We already have a voluntary censorship tool: the mouse. Only content approved through clicking is displayed. User error might let a small amount through, but the eyelids provide adequate redundancy. Should hospital wards and nursing homes for quadriplegics whose eyelids have been burned off have filtered internet? This I admit is an important question that deserves investigation and debate.
The defense of torrents is still valid, but the courts are wrong. Without opposition repression will spread. Already in most countries the same corrupt legal theory that some legal things are also illegal has led to the criminalization of armed self-defense. Already Google has had to alter its website to block torrent suggestions, and governments are seizing unapproved websites. Copyright parasites are demanding royalties from Google, and are pressuring ISPs to filter connections.
Your state is probably already forcing you to help fund the production of crappy movies and sports entertainment. Not to mention the work you do to fund obsolete and redundant weapons systems, completely non-productive government employees, etc. Writing has less overhead, and the Belgian guy might actually uncover the socialist pedophile alien invasion. Maybe it's not worth it since we have reached a point of diminishing returns from the typing monkeys, but a proposal to fund them can hardly be called crazy compared to the government's current spending priorities.
Seems to be the best option to maximize the harm to Sony. Yes there is collateral damage, but it is comparatively minor. Taking people's money and being too cheap or indifferent to secure their personal information is fucked up and selfish to a greater degree.
Anytime a word is spoken against the sales tax unionized government employees unleash an army to preserve if not raise it. They have a lot of time on their hands, 10s of millions to spend on political action, and they helped most government representatives get elected.
States can't lose money from sales tax, since that money is still in their residents' pockets...before all of it and more was taken through property tax and fee increases. States are trying to squeeze money from their broke population, instead of looking at themselves, massively overstaffed, overpaid, and over-committed to boondoggles.
To be fair, you shouldn't pay sales tax at physical stores. No need to set up a complicated system. Sales tax is used principally to reduce the income and investment taxes for the richest state residents and provide an inconspicuous funding stream for pork projects and bloated salaries.
Sales taxes are the fairest and most reasonable tax.
Are you joking? Not only is the sales tax regressive, but it is the double-taxation of money that was already subjected to the income tax. It's not the forces of civilization who are writing these laws, but corporate aristocrats like the Waltons, who are happy with the peasants picking up most of their tax burden, and want to poke Amazon in the eye.
The nature of government is expansionary. Since "lone wolves" have no ties to terrorism and few obvious characteristics, intensive surveillance and broad restrictive measures must be wielded against 100% of population.
The brain, released from the bonds of the body, then develops its full potential for telepathy and telekinesis. Soon all conscious life is living in a world that it constructed.
While some professional courses are "safer paths", the majority of people in college would be better off doing anything else with their time and money. Even if their efforts to start a company fail they will still be winning.
Simply because you do not own the roads, you do not clean up the mess and you don't have to pay for all the costs of hospitalisation, rehabilitation and permanent disability.
It's called vehicle registrations and drivers licence, don't like it, walk or take public transport.
You certainly have less claim to "owning" public transport than pathways through space, and walking without, within, or across roads is usually impossible or illegal. Just because a law exists doesn't means it's justified: the Germans had registrations and "licenses" too in the form of yellow stars.
Students pay, maybe even a "technology" fee. The difference is schools operate on a (mostly) non-profit basis and can be trusted to maintain the network for the benefit of the users, unlike ISPs that are more concerned with the shareholders. Contracts or regulation can't really keep them honest, since some shaping is probably always necessary. The answer is more competition, but that is hard to maintain in any market let alone a utility market.
It is the nature of some information to be public. Telephone numbers, birth records, real estate records, and flight plans. The average person is an open book for this information, so people who live high-profile lives can hardly complain when all it takes is a team of investigators from a national newspaper to discover theirs. Since they are too rich to even use a jet rental service, they could certainly afford more complicated holding companies to conceal their ownership or even fly decoy planes. But usually they want to be noticed.
When the purpose of the law is to protect a company at the expense of 100% of the local population the logic of the law isn't really worth examining. But a new government department not running a deficit is virtually impossible, as is calling a referendum for new spending. Communities probably wouldn't even have drinking water if those terms were applied.
Come on, while you might have a point if he was talking about his 5 roommates using 100s of GBs, 1.5GB is a ridiculous quota. There is no way they should be selling 10mb/s until they have a robust enough network to deliver 500kb/s.
Our ancient reactors and outlaw bankers are 1000 times more likely to cause those than terrorists. Appropriately the PATRIOT Act is applied about 1000 times less to terrorism than to the narcotics black market.
You weigh the item and the scale prints out the bar code after you input what you bought. Scanning produce is a weakness of the cashier system, not of self-scanning, since you know what you are buying.
The incentive for you to use the scanners is a more accurate checkout, not having to waste months of your life being corralled like an animal, and "instant coupons" that might save you money. It's pretty ridiculous having millions of people waving stuff in front of scanners all day for their occupation, but if you really want to save jobs cross out the bar-codes so that the prices have to be entered manually.
Slashdot Mirror
We already have a voluntary censorship tool: the mouse. Only content approved through clicking is displayed. User error might let a small amount through, but the eyelids provide adequate redundancy. Should hospital wards and nursing homes for quadriplegics whose eyelids have been burned off have filtered internet? This I admit is an important question that deserves investigation and debate.
