Um, it would be the people downloading pirated songs.
So, what you are saying is that if I download a song from the Internet, it is my responsibility to make sure that no copyrights are being violated, and the song is available to me for listening. That means that for every public domain work I want to hear, I must take the time to search the world to make sure that nobody owns the rights to the work in question, or that it was distributed with their permission.
You clearly were not thinking about what you were saying.
Don't leave out the "A well regulated Militia" part, or else you'll change the entire subject of the second amendment...
I beg your pardon for joining the off-topic fray like this, but in what way is the meaning of the Second Amendment changed by the part about "A well regulated Militia"?
If I recall the wording of it correctly, the Amendment states that it is the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and the reason for that is because a well-regulated Militia (by which, they meant a population that is properly equipped and ready) is essential to the preservation of a free state.
The notion is that if a dictator were to usurp control of the government (as has happened to nearly every prior government based on democratic principals), an armed population would be nearly impossible to completely control. Tanks and bombs are great against other armies, but an armed nation is much more difficult to overcome.
Can a basically unknown candidate like Ralph Nader get a resonable number of votes thanks to just his web site?
What!? Unknown!?
Oh, come on! He has been a nationally recognized whiner^H^H^H^H^H^Hpundit for a long, long time. More typical Americans know about him today than knew about Perot before 1991.
He also has the endorsement of the UAW, one of the countries largest labor unions.
If he gets anything less that 5% of the popular vote, he should view it as a profound failure and rejection of his candidacy.
Great summary. You could have called it "Constitutional Government in a Nutshell".
One minor nit to pick, though: The Presedent is charged with executing the law, not judging it. He has veto power, but it is mostly a political tool, not one of constitutional judgement. The office of the President is unique in that he is the only truely national representative. All the Senators and Reps were put into place by regional constituencies, so the veto is needed to make it harder for one group of districts or states to bully another part of the country.
The final say in whether a law passes constitutional muster lies in the hands of the judiciary.
A good example of this is the "line item" veto. Most people liked the idea. The Republicans in Congress followed through on their campaign promise and passed a bill for it. Clinton considered it a good idea too, and signed it into law. The Courts overturned it, ruling that it expanded the power of the President too much. End of story. There will be no line-item veto unless the Constitution is amended.
Honestly, what kind of a f* choice is George Bush or Al Gore?
With two very weak candidates, this could be a watershed year for third parties. The UAW has endorsed Ralph Nader... Pat Buchannan is rousing up the protectionist nut-jobs... the Independence party might put out a candidate of their own and get on the ballot in a few states... Me, I will probably vote Libertarian this time.
Even if you know your guy has no chance, small parties need a certian percentage to gain major-party status in future elections, so your vote helps them whether the candidate wins or not.
I can't justify risking, every day, a vehicle that costs $10,000+ in the farce that is Toronto's highway system.
umm. 'kay.
Not sure what all that has to do with my point, that driving costs about $.50 per mile for most people driving most typical cars, which was in response to a Honda driver who was insisting that the figure should be much lower.
You do something else. That's great. I'm happy for you. Nothing to do with the thread, but congratulations.
Or, if you really want to get out of the apartment, take the hit on a no-cost loan. You get shafted on the interest, but housing interest is tax-deductable. After a couple years of improving your financial situation, you can re-finance with a better loan or move to a nicer house. It's not as good of a deal as you would get if you already had 10% to put down, but it is a better deal than paying rent (which builds no equity and is not a write-off), and you get to live in a house right away, instead of waiting 2-5 years.
Minnesota is good, because the cost of living is very reasonable, and the schools here provide some pretty good fodder for new hires. The downside with MN is the taxes, we are a very liberal state in that regard.
Most of the upper midwest is well suited to tech companies. Gateway computers is located out in the sticks in South Dakota, and its a big part of why they are able to keep their labor costs down so far. Lots of small-town folks were willing to work in their warehouse for far less then people in the city would consider, because the live in big houses that cost them about $20k. Fairfield, Iowa is another town that used to be a blank spot on a lot of maps that has boomed because of a couple telecommunication startups.
If you are starting a new venture, and your VC sources don't balk at you being a non-Valley business, then the midwest is a great place to start a company right now. If you are afraid of not being able to recruit new techie hires, consider the Minneapolis area (or across the river in Madison, WI if you want to avoid the MN taxes), there are more geeks up here than you would think.
