I didn't know that going directly to jail for tax evasion was actually a thing anymore. I thought that what they did now was they would assume it was an error, and notify the person, providing them with an opportunity to correct it by paying the amount owed (with interest, of course). I would imagine that one would only actually go to jail if they could be found to be deliberately avoiding paying the amount that they supposed to owe. This should require going to court first and so one wouldn't really go directly to jail, not to mention also getting lots of notice.
Exactly,,,, they may say it's "unlimited" because they don't directly try to limit the *amount* of data you can download, but in fact by imposing an limitation on the *speed* of the download, they are effectively creating a data limit as well anyways, as there is only so much data that you can download in a given time at a given speed. Of course, on any given physical infrastructure that latter point would be true even if the company didn't impose any limitations on bandwidth at all, but when it is the company that makes a policy choice to impose a "limit" on the rate at which data may be received, they are still indirectly imposing a limit on the amount of data that can be downloaded as well, so they cannot call such a plan "unlimited" when they are, in fact, limiting it in ways beyond those that might be imposed by virtue of the underlying physical communications infrastructure.
Does it get bricked remotely, or is there an expiry date built into the existing firmware? I'm pretty darn sure that if it's the former, but the only way I can see that being enforceable is if they also required the 'copter to have an internet connection either before or during each flight.
Or, perhaps, if you don't know what version they are talking about, it probably doesn't affect you and you don't need to worry about it.. Do you also expect people to call eachother by social security number or drivers license id number? Probably not... we each have a name, after all. Sure, you can use the number where it matters, but if you don't recognize the name, then generally it's not something you should be concerned about.
But really, what's so awful about naming something? Do you similarly object to the names they give to major storms, or the names they give to any newly discovered celestial objects?
... And when lives aren't lost, there will be no real incentive for either side to offer surrender, imitating to no small measure what was happening in A Taste of Armageddon.
You suggest that no human lives would be lost, and that may be true, but what about human rights? Or do you seriously think that being at war wouldn't impact those?
Electric vehicles are most beneficial for city commuters, and not for people in more rural areas, where if they do commute they typically have distances to travel that make the limitations on electric vehicle range impractical. Since high density urban areas typically have a majority of the population living in multiunit dwelling's such as apartments or condominiums. While these people may have available parking they rarely have private garages with full control of the electricity offered to it, and as such unless the building they live in was built with some foresight for this, typically no earlier than within the past 10 years or so, there will rarely be electrical outlets available for the residents of such buildings in the same spaces as where they park.
The statistic of majority of people living in detached homes is accurate, but a majority of people would most benefit from electrical vehicles are not owners of detached homes
Unfortunately, the developers seem to have largely abandoned it, and no new work has been done on it in some time. The website it needs to connect to in order to download any needed content seems to be keeping maintained, but the forums, once booming with activity with questions from users and fast responses from the development team have all but dried up completely.
While it was once (and still is) commercial, open source seems to me like the only way that project can get any new life at this stage.
I'm not contesting that point... I was addressing the assumption that one should not need to require a fast fill up as they can get with a gasoline vehicle simply because they could charge their EV overnight, when that assumption is not valid for a significant number of people when they live in the kinds of areas where those with an electric vehicle with limited range would typically benefit the most.
Actually, in high density urban areas, it's entirely consequential to most people. It's only inconsequential to most people that live in suburban or rural areas where detached housing is more common.
Typically, well over 50% of people live in apartments or condominiums if they happen to live in a large city. The statistic of 30% of people in the USA live in apartments is an overall statistic, and ironically, the people that would typically benefit the most from an electric vehicle are people who live in such populated areas.
Obviously... But that was kind of my point. The above post to which I responded suggested that a fast fill up time isn't ever really needed, but in practice this is only true when one has available charging facilities at home.
