Maybe not their grandmother. But plenty of grandmothers are getting shot in the streets this week in some of those countries. Next week it'll be some other of those countries, and the week after that...
And yes, some people who are emailing other people about their revolutionary plans and actions are somebody's grandmother. And most of these people have better things to do than stay on top of how MS is revoking the HTTPS they'd already heard for years would keep their emails secret.
People stopped believing that the Earth was flat when they were shown evidence to the contrary.
You "libertarians" are the most ridiculous suckers of all time. Er, I meant Teabaggers. Oh, OK - Republicans. You want to stop looking like a clown, post the evidence that there were "almost two decades of depression" after the late 1930s.
Because it's completely well known that the Great Depression ended with unilateral government spending in the late 1930s, followed by decades of expansion with a few brief exceptions.
Your assertion is the extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence. Your glib failure to do so at all just makes you look obnoxious.
Counterfeiters break laws even as they individually undermine the official currency only a little.
Ad-hominem attacks argue irrelevant personal characteristics rather than the proposition at hand. You "libertarians" are corporate anarchists, which is a central proposition in your arguments that you'd rather hide. Because you're bad arguers. Opposing the government's protection of the official currency because "no one has claimed damages" fundamentally misunderstands the government and criminal laws.
You're bad arguers. The comment to which I replied claimed the silver was worth more than "the face value of US coin", but that's irrelevant. The counterfeit coin says "$20", so "the face value of US coin" is irrelevant, because it doesn't counterfeit a specific US coin: just the status of the coin as "$20". Which contained silver that could be bought for less than $20 (of course). So the original poster was wrong. And now you're extending that bad argument into a pure straw man. Bad arguers.
Besides, it's false that "coins always command some seigniorage". US pennies cost over $0.01 to make. Because the coin is necessary to the economy. The value of the object is only loosely related to its value in exchange. You "libertarians" are always dropping words that you don't understand, a smokescreen to cover your misunderstandings of logic, government, economics, and anything else you're obsessed with.
Stick to Sim City. You don't hurt anyone by running that into the ground.
Your responses are wrong. They do not accurately describe the anti-spam system that was proposed.
The idea of "email stamps" to directly counter the essence of spam's advantage (bulk messaging is extremely cheap) is a solid one. Indeed it underlies the limits on junk postal mail, which are reversed to encourage junk that subsidizes individual items' postal delivery.
Your form response is a good example of the lack of imagination and abundance of inertia that leave us with a badly managed spam problem.
Why is splintering bad? It provides alternative currencies, each with their own inflation rates and relative values. The currency market among them is easy to automate, also distributed without a controlling middleman, so holding multiple alternatives at once doesn't prevent liquidating any into another. The result is the purest free market for value possible, so long as the information used to value items in the market is freely available.
Multiple alternatives after "splintering" sounds like the logical extension of the bitcoin premise. It's the way to see whether the premise is really good.
Yes, patriotic people who create governments to protect our rights are pretty strong in America and elsewhere that reads Websites. Bad arguments from anarchists tend to provoke that kind of patriotism even in ordinarily apathetic people who still can tell when our liberty is threatened.
Your paranoia is a good explanation for how these "forces" mysteriously downrate your posts that "have no connection between each other". Your paranoia, and the low quality of your posts that any moderator can recognize.
Criminal laws do no not require an injured party to claim damages. You are confusing them with civil laws and contracts.
We have a government to protect the people even without specific people claiming damages after the fact. Instead we elect representatives who make laws that protect us from well understood past damages, to prevent and interrupt them.
But you are a "libertarian": a corporate anarchist. You don't understand government; you want to eliminate it and take your chances with corporate powers. But we have a government, because we've seen how those autocratic orgs abuse the rights and property of the people.
You also don't understand the most basic economics: the ounce of silver in those "dollars" was worth $10-19, averaging about $14, through 1999, but was sold for $20 (legitimate dollars). If the fake dollar's silver were worth "quite a bit more than the face value of US coin", this crook would have been losing money on every sale. Which qualifies him to be a "libertarian".
