The problem with that is they're not crossing a border with drugs, for all we know Geohotz grows his own in his back yard or gets it from someone else who does.
Furthermore, there's nothing that says his car even *crossed* a border.
If you broaden the criteria for non-consensual searches to "any item that may have crossed a border" you might as well include mandating searches of anyone, anywhere.
Even if you grant them mandatory illegal alien checkpoints, how is it possible for them to subject you to a search for something unrelated to border enforcement and prosecute you for it?
I know we're largely flushing the entire constitution down the toilet these days, but this seems really egregious.
I've been through the checks outside of Sierra Vista & Tombstone, AZ, and they were more or less roll to a stop, yes we are citizens, have a nice day. No dogs run around the car, no bullshit, although there were dogs at the checkpoints.
I seldom lug mine around with me on a daily basis, but in the living room, kitchen, bathroom the larger screen makes it much more usable than a phone is.
Unfortunately, with a wife, 7 year old and a 80 pound dog, having a computer in every usable location is not even negotiable in my household, let alone practical.
I find the form factor to be the "killer app". Holds/handles like a book, but does much of what you might want to do on a computer, without having the awkwardness of even an ultralight laptop.
I get into countless arguments with people who INSIST that a laptop/netbook/macbook air is "the same" but that just hasn't been my experience in trying to sit on the couch, fly on a plane, ride in a car, etc and use the same devices.
There's no debate that those platforms have greater computing potential (keyboard/mouse, OS choices, HDD, yadda yadda). But they all still need to be opened up, generally lack the battery life of an iPad (even my 2 year old iPad 1 still goes 2-3 days without needing charging) and just aren't as physically useful as a tablet.
I always thought that it would be interesting to see weaponized UAVs that could be launched from a high-altitude loitering plane on demand.
When requested, a UAV with a weapon could be released from a loitering plane and then controlled on the ground by the unit requesting it for surveillance and ultimately to engage a target if necessary.
It could be faster than waiting for a manned plane or helicopter air strike as well as providing detailed intel.
Arizona is also one of those states where even the liberals have little tolerance for Big Brother. IIRC, the AZ cameras were getting shot up. Regularly.
One of the things I would do is hire a statistician/economist to study speed/traffic enforcement and find out if law enforcement is even remotely performing enforcement relative to areas of high accidents. If its totally unrelated statistically, I'd hire a lobbyist (or maybe even a politician!) to publicly shame them for wasting money and just harassing people and possibly push for a law that would require the police to enforce traffic safety where there were actual problems with traffic safety. Maybe even make "speed traps" not in a state reported risk zone flat out illegal.
My guess is that 90% of police traffic/speed enforcement has literally nothing to do with traffic safety but instead is focused on where people are speeding (underutilized highways, in good condition, etc) and how easy it is to catch them (good hiding places, good weather, etc).
I've never heard of a police department doing an analysis on accidents, traffic volume, pedestrian volume and then choosing to focus enforcement efforts on areas where people actually have a lot of accidents related to traffic infractions.
I'm told by someone in law enforcement that in at least one upscale suburban community their speed enforcement on local streets has literally nothing to do with traffic safety -- they pick spots where people naturally speed by small margins (eg, 35 in a 30 zone) due to hills or lack of intersections for the express purpose of pulling them over, checking identification, and trying to get "easy" arrests for other offenses unrelated to traffic safety. Basically one step above a police state checkpoint.
As a parent in a generally successful urban school, I see some issues, most appear to be âoetoo big to solve.â
Expectation Paradigm -- There appears to be an expectation paradigm for education that wants to make every student a âoecollege graduateâ. This strikes me as failing to take into account student ability, aptitude, and the vocational needs of the society at large. While everyone theoretically could benefit from a liberal arts education, itâ(TM)s a dubious proposition to prove and is of little vocational value to most people, other than people involved in careers that engage liberal arts skills. Adjusting the educational paradigm at a macro level is necessary so that we give everyone educational opportunities that match their aptitude and provide them with vocational skills that translate into the workplace and stop defining educational failure/success as âoegetting people into college.â
Poverty, race and parental engagement â" Many of the children who are failing in schools are African Americans, while some of this is tied to poverty, some of this is cultural and this creates a huge minefield. The school system has become taxed with âoesolvingâ the racial poverty issue. It canâ(TM)t do this â" it lacks the budget, the resources and the political mandate. Yet we consume an inordinate amount of resources trying to achieve âoeracial parityâ without ever addressing parental involvement and social questions at home. Bussing, free lunch, No Child Left Behind, etc canâ(TM)t fix these issues, and many of them may be completely intractable. âoeCivilization is a hopeless race to discover remedies for the evils it createsâ was said 400 years go.
