DirecTV would be allowed to sell service in Canada under these circumstances:
- They offer 4 times more Canadian stations than they do american stations.
- 75% of their American stations are blacked out for Canadians, and they offer all the current Canadian stations.
I might be off by a few percent on those numbers, but that's about the sum of it.
There's another point to this fight: Canada is a highly multicultural country, but the CRTC has created a melting pot TV, Canadian-only service. I know some of the local ethnic community and hacking the multicultural DishNetwork satellite is EXTREMELY popular, as stations such as Z-TV (indian programming) and others are simply not available in any format in Canada.
On the other hand, if you're an eskimo, you might want to check out Bell ExpressVu. There's an entire channel dedicated to you on there.
>So you're OK with me putting all your cellphone conversations online?
No, that's a violation of privacy.
Pirate's Den at no point ever offered any recordings of any service to the public. At best they offered information on how to individually recieve pirated TV service.
>After all, they're broadcast radio signals, using encryption (very weak encryption, at least in GSM's case) to control access. If you don't want me listening in, don't beam it at me!
In some cases none! In Canada (unlike the US where these are outlawed) you can buy scanners at your local Radio Shack that will pick up the complete cellphone and police bands. And it is totally legal to listen to it. The legalities of recording the transmissions are shaky though, but certainly not listening to them.
Sorry bud, but the other year the Supreme court "re-read" section 9.1(c) of the Radio Telecommunications Act that allowed hacking of non-authorised services to mean authorised by anyone (which, technically, means that if you write "authorised" on the piece of paper, it's authorised).
It sucks, but it's true. When it comes to big business (ie: Bell ExpressVu) the Supreme Court has no problems rewriting laws, rather the letting the government do it.
At the moment the law resides in this domain:
- Being caught actively hacking the service is illegal (ie: police find a pirate card in your receiver).
- Being caught with hacking tools is a grey area. You'll probably get prosecuted, but you could win, maybe.
- Buying "hacking tools" that aren't programmed for hacking already is, in general, legal, considering they all have alternate uses (however minor). Of course, the problem is, can you be sure the store doesn't sell any pre-programmed stuff? Because, if they do, and if they're caught, it'll be assumed you bought yours pre-programmed.
- Discussing hacking methods is definitely legal, but certainly would be enough to get the RCMP suspicious of you.
IANAL, and don't take that as legal advice. Oh, and be smart, build the stuff yourself. An ISO-7816 programmer only takes one chip...
>Might only be one case, but it still worked fairly well in this one.
That's because your brother is a decent, moral, law abiding person. While driving at that speed is usually dangerous, the people society really need to worry about are the hardcore criminals that will stop at nothing to get their way. I doubt your brother would purposely harm anyone without a legitimate reason, and I bet if he were given his license back the day after being caught speeding, he wouldn't drive like a maniac anymore.
He isn't really a "bad driver", just a regular driver that needed some helpful guidance. I see no reason why he needs to be treated as a criminal, like those that would habitually drive like crazy mofos.:-)
>Generally, these restrictions take the form of requiring you to get a "building permit". Glad you agree with them.
No, no, no. That's not how it works.
These restrictions take the form of laws. As with all laws you have the freedom to break them. You simply pay for the consequences of doing so. An intelligent society simply sets the consequences high enough that most people aren't interested in doing such things.
_That's_ what the libertarian philosophy is all about. Freedom. Freedom is not assuming you are a criminal that has to have their activities monitored like some scoundrel.
Freedom is being able to do what you feel is right, and paying your dues if you make mistakes.
>Go look at the deed that says it's your property. Determine the issuing authority. Unless it says "God Almighty", I think someone can tell you what you can and can't do on your property.
And that's the problem, isn't it?
It's the thought that you never really do own your own property that makes it illegal for gays in Texas to do whatever they like inside their own homes as long as nobody else has to hear about it.
I think it's high time to take the diapers off society and let people be responsible for their own actions.
"Judge Osteen determined that the EPA had "cherry picked" its data and had grossly manipulated "scientific procedure and scientific norms" in order to rationalize the agency's own preconceived conclusion that passive smoking caused 3,000 lung cancer deaths a year. In addition, Osteen ruled that the EPA had violated the Radon Act, which was the agency's authority for disseminating its "de facto regulatory scheme" that intended to prohibit passive smoking."
