The licence is to verify you have a valid reason for being naked in public, which would otherwise be illegal.
In particular I suspect that it's to make sure that once you're naked you only fulfil that valid reason, and don't hand out any "extras" that might get your license revoked....
Of course, because we don't already have any laws (just or unjust, I'm not going to go there) that address those concerns.
They are going to care if the girl is underage, aren't they?
Nope.. douchebag strip club owner near me is now in jail for using underage dancers.
You just made AC's point for him(her?). Just because some are willing to break the law by hiring underage dancers, laws already on the books deal with that -- and based on your own words, with some effect too.
You shouldn't have to register your employment choice with the government, unless you provide a professional service that could impact public health and safety and requires verifiable skills (e.g., doctor, lawyer, plumber, etc.). It's not any of the government's business.
> So who is doing the checking? The strip club doesn't care who dances as long as money comes in.
They do if you make them liable for it.
Dancer missing her ID? $20,000 fine per occurrence.
Dancer with fake ID? $20,000 more on top of that fine.
Dancer that turns out to be underage? $500,000 fine, plus they lose their liquor license for a year (for serving while minors are present).
They'll care plenty.
This is also neatly handled by requiring dancers to be licensed. Then the state does all the ID checking, and the club only needs to verify the license.
Absolutely! And since no one ever carries any state-issued, verifiabledocument that has a person's age on it, it's really important to have such certificates, since there's absolutely no other way to verify age.
Certification is not necessarily licensing. You wouldn't even need to require the certificates -- just use them as an easy way to prove girls are over 18.
Of course, because the strip clubs have no other way to verify someone's age without a state registration declaring intent to remove their clothes for money.
I mean, they never do that sort of thing when they allow people to enter such a club, or allow them to buy alcohol. We need age verification registration for alcohol purchases too! You'd think we'd have figured something like that out by now.
It's a travesty! Think of the children!
If only we had some sort of state-issued document that verifies your age -- maybe even with a picture on it. I guess that's just a pipe dream, huh?
Are you folks being deliberately obtuse, or have just not looked in your wallet recently? Sigh.
If there's any question about their age, they present the certificate.
And how do you validate the certificate if there is no record of its existence?
Forget certificates. How about a driver's license or state-issued non-driver ID? Of course not. Those are never used for age verification. Sigh.
It is really difficult. Exceedingly so. Because business owners aren't required to verify that someone is allowed to work in the US, so as not to run afoul of the IRS.
And of course these places have no way to verify the age of anyone who comes into their club. It's not like people are ever asked to prove their age to enter an establishment that serves alcohol, which most of these clubs do.
Useless registration rules to raise barriers to getting into this kind of work. Our Puritan forbears would be proud.
This reminds me back when one insightful person referred to the stretches being done for string theories as "masturbated math." In the mechanico/natural-scientific realm, ex nihilo is mathematically and qualitatively not possible...by definition. That "Science" is being stretched to try and explain origins like this bespeaks much. That we are ignoring that probabilities are a tool to overcome our own limitations of dealing with complexity and at the same time cause-effect is grammatically the same thing as the last statement.
In order for there to be "science," in the modern sense the scientific method must be applied. This requires testable (e.g. collect experimental data, observing events in objective reality, etc.) of hypotheses -- that is, falsifiability.
This work, as well as the various string theories, cannot be tested, so are not falsifiable. Hence, they are not "science" in the modern sense. However, the mathematics underpinning the work may allow for the advancement of real science. Hooray for mathematics!
At the bottom of the article is "Artist's impression of the HL Tauri protoplanetary disk." This is in addition to the image from the actual ALMA observatory.
As soon as I saw the article was from discovery.com, I gleaned enough information from the article to find the actual source and went there. I never saw the referenced "artist's impression." My apologies.
I've always wondered who does the "Artist's impression of" things for NASA and various other agencies. Do they just employ some CG artists full time and they're basically on-call to whip something up so they can actually publish one of these articles? How accurate are they or are just going for visual impact instead of real fidelity?
That's a great question. And might even be useful if it applied in this case.
