And there's the whole other class of people who would buy the 2001 Jetta TDI and call you a sucker for spending 30k on a new car when you can buy used for 15k...
Well, yea, but probably no leather, no heated seats, no premium sound system (or, if there is one, it's been destroyed by the previous owner and/or their teenage son)... definitely no Bluetooth.... Which was my point, that a lot of people apparently missed - OP implied that the only way to have a nice, luxurious car was to spend shit-tons of money, and I contend that the only people who think that way are the ones that have more money than sense. I stand by that remark.
...I'm not one of those people though - grats on the car! My dad got one (in wagon form) many moons ago (2001? 2004? something older...) and gets better mileage than I can get from my motorbike.
Had an equally-equipped Sportwagen been available at the time (without a 250 mile drive), we probably would have gotten one too; leave it to V-Dub to make the station wagon cool again.
Spend your money how you want, on what you want. As long as you pay your taxes and follow the law, who gives a shit what you spend YOUR money on.
Judging from the replies? Lots of people.
'Course, I couldn't give a shit less what kind of cars other people buy, but if those people insist the only way to have a nice car is to spend almost $100,000, I'm going to call them suckers.
Got a problem with that? Good - being able to hold and express differing opinions is one of the things that's supposed to make this country awesome.
People have different tastes from you. That doesn't make them suckers.
Having different tastes isn't what makes them suckers; thinking that the only way to get a quality luxury car is to spend spend spend, as the parent post implied, is what does it. As was pointed out by another poster, you can get leather, heated seats, et. al. for less than 20 grand.
Nothing bars private companies putting plate scanners out there to keep track of where you go.
Except for the fact the scanners have to be somewhere, and being on public property would require a permit and approval from the government. Scanners placed on private property would be legal with the landowners permission, but you would need landowners that don't care about privacy. Scanners on commercial premises, other than those operated by the business itself for its own safety, would probably drive away a high enough ratio of customers that the business would not allow the private company put any scanners there either.
Yea, $Deity help us all the day some private company or government agency learns about the concept of bribery.
I bought a 2012 VW Jetta TDI brand new off the showroom floor last year; every option except the nav system ('cuz I'm not stupid) - leather, heated seats, premium Fender stereo system, the works. The damn thing gets 40-60 MPG, has mountains of torque (handy here on the Ozark Plateau, which isn't very plateau at all), and is generally a damn nice way to get around.
All for less than $30K.
Personally I have no idea why people spend this kind of money on a car.
Some people want a little more luxury, more features, etc, and if they can afford it, then why not?
They're going after that one next. What with the new gun banning laws, attacks on "stand your ground" laws. Heck most of the states have gotten rid of the Castle doctrine as well.
Much as the feds would like it to be so, that's not the case. In fact, there are only 5 states (and the District of Columbia) that either do not have any castle doctrine or stand-your-ground laws, or the ones they do are too weak to be effective.
um you do know some fish have wings and do in fact fly right? Or did you miss that class too?
Yea, I knew some jackass would latch onto the fringe case of flying fish (which you should know don't actually fly, they glide short distances). Hence the reason I went the opposite direction of asking a bird what it's like under water.
Of course, it matters not, as it has fuck-all to do with the conversation at hand.
Kriminy, some people will come up with any old excuse to argue...
I know, it's crazy. It's almost as if the point of the war on drugs isn't actually to stop the drug trade at all!
This is why I piss on Nixon's grave several times a year.
I like to think that old Tricky Dick ( who initiated the war on drugs ) is sitting on a sinking raft in the middle of a lake of fire, in hell, but that he has a live video feed to people pissing on his grave.
That's nice, but if your goal is to piss on the grave of the man who started America's war on personal freedom, you've got the wrong guy (granted, Nixon didn't do us any favors).
The headstone you're looking for is that of one Harry J. Anslinger, the first US drug czar.
Meh, was young and impressionable (plus, excited about voting for the first time).
Didn't make the same mistake twice, and I won't ever make that one again.
The racist Democratic Party always takes advantage of youthful inexperience and exuberance. You won't make that mistake, but there's always a new crop of kids who will. Until population starts to decline instead of rise, the stupid-18yo vote will be a factor.
