Police don't necessarily prevent murder, but they are there to clean up the mess. SEC is trying to prevent murder, and failing miserably.See "Mortgage Backed Securities".
I would go a step further, in that the SEC was completely complacent in the whole Banking Investment fraud that led up to the collapse of the economy. They failed, completely, to understand the "new" derivative investments and thus the problems associated with compounded leveraging, that they of all people should have recognized.
IMHO when a organization, which has one task, fails to manage in their duties in such a complete way as this, the whole thing needs scrapped. Caveat Emptor is heartless, but it is heartless at both ends. However if you break the law, you should go to jail. Too bad our elected officials were in on the scam and thus nobody is going to jail for the theft and fraud that was perpetrated on our country (and the world)
Well, taking your "devil's advocate" position, I would postulate that both Voting and Keeping/Bearing Arms are rights, but that Voting is more limited in as much as one needs to be a citizen while Keeping and Bearing Arms has no such limitation declared. This analysis would support my position even better, meaning that it is more reasonable to make sure that everyone voting is a citizen, rather than everyone Carrying a Weapon has ID.
But Logic doesn't rule our land, fear mongering does.
The problem is, that without a regular reading of the Constitution, all you're left with are opinions of lawyers and judges as to all that the Constitution means. The fact is, the Constitution was deliberately focused and precise overarching set of "guidelines" that have been slowly eroded in favor of more "pragmatic" approaches, since nearly the beginning.
Here is a test on Voting Rights and Right to Bear Arms. We have a set of court opinions that one requires ID and the other doesn't require any, both on "Constitutional" grounds. Either both are rights, and require the same application to exercise, or they are not rights.
And for the anti-gun wackos, I'd suggest that Voting is more dangerous than guns, because you can't tell who the stupid people are voting for the tyrants taking away our rights as fast as they can.
You, sir, scare the crap out of me. The most dangerous thing I can do, is use my words to convince others to act. Yelling fire in a theater is not illegal. Causing the resulting panic is. An actor, upon a stage can yell "fire" all day long, and it doesn't cause panic. There is this little thing called "intent". There are no limits to free speech, you cannot stop me from yelling "fire" in a theater, you can only hold me responsible for the result. I being an Actor, can yell Fire all day long, in a theater with nobody given a shit.
And the thing of it is, simplistic arguments like your example of yelling "fire" do more damage to society than well reasoned logical arguments. If anything, you should have to register as being "too stupid" to open your mouth, because you obviously don't know how to use "free speech" appropriately. (please note, this is sarcastic, and not real suggestion, designed to make a point about what people think is "dangerous")
Actually, you're not counting wars, which are gun deaths. Nor are you counting the millions who died after the right to arm themselves was taken away, by the government who's purpose was to protect those very lives, often by means of a bullet.
Name one dictator that allowed the citizens to keep and bear arms. Just one! Should be easy! The one thing they all have in common, is restricted guns to government agents. Germany, Russia/USSR, Cuba, China..... Millions of dead civilians.
BTW, you're not anti gun, you're just against anyone but the government having guns. I'll bet you're all for Police, Military and agencies like the BLM having assault rifles and tanks. But hey, if you REALLY want to be anti-gun, please by all means, disarm the government first, for the Government has killed more innocent people, with guns, than I, or any of my "gun owning" friends have. In fact, my cousin (unarmed) was shot and killed by police, so anecdotally speaking, government I know has killed more people, I know, with guns than the people I know have killed with guns.
Suffice it to say, you need a better perspective on reality. Your irrational fear of guns, and not the tyrants that wield them is getting the better of you.
What is the "big difference". Ease? That is not a big difference. ALL technology makes something "easier", that is the point of it. At some point, you either become a Luddite or you realize that you can't stop progress.