Trivial, sure... cheap, not so much... and then there's still the matter of convincing enough of the owners in a high rise condominium that this is an investment they should actually make for their parking infrastructure, since any such purchase would require no less than a majority vote by the strata. In my experience, most condo stratas have far more immediate and pressing issues that they need to spend money on. A forward thinking owner that is willing to front the cash to add an outlet into their own stall may certainly do so (as long as they get permission from their strata), but when the available carpark has not been wired with any outlets at all, this is still going to be a pretty expensive endeavor because they will need to have a separate breaker box for your own outlet, as well as separate metering (since there is no way that the strata is going to want to pay for you to charge your car). The up-front cost to a single owner willing to front the money to do this is on the order of simply not worth the expenditure, largely owing to the expense of rewiring and getting all of the necessary certifications. If one can find enough other owners in the same building willing to personally shoulder those costs, this can become tenable, but that is not always possible... and in my experience with strata, it's also a pretty safe bet that there's going to be a lot of very cheap people with very loud voices that are going to find things to bitch about while the work is being done, as it creates a (temporary) inconvenience to everybody.
Explain how that's supposed to work for people who don't have a private garage to park their car in and charge it overnight.
In many high density urban areas, where practically everybody lives in apartments or condo's, you don't get that luxury... in many cases, for the foreseeable future.
I would suggest only that we have a natural born right to freedom of thought the only way to deprive you of that right being to subject you directly to aggressive brainwashing methods or the direct removal of certain parts of the brain, leaving behind someone without any individuality at all.
Certainly the things that you may get exposed to, which can be controlled by external forces or powers, can to a very large degree control exactly what you may think about, but short of such aforementioned aggressive methods used to prevent it, one can still always draw their own individual conclusions and create their own unique ideas. Freedom of thought is certainly a natural born right.
Freedom of speech is not an in inborn right.... like privacy, it is something that as a civilized society we should strive to protect, but it's certainly not something that anyone is born with.
Even accepting the notion you've presented, it hasn't actually happened yet. It may make him stupid and even dangerous, but realistically, while even a full 8 years in office with his policies on global warming might be pretty bad, it is highly improbable that it actually would lead to human extinction. The only thing he conceivably has the power to do that could actually wipe out billions is start a nuclear war. Which, by the way, I wouldn't put it past him for, but even that still hasn't happened yet, whereas to suggest he is somehow among the objectively worst presidents is to compare things you fear he will do to the horrible things that some past presidents *actually* did
While I have absolutely no admiration for the man at all, it is the very height of injustice to condemn someone for something that you believe they will do in the future, the same way you would if they actually did it.
Touche, but since we are talking about Mars and providing references: howaboutthese? The last one even explicitly mentions microbes that can survive on perchlorates.
It's a fairly safe bet that the environment of Mars will not pose any threat to the types of life that could survive the journey unprotected, in the vacuum of space, far colder than even the coldest night on Mars.
I think it is less likely that all of these people are all genuinely too poor to afford the content (because let's face it, Netflix is pretty damn cheap, considering...) and more likely the case that they simply just don't want to be bothered paying for it when they've found they can get it for free.
Nothing Trump has done so far even begins to compare to the atrocities committed by some past presidents... so while I certainly don't want to ever be seen as defending Trump, I really can't say I agree that he's objectively the worst that the USA has ever had. I'll be willing to concede, however, that he might very well be the dumbest, and I'll acknowledge that it's very possible (and maybe even probable) that his ignorance may lead to actions that in turn might make even his worst predecessors look tame, but right now, and so far, at least, it's just too soon to call.
In general, the people that do lose their jobs on account of automation will eventually find alternative employment, and at an overall higher pay than what they were making before... so it's fairly clear that despite the immediate job losses, there are longer term net benefits to society that can be easily overlooked if you only focus on the here and now, as long as the minimum wage increases are kept within tolerances for the rate at which the cost of living has increased (which is historically is not typically a problem because minimum wage hikes usually lag several years behind the continual cost of living increases anyways).
"eating" and "breathing" are functions of more complex life forms than what we are talking about here. There are organisms that can survive, and even thrive, practically anywhere in space, even on the moon. The CO2 martian atmosphere and the toxicity of its soil would not be any danger to them at all.
That was not my initial understanding, and if that is the case, I must alter my position... if he knew, or even if he reasonably *should* have known, that the people was selling stuff to had any criminal intent, he should have walked the other way immediately. However, if he really had no practical way to know what the people he was selling it to were going to do with it, then he should not be held accountable for the consequences that they produced.