Yea, yea, and the racist Republican party always takes advantage of the bitterness and closed-mindedness that comes with age. Fact is, they're both 2 sides of the same damn coin, and the sooner partisans such as yourself come to realize that, the better off we'll all be.
So, my points that downloading illegally does nothing but help enact even more draconian legislation regarding copyright, and that the only effective means of changing this practice is to universally boycott their products, stand firm.
Doesn't sound like it. The way you made it sound, they'll spin anything to support their draconian agenda, so no matter what happens, copyright infringement will be blamed.
Lol, yea, they totally will (hell, they already have, just do a little google-fu and you'll see how ridiculous some of the MAFIAA's rationales are). However, boycotting actually does hurt them in the long run, because A) they don't make any money if nobody buys their products, and B) eventually, if enough people join the boycott, they won't be able to say, 'It has value because people are stealing it.'
Copying those things isn't the problem; what you would then do with that information is the problem. In the case of copying a movie, no such things happen.
Your analogy seems rather ridiculous.
So does your ideology that it's OK to take things or copy that you do not have permission to take or copy.
To each his own, I guess. Good luck not getting busted (and I really do mean that sincerely, even if I personally think you're doing something wrong; Fuck the MPAA).
I'm not sure it is possible anymore. Those fucks just obtained right to jail citizens for indefinite time without court order (NDAA injunction has been struck down by Obama's cronies in 13 circuit, and good lock with SCOTUS). US of A 2013 reminds me Germany 1936. Scary times ahead...
Which is why it's more important now than ever before in our national history to honor and respect each other's 2nd Amendment rights.
The soapbox, ballot box, and jury box have been compromised.
I wonder how the government would feel if someone were to put up a website that gives real-time information about the location of members of congress, based on cell-phone data? Surely that wouldn't make them feel a bit uneasy, even if there were no publicly-ill intentions, right?
And WE don't need a warrant to vote for the first presidential candidate who promises to rock your world and make sure your out of control ass gets curbed, and to prosecute everyone who failed to honor their pledge to UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION. In fact maybe the NSA doesn't even need to exist. We won WW2 without you.
Sincerely, voting citizens who have a clue and a care
Tried it, didn't work - remember "Hope and Change?" Hell, not only did dude fail to uphold his campaign promises, the motherfucker doubled-down on anti-Constitutional activities!
Don't feel bad, I voted for the bastard once myself.
Soo... since it's pretty well established at this point that the DOJ does not respect the authority of the US Constitution, it would stand to reason that We, the People, should as a matter of principle and duty refuse to respect the authority of the DOJ, correct?
Bullshit like this is why I feel an irresistible urge to pimp-slap someone every time I hear the Constitution referred to as "a living document."
When you call 911 with cardiac symptoms and then drop off the call, it's useful information.
To the 911 operators.
But that doesn't answer his question: Why does Verizon store his info, and for much, much longer than what would be reasonably required for emergency response purposes?
For years games was a big argument to have windows installed on a machine. But the arrival of the 360 made it for me so easy to dump windows for linux on my desktop and buy a macbook pro for on the go.
Funny, Windows 7 took me in the opposite direction - skipped the AdBox 360 and started getting all my games on PC so I could mod to my hearts' content.
Slashdot Mirror
That seems to be the direction we're heading in.
I guess if you want to be an optimist, you can take comfort in the fact they aren't using poor people as food... yet, anyway.
Everyone knows the internet is a series of tubes.
You mean it's not a big truck?
It's time to start assuming that you can't trust anyone with your data.
FTFY.
Welcome to the world of Johnny Mnemonic, minus the cerebral implants and Henry Rollins' terrible acting.
Ever consider a dual radio set up? That way, you can have your secure network, and an open net for guests.
And there's the whole other class of people who would buy the 2001 Jetta TDI and call you a sucker for spending 30k on a new car when you can buy used for 15k...