Bureaucracy â" Schools need a bureaucracy to allocate resources and run the organization. But in many cases, above the school level, it appears run amok â" filled with âoeprogram administratorsâ who have the requisite need for offices, supplies, administrative personnel, etc. with little tie-in to the actual educational experience at the school. Many of these programs appear to be associated with the social issues questions, none appear to have any solution for them, and all take resources from the primary mission of education.
I donâ(TM)t think âoebadâ teachers are really the problem, except at maybe the worst schools in the worst districts, and then what do you expect? I also think unions are something of a canard as well, although I donâ(TM)t know how comfortable I am with teachersâ(TM) unions as a concept, especially given their lobbying strength and the kind of feedback loops this creates.
I generally only use the 5 or 6 when I am in Manhattan, but need to go someplace on the A on my next trip. I could take a 1/2/3 but I'd have to walk a little further, but would consider it if the A was that bad.
First of all, I don't know if I'd use the word "advance" -- I'm not entirely sure society has "advanced", as in improved. We seem to trade one indignity for another.
Second of all, while I'd agree that many of these changes are as a whole for the good of the broader economy, the process by which they occur is really harsh for the people involved.
It's a bit like saying that famine is good for poor countries, since they're killing off the excess people they can't feed. Sure, in the long run they've got fewer mouths to feed, but it's a helluva way to do it.
Overwhelmed with choices, not distractions
on
The eBook Backlash
·
· Score: 1
IMHO, the problem is less about distractions but being overwhelmed with choices.
With an iPad, for example, you have basically the entire Internet at your fingertips, along with music, video, ebooks, magazines.
There's so many choices that the distraction isn't interruptions from email, etc, but that you can't really decide what to do. With a paper book, you've made a much greater mental commitment because you have actually made a "final" choice, since the book only does one thing.
I've owned portable music players since the first Walkman, but the iPod sometimes makes me less interested in music because there are too many choices.
When I went walking with a cassette Walkman, it really wasn't practical to carry more than a couple of 'extra' cassette tapes, and sometimes none at all, so you listened to what you had. With my iPod and 40 GB of music, there are times where I skip around so much it seems like I don't really listen to anything.
Other problems include just wearing out songs I like because it's so easy to play them over and over, or never spending enough time listening to something to understand it's appeal -- if it doesn't provide immediate gratification, skip it.
And it's not like its even done "intentionally" to find someone to blame, it's just that there is SO much outsourcing and the buck stops...nowhere. Everybody does the least amount they possibly can to keep something from going wrong, because they (well, hell, *I*) know it will because there's inadequate training, documentation, testing, PHBs and Suits screaming about how late projects are, nobody bought enough storage/CPU/bandwidth/amperage and the aforementioned suits/PHBs wont' spend "any more".
It's just fucking endless and the blame just gets shipped downstream, rather than someone wondering if maybe somebody with a brain bigger than the shift knob on their BMW sedan should be in charge.
It sounds like this is just some kind tool to show that "it's not our fault, really" -- but at the end of the day, aren't the internal staff responsible for managing the "outside forces" up to and including setting standards, supervision, etc?
Or is this one of those deals where so much it oursourced that it's easy for everyone to deny culpability?
It seems like even the biggest guys can't make it work reliably, and presumably given the high profile of these services, they're not afraid to throw money and smart people at these problems.
I'd like to know how primary elections got co-opted by political parties as a means of selecting their party's candidate for the general election. If they want to use the public voting system for party needs, they should pay for it or stage their own party-specific election and not hold a primary at all.
In the best of all possible worlds, there wouldn't be ANY primary elections. There would be a single election with ranked preference voting and everybody gets three to choose their first, second and third choices in a single election. This would put an end to "throwing away" your vote.
If there is still a desire for a primary election to reduce the general election to a smaller field, then the primary should be open and free of party labels. Everybody gets one vote, and the two candidates who get the most votes appear in the general election, even if it means two Republicans or two Democrats or a Democrat and a Socialist or a Republican and that crazy guy Ole Savior who runs in every election.