The defense of torrents is still valid, but the courts are wrong. Without opposition repression will spread. Already in most countries the same corrupt legal theory that some legal things are also illegal has led to the criminalization of armed self-defense. Already Google has had to alter its website to block torrent suggestions, and governments are seizing unapproved websites. Copyright parasites are demanding royalties from Google, and are pressuring ISPs to filter connections.
Your state is probably already forcing you to help fund the production of crappy movies and sports entertainment. Not to mention the work you do to fund obsolete and redundant weapons systems, completely non-productive government employees, etc. Writing has less overhead, and the Belgian guy might actually uncover the socialist pedophile alien invasion. Maybe it's not worth it since we have reached a point of diminishing returns from the typing monkeys, but a proposal to fund them can hardly be called crazy compared to the government's current spending priorities.
Many before you have dreamed of a barn filled with heavy-breasted ladies. Few have succeeded.
Seems to be the best option to maximize the harm to Sony. Yes there is collateral damage, but it is comparatively minor. Taking people's money and being too cheap or indifferent to secure their personal information is fucked up and selfish to a greater degree.
Anytime a word is spoken against the sales tax unionized government employees unleash an army to preserve if not raise it. They have a lot of time on their hands, 10s of millions to spend on political action, and they helped most government representatives get elected.
States can't lose money from sales tax, since that money is still in their residents' pockets...before all of it and more was taken through property tax and fee increases. States are trying to squeeze money from their broke population, instead of looking at themselves, massively overstaffed, overpaid, and over-committed to boondoggles.
To be fair, you shouldn't pay sales tax at physical stores. No need to set up a complicated system. Sales tax is used principally to reduce the income and investment taxes for the richest state residents and provide an inconspicuous funding stream for pork projects and bloated salaries.
Sales taxes are the fairest and most reasonable tax.
Are you joking? Not only is the sales tax regressive, but it is the double-taxation of money that was already subjected to the income tax. It's not the forces of civilization who are writing these laws, but corporate aristocrats like the Waltons, who are happy with the peasants picking up most of their tax burden, and want to poke Amazon in the eye.
True, if we didn't sleep we could tweet a lot more.
If you're not in jail you aren't protesting hard enough.
The nature of government is expansionary. Since "lone wolves" have no ties to terrorism and few obvious characteristics, intensive surveillance and broad restrictive measures must be wielded against 100% of population.
The brain, released from the bonds of the body, then develops its full potential for telepathy and telekinesis. Soon all conscious life is living in a world that it constructed.
While some professional courses are "safer paths", the majority of people in college would be better off doing anything else with their time and money. Even if their efforts to start a company fail they will still be winning.
A VCR would have been cheaper.
DOCSIS 2 goes up to 30-40Mb/s which is more than enough for 250GB/month
Simply because you do not own the roads, you do not clean up the mess and you don't have to pay for all the costs of hospitalisation, rehabilitation and permanent disability. It's called vehicle registrations and drivers licence, don't like it, walk or take public transport.
You certainly have less claim to "owning" public transport than pathways through space, and walking without, within, or across roads is usually impossible or illegal. Just because a law exists doesn't means it's justified: the Germans had registrations and "licenses" too in the form of yellow stars.
Students pay, maybe even a "technology" fee. The difference is schools operate on a (mostly) non-profit basis and can be trusted to maintain the network for the benefit of the users, unlike ISPs that are more concerned with the shareholders. Contracts or regulation can't really keep them honest, since some shaping is probably always necessary. The answer is more competition, but that is hard to maintain in any market let alone a utility market.
It is the nature of some information to be public. Telephone numbers, birth records, real estate records, and flight plans. The average person is an open book for this information, so people who live high-profile lives can hardly complain when all it takes is a team of investigators from a national newspaper to discover theirs. Since they are too rich to even use a jet rental service, they could certainly afford more complicated holding companies to conceal their ownership or even fly decoy planes. But usually they want to be noticed.
When the purpose of the law is to protect a company at the expense of 100% of the local population the logic of the law isn't really worth examining. But a new government department not running a deficit is virtually impossible, as is calling a referendum for new spending. Communities probably wouldn't even have drinking water if those terms were applied.
Come on, while you might have a point if he was talking about his 5 roommates using 100s of GBs, 1.5GB is a ridiculous quota. There is no way they should be selling 10mb/s until they have a robust enough network to deliver 500kb/s.
Our ancient reactors and outlaw bankers are 1000 times more likely to cause those than terrorists. Appropriately the PATRIOT Act is applied about 1000 times less to terrorism than to the narcotics black market.
You weigh the item and the scale prints out the bar code after you input what you bought. Scanning produce is a weakness of the cashier system, not of self-scanning, since you know what you are buying.
The incentive for you to use the scanners is a more accurate checkout, not having to waste months of your life being corralled like an animal, and "instant coupons" that might save you money. It's pretty ridiculous having millions of people waving stuff in front of scanners all day for their occupation, but if you really want to save jobs cross out the bar-codes so that the prices have to be entered manually.
Normally the cashier looks at the shelf tag and enters the price manually, so if you are your own cashier...