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't know that going directly to jail for tax evasion was actually a thing anymore. I thought that what they did now was they would assume it was an error, and notify the person, providing them with an opportunity to correct it by paying the amount owed (with interest, of course). I would imagine that one would only actually go to jail if they could be found to be deliberately avoiding paying the amount that they supposed to owe. This should require going to court first and so one wouldn't really go directly to jail, not to mention also getting lots of notice.
Exactly,,,, they may say it's "unlimited" because they don't directly try to limit the *amount* of data you can download, but in fact by imposing an limitation on the *speed* of the download, they are effectively creating a data limit as well anyways, as there is only so much data that you can download in a given time at a given speed. Of course, on any given physical infrastructure that latter point would be true even if the company didn't impose any limitations on bandwidth at all, but when it is the company that makes a policy choice to impose a "limit" on the rate at which data may be received, they are still indirectly imposing a limit on the amount of data that can be downloaded as well, so they cannot call such a plan "unlimited" when they are, in fact, limiting it in ways beyond those that might be imposed by virtue of the underlying physical communications infrastructure.
Does it get bricked remotely, or is there an expiry date built into the existing firmware? I'm pretty darn sure that if it's the former, but the only way I can see that being enforceable is if they also required the 'copter to have an internet connection either before or during each flight.
Or, perhaps, if you don't know what version they are talking about, it probably doesn't affect you and you don't need to worry about it.. Do you also expect people to call eachother by social security number or drivers license id number? Probably not... we each have a name, after all. Sure, you can use the number where it matters, but if you don't recognize the name, then generally it's not something you should be concerned about.
Android 8.0
Is that clear enough for you?
But really, what's so awful about naming something? Do you similarly object to the names they give to major storms, or the names they give to any newly discovered celestial objects?
You suggest that no human lives would be lost, and that may be true, but what about human rights? Or do you seriously think that being at war wouldn't impact those?
Electric vehicles are most beneficial for city commuters, and not for people in more rural areas, where if they do commute they typically have distances to travel that make the limitations on electric vehicle range impractical. Since high density urban areas typically have a majority of the population living in multiunit dwelling's such as apartments or condominiums. While these people may have available parking they rarely have private garages with full control of the electricity offered to it, and as such unless the building they live in was built with some foresight for this, typically no earlier than within the past 10 years or so, there will rarely be electrical outlets available for the residents of such buildings in the same spaces as where they park.
The statistic of majority of people living in detached homes is accurate, but a majority of people would most benefit from electrical vehicles are not owners of detached homes
Genetica
Unfortunately, the developers seem to have largely abandoned it, and no new work has been done on it in some time. The website it needs to connect to in order to download any needed content seems to be keeping maintained, but the forums, once booming with activity with questions from users and fast responses from the development team have all but dried up completely.
While it was once (and still is) commercial, open source seems to me like the only way that project can get any new life at this stage.
I'm not contesting that point... I was addressing the assumption that one should not need to require a fast fill up as they can get with a gasoline vehicle simply because they could charge their EV overnight, when that assumption is not valid for a significant number of people when they live in the kinds of areas where those with an electric vehicle with limited range would typically benefit the most.
It's not like I'm just bringing it up now.... I explicitly mentioned high density urban areas right from the very beginning.
Actually, in high density urban areas, it's entirely consequential to most people. It's only inconsequential to most people that live in suburban or rural areas where detached housing is more common.
Typically, well over 50% of people live in apartments or condominiums if they happen to live in a large city. The statistic of 30% of people in the USA live in apartments is an overall statistic, and ironically, the people that would typically benefit the most from an electric vehicle are people who live in such populated areas.
Obviously... But that was kind of my point. The above post to which I responded suggested that a fast fill up time isn't ever really needed, but in practice this is only true when one has available charging facilities at home.