No, you don't understand copyright. It's closer to a case of trademark violation: the marks confuse the consumer into thinking the items are US Federal dollars, but they're not.
You also don't understand what "remotely" means. These "Liberty Dollars" are quite close to US Federal dollars, especially the famous "Liberty Dollars" circulated in the early 1900s, also made of silver.
You don't understand what "valuable" means. Silver is valuable because of convention, not utility (except for the rare dentist or metallurgist), just as US Federal dollars are.
But since you'll disagree, please send me all your "garbage" US Federal dollars. I'll pay for postage - in silver if you prefer. And go ahead and photocopy them all, front and back, before you send them to me - then pass them around in exchange for electronics equipment. I'll tip you some more silver for your act that "remotely" resembles counterfeiting.
The only reason we do not have those laws and enforce them is that corporations own the legislators and regulators the people put in charge of these consequences. And that the corporations competing with each other accept the unfair competition, instead of using the legislators and regulators they own to make and enforce such laws properly.
Can you give me a cited example of an American actually sent to jail under those laws? You're handy with a search engine and FPCA training, so let's see it in action. Because I've never heard of anyone going to jail.
Do you have a cited example of an American caught drinking in a foreign country where it's legal, but was extradited, charged in the USA and forced to repay their scholarship?
There is no legal or ethical reason the SEC cannot have laws that penalize this kind of bribery with jail time by the people in the corporation who did the illegal acts. There is also no legal or ethical reason the SEC cannot require the kind of auditable bookkeeping that would make "looking the other way" a crime actively committed, rather than merely an obligation passively neglected.
The only reason we do not have those laws and enforce them is that corporations own the legislators and regulators the people put in charge of these consequences. And that the corporations competing with each other accept the unfair competition, instead of using the legislators and regulators they own to make and enforce such laws properly.
And of course the only reason any of that is the situation is because we the people accept it, even insist on it.
I looked at Yorktown Heights, NY (about 50 mi north of NYC), but saw no papers indicated. Yet that's IBM's main R&D center. I suspect the data is not properly representative.
I said we have no control over stopping earthquakes. And I didn't say geothermal is "our single energy savior" - just a good replacement for nukes. Geothermal is available in nearly every country, in most parts of the US, not just Iceland.
You are ignorant of facts and fallacies, rolling them all up into one.
We are going with all kinds of options that aren't the cheapest. Especially when total costs are included. Like meltdown costs. Or oil war costs. Or coal pollution costs.
I didn't say that we shouldn't build anything but geothermal. I said not to build nukes. I didn't say we shouldn't build nukes because we need to build "my favored alternative".
Nukes are bad so we shouldn't build them - we should retire them. But we need something with nukes' capacity, though without nukes' risks and damages, so we need something like geothermal.
No, I didn't claim what you just said I claimed. And no, these plants were left without upgrades despite public opinion that obtained new reactors with better designs.
So yes, you can't be a worthwhile partner in a reasonable discussion. Goodbye.
Three Mile Island is a good example, because it was a meltdown. Nuke plants melt down. But nuke sellers won't admit it. They can't be trusted with these risks, as we're seeing today.
That is the lesson. But people who think about nukes only in terms of their potential (though never realized) upsides will see only reasons to have more. But people are idiots, so no surprise there.
Yes, by foreign I mean "Canadian and Australian", along with countries like Kazakhstan (which you mention produces more than either), Russia (hardly a reliable source of anything), and Namibia and Niger (double ditto).
None of these sources are reliable enough to depend on. Uranium is among the rarest elements on Earth, and it's running low. Meanwhile, China and other countries are increasingly competing with the US for supplies. Decreasing supplies against increasing demand means scarcity, which also means periodic shocks by market manipulators.
Even in "good times", reliance on such an important strategic material coming from any foreign country with its own priorities, however friendly today, is a serious risk.
You might want to be more reasonable about what you worry about.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe not their grandmother. But plenty of grandmothers are getting shot in the streets this week in some of those countries. Next week it'll be some other of those countries, and the week after that...
