There are high current zeners out there that can handle the load more than long enough to discharge the caps in the USB stick. You just might need a better heat sink.
Yes, we do or should hold parents responsible for their children. That problem also stands out like a sore thumb. Maybe you haven't flown lately. You certainly don't lay it on the kid. That's the parents' job.
If offering them is so successful, why not go after that aspect of it?
I am, by going after the people who take the bribes. Then it won't be so successful and it will happen less often. Until then, what you see is what you get.
You and the majority are simply displaying willful blindness to real logic.
Always look to see who benefits. That will be your clue.
And your thing about the kids is so far off base, there is no point in going anywhere with that. We don't hold them responsible for a reason. That would be a parental problem, one of neglect.
can you back that up with even a shred of proof? Anything at all?
Yes, the crooked politicians that dominate, that take the bribes and win elections over and over. That is more than adequate proof. But like the lesson of the parable, nobody wants to see, and in fact, has them digging in their heels, like you are doing here.
And once again, the person who takes the bribe is the criminal to go after. We are in this situation because that is not the case. We are rewarding the people who take bribes. That is why offering them is such a successful business. The majority and you are wrong.
And what if some of the bribery is used to conceal the fact that they're taking money?
Their actions will always prove one way of the other.
As for involving children, that doesn't relate to what we are talking about, no matter how much you want it to.
Apparently we are going to disagree on this till the end of days. The majority and you are wrong on this. And your obstinance and the continued rewarding of people who take bribes will preclude any progress on the subject.
Your analogies are getting weirder, you have fallen even father away from your rocker. Regardless the what the majority or the law says, the truth is the indisputable truth. The recipient of the bribe, if he acts on it, is culpable party. If he takes the money and runs, good for him. Let the giver run to the cops and see what happens.
Citizens United was a right and proper ruling. If you don't like it, then don't vote for people who take the money. If the simplicity is beyond your comprehension, which it appears to be, then carry on fighting the good fight. Just make sure to duck when the tomatoes fly in your direction.
We usually don't elect politicians who are paid to commit murder, at least not knowingly. The bribes they take are made perfectly obvious by the actions they take, and despite that the voters reward them at every turn. For instance, Pelosi is keeping her job as house democratic leader. Obviously she brings something home to the party. The lessons of the 2016 vote went completely unlearned. Party supporters and voters are still flooding them with money.
Your analogies are so horrible. You are off your rocker.
No, the buck stops with the voters who reliably reelect 97% of Congress and always elect republicans and democrats to the white house every time. Until that changes, nothing else will.
Sorry, now you're just being repetitious. If people that take bribes win elections, that obviously means people approve, law or no law. That's the issue you are evading. I never said that society is logical. I am just pointing out physical facts. The law is irrelevant. And furthermore, you never heard me say that I approve of offering bribes, only that it need not be illegal. But people that reward people who take bribes do approve of offering bribes. Vote them out and the problem is solved. Too simple.
I really don't have to lift a finger. It's all there for anyone who wants to see. Offering bribes is obviously widely accepted. The people that accept them are always winning the elections. They and the voters make my case. If bribes were considered so evil, it wouldn't be so.
VPNs are trivial to block. Besides, once the ISP engages in deep packet inspection, the game is over. Your 'non-compliant' (encrypted) packets will be dropped and reported to the authorities. Expect a knock on the door soon afterwards.
Problem is that people won't fight it. In fact, history says that the majority will demand more. Authoritarianism is on the rise big time all around the planet.
An AC has been nagging me about I2P. Now is a good time to put it to the test. Then we can find out how far the ISPs will go to block anything they can't read.
I didn't refute myself at all. That is only your perception. And I recognized my minority status a very long time ago, and, being actually right and all, will stick my guns to the very end.
Sorry, you are wrong again and have it completely backwards still. But I am tired of your obstinance. This has gone as far as I can take it. You win this round. But you didn't make the sale.
No you shouldn't. The other replies already explained it quite simply. Unless you block the light from your lamp, I can read from it. Unless you block the smoke from your pipe, I can enjoy the aroma, or the high. And the things I purchase are mine, not yours to control in any way. You can get paid for performing the work, not for my enjoyment.
Slashdot Mirror
Never fails. Too bad you fail to address the little issue of your misinformation there.
Does it come with a big bag of amphetamines too?
In those days, among the company's other great attributes, the company didn't get involved in politics.
You're kidding, right?
I gotta run now.
Now, you know the routine. Do it again!
There are high current zeners out there that can handle the load more than long enough to discharge the caps in the USB stick. You just might need a better heat sink.