A paid shill? I wish. My comment was more of a reference to everyone jumping on a bandwagon about whatever topic is hot right now. Fight one fire with another fire.
Understood. I guess we're in violent agreement, eh?
You know, I find it quite interesting just how much people claim anyone who appreciates something that they don't is suddenly a paid shill.
And if everyone is paying attention maybe they're not paying anyone... or maybe you just don't understand how social media has changed the face of mass media?
It may well be a matter of appreciation on jfdavis668's part. However, he claims "Everyone else is" using ApplePay. Which is absurd on its face.
As for the media (online and MSM) coverage, it's been orders of magnitude larger than for any other e-wallet/e-pay platform. So I made the inference that Apple is staging a big marketing push for it. That's a reasonable conclusion, IMHO. Whether jfdavis668 is a paid shill or not, is irrelevant.
You know, I find it quite interesting just how much press and attention ApplePay is getting. Even in/. comments it seems. I guess their marketing folks are spreading the money around pretty liberally. I wonder how much they'd pay me to shill for them?
Not just for Stripe, but for most (all?) of the CC payment processors. They generally do this sort of thing for a wide array of businesses and business models. The worst part is that often they will sign you up. accept your customers' money, then freeze your account, claiming your business is either too fraud prone and/or deals in illegal/inappropriate products/services.
Nothing to see here. Just business as usual. Move along, consumer.
Keep your hands out of my wallet and you can do whatever you like as well.
Why even bother replying? Your claim about eligibility was wrong. It's an often repeated lie from the forked tongues of our politicians. We have to see past the lies.
It isn't. Lobbying is talking. Bribing is paying or giving stuff. Lobbyists that are caught paying or giving stuff go to jail for... bribery. Which means the same thing here as other places.
That's just adorable! Do you believe in Santa and the Tooth Fairy too?
Just to make sure I'm clear on this: you feel that it's not a big deal that 3.5 *billion* (probably a couple billion more in the next 50 years) will become homeless refugees, along with the loss of arable land, infrastructure and all manner of other things.
This is not supported by the IPCC conclusions or anything else. There is no plausible scenario under which this can happen. Your fears are utterly irrational. Either you are a liar or a moron, take your pick.
I see that reading comprehension is not your strong suit, so I'll say for the *fourth* time on this thread. My comment was pointing out the idiotic comment by another poster who stated and I quote (note, I'll say it a fifth time. I did not say this. this is a quote from another poster -- cf. http://slashdot.org/comments.p...):
Even if the polar ice caps melt, only coastal cities will be lost.
Such a statement is ridiculous on its face and is both unrealistic (as you pointed out), but if by some bizarre series of events it were to happen, there would be enormous dislocations around the world with huge numbers of refugees in the low lying areas around continents and much more so in the island nations around the world.
So. Just to wrap this up for good as I'm tired of repeating myself -- the complete melting of the polar ice caps is not going to happen on any timescale relevant to our civilization. Another poster suggested that -- not me. It was so ridiculous on its face, I didn't realize I needed to state that up front. Apparently, a whole bunch of you just like to pile on without applying any context. My argument was not This is going to happen and we're all going to die next Thursday. My argument was If, somehow, such a catastrophe happened, the impact would be enormously greater than the GP I was replying to suggested.
Okay. I'm done. If you don't get it now you're likely a troll or just an asshole. Either way, go yell at someone else.
Who knows what folks would do with the opportunities provided by high-speed symmetric links?
You may not be aware of it, but you have technically strayed off-topic a bit. Or at least there is need for clarification. There are two quite different kinds of symmetry being discussed here. What the article was talking about was not symmetric bandwidth links (e.g. 10Mbs upstream and 10Mbs downstream), but rather the symmetry in being allowed to use your data transfer (upstream and downstream) to act as a webserver, instead of a webclient. If the FCC version of Net Neutrality was only updated to reflect the latter, then I believe the market would sort out the former. In all likelyhood it doesn't make sense to architect the last mile presuming symmetry which we know doesn't exist at this point in the evolution of the net. The key is to at least allow the current asymmetry to be fully utilized. I.e. allowing full non-discriminatory freedom for all end users to use their share of traffic resources in an application/service/device agnostic way. Myself, 15 years ago, had dreams of getting a full 1.5Mbs/up/down T1 and being able to host something like the 1999 version of slashdot. The fact that 15 years later, GoogleFiber allegedly offers 1Gbs up and down, yet terms of service forbids any commercial server hosting is the problem. It leads to a skewed supply/demand scenario where Google and the rest of the established players tilt the rules of the game in favor of the servers they operate.