So, let's see, no they weren't lying. In other news, everyone on earth is white. How did I come to that conclusion? I only interviewed the British Royal Family.
So, on one hand, no, they're not lying. On the other hand, they're lying to themselves.
>Whenever anybody so much as mentions cigarettes, he just votes whichever way best conveys "I love Philip Moris!" The guy's a hack.
And you libel a perfectly innocent man without providing any proof to back up your claims. People like you are the foundation of bad EPA studies like this one.
>The only reason that story gets spread around is Junk Science linked to it, and so everybody assumes it's cool and rebelious to talk about it.
No, it gets spread around because NUMEROUS studies have shown it to be false. Here's a link to at least 8 major international studies that have shown that SHS doesn't cause lung cancer. And, moreso, improves the health of young children (don't believe me? Ask the WHO). In fact, here's some facts the EPA gave judge Osteen to "back up" their case.
Svendsen Study (1987): No Dose Response Effect Kalandidi Study (1987): No Dose Response Effect Masi Study (1988): Strongest effect in Men for exposure before age 17 yr. Kauffmann Study (1989): Increased risks for respiratory symptoms did not reach statistical significance Hole Study (1989): No significant increase in risk of symptoms Schwartz and Zeger (1990): Over-reporting by exposed subjects may bias results
Clearly, if this is the best evidence the EPA has, it's pathetic.
>More or less, if you're trying to be Libertarian, you have to make sure the new system makes enough extra money to still hold a profit after you clean up the corpses of the poor people that are going to starve to death.
You clearly don't have the slightest clue about libertarian ideology. Study it more and get back to me when you understand it better.
BTW: Far more people died in communist gulags and exploding nuclear power plants than have ever died under a free market, democratic system. There is positively no evidence to back up your case, as far as I can tell.
>If, for example, you vote to eliminate building permits, you have to be willing to pay to deal with the increased number of abandoned Barbie Dream-Deathtraps that will produce.
Why would I pay for that? That's a communist notion, that the populous should pay for the mistakes of the one. The builder of the deathtrap would be the one to pay, clearly. Where you got the idea that you and I should pay, well, I really don't know.
>There's plenty of wiggle room in the death/money scale, but between the costs of the hyperspecialization you're looking for in telecommunications, and the luxury-centered healthcare system, I think you're going to have to either get used to the stench of rotting corpses, or cut off your $2000 a month DSL line.
??? You are confusing me. More people have died as a result of communism than any other system. Look at what Communist China does when it has problems. People are only expendable when they have no self-control.
Wow. I really don't have much else to say other than that you should put down the hammer and sicle for a moment and consider why communist flags are blood red.
>But since real societies are filled with those with less than an acceptable consideration for others and those who seem to actively defy common sense, we need to test and verify before allowing people on to the road or to build a building.
Whether or not we require licenses people drive without them anyways.
Unless you build DRM into cars and require drivers to swipe their license to start the car, bad drivers will still find keys and drive. If they don't own vehicles, some of them will even steal them.
Just watch an episode of COPS and tell me how long it takes before someone is caught driving without a license. And, for the proverbial cherry on top, listen when the police officer says how many times they've been caught doing it.
Licenses are just another government tax and have never stopped a bad driver from driving. And, unless you turn the country into a police state, they never will.
Personally...
on
fvwm Turns Ten
·
· Score: 2, Informative
>shepd, I'm guessing you are not a native Canadian. If so, you are quite the iconoclast from what I can tell.
Actually, I am born and raised Canadian. I started despising the level of government services here when I discovered, as an atheist, I'd have to pay for religious indoctrination of others (the separate school system). It's quite disgusting that my money will pay for students to learn the the earth was created by a malevolent God in 6 days, and that everthing alive was inbred from two "original" progenetors of that species. No offense to the religious intended, though.
The whole teacher's strike thing, where my taxes didn't decrease despite a reduced level of service, pushed it over the edge. In the real world (tm) schools with striking teachers would either hire scabs or go out of business (prefe.
And then my union started abusing me. That pretty much cut it right there, and at that point I turned libertarian.
It's fun explaining your political views to virtually every person you meet in your town (only if they ask who I'm voting for, cause nobody here knows what libertarians are). I think a lot of Ontarians haven't considered just what Mike Harris was really working towards (to a certain degree -- there's a lot of personal freedom issues that he never dealt with). Perhaps if they did they'd just have voted libertarian and been done with it.;-)
Now, to see if my podunk riding actually has a libertarian candidate to vote for...