And yes, some people who are emailing other people about their revolutionary plans and actions are somebody's grandmother. And most of these people have better things to do than stay on top of how MS is revoking the HTTPS they'd already heard for years would keep their emails secret.
MS isn't even trying to hide it anymore.
People stopped believing that the Earth was flat when they were shown evidence to the contrary.
You "libertarians" are the most ridiculous suckers of all time. Er, I meant Teabaggers. Oh, OK - Republicans. You want to stop looking like a clown, post the evidence that there were "almost two decades of depression" after the late 1930s.
You can't. You're a clown.
Goodbye.
Because it's completely well known that the Great Depression ended with unilateral government spending in the late 1930s, followed by decades of expansion with a few brief exceptions.
Your assertion is the extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence. Your glib failure to do so at all just makes you look obnoxious.
Speeders break laws even before they hit someone.
Counterfeiters break laws even as they individually undermine the official currency only a little.
Ad-hominem attacks argue irrelevant personal characteristics rather than the proposition at hand. You "libertarians" are corporate anarchists, which is a central proposition in your arguments that you'd rather hide. Because you're bad arguers. Opposing the government's protection of the official currency because "no one has claimed damages" fundamentally misunderstands the government and criminal laws.
You're bad arguers. The comment to which I replied claimed the silver was worth more than "the face value of US coin", but that's irrelevant. The counterfeit coin says "$20", so "the face value of US coin" is irrelevant, because it doesn't counterfeit a specific US coin: just the status of the coin as "$20". Which contained silver that could be bought for less than $20 (of course). So the original poster was wrong. And now you're extending that bad argument into a pure straw man. Bad arguers.
Besides, it's false that "coins always command some seigniorage". US pennies cost over $0.01 to make. Because the coin is necessary to the economy. The value of the object is only loosely related to its value in exchange. You "libertarians" are always dropping words that you don't understand, a smokescreen to cover your misunderstandings of logic, government, economics, and anything else you're obsessed with.
Stick to Sim City. You don't hurt anyone by running that into the ground.
Show the evidence of "almost two decades of depression" starting in the late 1930s.
Your responses are wrong. They do not accurately describe the anti-spam system that was proposed.
The idea of "email stamps" to directly counter the essence of spam's advantage (bulk messaging is extremely cheap) is a solid one. Indeed it underlies the limits on junk postal mail, which are reversed to encourage junk that subsidizes individual items' postal delivery.
Your form response is a good example of the lack of imagination and abundance of inertia that leave us with a badly managed spam problem.
One example that is difficult to disagree with is the unilateral government spending in the late 1930s that ended the Great Depression.
There are plenty of other good examples, but some people find them easier to disagree with.
Why is splintering bad? It provides alternative currencies, each with their own inflation rates and relative values. The currency market among them is easy to automate, also distributed without a controlling middleman, so holding multiple alternatives at once doesn't prevent liquidating any into another. The result is the purest free market for value possible, so long as the information used to value items in the market is freely available.
Multiple alternatives after "splintering" sounds like the logical extension of the bitcoin premise. It's the way to see whether the premise is really good.
Yes, patriotic people who create governments to protect our rights are pretty strong in America and elsewhere that reads Websites. Bad arguments from anarchists tend to provoke that kind of patriotism even in ordinarily apathetic people who still can tell when our liberty is threatened.
Your paranoia is a good explanation for how these "forces" mysteriously downrate your posts that "have no connection between each other". Your paranoia, and the low quality of your posts that any moderator can recognize.
Criminal laws do no not require an injured party to claim damages. You are confusing them with civil laws and contracts.
We have a government to protect the people even without specific people claiming damages after the fact. Instead we elect representatives who make laws that protect us from well understood past damages, to prevent and interrupt them.
But you are a "libertarian": a corporate anarchist. You don't understand government; you want to eliminate it and take your chances with corporate powers. But we have a government, because we've seen how those autocratic orgs abuse the rights and property of the people.
You also don't understand the most basic economics: the ounce of silver in those "dollars" was worth $10-19, averaging about $14, through 1999, but was sold for $20 (legitimate dollars). If the fake dollar's silver were worth "quite a bit more than the face value of US coin", this crook would have been losing money on every sale. Which qualifies him to be a "libertarian".