Actually, the figure of $.50 per mile is about right for a typical car that's less than 5 years old.
For the first few years of a car's life, every mile takes a little bit off the resale value. You need to calculate that in.
You can save on maintenece by changing your own oil & stuff, but then you should count your labor time (at whatever you make per hour) if you are going to be honest about the real costs.
Of course, the longer you keep a car, the cheaper it becomes to drive it. I bought my Mazda pickup (new) in '91, and intend to drive it until it falls apart, so my costs are about the same as your old Honda.
For people who buy a new car every 2 or 3 years, the costs of driving are quite a bit higher.
I live in the Twin Cities, where we actually have a decent number of high-tech companies out in the western suburbs (jokingly called the "Silicon Prairie), and a lot of financial companies downtown.
I live close to the city (5 miles) in a house that costs about $150k.
My brother lives in one of the finge suburbs, but is still only a half-hour drive from work. He got his 5-bedroom, 3-story, 2-year-old house at the end of a cul-de-sac for about 200 grand.
SV is a pretty area, but a house like mine would cost a fortune there, even if I lived an hour or more from work. That high cost of living translates to a high cost of doing business, so I don't really even consider it the ideal place for a start-up venture.
Re:The purpose of my post...
on
Virtual War
·
· Score: 1
And the purpose of my suggestion that nobody would dare repeat your statement to Cuban refugees in Florida had nothing to do with popularity, and everything to do with the fact that your statement was deceptive and misleading.
Those most directly impacted by the sad tragedy that is the Castro revolution would be quick to point that out to you, if you dared to express such a foolish opinion to their faces.
Listen to Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon at high volumes to see where the quote "I never said I was afraid of dying" came from. It is an ironic statement, not an expression of patriotism.
Check your war of 1812 history books.
Last time I checked, it was the Brittish Navy that did most of the damage to us in that war. Canadians tend to exaggerate their importance in the conflict... If it wasn't you, it would have been more redcoats.
Closest we ever came to a real US vs. Canada war was back in the "54.40 or Fight!" days, when some US nutbags wanted to conquer the bottom slice of Canada (where most Canadians live, these days). It never happened, and we have been extremely close allies and trade partners for a long, long time.
We'd catch you with your VR glasses on, and not even have to waste a bullet!
Good thing, too, when all you have to fire your bullets with are hockey sticks.;)
But seriously, never underestimate the loyalty of another for their country.
Not me, friend! Russia made that mistake with Finland. Can you imagine!? Getting your butt kicked by a tiny country like Finland!? It's true... the Fins grew to hate the Russians so much that they invented a whole new sport just to teach their kids how to kill Russian commanders. (The bi-athalon, now an olympic event, involves cross-country skiing for a long distance, and then shooting at targets. Now you know where it came from. Isn't learning fun?)
Seriously, I live in Minnesota, which is kind of like Canada, but without all the metric highway markers and French radio stations.:)
I'm sure you were just kidding around, but I doubt that asking for asylum is really neccesary.
Those of you that would rather live in the US will find that immigrating here is remarkably easy, especially if you are a geek with lots of usefull skills. If nothing else, you could probably come in as a "resident alien" for a few years on a work visa, and get the citizenship as time goes on.
If you are from northern Canada, Alaska might be the ideal state for you... oil money pays for almost everything, so compared to Canadian taxes it's practically a free ride!
Religion is one of the obvious example on making laws to protect some culture...
Our laws are intended not respect the establishment of religion down here. We concluded over 200 years ago that to do so is a Bad Thing.
When the US govt restricts it's citizen and businesses from doing business with Cuba, it does this to prevent the communist ideology of Cuba to infect it's culture.
No, it does this to weaken the economy of a military dictatorship that sits 90 miles off our shores. We have had plenty of Cuban culture blended with our own for quite some time, and we like it.
That's the difference between the US and Quebec... we believe that the "melting pot" of cultures strenthens us, you fear the influence of non-french culture.
To be fair, we have polititians down here that wish to keep our culture "pure" of alien influence (like Pat Buccannan, the Reform Party candidate for President), but the vast majority of us reject such thinking as Xenophobic, over-protectionist, and perhaps even racist.
Unpopular truths are no less true for being unpopular.