>Environmental Protection. The phrase "The fox guarding the Henhouse" applies to any private company. And I doubt that people who want less government would want the Sierra Club providing this function.
We'd be better with neither. The EPAlies through it's teeth, despite court orders not to. The Sierra Club does whatever the hell it likes regardless of laws (stupid or not).
I say let the people decide for themselves what level of "environmental protection" is right for them. They could either democratically vote to hire a company to support their views (locally, of course) or, better yet, simply speak with their wallets.
>Fire and Emergency Services. I can see "Sorry, your insurance doesn't cover this type of emergency - what is your credit card number". Yes, I know some ambulances are run by private companies.
And all Doctors take the hippocratic oath. You'll be "saved" despite having no funds. However, if you want quality, speedy healthcare, better than what we (in my province, for example) have now, you _should_ have to pay. It only makes sense, and it gives people just one more reason not to sit on their duffs jobless.
I'd have said the opposite.:) Take the GST, for example. A Canadian tax with collection procedures so complicated, some question wether it actually gathers enough to pay for it's own administration (it does, but it doesn't leave a whole lot left). However, minus the cost to business (passed on to consumers) this tax costs much more than it brings in.
And then there's the dreaded audits... Help!
The fact is that if we were to completely privatize everything reasonbly possible, taxes would be so low I doubt there'd be enough to collect to make it interesting to defraud.
>It's always easier to cut a few corners to do a crappy job.
And, at the same time, you can spend more and get the other half of the customers.
That's why both wal-mart and Saks 5th Avenue sell clothes. They're both the same end product, just one of the companies doesn't cut corners. Both of them operate just fine, and give consumers a choice.
Perhaps I _want_ to cut certain corners? Maybe a gravel road to my house would suit me just fine rather than a paved one? Maybe I live so far away from a city that having the same level of police protection is wasteful? Perhaps I want more telecommunications service than a 14.4 kbps maximum phone line? I wish I could make that decision rather than a government office miles removed.
>And most non-profit organizations aren't any better - would you want the Jehovah's Witnesses in charge of building permits?
Actually, I'd advocate no building permits. If you own land, you should be allowed to do anything you like with it, as long as you don't endanger lives or harm the property of others (and perhaps a handful of other things).
Zoning regulations (and building permits) are horrible, and, in fact, increased the cost of leasing for my company by 60% because the location we wanted was zoned for Convenience stores only (not computer stores) and we had to find accomodation elsewhere, at an inflated price (which we certainly will pass on to customers, I'm not a charity.;-)
Deregulation has been no more of a failure than Capitalism in (ex) Soviet Russia.
The fact is that monopolistic companies, set free, haven't a clue how to operate. Some of them will wither and die, and in the process, fuck things up royally.
>Look at the manufactured California energy crisis.
Yay. In 20 years, tell me how things are. Converting from communism to capitalism takes time, and there'll be growing pains as things move ahead to a brighter future.
Nobody said the change would be easy. But, if you believe in the free market, rather than communism, then you know it will happen, given time.
They moved my Province (Ontario) to free market electricity not so long ago, and the prices doubled. People bitched and moaned, and the government re-socialized them to the old rates. Now I'm stuck with pathetic power that goes out weekly, and it takes 3 hours to fix a snapped power pole on a weekend. That's because of the old maxim:
- Cheap
- Reliable
- Fast
Pick two.
I'd rather have the last two, myself. Too bad I can't because of all the communists.
>If they only reason they exist at all is because the federal government keeps pumping billions of dollars into them, why should we pretend that they should be private industry?
Then the answer is simple. Take away the funding and allow airlines to set their own rates. People will complain at the higher cost of travel, but with the increased disposable income from tax rebates, it won't matter -- they'll be able to afford it.
>Some things just make more sense to be handled by the federal government.
I haven't seen a single thing, other than the court system, that would make any sense to be handled by the feds (or any other level of government). Even the police are worried -- they know rent-a-cops do the same job at half the cost, and that if there were a free market, they'd be booted in no time.
>However, I don't think that every city block should look like a Fort Apache from a Hollywood western because of the number of poles required to run lines to their own customers.