Well, yea, but probably no leather, no heated seats, no premium sound system (or, if there is one, it's been destroyed by the previous owner and/or their teenage son)... definitely no Bluetooth. ... Which was my point, that a lot of people apparently missed - OP implied that the only way to have a nice, luxurious car was to spend shit-tons of money, and I contend that the only people who think that way are the ones that have more money than sense. I stand by that remark.
...I'm not one of those people though - grats on the car! My dad got one (in wagon form) many moons ago (2001? 2004? something older...) and gets better mileage than I can get from my motorbike.
Had an equally-equipped Sportwagen been available at the time (without a 250 mile drive), we probably would have gotten one too; leave it to V-Dub to make the station wagon cool again.
Spend your money how you want, on what you want. As long as you pay your taxes and follow the law, who gives a shit what you spend YOUR money on.
Judging from the replies? Lots of people.
'Course, I couldn't give a shit less what kind of cars other people buy, but if those people insist the only way to have a nice car is to spend almost $100,000, I'm going to call them suckers.
Got a problem with that? Good - being able to hold and express differing opinions is one of the things that's supposed to make this country awesome.
Some people are suckers.
People have different tastes from you. That doesn't make them suckers.
Having different tastes isn't what makes them suckers; thinking that the only way to get a quality luxury car is to spend spend spend, as the parent post implied, is what does it. As was pointed out by another poster, you can get leather, heated seats, et. al. for less than 20 grand.
Nothing bars private companies putting plate scanners out there to keep track of where you go.
Except for the fact the scanners have to be somewhere, and being on public property would require a permit and approval from the government. Scanners placed on private property would be legal with the landowners permission, but you would need landowners that don't care about privacy. Scanners on commercial premises, other than those operated by the business itself for its own safety, would probably drive away a high enough ratio of customers that the business would not allow the private company put any scanners there either.
Yea, $Deity help us all the day some private company or government agency learns about the concept of bribery.
My latest copy of BBW...
Huh, didn't know Big Beautiful Women had their own publication.
I bought a 2012 VW Jetta TDI brand new off the showroom floor last year; every option except the nav system ('cuz I'm not stupid) - leather, heated seats, premium Fender stereo system, the works. The damn thing gets 40-60 MPG, has mountains of torque (handy here on the Ozark Plateau, which isn't very plateau at all), and is generally a damn nice way to get around.
All for less than $30K.
Personally I have no idea why people spend this kind of money on a car.
Some people want a little more luxury, more features, etc, and if they can afford it, then why not?
Some people are suckers.
Why?
Conditioning.
Same reason why so many people still think they only get to choose between Democrats and Republicans in elections.
They're going after that one next. What with the new gun banning laws, attacks on "stand your ground" laws. Heck most of the states have gotten rid of the Castle doctrine as well.
Much as the feds would like it to be so, that's not the case. In fact, there are only 5 states (and the District of Columbia) that either do not have any castle doctrine or stand-your-ground laws, or the ones they do are too weak to be effective.
um you do know some fish have wings and do in fact fly right? Or did you miss that class too?
Yea, I knew some jackass would latch onto the fringe case of flying fish (which you should know don't actually fly, they glide short distances). Hence the reason I went the opposite direction of asking a bird what it's like under water.
Of course, it matters not, as it has fuck-all to do with the conversation at hand.
Kriminy, some people will come up with any old excuse to argue...
I know, it's crazy. It's almost as if the point of the war on drugs isn't actually to stop the drug trade at all!
This is why I piss on Nixon's grave several times a year.
I like to think that old Tricky Dick ( who initiated the war on drugs )
is sitting on a sinking raft in the middle of a lake of fire, in hell,
but that he has a live video feed to people pissing on his grave.
That's nice, but if your goal is to piss on the grave of the man who started America's war on personal freedom, you've got the wrong guy (granted, Nixon didn't do us any favors).
The headstone you're looking for is that of one Harry J. Anslinger, the first US drug czar.
I voted for the bastard twice, and have no regrets.
You really thing McCain/Palin or Romney/Ryan would have been better?
Yes, O is a fuckup. He's a fuckup because he's a moderate and not a progressive.
The best Democratic alternatives? Clinton who voted with Shrub for the war and Kucinich an anti-vaxxer Sheez.