Funny how totalitarian dictators tend to be "unpopular" among the refugees that escaped from their oppression, eh?
If only these dullards were as enlightened as you, they may have realized how good they had it in Cuba, and would not have risked near-certain death to come here.
I'm going to stop using my +1 mod in this discussion, because I'm starting to get the feeling I am being trolled...
Re:Canadians telling USA what wars to get into
on
Virtual War
·
· Score: 2
Canadians are one of your few good friends in the world...
Picking on Canadians (and vice versa) is funny specifically because we get along so well.
My comments in no way were meant to diminish the quaint little commune you call a country.;)
Restoring the balance of power in the Middle East? What exactly does that mean?
It means not allowing a single military dictatorship, who is hostile to US interests, to control the entire region. If Iraq managed to build up and take on Saudi Arabia and Israel, we might have ended up with exactly that.
One swollowing up the other was not necessarily going to affect basic human rights in the area.
Excuse me, but didn't I just get done saying that the war was not about human rights?
(Keep in mind that Cuba has some of the highest health and educational standards in the "Third World").
I invite you to stand on any street corner in Downtowm Miami and say that out loud.
Re:The problem of bullies
on
Virtual War
·
· Score: 2
Typed like a true child of the late 20th Century. There is a term to describe this belief, it is called "Total War". It was pioneered in World War II, and you have summed it up with that sentence.
Typed like a true child of the 60's. Total War was a tactic used by the North during the Civil War. Go back to high school, or at least rent a copy of Gone With The Wind.
Re:What's Really Important Here
on
Virtual War
·
· Score: 2
So what is the cost of regional stability? about a couple hundred American casulaties (and others from the coalition nations), and the popluation of Iraq which must suffer under a trade embargo and die of starvation, disease, and persecution. And what about the oil? Go to a gas station and find out. God bless America. One hard lesson about foreign policy I learned from my ultra-liberal (but extremely smart) Poli Sci prof was this:
National Security == Economic Stability.
Given that it would be a Bad Thing is 10,000 Americans died becasue Canada invaded the US... it is also a Bad Thing if 10,000 Americans die because it was too expensive for them to heat their homes. When discussion national security issues, you must include domestic security in the equation.
It is very easy to make an emotional argument of "no blood for oil", but there is a real cost of human life to consider on both sides of the ledger here.
Until we master nuclear fusion, or find some other massive source of power (note: solar and wind ain't enough), our civilization will continue to depend on oil to survive... and lots of it.
Re:What's Really Important Here
on
Virtual War
·
· Score: 2
Most people will dismiss this sort of talk as conspiracy-theorist-Roswell-freak-paranoia.
And despite this down the road a bit further in the amercian revolution the English lined up in little rows, wearing bright red, and marched through the woods while being shot at from hiding.
... which taught the English the value of skirmishing rifle-men, hiding behind rocks and trees. They applied this lesson against Napoleon, and kicked French butt once again.
Several people have now posted a reference to WWI. The argument is that conflict in the Balkins is important, because a small conflict there in the beginning of the Century lead to WWI, which lead to the rise of Communism, the economic ruin of Germany, and the eventual rise of the Nazi's...
It seems to me that this makes a pretty strong case against getting involved in the new conflict, seeing as we all made such a muck of it last time.
Slashdot Mirror
Um, it would be the people downloading pirated songs.
So, what you are saying is that if I download a song from the Internet, it is my responsibility to make sure that no copyrights are being violated, and the song is available to me for listening. That means that for every public domain work I want to hear, I must take the time to search the world to make sure that nobody owns the rights to the work in question, or that it was distributed with their permission.
You clearly were not thinking about what you were saying.
I beg your pardon for joining the off-topic fray like this, but in what way is the meaning of the Second Amendment changed by the part about "A well regulated Militia"?
If I recall the wording of it correctly, the Amendment states that it is the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and the reason for that is because a well-regulated Militia (by which, they meant a population that is properly equipped and ready) is essential to the preservation of a free state.
The notion is that if a dictator were to usurp control of the government (as has happened to nearly every prior government based on democratic principals), an armed population would be nearly impossible to completely control. Tanks and bombs are great against other armies, but an armed nation is much more difficult to overcome.
Everybody knew about Perot by '91. My bad.
What!? Unknown!?