Most power poles are either owned by the city or your local electric company. In the first case they are public property and rented to telcos, etc. In the second case, they are usually still public property since few places have privatized electricity.
Even if they are private poles, a company would be stupid to stop you from using them (at a modest fee).
>In Sweden they are currently testing the no speeding and no drunk driving DRM. There is talk about making these "features" manditory for all new cars sold in Sweden.
Interesting. Of course, this will destroy car sales as we know it, since if this happens there is no longer a difference between a Neon and a Porsche, apart from the "stylish looks".
Perhaps Sweden will be communism's last stand, finally getting to the "ideal" of forcing everyone to drive the same crapmobile together.
I've had that drive for over a year and have had positively no problems with it. I generally use nothing other than $1 DVD-Rs for writing (and it's why I didn't get DVD+R -- to get discs that cheap for +R I'd have to mail-order them).
I'm sorry to hear you've had troubles with yours.
BTW: The firmware was locked so that Pioneer wouldn't have to deal with people burning out their lasers on new 4x media.
Slashdot Mirror
DirecTV would be allowed to sell service in Canada under these circumstances:
- They offer 4 times more Canadian stations than they do american stations.
- 75% of their American stations are blacked out for Canadians, and they offer all the current Canadian stations.
I might be off by a few percent on those numbers, but that's about the sum of it.
There's another point to this fight: Canada is a highly multicultural country, but the CRTC has created a melting pot TV, Canadian-only service. I know some of the local ethnic community and hacking the multicultural DishNetwork satellite is EXTREMELY popular, as stations such as Z-TV (indian programming) and others are simply not available in any format in Canada.
On the other hand, if you're an eskimo, you might want to check out Bell ExpressVu. There's an entire channel dedicated to you on there.
>So you're OK with me putting all your cellphone conversations online?
No, that's a violation of privacy.
Pirate's Den at no point ever offered any recordings of any service to the public. At best they offered information on how to individually recieve pirated TV service.
>After all, they're broadcast radio signals, using encryption (very weak encryption, at least in GSM's case) to control access. If you don't want me listening in, don't beam it at me!
In some cases none! In Canada (unlike the US where these are outlawed) you can buy scanners at your local Radio Shack that will pick up the complete cellphone and police bands. And it is totally legal to listen to it. The legalities of recording the transmissions are shaky though, but certainly not listening to them.
Sorry bud, but the other year the Supreme court "re-read" section 9.1(c) of the Radio Telecommunications Act that allowed hacking of non-authorised services to mean authorised by anyone (which, technically, means that if you write "authorised" on the piece of paper, it's authorised).
It sucks, but it's true. When it comes to big business (ie: Bell ExpressVu) the Supreme Court has no problems rewriting laws, rather the letting the government do it.
At the moment the law resides in this domain:
- Being caught actively hacking the service is illegal (ie: police find a pirate card in your receiver).
- Being caught with hacking tools is a grey area. You'll probably get prosecuted, but you could win, maybe.
- Buying "hacking tools" that aren't programmed for hacking already is, in general, legal, considering they all have alternate uses (however minor). Of course, the problem is, can you be sure the store doesn't sell any pre-programmed stuff? Because, if they do, and if they're caught, it'll be assumed you bought yours pre-programmed.
- Discussing hacking methods is definitely legal, but certainly would be enough to get the RCMP suspicious of you.
IANAL, and don't take that as legal advice. Oh, and be smart, build the stuff yourself. An ISO-7816 programmer only takes one chip...
>Might only be one case, but it still worked fairly well in this one.
:-)
That's because your brother is a decent, moral, law abiding person. While driving at that speed is usually dangerous, the people society really need to worry about are the hardcore criminals that will stop at nothing to get their way. I doubt your brother would purposely harm anyone without a legitimate reason, and I bet if he were given his license back the day after being caught speeding, he wouldn't drive like a maniac anymore.
He isn't really a "bad driver", just a regular driver that needed some helpful guidance. I see no reason why he needs to be treated as a criminal, like those that would habitually drive like crazy mofos.
Again, just my 2 cents.
>Generally, these restrictions take the form of requiring you to get a "building permit". Glad you agree with them.
No, no, no. That's not how it works.
These restrictions take the form of laws. As with all laws you have the freedom to break them. You simply pay for the consequences of doing so. An intelligent society simply sets the consequences high enough that most people aren't interested in doing such things.