The current system is just a cattle call that just reinforces the two party "system".
I think a lot of reason that "people suck dick for crack" is that among the demographic who wants to smoke crack but can't afford to, "sucking dick" is just generally considered an easy way to make money.
It's really not that crack is so desirable, it's just that sucking dick is the skillset and occupation they can most easily engage in to make money quickly.
...as an incentive to either pay out dividends or to put the capital to work.
And not that businesses shouldn't have the ability to build cash reserves, but US corporations are sitting on something like $2 trillion in assets. Some have so much cash that banks are charging steep fees to handle it.
At some multiple of earnings, these cash hoards are actually a drag on the economy. For one, they represent underutilized capital -- generally a firm's cash is tucked into short-term securities for liquidity, meaning the cash has a poor rate of return.
Paying dividends is a mechanism not only to keep granny Vanderbilt in her upper east side mansion, but to distribute excess capital to firms owners (shareholders) so that they may re-invest it or put it to direct use in the economy (ie, spending it).
Instead, management is allowed to hoard it, locking it away from productive use or tempting them to use it for self-serving purposes, such as "stock buybacks" where firms with stagnant share prices and/or earnings buy their own stock, essentially shrinking the number of outstanding shares. The idea is to drive up the price of the shares so that management, compensated with stock grants, can sell them at a premium.
It astonishes me that boards let this happen -- it's almost patently a way to pay themselves a dividend instead of the regular shareholders, in addition to perverting the incentive share grants were supposed to provide (ie, grow the company and increase its value so that the share grants appreciate).
But this is the new world we live in, where the wealthy and powerful use capitalism as a banner for their own encrichment despite grossly perverting it in practice.
You'd think a country like North Korea would go totally full tilt on the "illegal" economy.
Either by manufacturing metric assloads of counterfeit money, speed, opiates, cocaine, viagra, etc, or by opening a red light Disneyworld where everything "bad" is available in unlimited quantities -- drugs, sex, etc.
I know there's the "export" problem, but the export problem is a lot worse for actual drug dealers versus drug dealers with diplomatic immunity.
I use and support MS server products as a consultant, and I actually make this point a lot to colleagues that want to use what I'll call "fringe" features of their products.
While they may seem like a magic bullet for some problems, I always worry because many of these features are poorly documented, leading to confusion about how they work or whatever resource limits or capabilities they really have, and more importantly, what happens when the feature goes away and you need to migrate to some newer release of the software?
Not only are you stuck with a potentially manual process for migrating data to some more mainstream but potentially less "slick" feature, it may require the organization to change some business process to accommodate the now-missing feature they have used previously.
The last part is the worst, as I work with customers who cling to software & software features that have been discontinued because "it's too expensive" to switch to something else, "this is how we work" or some other reason. Seldom if ever do they acknowledge that should this system die, they won't work at all. One client has a software package that has been abandoned totally (source vendor has been out of business for 4+ years) and if the Windows XP system its on crashes hard, they lose the ability to manage 35% of their assets (app is on floppies, and somehow the app won't install except with a physical floppy drive....if the floppies are even readable.).
I'm always reading about some old, rural residential campus (asylum, VA hospital, etc) that's being closed down because they don't need it.
Why not make that a "residential heroin treatment center" -- give addicts a choice of inpatient, locked-door detox and treatment or to maintain their habit but live at the treatment center where they would get heroin but live under restrictive circumstances?
Or even better, just give them heroin (perhaps doled out in quantities small enough to inhibit dealing) and let them be addicts?
Or better yet, just stop the war on freedom and let addicts buy heroin at realistic market prices? Some will just maintain a habit and perhaps work a job and be something other than criminals, some will just eventually OD, but the rest of us won't have to live in a police state.
If you read the "Freedom of Movement" page on Wikipedia, it says that there is a constitutional right to freedom of movement and even describes it as the "orphaned constitutional right".
If this right was frequently litigated, it might actually impact some of the restrictions on freedom of movement, perhaps even forcing the government to make accommodations for intrastate non-motorized travel via interstate rights of ways or limit the kinds restrictions that can be put on various modes of motorized traffic.
Slashdot Mirror
So he's on the lookout for boat people portaging across the peninsula?
My guess is with SXSW going on, local prices are probably inflated and local supplies are probably depleted.
The flip side of that is, SXSW is going on and there's a lot of like-minded people in the same place at the same time.
