pickup only, or freight charges can dominate the sale price.
For anyone thinking about it, they're simpler than computers, and not too difficult to repair. The monitor caps seem to be the first thing to go, either suddenly a blank screen or just stretched beyond recognition, but a repair kit brings the picture back to normal.
You need to read what I've explained to you, rather than projecting your misconceptions onto what I've written.
Large scale pumped hydro isn't needed until/unless the world switches to 90%+ solar. Short of that, all is good. The US DoE has said so, and they know vastly more than you. Solar thermal can have several days of storage. Overnight, existing hydro easily provides the low baseload today, and it can be shut off whenever wind power is producing enough.
Solar IS peaking, because demand follows the sun in most of the world. Industry makes up 75% of demand, and they operate predominantly 8am-5pm, while the sun is shining the most. Dense office environments need air conditioning constantly, even through fall and into winter, and that tracks solar supplies quite nicely.
The research is out there. You don't need to imagine that it won't work. You can search the DoE's website for facts and figures for the US power grid. I'm willing to bet the Germans did research on the subject, too.
I know how the grid works, far better than you ever will, and your misreading or making bad assumptions in what I've written is just wasting my time. You are utterly wrong in most all of your assertions.
No, the large swaths of valuable land, left uninhabitable by humans for centuries, is the bigger impact.
That's complete nonsense. Solar IS the "peaking power plant".
Both risks are very easily eliminated by proper regulations, forcing contractors to use proper safety equipment.
Also nonsense. In fact solar is the ONLY technology that can supply the projected demand a century in the future. It can supply ALL electrical demands, in combination with pumped hydro for extended solar minimums, without issue, just as quickly as the facilities can be built. Solana is a good model: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
Baseless crap. The current efficiencies are vastly more than necessary. The numbers have been run by a number of people many times, and only a very small landmass is needed for the entire world's current energy needs.
Thermal storage is well understood and has been in-use for years. Pumped hydro storage is well understood and deployed on a massive scale already.
That's funny coming from a nuclear zealot, who jumps on anyone who points out the problems with his preferred technology. And who is outright lying with a straight face, about the capabilities of renewables, since their use is cutting in to poor old nuclear power. Boo hoo.
"both reactors had to be shut down in January 2012 due to premature wear found on over 3,000 tubes in replacement steam generators"
You've got a funny definition of "political pressure".
Japan did nuclear, and it worked out just fine... until they had problems. Today, with the benefit of hindsight, nearly everyone would say it didn't work out quite so well.
PV panels didn't exist in the 50s. Solar and wind haven't had remotely as long to scale-up. They are now being installed at a break-neck pace, and will eventually dominate.
Obviously you can't point to any nuclear power plants that have been operational for 80 years, so that's a BS theoretical figure.
Meanwhile, none of San Onofre's three units have operated for more than 30 years, before decommissioning. That's probably a more accurate figure for the life-span of a reactor. So I'd say you'll have to at least double your lifetime cost figures to be accurate.
Nobody mandated solar, people just decided it would work and be profitable. Germany got a lot of wind power built as well, but apparently solar also works well enough to be worth the investment.
The prices for electricity in Germany are insane, but there's no question that they need to get away from reliance on Russian natural gas as quickly as possible, and if solar helps that process along, so be it.
Depends on location, usage, and interest rates... In many locations (deserts, mostly), consumer rooftop PV solar absolutely is cheaper than buying grid power, after less than 20 years, without even counting the subsidizes.
http://www.solar-estimate.org/
But then again, coal, nuclear, and natural gas get many subsidizes of their own, so it's not a fair comparison.
Arguing on a subject you are ignorant of, isn't a good way to go. Read the law, it specifically talks about shared antennas.
In theory, everyone else can, too. Reality is that they don't, though, because they all have something to gain. Supreme court justices routinely accept money, accommodations, and gifts from big organizations.
You said: "cable and satellite providers must pay retransmission fees, but Aereo avoided them."
Cable providers can avoid them in the same way Aereo did.
Aereo thought that following the law would keep them safe from the millions of dollars in lawyers the broadcasters would throw at them. Their legal interpretation remains sound. But under enough pressure and money, the courts will make anything legal, or illegal, to suit major multinational corporations, at the expense of startups.