And that says a bunch about the Apple Customer base than anything. I wonder how many iPhone sales are from people wanting Android and "accidentally" getting an iPhone.;)
having just bought a phone for my mom, at a VZ store no less, they recommended iPhone. We went with the Galaxy S5 instead, as I have never used an iPhone, and I am the one going to support it. My impression of the store was, you have half a dozen iPhones on the Apple wall, and several brands and a few models of each on the Android wall. The shear number of choices made it hard to choose iPhone randomly. And the salesperson's push to iPhone made it hard to choose Android by accident.
In the end, (anecdotal evidence) we got exactly the phone we wanted. It isn't hard to choose either, and if you're just looking for a "smart phone" you'll get one. However, saying that people "accidentally" bought an Android is a bit of a stretch and quite frankly says more about iPhone users and Apple customers intelligence than I suspect he wanted to say.
Maybe. There is a theory that time itself is multidimensional which would account for the appearance of red shift we assume is the universe expanding, but might just be the effects of time upon the light as it travels interstellar distances.
Not a problem, as I'm fairly certain that none of the slot machines on the floor have any conceivable way of ever connecting directly to any network except for the dark wire casinos use for exactly this purpose.
I'm sure they connect to a network. The question is, is the network attached or otherwise accessible from outside, or by other means (social engineered hack). Unless the network is 100% completely separated from the outside (and even then..) it is at risk.
Here, I'll prove my point,. You can buy something for $15 today, and have it supported until tomorrow(or whenever) or you can pay $300 for the same exact thing, only support will go for a guaranteed 10 years.
Guess what, the company didn't make the choice, you did. The company is just following the choice you've taken.
The problem is solvable. Like Cellphones, it is cheaper and easier in the long run to simply buy a new one every 2 years than it is to buy one that will last you five. And in two years, sufficient advancement means that your old cell phone won't do all the neat cool things that all the new phones want to do, and you're gonna upgrade it anyway, so buy the cheaper one now, and upgrade in two years.
The problem isn't android at all. The problem is that any phone past the 2 years release date is not supported. Heck, one year is often enough to never see an update. With CyanogenMod and other ROM makers out there supporting older devices supporting it by the Manufacturers shouldn't be an issue. Heck, they could hand off support to Cyanogen if they wanted, but that doesn't sell new handsets every 1.5 years.
Buying an Apple might get you updates beyond 2 years.
You can have SMS on any Android phone with Google Voice and/or Hangouts. There are also other service providers of similar if you look around when you don't like Google.
The issue is, can you get away from Phone part of the phone? Do you really want to lose the phone?
1) Non-person entities cannot donate directly to any candidate or cause, but rather must fund their own "campaigns". If say ATT or Google want to help elect people, they can buy their own damn TV spots. "Google supports Harry Reid for senate".
2) Persons can only contribute directly to campaigns for whom they are eligible to vote. Outside influences and PACS can buy their own damn TV spots (NRA, MoveOn, Koch, etc) "NRA supports Mitch McConnell".
3) All advertising must present, who is the primary sponsor (PAC, Lobbying group, etc) with clear details on contributors. Groups wanting to keep their membership "secret" must display "Secret" prominently in their advertisement. "The ad paid for by Mothers Against Dumb Dads --- SECRET"
People have a natural distrust of "secret" organizations.
Easier than that. Send the last mile back to the Local Municipality, let them manage that. Build out a COLO build for up to however many "content/network" providers. Have a small "connect" fee charged when switching providers and let the market decide which provider gets the business.
This makes the last mile, more like Electricity or Water, but allows for competition on what goes down the fiber.
Slashdot Mirror
So, do you not think it is a patriots duty to overthrow a tyrannical government?
If so, then the question is, how much Tyranny is too much Tyranny? Not that we shouldn't act, but when should we.
But if not, then that means you support Tyranny, making you part of the problem.
Sorry, but that isn't sarcasm. That is a fact.
Police don't necessarily prevent murder, but they are there to clean up the mess. SEC is trying to prevent murder, and failing miserably.See "Mortgage Backed Securities".