_That's_ what the libertarian philosophy is all about. Freedom. Freedom is not assuming you are a criminal that has to have their activities monitored like some scoundrel.
Freedom is being able to do what you feel is right, and paying your dues if you make mistakes.
>Go look at the deed that says it's your property. Determine the issuing authority. Unless it says "God Almighty", I think someone can tell you what you can and can't do on your property.
And that's the problem, isn't it?
It's the thought that you never really do own your own property that makes it illegal for gays in Texas to do whatever they like inside their own homes as long as nobody else has to hear about it.
I think it's high time to take the diapers off society and let people be responsible for their own actions.
>He disputes none of their findings, and peer reviews of that study have backed it up.
Huh?
Let me give you a quote from another site:
"Judge Osteen determined that the EPA had "cherry picked" its data and had grossly manipulated "scientific procedure and scientific norms" in order to rationalize the agency's own preconceived conclusion that passive smoking caused 3,000 lung cancer deaths a year. In addition, Osteen ruled that the EPA had violated the Radon Act, which was the agency's authority for disseminating its "de facto regulatory scheme" that intended to prohibit passive smoking."
So, let's see, no they weren't lying. In other news, everyone on earth is white. How did I come to that conclusion? I only interviewed the British Royal Family.
So, on one hand, no, they're not lying. On the other hand, they're lying to themselves.
>Whenever anybody so much as mentions cigarettes, he just votes whichever way best conveys "I love Philip Moris!" The guy's a hack.
And you libel a perfectly innocent man without providing any proof to back up your claims. People like you are the foundation of bad EPA studies like this one.
>The only reason that story gets spread around is Junk Science linked to it, and so everybody assumes it's cool and rebelious to talk about it.
No, it gets spread around because NUMEROUS studies have shown it to be false. Here's a link to at least 8 major international studies that have shown that SHS doesn't cause lung cancer. And, moreso, improves the health of young children (don't believe me? Ask the WHO). In fact, here's some facts the EPA gave judge Osteen to "back up" their case.
Svendsen Study (1987): No Dose Response Effect
Kalandidi Study (1987): No Dose Response Effect
Masi Study (1988): Strongest effect in Men for exposure before age 17 yr.
Kauffmann Study (1989): Increased risks for respiratory symptoms did not reach statistical significance
Hole Study (1989): No significant increase in risk of symptoms
Schwartz and Zeger (1990): Over-reporting by exposed subjects may bias results
Clearly, if this is the best evidence the EPA has, it's pathetic.
>More or less, if you're trying to be Libertarian, you have to make sure the new system makes enough extra money to still hold a profit after you clean up the corpses of the poor people that are going to starve to death.
You clearly don't have the slightest clue about libertarian ideology. Study it more and get back to me when you understand it better.
BTW: Far more people died in communist gulags and exploding nuclear power plants than have ever died under a free market, democratic system. There is positively no evidence to back up your case, as far as I can tell.
>If, for example, you vote to eliminate building permits, you have to be willing to pay to deal with the increased number of abandoned Barbie Dream-Deathtraps that will produce.
Why would I pay for that? That's a communist notion, that the populous should pay for the mistakes of the one. The builder of the deathtrap would be the one to pay, clearly. Where you got the idea that you and I should pay, well, I really don't know.
>There's plenty of wiggle room in the death/money scale, but between the costs of the hyperspecialization you're looking for in telecommunications, and the luxury-centered healthcare system, I think you're going to have to either get used to the stench of rotting corpses, or cut off your $2000 a month DSL line.
??? You are confusing me. More people have died as a result of communism than any other system. Look at what Communist China does when it has problems. People are only expendable when they have no self-control.
Wow. I really don't have much else to say other than that you should put down the hammer and sicle for a moment and consider why communist flags are blood red.
>But since real societies are filled with those with less than an acceptable consideration for others and those who seem to actively defy common sense, we need to test and verify before allowing people on to the road or to build a building.
Whether or not we require licenses people drive without them anyways.
Unless you build DRM into cars and require drivers to swipe their license to start the car, bad drivers will still find keys and drive. If they don't own vehicles, some of them will even steal them.
Just watch an episode of COPS and tell me how long it takes before someone is caught driving without a license. And, for the proverbial cherry on top, listen when the police officer says how many times they've been caught doing it.
Licenses are just another government tax and have never stopped a bad driver from driving. And, unless you turn the country into a police state, they never will.