And the R's were even worse.
I find the fact that you're convinced that there were only 2 parties running for President quite telling, and pretty damn sad to boot.
Meh, was young and impressionable (plus, excited about voting for the first time).
Didn't make the same mistake twice, and I won't ever make that one again.
The racist Democratic Party always takes advantage of youthful inexperience and exuberance. You won't make that mistake, but there's always a new crop of kids who will. Until population starts to decline instead of rise, the stupid-18yo vote will be a factor.
Yea, yea, and the racist Republican party always takes advantage of the bitterness and closed-mindedness that comes with age. Fact is, they're both 2 sides of the same damn coin, and the sooner partisans such as yourself come to realize that, the better off we'll all be.
Meh, was young and impressionable (plus, excited about voting for the first time).
Didn't make the same mistake twice, and I won't ever make that one again.
So, my points that downloading illegally does nothing but help enact even more draconian legislation regarding copyright, and that the only effective means of changing this practice is to universally boycott their products, stand firm.
Doesn't sound like it. The way you made it sound, they'll spin anything to support their draconian agenda, so no matter what happens, copyright infringement will be blamed.
Lol, yea, they totally will (hell, they already have, just do a little google-fu and you'll see how ridiculous some of the MAFIAA's rationales are). However, boycotting actually does hurt them in the long run, because A) they don't make any money if nobody buys their products, and B) eventually, if enough people join the boycott, they won't be able to say, 'It has value because people are stealing it.'
Win-Win.
Copying those things isn't the problem; what you would then do with that information is the problem. In the case of copying a movie, no such things happen.
Your analogy seems rather ridiculous.
So does your ideology that it's OK to take things or copy that you do not have permission to take or copy.
To each his own, I guess. Good luck not getting busted (and I really do mean that sincerely, even if I personally think you're doing something wrong; Fuck the MPAA).
I'm not sure it is possible anymore. Those fucks just obtained right to jail citizens for indefinite time without court order (NDAA injunction has been struck down by Obama's cronies in 13 circuit, and good lock with SCOTUS). US of A 2013 reminds me Germany 1936. Scary times ahead...
Which is why it's more important now than ever before in our national history to honor and respect each other's 2nd Amendment rights.
The soapbox, ballot box, and jury box have been compromised.
I wonder how the government would feel if someone were to put up a website that gives real-time information about the location of members of congress, based on cell-phone data? Surely that wouldn't make them feel a bit uneasy, even if there were no publicly-ill intentions, right?
Judging from recent events, most likely that person would be declared a traitor and enemy of the state, and if they did not flee, the storm troopers would come down on their ass like motherfucking Mjölnir, the hammer of Thor.
Dear DOJ:
And WE don't need a warrant to vote for the first presidential candidate who promises to rock your world and make sure your out of control ass gets curbed, and to prosecute everyone who failed to honor their pledge to UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION. In fact maybe the NSA doesn't even need to exist. We won WW2 without you.
Sincerely,
voting citizens who have a clue and a care
Tried it, didn't work - remember "Hope and Change?" Hell, not only did dude fail to uphold his campaign promises, the motherfucker doubled-down on anti-Constitutional activities!
Don't feel bad, I voted for the bastard once myself.
Soo... since it's pretty well established at this point that the DOJ does not respect the authority of the US Constitution, it would stand to reason that We, the People, should as a matter of principle and duty refuse to respect the authority of the DOJ, correct?
Bullshit like this is why I feel an irresistible urge to pimp-slap someone every time I hear the Constitution referred to as "a living document."
When you call 911 with cardiac symptoms and then drop off the call, it's useful information.
To the 911 operators.
But that doesn't answer his question: Why does Verizon store his info, and for much, much longer than what would be reasonably required for emergency response purposes?
For years games was a big argument to have windows installed on a machine. But the arrival of the 360 made it for me so easy to dump windows for linux on my desktop and buy a macbook pro for on the go.
Funny, Windows 7 took me in the opposite direction - skipped the AdBox 360 and started getting all my games on PC so I could mod to my hearts' content.