The problem with that is they're not crossing a border with drugs, for all we know Geohotz grows his own in his back yard or gets it from someone else who does.
Furthermore, there's nothing that says his car even *crossed* a border.
If you broaden the criteria for non-consensual searches to "any item that may have crossed a border" you might as well include mandating searches of anyone, anywhere.
Even if you grant them mandatory illegal alien checkpoints, how is it possible for them to subject you to a search for something unrelated to border enforcement and prosecute you for it?
I know we're largely flushing the entire constitution down the toilet these days, but this seems really egregious.
I've been through the checks outside of Sierra Vista & Tombstone, AZ, and they were more or less roll to a stop, yes we are citizens, have a nice day. No dogs run around the car, no bullshit, although there were dogs at the checkpoints.
I seldom lug mine around with me on a daily basis, but in the living room, kitchen, bathroom the larger screen makes it much more usable than a phone is.
Unfortunately, with a wife, 7 year old and a 80 pound dog, having a computer in every usable location is not even negotiable in my household, let alone practical.
I find the form factor to be the "killer app". Holds/handles like a book, but does much of what you might want to do on a computer, without having the awkwardness of even an ultralight laptop.
I get into countless arguments with people who INSIST that a laptop/netbook/macbook air is "the same" but that just hasn't been my experience in trying to sit on the couch, fly on a plane, ride in a car, etc and use the same devices.
There's no debate that those platforms have greater computing potential (keyboard/mouse, OS choices, HDD, yadda yadda). But they all still need to be opened up, generally lack the battery life of an iPad (even my 2 year old iPad 1 still goes 2-3 days without needing charging) and just aren't as physically useful as a tablet.
I always thought that it would be interesting to see weaponized UAVs that could be launched from a high-altitude loitering plane on demand.
When requested, a UAV with a weapon could be released from a loitering plane and then controlled on the ground by the unit requesting it for surveillance and ultimately to engage a target if necessary.
It could be faster than waiting for a manned plane or helicopter air strike as well as providing detailed intel.
If they surrender, they're intelligent VC.
Arizona is also one of those states where even the liberals have little tolerance for Big Brother. IIRC, the AZ cameras were getting shot up. Regularly.
One of the things I would do is hire a statistician/economist to study speed/traffic enforcement and find out if law enforcement is even remotely performing enforcement relative to areas of high accidents. If its totally unrelated statistically, I'd hire a lobbyist (or maybe even a politician!) to publicly shame them for wasting money and just harassing people and possibly push for a law that would require the police to enforce traffic safety where there were actual problems with traffic safety. Maybe even make "speed traps" not in a state reported risk zone flat out illegal.
My guess is that 90% of police traffic/speed enforcement has literally nothing to do with traffic safety but instead is focused on where people are speeding (underutilized highways, in good condition, etc) and how easy it is to catch them (good hiding places, good weather, etc).
I've never heard of a police department doing an analysis on accidents, traffic volume, pedestrian volume and then choosing to focus enforcement efforts on areas where people actually have a lot of accidents related to traffic infractions.
I'm told by someone in law enforcement that in at least one upscale suburban community their speed enforcement on local streets has literally nothing to do with traffic safety -- they pick spots where people naturally speed by small margins (eg, 35 in a 30 zone) due to hills or lack of intersections for the express purpose of pulling them over, checking identification, and trying to get "easy" arrests for other offenses unrelated to traffic safety. Basically one step above a police state checkpoint.
As a parent in a generally successful urban school, I see some issues, most appear to be âoetoo big to solve.â
Expectation Paradigm -- There appears to be an expectation paradigm for education that wants to make every student a âoecollege graduateâ. This strikes me as failing to take into account student ability, aptitude, and the vocational needs of the society at large. While everyone theoretically could benefit from a liberal arts education, itâ(TM)s a dubious proposition to prove and is of little vocational value to most people, other than people involved in careers that engage liberal arts skills. Adjusting the educational paradigm at a macro level is necessary so that we give everyone educational opportunities that match their aptitude and provide them with vocational skills that translate into the workplace and stop defining educational failure/success as âoegetting people into college.â
Poverty, race and parental engagement â" Many of the children who are failing in schools are African Americans, while some of this is tied to poverty, some of this is cultural and this creates a huge minefield. The school system has become taxed with âoesolvingâ the racial poverty issue. It canâ(TM)t do this â" it lacks the budget, the resources and the political mandate. Yet we consume an inordinate amount of resources trying to achieve âoeracial parityâ without ever addressing parental involvement and social questions at home. Bussing, free lunch, No Child Left Behind, etc canâ(TM)t fix these issues, and many of them may be completely intractable. âoeCivilization is a hopeless race to discover remedies for the evils it createsâ was said 400 years go.