I would go a step further, in that the SEC was completely complacent in the whole Banking Investment fraud that led up to the collapse of the economy. They failed, completely, to understand the "new" derivative investments and thus the problems associated with compounded leveraging, that they of all people should have recognized.
IMHO when a organization, which has one task, fails to manage in their duties in such a complete way as this, the whole thing needs scrapped. Caveat Emptor is heartless, but it is heartless at both ends. However if you break the law, you should go to jail. Too bad our elected officials were in on the scam and thus nobody is going to jail for the theft and fraud that was perpetrated on our country (and the world)
Well, taking your "devil's advocate" position, I would postulate that both Voting and Keeping/Bearing Arms are rights, but that Voting is more limited in as much as one needs to be a citizen while Keeping and Bearing Arms has no such limitation declared. This analysis would support my position even better, meaning that it is more reasonable to make sure that everyone voting is a citizen, rather than everyone Carrying a Weapon has ID.
But Logic doesn't rule our land, fear mongering does.
The problem is, that without a regular reading of the Constitution, all you're left with are opinions of lawyers and judges as to all that the Constitution means. The fact is, the Constitution was deliberately focused and precise overarching set of "guidelines" that have been slowly eroded in favor of more "pragmatic" approaches, since nearly the beginning.
Here is a test on Voting Rights and Right to Bear Arms. We have a set of court opinions that one requires ID and the other doesn't require any, both on "Constitutional" grounds. Either both are rights, and require the same application to exercise, or they are not rights.
And for the anti-gun wackos, I'd suggest that Voting is more dangerous than guns, because you can't tell who the stupid people are voting for the tyrants taking away our rights as fast as they can.
Ah yes, the UK, who we fought for our independence from and the tyranny of the Crown. Whose ass we had to save from Germans 70 years ago. That UK?
You, sir, scare the crap out of me. The most dangerous thing I can do, is use my words to convince others to act. Yelling fire in a theater is not illegal. Causing the resulting panic is. An actor, upon a stage can yell "fire" all day long, and it doesn't cause panic. There is this little thing called "intent". There are no limits to free speech, you cannot stop me from yelling "fire" in a theater, you can only hold me responsible for the result. I being an Actor, can yell Fire all day long, in a theater with nobody given a shit.
And the thing of it is, simplistic arguments like your example of yelling "fire" do more damage to society than well reasoned logical arguments. If anything, you should have to register as being "too stupid" to open your mouth, because you obviously don't know how to use "free speech" appropriately. (please note, this is sarcastic, and not real suggestion, designed to make a point about what people think is "dangerous")
Actually, it is a settled right, as long as there is the 2nd Amendment. It is an affirmed right, that cannot be taken away except under tyrant's rule.
Actually, you're not counting wars, which are gun deaths. Nor are you counting the millions who died after the right to arm themselves was taken away, by the government who's purpose was to protect those very lives, often by means of a bullet.
Name one dictator that allowed the citizens to keep and bear arms. Just one! Should be easy! The one thing they all have in common, is restricted guns to government agents. Germany, Russia/USSR, Cuba, China ..... Millions of dead civilians.
BTW, you're not anti gun, you're just against anyone but the government having guns. I'll bet you're all for Police, Military and agencies like the BLM having assault rifles and tanks. But hey, if you REALLY want to be anti-gun, please by all means, disarm the government first, for the Government has killed more innocent people, with guns, than I, or any of my "gun owning" friends have. In fact, my cousin (unarmed) was shot and killed by police, so anecdotally speaking, government I know has killed more people, I know, with guns than the people I know have killed with guns.
Suffice it to say, you need a better perspective on reality. Your irrational fear of guns, and not the tyrants that wield them is getting the better of you.
What is the "big difference". Ease? That is not a big difference. ALL technology makes something "easier", that is the point of it. At some point, you either become a Luddite or you realize that you can't stop progress.
You are an exception. Not the rule.