Oh, come on! He has been a nationally recognized whiner^H^H^H^H^H^Hpundit for a long, long time. More typical Americans know about him today than knew about Perot before 1991.
He also has the endorsement of the UAW, one of the countries largest labor unions.
If he gets anything less that 5% of the popular vote, he should view it as a profound failure and rejection of his candidacy.
One minor nit to pick, though: The Presedent is charged with executing the law, not judging it. He has veto power, but it is mostly a political tool, not one of constitutional judgement. The office of the President is unique in that he is the only truely national representative. All the Senators and Reps were put into place by regional constituencies, so the veto is needed to make it harder for one group of districts or states to bully another part of the country.
The final say in whether a law passes constitutional muster lies in the hands of the judiciary.
A good example of this is the "line item" veto. Most people liked the idea. The Republicans in Congress followed through on their campaign promise and passed a bill for it. Clinton considered it a good idea too, and signed it into law. The Courts overturned it, ruling that it expanded the power of the President too much. End of story. There will be no line-item veto unless the Constitution is amended.
With two very weak candidates, this could be a watershed year for third parties. The UAW has endorsed Ralph Nader... Pat Buchannan is rousing up the protectionist nut-jobs... the Independence party might put out a candidate of their own and get on the ballot in a few states... Me, I will probably vote Libertarian this time.
Even if you know your guy has no chance, small parties need a certian percentage to gain major-party status in future elections, so your vote helps them whether the candidate wins or not.
umm. 'kay.
Not sure what all that has to do with my point, that driving costs about $.50 per mile for most people driving most typical cars, which was in response to a Honda driver who was insisting that the figure should be much lower.
You do something else. That's great. I'm happy for you. Nothing to do with the thread, but congratulations.
Or, if you really want to get out of the apartment, take the hit on a no-cost loan. You get shafted on the interest, but housing interest is tax-deductable. After a couple years of improving your financial situation, you can re-finance with a better loan or move to a nicer house. It's not as good of a deal as you would get if you already had 10% to put down, but it is a better deal than paying rent (which builds no equity and is not a write-off), and you get to live in a house right away, instead of waiting 2-5 years.
Most of the upper midwest is well suited to tech companies. Gateway computers is located out in the sticks in South Dakota, and its a big part of why they are able to keep their labor costs down so far. Lots of small-town folks were willing to work in their warehouse for far less then people in the city would consider, because the live in big houses that cost them about $20k. Fairfield, Iowa is another town that used to be a blank spot on a lot of maps that has boomed because of a couple telecommunication startups.
If you are starting a new venture, and your VC sources don't balk at you being a non-Valley business, then the midwest is a great place to start a company right now. If you are afraid of not being able to recruit new techie hires, consider the Minneapolis area (or across the river in Madison, WI if you want to avoid the MN taxes), there are more geeks up here than you would think.
Better still, if you really want urban entertainment, you can get to Twin Cities in about an hour, and are just a few hours' drive from Chicago.
As long as the Mayo Clinic is there, the med-tech industry alone will keep the economy booming in that area.
For the first few years of a car's life, every mile takes a little bit off the resale value. You need to calculate that in.
You can save on maintenece by changing your own oil & stuff, but then you should count your labor time (at whatever you make per hour) if you are going to be honest about the real costs.
Of course, the longer you keep a car, the cheaper it becomes to drive it. I bought my Mazda pickup (new) in '91, and intend to drive it until it falls apart, so my costs are about the same as your old Honda.
For people who buy a new car every 2 or 3 years, the costs of driving are quite a bit higher.
I live in the Twin Cities, where we actually have a decent number of high-tech companies out in the western suburbs (jokingly called the "Silicon Prairie), and a lot of financial companies downtown.
I live close to the city (5 miles) in a house that costs about $150k.
My brother lives in one of the finge suburbs, but is still only a half-hour drive from work. He got his 5-bedroom, 3-story, 2-year-old house at the end of a cul-de-sac for about 200 grand.
SV is a pretty area, but a house like mine would cost a fortune there, even if I lived an hour or more from work. That high cost of living translates to a high cost of doing business, so I don't really even consider it the ideal place for a start-up venture.
Those most directly impacted by the sad tragedy that is the Castro revolution would be quick to point that out to you, if you dared to express such a foolish opinion to their faces.