I find VTWM suits my needs better.
;-)
If you're going to go lean and mean, why not go all the way?
>shepd, I'm guessing you are not a native Canadian. If so, you are quite the iconoclast from what I can tell.
;-)
Actually, I am born and raised Canadian. I started despising the level of government services here when I discovered, as an atheist, I'd have to pay for religious indoctrination of others (the separate school system). It's quite disgusting that my money will pay for students to learn the the earth was created by a malevolent God in 6 days, and that everthing alive was inbred from two "original" progenetors of that species. No offense to the religious intended, though.
The whole teacher's strike thing, where my taxes didn't decrease despite a reduced level of service, pushed it over the edge. In the real world (tm) schools with striking teachers would either hire scabs or go out of business (prefe.
And then my union started abusing me. That pretty much cut it right there, and at that point I turned libertarian.
It's fun explaining your political views to virtually every person you meet in your town (only if they ask who I'm voting for, cause nobody here knows what libertarians are). I think a lot of Ontarians haven't considered just what Mike Harris was really working towards (to a certain degree -- there's a lot of personal freedom issues that he never dealt with). Perhaps if they did they'd just have voted libertarian and been done with it.
Now, to see if my podunk riding actually has a libertarian candidate to vote for...
>Environmental Protection. The phrase "The fox guarding the Henhouse" applies to any private company. And I doubt that people who want less government would want the Sierra Club providing this function.
:) Take the GST, for example. A Canadian tax with collection procedures so complicated, some question wether it actually gathers enough to pay for it's own administration (it does, but it doesn't leave a whole lot left). However, minus the cost to business (passed on to consumers) this tax costs much more than it brings in.
;-)
We'd be better with neither. The EPA lies through it's teeth, despite court orders not to. The Sierra Club does whatever the hell it likes regardless of laws (stupid or not).
I say let the people decide for themselves what level of "environmental protection" is right for them. They could either democratically vote to hire a company to support their views (locally, of course) or, better yet, simply speak with their wallets.
>Fire and Emergency Services. I can see "Sorry, your insurance doesn't cover this type of emergency - what is your credit card number". Yes, I know some ambulances are run by private companies.
And all Doctors take the hippocratic oath. You'll be "saved" despite having no funds. However, if you want quality, speedy healthcare, better than what we (in my province, for example) have now, you _should_ have to pay. It only makes sense, and it gives people just one more reason not to sit on their duffs jobless.
>Tax Collection. Sorry, can't trust non-government entities.
I'd have said the opposite.
And then there's the dreaded audits... Help!
The fact is that if we were to completely privatize everything reasonbly possible, taxes would be so low I doubt there'd be enough to collect to make it interesting to defraud.
>It's always easier to cut a few corners to do a crappy job.
And, at the same time, you can spend more and get the other half of the customers.
That's why both wal-mart and Saks 5th Avenue sell clothes. They're both the same end product, just one of the companies doesn't cut corners. Both of them operate just fine, and give consumers a choice.
Perhaps I _want_ to cut certain corners? Maybe a gravel road to my house would suit me just fine rather than a paved one? Maybe I live so far away from a city that having the same level of police protection is wasteful? Perhaps I want more telecommunications service than a 14.4 kbps maximum phone line? I wish I could make that decision rather than a government office miles removed.
>And most non-profit organizations aren't any better - would you want the Jehovah's Witnesses in charge of building permits?
Actually, I'd advocate no building permits. If you own land, you should be allowed to do anything you like with it, as long as you don't endanger lives or harm the property of others (and perhaps a handful of other things).
Zoning regulations (and building permits) are horrible, and, in fact, increased the cost of leasing for my company by 60% because the location we wanted was zoned for Convenience stores only (not computer stores) and we had to find accomodation elsewhere, at an inflated price (which we certainly will pass on to customers, I'm not a charity.
Hey, just my 2 cents!
>Deregulation has been a huge failure.
Deregulation has been no more of a failure than Capitalism in (ex) Soviet Russia.
The fact is that monopolistic companies, set free, haven't a clue how to operate. Some of them will wither and die, and in the process, fuck things up royally.
>Look at the manufactured California energy crisis.
Yay. In 20 years, tell me how things are. Converting from communism to capitalism takes time, and there'll be growing pains as things move ahead to a brighter future.