And that says a bunch about the Apple Customer base than anything. I wonder how many iPhone sales are from people wanting Android and "accidentally" getting an iPhone. ;)
having just bought a phone for my mom, at a VZ store no less, they recommended iPhone. We went with the Galaxy S5 instead, as I have never used an iPhone, and I am the one going to support it. My impression of the store was, you have half a dozen iPhones on the Apple wall, and several brands and a few models of each on the Android wall. The shear number of choices made it hard to choose iPhone randomly. And the salesperson's push to iPhone made it hard to choose Android by accident.
In the end, (anecdotal evidence) we got exactly the phone we wanted. It isn't hard to choose either, and if you're just looking for a "smart phone" you'll get one. However, saying that people "accidentally" bought an Android is a bit of a stretch and quite frankly says more about iPhone users and Apple customers intelligence than I suspect he wanted to say.
Maybe. There is a theory that time itself is multidimensional which would account for the appearance of red shift we assume is the universe expanding, but might just be the effects of time upon the light as it travels interstellar distances.
Not a problem, as I'm fairly certain that none of the slot machines on the floor have any conceivable way of ever connecting directly to any network except for the dark wire casinos use for exactly this purpose.
I'm sure they connect to a network. The question is, is the network attached or otherwise accessible from outside, or by other means (social engineered hack). Unless the network is 100% completely separated from the outside (and even then..) it is at risk.
Companies aren't "cheapskates", customers are.
Here, I'll prove my point,. You can buy something for $15 today, and have it supported until tomorrow(or whenever) or you can pay $300 for the same exact thing, only support will go for a guaranteed 10 years.
Guess what, the company didn't make the choice, you did. The company is just following the choice you've taken.
The problem is solvable. Like Cellphones, it is cheaper and easier in the long run to simply buy a new one every 2 years than it is to buy one that will last you five. And in two years, sufficient advancement means that your old cell phone won't do all the neat cool things that all the new phones want to do, and you're gonna upgrade it anyway, so buy the cheaper one now, and upgrade in two years.
The problem isn't android at all. The problem is that any phone past the 2 years release date is not supported. Heck, one year is often enough to never see an update. With CyanogenMod and other ROM makers out there supporting older devices supporting it by the Manufacturers shouldn't be an issue. Heck, they could hand off support to Cyanogen if they wanted, but that doesn't sell new handsets every 1.5 years.
Buying an Apple might get you updates beyond 2 years.
And good luck with any other OS.
You can have SMS on any Android phone with Google Voice and/or Hangouts. There are also other service providers of similar if you look around when you don't like Google.
The issue is, can you get away from Phone part of the phone? Do you really want to lose the phone?
that function "like a brain on the Internet"
Here is my fix for Campaign Finance.
1) Non-person entities cannot donate directly to any candidate or cause, but rather must fund their own "campaigns". If say ATT or Google want to help elect people, they can buy their own damn TV spots. "Google supports Harry Reid for senate".
2) Persons can only contribute directly to campaigns for whom they are eligible to vote. Outside influences and PACS can buy their own damn TV spots (NRA, MoveOn, Koch, etc) "NRA supports Mitch McConnell".
3) All advertising must present, who is the primary sponsor (PAC, Lobbying group, etc) with clear details on contributors. Groups wanting to keep their membership "secret" must display "Secret" prominently in their advertisement. "The ad paid for by Mothers Against Dumb Dads --- SECRET"
People have a natural distrust of "secret" organizations.
The real test is to have the driverless cars race 500 miles at a super speedway like Daytona.
Easier than that. Send the last mile back to the Local Municipality, let them manage that. Build out a COLO build for up to however many "content/network" providers. Have a small "connect" fee charged when switching providers and let the market decide which provider gets the business.
This makes the last mile, more like Electricity or Water, but allows for competition on what goes down the fiber.
And Fort Hood was "workplace violence" .... we get it.
Civil awards are not subject to taxes. Sorry.