Listen to Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon at high volumes to see where the quote "I never said I was afraid of dying" came from. It is an ironic statement, not an expression of patriotism.
Check your war of 1812 history books.
Last time I checked, it was the Brittish Navy that did most of the damage to us in that war. Canadians tend to exaggerate their importance in the conflict... If it wasn't you, it would have been more redcoats.
Closest we ever came to a real US vs. Canada war was back in the "54.40 or Fight!" days, when some US nutbags wanted to conquer the bottom slice of Canada (where most Canadians live, these days). It never happened, and we have been extremely close allies and trade partners for a long, long time.
We'd catch you with your VR glasses on, and not even have to waste a bullet!
Good thing, too, when all you have to fire your bullets with are hockey sticks. ;)
But seriously, never underestimate the loyalty of another for their country.
Not me, friend! Russia made that mistake with Finland. Can you imagine!? Getting your butt kicked by a tiny country like Finland!? It's true... the Fins grew to hate the Russians so much that they invented a whole new sport just to teach their kids how to kill Russian commanders. (The bi-athalon, now an olympic event, involves cross-country skiing for a long distance, and then shooting at targets. Now you know where it came from. Isn't learning fun?)
Seriously, I live in Minnesota, which is kind of like Canada, but without all the metric highway markers and French radio stations. :)
Those of you that would rather live in the US will find that immigrating here is remarkably easy, especially if you are a geek with lots of usefull skills. If nothing else, you could probably come in as a "resident alien" for a few years on a work visa, and get the citizenship as time goes on.
If you are from northern Canada, Alaska might be the ideal state for you... oil money pays for almost everything, so compared to Canadian taxes it's practically a free ride!
Our laws are intended not respect the establishment of religion down here. We concluded over 200 years ago that to do so is a Bad Thing.
When the US govt restricts it's citizen and businesses from doing business with Cuba, it does this to prevent the communist ideology of Cuba to infect it's culture.
No, it does this to weaken the economy of a military dictatorship that sits 90 miles off our shores. We have had plenty of Cuban culture blended with our own for quite some time, and we like it.
That's the difference between the US and Quebec... we believe that the "melting pot" of cultures strenthens us, you fear the influence of non-french culture.
To be fair, we have polititians down here that wish to keep our culture "pure" of alien influence (like Pat Buccannan, the Reform Party candidate for President), but the vast majority of us reject such thinking as Xenophobic, over-protectionist, and perhaps even racist.
If you had some ham, we could have ham sandwiches, if I had some bread.
Funny how totalitarian dictators tend to be "unpopular" among the refugees that escaped from their oppression, eh?
If only these dullards were as enlightened as you, they may have realized how good they had it in Cuba, and would not have risked near-certain death to come here.
I'm going to stop using my +1 mod in this discussion, because I'm starting to get the feeling I am being trolled...
Picking on Canadians (and vice versa) is funny specifically because we get along so well.
My comments in no way were meant to diminish the quaint little commune you call a country. ;)
It means not allowing a single military dictatorship, who is hostile to US interests, to control the entire region. If Iraq managed to build up and take on Saudi Arabia and Israel, we might have ended up with exactly that.
One swollowing up the other was not necessarily going to affect basic human rights in the area.
Excuse me, but didn't I just get done saying that the war was not about human rights?
(Keep in mind that Cuba has some of the highest health and educational standards in the "Third World").
I invite you to stand on any street corner in Downtowm Miami and say that out loud.
Typed like a true child of the 60's. Total War was a tactic used by the North during the Civil War. Go back to high school, or at least rent a copy of Gone With The Wind.
National Security == Economic Stability.
Given that it would be a Bad Thing is 10,000 Americans died becasue Canada invaded the US... it is also a Bad Thing if 10,000 Americans die because it was too expensive for them to heat their homes. When discussion national security issues, you must include domestic security in the equation.
It is very easy to make an emotional argument of "no blood for oil", but there is a real cost of human life to consider on both sides of the ledger here.
Until we master nuclear fusion, or find some other massive source of power (note: solar and wind ain't enough), our civilization will continue to depend on oil to survive... and lots of it.
We will - because it is.
Kinda cool how everything comes around, eh? :)
It seems to me that this makes a pretty strong case against getting involved in the new conflict, seeing as we all made such a muck of it last time.