Nobody said the change would be easy. But, if you believe in the free market, rather than communism, then you know it will happen, given time.
They moved my Province (Ontario) to free market electricity not so long ago, and the prices doubled. People bitched and moaned, and the government re-socialized them to the old rates. Now I'm stuck with pathetic power that goes out weekly, and it takes 3 hours to fix a snapped power pole on a weekend. That's because of the old maxim:
- Cheap
- Reliable
- Fast
Pick two.
I'd rather have the last two, myself. Too bad I can't because of all the communists.
>If they only reason they exist at all is because the federal government keeps pumping billions of dollars into them, why should we pretend that they should be private industry?
Then the answer is simple. Take away the funding and allow airlines to set their own rates. People will complain at the higher cost of travel, but with the increased disposable income from tax rebates, it won't matter -- they'll be able to afford it.
>Some things just make more sense to be handled by the federal government.
I haven't seen a single thing, other than the court system, that would make any sense to be handled by the feds (or any other level of government). Even the police are worried -- they know rent-a-cops do the same job at half the cost, and that if there were a free market, they'd be booted in no time.
>However, I don't think that every city block should look like a Fort Apache from a Hollywood western because of the number of poles required to run lines to their own customers.
Most power poles are either owned by the city or your local electric company. In the first case they are public property and rented to telcos, etc. In the second case, they are usually still public property since few places have privatized electricity.
Even if they are private poles, a company would be stupid to stop you from using them (at a modest fee).
>In Sweden they are currently testing the no speeding and no drunk driving DRM. There is talk about making these "features" manditory for all new cars sold in Sweden.
Interesting. Of course, this will destroy car sales as we know it, since if this happens there is no longer a difference between a Neon and a Porsche, apart from the "stylish looks".
Perhaps Sweden will be communism's last stand, finally getting to the "ideal" of forcing everyone to drive the same crapmobile together.
>So what is your secret?
:-)
No secret, except start early (5 years old on my case) and have lucky eye-genetics.
If your eyesight goes bad quickly, hey, I feel bad for you, but it's your body's fault (normally), not your computer's/TV's fault.
>Sitting in front of a CRT all day playing games does wonders for your eyes.
Actually, I specifically asked my opthamologist about this, and she explained to me there is no link between CRT use and eye problems.
Well, that and I've been using one for about 20 years, and my eyesight is still 20/20.
Yep, that's why both the Apple and Real service suck. They both use wacky proprietary file formats (and Apple includes DRM).
At least the real audio codecs work in Linux, though.
>If there's a 1.2.3.4 in the real world, and you give Joe Shmoe on your private network 1.2.3.4, the router's gotta pick one or the other, bub.
Exactly. It picks the internal address.
You missed the whole joke, unfortunately. When you firewall everyone outside, why worry about re-using their addresses?
I didn't edit the second line that well, let's try again:
1 track @ Apple - $.99 + $1,000 (for a computer to download the songs) = $1000.99
That's better!
And the real math, for the 90% of users that don't do Mac (tm):
1 track @ RealR - $.79 + $9.95 = $10.74
1 tracks @ Apple - $9.90 + $1,000 (for a computer to download the songs) = $1000.99
Looks like for 90% of all computers users Real is a steal.
I've had that drive for over a year and have had positively no problems with it. I generally use nothing other than $1 DVD-Rs for writing (and it's why I didn't get DVD+R -- to get discs that cheap for +R I'd have to mail-order them).
I'm sorry to hear you've had troubles with yours.
BTW: The firmware was locked so that Pioneer wouldn't have to deal with people burning out their lasers on new 4x media.
>who would screw with that?
Women?
Nahhh....
Yah, and gullible isn't in the dictionary.
Show me where in the berne convention pornography is excepted. I've even linked you to the appropriate section. HTH.
>If the BIOS pings a server using the onboard nic before it tries to bootstrap to a drive, it would be very difficult to disable this...
So wait... If you have a faulty motherboard, you're assured your hard drive will be erased.
Man that sucks. Sucks way worse than a broken onboard NIC.
Well, $12 CDN for 4 movies at a drive in. Of which all but Malibu's Most Wanted were much better.
Here I sit brokenhearted,
Paid $3 and and wasn't outsmarted.
>Kazaa is a closed source network so if Kazza dies Kazaa Lite wont exist.
No, it'll just be hacked to work with giFT.