Looks like /code may have stripped some of your HTML. Allow me to help:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/i...
Actually, it may just mean live streaming of TV is off the table, but DVRing is okay.
Or it could mean you'll have to buy (or rent) an actual DVR and antenna which will be hosted in the data center on your behalf. On the plus side, this could mean the elimination of the geographic restrictions they currently have on the service...
There are very few places in the US where that's a problem, and I bet Aereo hasn't covered any of them.
The most common problem is people living in multi-story apartments where the landlord can forbid you from installing a rooftop antenna, where reception will be best. Still, if you're above ground level, and have a balcony or just a window facing roughly in the same direction, you've got a hell of a good chance of being able to receive a good TV signal with a proper antenna.
TV Fool is invaluable for finding out if you'll be able to get decent reception:
http://www.tvfool.com/index.ph...
If it reports signal strength greater than -110dBn at your location and at the height you'll be installing the antenna, there's an extremely good chance a relatively inexpensive antenna system like a Winegard 8800 (UHF) will offer you a good signal with minimal drop-outs.
UHF is easier in some ways, while VHF needs a large antenna that might not fit too well in a high-rise apartment, unless it can be attic or ceiling mounted out of the way, but still doable.
Just realize tvfool and my advice is general is NOT perfect. Co-channel interference can knock some channels out of contention, when they would otherwise be strong enough.
PBS provides vastly superior content to anything you'll find in the UK. Frontline is probably the most "enriching" show available to anyone, anywhere in the world. Throw in Nova, American Experience, Secrets of the Dead, Nature, This Old House, Charlie Rose, History Detectives, etc., etc. Not to mention the absolute inundation of educational childrens programming, from the venerable Sesame Street to the more recent hours of educational cartoon shows.
You don't NEED commercial television, and can get your entire viewing time filled by PBS. So if you want the UK model so badly, why aren't you watching PBS? The answer will no-doubt be why the UK model won't work so well in the US. And that's not to mention that the UK is quickly adopting the US model with for-pay satellite television becoming pervasive.
The 30 minute nightly world news reports on the big 3 networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) are far superior to BBC or anything else, with BBC News having the standards of a tabloid, by comparison.
And don't get me started on all the TV license collection horror stories.
No, Cable companies could use their "OnDemand" capabilities to copy, precisely, what Aereo is doing. It just wouldn't be "Channel 7" on the dial anymore... Which really doesn't matter as most cable providers have switched to encrypted QAM, so older TVs can't receive it without a cable box in any case.
Hell, cable providers could even just include DOCSIS capabilities in their set-top boxes, and perform EXACTLY like Aereo, over the network.
Satellite providers have some technical limitations which would prevent doing the same thing as Aereo or cable, but they still have the right to negotiate pricing, and might be better off if local channel refused to offer them a decent license, and they just took local channels off the table, like they tried to do in the beginning before the Clinton-era government forced them to carry local channels.
Bullshit. It's a direct response to GP's stated claims.
Yeah, that's a common hallmark of just simply being wrong, and unwilling to accept it...
You're clearly arguing out of gross ignorance of the subject, asserting how things work in your fantasy world is the way things are supposed to work elsewhere. It's nonsense, and a waste of time.
Yes it does. That's how it works. Laws are to be interpreted. They cannot be treated as a rigid computer program, mindlessly applied. How the founders MEANT something to be applied matters infinitely more than the particular wording.
The government wrote the constitution, and has unlimited power to amend it. You're saying "the government only has the powers the government says it has". Besides, it's ridiculous to claim a piece of paper grants anyone any power.
Yes you did. You extremely narrowly construed your incorrect statement. Widening the scope of your claim just makes it patently obvious how ridiculous it really is.
Claiming this particular violation is going to spell the end of the Union (while all previous ones did not) is utter nonsense.
Damn near everyone disagrees with you.... Including the founders, who offered tools to amend it as needed for changing times.
Also notice that fundamental rights like freedom of speech are not limitless, despite those limits not being enumerated in the constitution. It's a framework, not a how-to.
There are plenty of governments around the world, which do not have a constitution to speak of.