No, you don't understand copyright. It's closer to a case of trademark violation: the marks confuse the consumer into thinking the items are US Federal dollars, but they're not.
You also don't understand what "remotely" means. These "Liberty Dollars" are quite close to US Federal dollars, especially the famous "Liberty Dollars" circulated in the early 1900s, also made of silver.
You don't understand what "valuable" means. Silver is valuable because of convention, not utility (except for the rare dentist or metallurgist), just as US Federal dollars are.
But since you'll disagree, please send me all your "garbage" US Federal dollars. I'll pay for postage - in silver if you prefer. And go ahead and photocopy them all, front and back, before you send them to me - then pass them around in exchange for electronics equipment. I'll tip you some more silver for your act that "remotely" resembles counterfeiting.
I'm talking about enforcement:
Can you give me a cited example of an American actually sent to jail under those laws? You're handy with a search engine and FPCA training, so let's see it in action. Because I've never heard of anyone going to jail.
Do you have a cited example of an American caught drinking in a foreign country where it's legal, but was extradited, charged in the USA and forced to repay their scholarship?
There is no legal or ethical reason the SEC cannot have laws that penalize this kind of bribery with jail time by the people in the corporation who did the illegal acts. There is also no legal or ethical reason the SEC cannot require the kind of auditable bookkeeping that would make "looking the other way" a crime actively committed, rather than merely an obligation passively neglected.
The only reason we do not have those laws and enforce them is that corporations own the legislators and regulators the people put in charge of these consequences. And that the corporations competing with each other accept the unfair competition, instead of using the legislators and regulators they own to make and enforce such laws properly.
And of course the only reason any of that is the situation is because we the people accept it, even insist on it.
I looked at Yorktown Heights, NY (about 50 mi north of NYC), but saw no papers indicated. Yet that's IBM's main R&D center. I suspect the data is not properly representative.
I said we have no control over stopping earthquakes. And I didn't say geothermal is "our single energy savior" - just a good replacement for nukes. Geothermal is available in nearly every country, in most parts of the US, not just Iceland.
You are ignorant of facts and fallacies, rolling them all up into one.
We are going with all kinds of options that aren't the cheapest. Especially when total costs are included. Like meltdown costs. Or oil war costs. Or coal pollution costs.
I didn't say that we shouldn't build anything but geothermal. I said not to build nukes. I didn't say we shouldn't build nukes because we need to build "my favored alternative".
Nukes are bad so we shouldn't build them - we should retire them. But we need something with nukes' capacity, though without nukes' risks and damages, so we need something like geothermal.
How is that ironic? All energy, and indeed all matter, is from radioactive decay.
Congratulations! You can worry about the costs of uranium mining to your national health.
No, I didn't claim what you just said I claimed. And no, these plants were left without upgrades despite public opinion that obtained new reactors with better designs.
So yes, you can't be a worthwhile partner in a reasonable discussion. Goodbye.
Three Mile Island is a good example, because it was a meltdown. Nuke plants melt down. But nuke sellers won't admit it. They can't be trusted with these risks, as we're seeing today.
That is the lesson. But people who think about nukes only in terms of their potential (though never realized) upsides will see only reasons to have more. But people are idiots, so no surprise there.
Yes, by foreign I mean "Canadian and Australian", along with countries like Kazakhstan (which you mention produces more than either), Russia (hardly a reliable source of anything), and Namibia and Niger (double ditto).
None of these sources are reliable enough to depend on. Uranium is among the rarest elements on Earth, and it's running low. Meanwhile, China and other countries are increasingly competing with the US for supplies. Decreasing supplies against increasing demand means scarcity, which also means periodic shocks by market manipulators.
Even in "good times", reliance on such an important strategic material coming from any foreign country with its own priorities, however friendly today, is a serious risk.
You might want to be more reasonable about what you worry about.
I didn't say anything about coal. You did. The coal plants are too damaging, too, and all of them have to go.