Maybe a zener diode shunt to ground would be more effective.
Yes, we do or should hold parents responsible for their children. That problem also stands out like a sore thumb. Maybe you haven't flown lately. You certainly don't lay it on the kid. That's the parents' job.
If offering them is so successful, why not go after that aspect of it?
I am, by going after the people who take the bribes. Then it won't be so successful and it will happen less often. Until then, what you see is what you get.
You and the majority are simply displaying willful blindness to real logic.
Always look to see who benefits. That will be your clue.
And your thing about the kids is so far off base, there is no point in going anywhere with that. We don't hold them responsible for a reason. That would be a parental problem, one of neglect.
can you back that up with even a shred of proof? Anything at all?
Yes, the crooked politicians that dominate, that take the bribes and win elections over and over. That is more than adequate proof. But like the lesson of the parable, nobody wants to see, and in fact, has them digging in their heels, like you are doing here.
And once again, the person who takes the bribe is the criminal to go after. We are in this situation because that is not the case. We are rewarding the people who take bribes. That is why offering them is such a successful business. The majority and you are wrong.
You're funny. Too bad you misread my post...
As long as we depend on the ISP, we are all being censored without even knowing it.
And what if some of the bribery is used to conceal the fact that they're taking money?
Their actions will always prove one way of the other.
As for involving children, that doesn't relate to what we are talking about, no matter how much you want it to.
Apparently we are going to disagree on this till the end of days. The majority and you are wrong on this. And your obstinance and the continued rewarding of people who take bribes will preclude any progress on the subject.
the comparison is so demeaning.
Copyright is more so. Nobody has any right to control what I possess.
Your analogies are getting weirder, you have fallen even father away from your rocker. Regardless the what the majority or the law says, the truth is the indisputable truth. The recipient of the bribe, if he acts on it, is culpable party. If he takes the money and runs, good for him. Let the giver run to the cops and see what happens.
Citizens United was a right and proper ruling. If you don't like it, then don't vote for people who take the money. If the simplicity is beyond your comprehension, which it appears to be, then carry on fighting the good fight. Just make sure to duck when the tomatoes fly in your direction.
We usually don't elect politicians who are paid to commit murder, at least not knowingly. The bribes they take are made perfectly obvious by the actions they take, and despite that the voters reward them at every turn. For instance, Pelosi is keeping her job as house democratic leader. Obviously she brings something home to the party. The lessons of the 2016 vote went completely unlearned. Party supporters and voters are still flooding them with money.
Your analogies are so horrible. You are off your rocker.
No, the buck stops with the voters who reliably reelect 97% of Congress and always elect republicans and democrats to the white house every time. Until that changes, nothing else will.
There should be. I mean, the signal should be unique enough that it's easy to block..
Sorry, now you're just being repetitious. If people that take bribes win elections, that obviously means people approve, law or no law. That's the issue you are evading. I never said that society is logical. I am just pointing out physical facts. The law is irrelevant. And furthermore, you never heard me say that I approve of offering bribes, only that it need not be illegal. But people that reward people who take bribes do approve of offering bribes. Vote them out and the problem is solved. Too simple.
I really don't have to lift a finger. It's all there for anyone who wants to see. Offering bribes is obviously widely accepted. The people that accept them are always winning the elections. They and the voters make my case. If bribes were considered so evil, it wouldn't be so.
Thanks!
VPNs are trivial to block. Besides, once the ISP engages in deep packet inspection, the game is over. Your 'non-compliant' (encrypted) packets will be dropped and reported to the authorities. Expect a knock on the door soon afterwards.
All very wonderful, until the ISPs block all unauthorized encryption. Then what?
Problem is that people won't fight it. In fact, history says that the majority will demand more. Authoritarianism is on the rise big time all around the planet.
An AC has been nagging me about I2P. Now is a good time to put it to the test. Then we can find out how far the ISPs will go to block anything they can't read.
Would it help here?
I didn't refute myself at all. That is only your perception. And I recognized my minority status a very long time ago, and, being actually right and all, will stick my guns to the very end.
Sorry, you are wrong again and have it completely backwards still. But I am tired of your obstinance. This has gone as far as I can take it. You win this round. But you didn't make the sale.
I should be able to control what's done with it.
No you shouldn't. The other replies already explained it quite simply. Unless you block the light from your lamp, I can read from it. Unless you block the smoke from your pipe, I can enjoy the aroma, or the high. And the things I purchase are mine, not yours to control in any way. You can get paid for performing the work, not for my enjoyment.