If you're going to say that the fact that people don't write software for Linux is a disadvantage, I have an equal right to argue that the fact that people don't write malware for Linux is an advantage.
When you do layoffs you try to fire the unproductive people first (unless your management is a bunch of morons, or an entire department is getting kicked out) so no, it's not a binary thing.
The problem with banning stuff is that you're playing whack-a-mole. First you ban incandescent lightbulbs, then plasma TVs, and you keep doing it until you have a laundry list of banned items that everyone who wants to sell a new invention has to somehow check through. And then someone makes a new energy-wasting device and you have to ban that. The number of external costs is limited - you have CO2, use of electricity, road damage from transportation, a few hundred minor pollutants, but then you're done. Banning individual items requires you to keep working as times change and old technologies pass out of favor while new ones come in.
Also, you don't seem to understand the whole point of externality taxes. They aren't intended as a deterrent where you hope people aren't stupid enough to buy a $10000 plasma TV (although they do act as one), they're compensation. So the person who buys a $10000 plasma TV is paying the price for the electricity that he's wasting and the smoke that he's pumping into the air and the electronics that will later have to be recycled, so he's harming only himself.
1) Reading a book
2) Checking something in his bag/wallet/satchel
3) Just looking forward for whatever/no reason
4) The intersection in question features a turn, so you can't see beyond 50 metres, and the person is looking the other way for those two seconds
There's a big difference between polluting as a natural byproduct of your business and poisoning food supplies. Pollution affects the entire population, which is why externality taxes are a good way to handle it. Poisoning food supplies affects a few people severely, so it is the domain of lawsuits (and criminal charges).
By "full price", I am including externalities like pollution. So if a rich person uses $600 of electricity per day, he'll pay, for example, $220 for the actual production and $380 to cover the environmental damage he's causing. We wouldn't care how much smoke he's causing to be pummeled into the air since he's reimbursing us for the harm it's causing.
You could always make the other taxes more progressive to compensate. You could also use the money this would raise to give people the initial investment needed to upgrade to lower power-expenditure technology, proper insulation, etc.
Why not just make people pay the full price of the electricity they're using so they can leave lights, heating and AC on 24/7 but it's only they who are suffering.
And there is no valid reason to divert emergency services from others just because of one demented person. Where I come from, if you have a mental issue that causes you to harm other people, you go to the mental hospital.
If you're actually doing some commentary on the pieces of the songs that you're using, then yes. And no, an episode of Family Guy is not a small piece - each episode is a standalone work.
"You have the right to use small parts of something covered by copyright (like quoting a book for an essay) to comment on it, write a review about it or parody it and you're allowed to make copies for yourself to use."
Slashdot Mirror
If you're going to say that the fact that people don't write software for Linux is a disadvantage, I have an equal right to argue that the fact that people don't write malware for Linux is an advantage.
When you do layoffs you try to fire the unproductive people first (unless your management is a bunch of morons, or an entire department is getting kicked out) so no, it's not a binary thing.
Just like many other jobs where multiple people are working on one thing, if you add more people the productivity of each individual goes down a lot.
The problem with banning stuff is that you're playing whack-a-mole. First you ban incandescent lightbulbs, then plasma TVs, and you keep doing it until you have a laundry list of banned items that everyone who wants to sell a new invention has to somehow check through. And then someone makes a new energy-wasting device and you have to ban that. The number of external costs is limited - you have CO2, use of electricity, road damage from transportation, a few hundred minor pollutants, but then you're done. Banning individual items requires you to keep working as times change and old technologies pass out of favor while new ones come in.
Also, you don't seem to understand the whole point of externality taxes. They aren't intended as a deterrent where you hope people aren't stupid enough to buy a $10000 plasma TV (although they do act as one), they're compensation. So the person who buys a $10000 plasma TV is paying the price for the electricity that he's wasting and the smoke that he's pumping into the air and the electronics that will later have to be recycled, so he's harming only himself.
But then, Joe Average runs Linux.
PLEASE take me to your alternate reality!
A seeing person that's:
1) Reading a book
2) Checking something in his bag/wallet/satchel
3) Just looking forward for whatever/no reason
4) The intersection in question features a turn, so you can't see beyond 50 metres, and the person is looking the other way for those two seconds
That situation would be likely to kill a seeing person as well.
Of course, your dreams are the sanctuary of your mind, where no one can BUY NEW UNDERWEAR CHEAP
No car will ever go beyond 0.99 mph then. And what about the cars that are moving when this law is enacted? Something like this?
We could add beeping noises for when the light turns green / finish but don't start / red.
Let's get some free software people doing this job.
BOGUS = BOGUS Open Government for United States
I tried that and now my data is all 1s. Thanks a lot!
rot1040? Is that what the IRS uses to secure my private data?
There's a big difference between polluting as a natural byproduct of your business and poisoning food supplies. Pollution affects the entire population, which is why externality taxes are a good way to handle it. Poisoning food supplies affects a few people severely, so it is the domain of lawsuits (and criminal charges).
I pump smoke into the air. You incur an estimated $50 in health costs from its effects. I pay you $50.
If we charge people more for electricity, consumers will start to make choices based on energy efficiency and manufacturers will cater to them.
By "full price", I am including externalities like pollution. So if a rich person uses $600 of electricity per day, he'll pay, for example, $220 for the actual production and $380 to cover the environmental damage he's causing. We wouldn't care how much smoke he's causing to be pummeled into the air since he's reimbursing us for the harm it's causing.
You could always make the other taxes more progressive to compensate. You could also use the money this would raise to give people the initial investment needed to upgrade to lower power-expenditure technology, proper insulation, etc.
Why not just make people pay the full price of the electricity they're using so they can leave lights, heating and AC on 24/7 but it's only they who are suffering.
It's like diffusion, there is no controlling force but it just naturally happens out of the actions of individual molecules.
Smart victims use screen lock.
Ekiga Softphone, which comes with Ubuntu. I don't know about how good it is, but for simple talking it should suffice.
And there is no valid reason to divert emergency services from others just because of one demented person. Where I come from, if you have a mental issue that causes you to harm other people, you go to the mental hospital.
If you're actually doing some commentary on the pieces of the songs that you're using, then yes. And no, an episode of Family Guy is not a small piece - each episode is a standalone work.
"You have the right to use small parts of something covered by copyright (like quoting a book for an essay) to comment on it, write a review about it or parody it and you're allowed to make copies for yourself to use."
That covers most of it.