Bureaucracy â" Schools need a bureaucracy to allocate resources and run the organization. But in many cases, above the school level, it appears run amok â" filled with âoeprogram administratorsâ who have the requisite need for offices, supplies, administrative personnel, etc. with little tie-in to the actual educational experience at the school. Many of these programs appear to be associated with the social issues questions, none appear to have any solution for them, and all take resources from the primary mission of education.
I donâ(TM)t think âoebadâ teachers are really the problem, except at maybe the worst schools in the worst districts, and then what do you expect? I also think unions are something of a canard as well, although I donâ(TM)t know how comfortable I am with teachersâ(TM) unions as a concept, especially given their lobbying strength and the kind of feedback loops this creates.
And even with that, you leave out the emissions created when the nuke plant was built and its fuel mined, refined and shipped on site.
For 'renewable' sources, you have to deal with the emissions associated with producing that equipment.
Operationally, they may be zero emissions but they can't be created in a zero emissions way.
Is the A train that bad in Manhattan?
I generally only use the 5 or 6 when I am in Manhattan, but need to go someplace on the A on my next trip. I could take a 1/2/3 but I'd have to walk a little further, but would consider it if the A was that bad.
First of all, I don't know if I'd use the word "advance" -- I'm not entirely sure society has "advanced", as in improved. We seem to trade one indignity for another.
Second of all, while I'd agree that many of these changes are as a whole for the good of the broader economy, the process by which they occur is really harsh for the people involved.
It's a bit like saying that famine is good for poor countries, since they're killing off the excess people they can't feed. Sure, in the long run they've got fewer mouths to feed, but it's a helluva way to do it.
IMHO, the problem is less about distractions but being overwhelmed with choices.
With an iPad, for example, you have basically the entire Internet at your fingertips, along with music, video, ebooks, magazines.
There's so many choices that the distraction isn't interruptions from email, etc, but that you can't really decide what to do. With a paper book, you've made a much greater mental commitment because you have actually made a "final" choice, since the book only does one thing.
I've owned portable music players since the first Walkman, but the iPod sometimes makes me less interested in music because there are too many choices.
When I went walking with a cassette Walkman, it really wasn't practical to carry more than a couple of 'extra' cassette tapes, and sometimes none at all, so you listened to what you had. With my iPod and 40 GB of music, there are times where I skip around so much it seems like I don't really listen to anything.
Other problems include just wearing out songs I like because it's so easy to play them over and over, or never spending enough time listening to something to understand it's appeal -- if it doesn't provide immediate gratification, skip it.
This is what I really wanted to post.
And it's not like its even done "intentionally" to find someone to blame, it's just that there is SO much outsourcing and the buck stops...nowhere. Everybody does the least amount they possibly can to keep something from going wrong, because they (well, hell, *I*) know it will because there's inadequate training, documentation, testing, PHBs and Suits screaming about how late projects are, nobody bought enough storage/CPU/bandwidth/amperage and the aforementioned suits/PHBs wont' spend "any more".
It's just fucking endless and the blame just gets shipped downstream, rather than someone wondering if maybe somebody with a brain bigger than the shift knob on their BMW sedan should be in charge.
It sounds like this is just some kind tool to show that "it's not our fault, really" -- but at the end of the day, aren't the internal staff responsible for managing the "outside forces" up to and including setting standards, supervision, etc?
Or is this one of those deals where so much it oursourced that it's easy for everyone to deny culpability?
It seems like even the biggest guys can't make it work reliably, and presumably given the high profile of these services, they're not afraid to throw money and smart people at these problems.
I'd like to know how primary elections got co-opted by political parties as a means of selecting their party's candidate for the general election. If they want to use the public voting system for party needs, they should pay for it or stage their own party-specific election and not hold a primary at all.
In the best of all possible worlds, there wouldn't be ANY primary elections. There would be a single election with ranked preference voting and everybody gets three to choose their first, second and third choices in a single election. This would put an end to "throwing away" your vote.