Trivial, sure... cheap, not so much... and then there's still the matter of convincing enough of the owners in a high rise condominium that this is an investment they should actually make for their parking infrastructure, since any such purchase would require no less than a majority vote by the strata. In my experience, most condo stratas have far more immediate and pressing issues that they need to spend money on. A forward thinking owner that is willing to front the cash to add an outlet into their own stall may certainly do so (as long as they get permission from their strata), but when the available carpark has not been wired with any outlets at all, this is still going to be a pretty expensive endeavor because they will need to have a separate breaker box for your own outlet, as well as separate metering (since there is no way that the strata is going to want to pay for you to charge your car). The up-front cost to a single owner willing to front the money to do this is on the order of simply not worth the expenditure, largely owing to the expense of rewiring and getting all of the necessary certifications. If one can find enough other owners in the same building willing to personally shoulder those costs, this can become tenable, but that is not always possible... and in my experience with strata, it's also a pretty safe bet that there's going to be a lot of very cheap people with very loud voices that are going to find things to bitch about while the work is being done, as it creates a (temporary) inconvenience to everybody.
Explain how that's supposed to work for people who don't have a private garage to park their car in and charge it overnight.
In many high density urban areas, where practically everybody lives in apartments or condo's, you don't get that luxury... in many cases, for the foreseeable future.
I would suggest only that we have a natural born right to freedom of thought the only way to deprive you of that right being to subject you directly to aggressive brainwashing methods or the direct removal of certain parts of the brain, leaving behind someone without any individuality at all.
Certainly the things that you may get exposed to, which can be controlled by external forces or powers, can to a very large degree control exactly what you may think about, but short of such aforementioned aggressive methods used to prevent it, one can still always draw their own individual conclusions and create their own unique ideas. Freedom of thought is certainly a natural born right.
Freedom of speech is not an in inborn right.... like privacy, it is something that as a civilized society we should strive to protect, but it's certainly not something that anyone is born with.
Even accepting the notion you've presented, it hasn't actually happened yet. It may make him stupid and even dangerous, but realistically, while even a full 8 years in office with his policies on global warming might be pretty bad, it is highly improbable that it actually would lead to human extinction. The only thing he conceivably has the power to do that could actually wipe out billions is start a nuclear war. Which, by the way, I wouldn't put it past him for, but even that still hasn't happened yet, whereas to suggest he is somehow among the objectively worst presidents is to compare things you fear he will do to the horrible things that some past presidents *actually* did
While I have absolutely no admiration for the man at all, it is the very height of injustice to condemn someone for something that you believe they will do in the future, the same way you would if they actually did it.
Touche, but since we are talking about Mars and providing references: how about these? The last one even explicitly mentions microbes that can survive on perchlorates.
It's a fairly safe bet that the environment of Mars will not pose any threat to the types of life that could survive the journey unprotected, in the vacuum of space, far colder than even the coldest night on Mars.
I think it is less likely that all of these people are all genuinely too poor to afford the content (because let's face it, Netflix is pretty damn cheap, considering...) and more likely the case that they simply just don't want to be bothered paying for it when they've found they can get it for free.
Nothing Trump has done so far even begins to compare to the atrocities committed by some past presidents... so while I certainly don't want to ever be seen as defending Trump, I really can't say I agree that he's objectively the worst that the USA has ever had. I'll be willing to concede, however, that he might very well be the dumbest, and I'll acknowledge that it's very possible (and maybe even probable) that his ignorance may lead to actions that in turn might make even his worst predecessors look tame, but right now, and so far, at least, it's just too soon to call.
In general, the people that do lose their jobs on account of automation will eventually find alternative employment, and at an overall higher pay than what they were making before... so it's fairly clear that despite the immediate job losses, there are longer term net benefits to society that can be easily overlooked if you only focus on the here and now, as long as the minimum wage increases are kept within tolerances for the rate at which the cost of living has increased (which is historically is not typically a problem because minimum wage hikes usually lag several years behind the continual cost of living increases anyways).
Clearly you didn't even *TRY* to google it.
"eating" and "breathing" are functions of more complex life forms than what we are talking about here. There are organisms that can survive, and even thrive, practically anywhere in space, even on the moon. The CO2 martian atmosphere and the toxicity of its soil would not be any danger to them at all.
Compared to space, even the harsh environment of Mars is positively balmy
Explain, then, how they survive the trip.
That was not my initial understanding, and if that is the case, I must alter my position... if he knew, or even if he reasonably *should* have known, that the people was selling stuff to had any criminal intent, he should have walked the other way immediately. However, if he really had no practical way to know what the people he was selling it to were going to do with it, then he should not be held accountable for the consequences that they produced.