If there is still a desire for a primary election to reduce the general election to a smaller field, then the primary should be open and free of party labels. Everybody gets one vote, and the two candidates who get the most votes appear in the general election, even if it means two Republicans or two Democrats or a Democrat and a Socialist or a Republican and that crazy guy Ole Savior who runs in every election.
The current system is just a cattle call that just reinforces the two party "system".
I think a lot of reason that "people suck dick for crack" is that among the demographic who wants to smoke crack but can't afford to, "sucking dick" is just generally considered an easy way to make money.
It's really not that crack is so desirable, it's just that sucking dick is the skillset and occupation they can most easily engage in to make money quickly.
...as an incentive to either pay out dividends or to put the capital to work.
And not that businesses shouldn't have the ability to build cash reserves, but US corporations are sitting on something like $2 trillion in assets. Some have so much cash that banks are charging steep fees to handle it.
At some multiple of earnings, these cash hoards are actually a drag on the economy. For one, they represent underutilized capital -- generally a firm's cash is tucked into short-term securities for liquidity, meaning the cash has a poor rate of return.
Paying dividends is a mechanism not only to keep granny Vanderbilt in her upper east side mansion, but to distribute excess capital to firms owners (shareholders) so that they may re-invest it or put it to direct use in the economy (ie, spending it).
Instead, management is allowed to hoard it, locking it away from productive use or tempting them to use it for self-serving purposes, such as "stock buybacks" where firms with stagnant share prices and/or earnings buy their own stock, essentially shrinking the number of outstanding shares. The idea is to drive up the price of the shares so that management, compensated with stock grants, can sell them at a premium.
It astonishes me that boards let this happen -- it's almost patently a way to pay themselves a dividend instead of the regular shareholders, in addition to perverting the incentive share grants were supposed to provide (ie, grow the company and increase its value so that the share grants appreciate).
But this is the new world we live in, where the wealthy and powerful use capitalism as a banner for their own encrichment despite grossly perverting it in practice.
You'd think a country like North Korea would go totally full tilt on the "illegal" economy.
Either by manufacturing metric assloads of counterfeit money, speed, opiates, cocaine, viagra, etc, or by opening a red light Disneyworld where everything "bad" is available in unlimited quantities -- drugs, sex, etc.
I know there's the "export" problem, but the export problem is a lot worse for actual drug dealers versus drug dealers with diplomatic immunity.
I use and support MS server products as a consultant, and I actually make this point a lot to colleagues that want to use what I'll call "fringe" features of their products.
While they may seem like a magic bullet for some problems, I always worry because many of these features are poorly documented, leading to confusion about how they work or whatever resource limits or capabilities they really have, and more importantly, what happens when the feature goes away and you need to migrate to some newer release of the software?
Not only are you stuck with a potentially manual process for migrating data to some more mainstream but potentially less "slick" feature, it may require the organization to change some business process to accommodate the now-missing feature they have used previously.
The last part is the worst, as I work with customers who cling to software & software features that have been discontinued because "it's too expensive" to switch to something else, "this is how we work" or some other reason. Seldom if ever do they acknowledge that should this system die, they won't work at all. One client has a software package that has been abandoned totally (source vendor has been out of business for 4+ years) and if the Windows XP system its on crashes hard, they lose the ability to manage 35% of their assets (app is on floppies, and somehow the app won't install except with a physical floppy drive....if the floppies are even readable.).
I'm always reading about some old, rural residential campus (asylum, VA hospital, etc) that's being closed down because they don't need it.
Why not make that a "residential heroin treatment center" -- give addicts a choice of inpatient, locked-door detox and treatment or to maintain their habit but live at the treatment center where they would get heroin but live under restrictive circumstances?
Or even better, just give them heroin (perhaps doled out in quantities small enough to inhibit dealing) and let them be addicts?
Or better yet, just stop the war on freedom and let addicts buy heroin at realistic market prices? Some will just maintain a habit and perhaps work a job and be something other than criminals, some will just eventually OD, but the rest of us won't have to live in a police state.
If you read the "Freedom of Movement" page on Wikipedia, it says that there is a constitutional right to freedom of movement and even describes it as the "orphaned constitutional right".
If this right was frequently litigated, it might actually impact some of the restrictions on freedom of movement, perhaps even forcing the government to make accommodations for intrastate non-motorized travel via interstate rights of ways or limit the kinds restrictions that can be put on various modes of motorized traffic.