While the FCC may be focusing elsewhere -- and on the wrong issues, IMHO, that doesn't mean I can't address the real issue and the real promise of the Internet. In my initial post on this thread I said:
It's like that because of the artificial restrictions placed on upload speeds by the DOCSIS and ADSL protocols. Which is just the big boys trying to protect their business model by keeping us from being creators and sharing on a peer-to-peer basis.
The "evolution" of the last mile is being hobbled (via technology and, yes, as you correctly point out, via abusive terms of service) by those who benefit from such hobbling.
I'm exceptionally lucky on the TOS side, as my ISP connection is server friendly and I even have multiple free static IPV4 addresses. Now, if only I could get decent upload speeds....What's more, my ISP has been absorbed into larger and larger organizations over the years. Said companies have consistently reduced the services offered and and engaged poorer and poorer quality tech support. I expect that they will try to slap me into line in the near to medium term. Sigh.
You are quite correct in talking about the need for "full non-discriminatory freedom" in terms of directionality on internet links. I believe, however, that that can be forced upon the ISPs once a critical mass of folks have symmetric links. Why? Because then there will be much more interest and an actual market in true P2P versions of applications which are now completely centralized. Such centralization aids the corporate thieves in propping up their dying business models as well as the the government law "enforcement" TLAs (Federal, state and local) to log everything we do online.
As I said elsewhere, let's not make the perfect the enemy of the good. Once symmetric links are out there, tools for maximizing the links will be developed (for example, the Diaspora Project is mostly a failure in that regard because most people don't have the upload speeds to support those activities -- so there's no real value in making it simple to implement and use) and should use strong encryption as well. Once enough people see the value in P2P (as the TCP/IP suite is peer-to-peer by design) and can secure their connections to others, it becomes much more difficult (yes, I understand how traffic analysis works so encryption isn't an end solution) to control how people use the
I know it's unusual, so I apologize for the shock, but while I was replying to your post, I was actually agreeing with you.
Specifically, "I really hate how cynical I'm getting, but our corporate and government overlords keep taking our freedoms and most people are cheering them on. Good consumers. No need to be a citizen. Just be a good little consumer.", but just expanding on the mechanism a bit.
The FCC will inevitably kowtow to the corporate and other interests and lock in their vision of what the Internet is and is for, discarding the reality of what it can be and what the rest of us would like it to be.
So, carry on...
Ohhh. My apologies. It's business as usual of course. Rock on. I'd only suggest that rather than focusing your ire on the symptoms (regulatory capture), perhaps focusing on the root cause (the monied interests which are the sources of capture and corruption) instead. Have a lovely Sunday evening.
Where do you think the money for state benefits comes from? A lot of it comes from the feds and is left to the states to come up with rules for dispersal of benefits. And no, a citizen should not have to move because of illegal immigration. The illegals should move back to their country of origin. I have friends trying to come here legally and cannot, meanwhile they flood in from our southern border and are promised amnesty by political hacks. It's disgraceful. If this country now runs on anarchy, surely the rest of us can start choosing laws that we'd like to break. Maybe we should all start by declining federal income tax. It's not illegal to break the law, right?
Yes, I know what block grants are. Do whatever you like, with whoever you like. Please just keep me out of it, kthxbye.
Slashdot Mirror
And how does that observation help a woman who's working as a hooker get off the streets, pray tell?
Not in any measurable way. How does your observation help a woman who's working as a hooker get off the streets, pray tell?
The licence is to verify you have a valid reason for being naked in public, which would otherwise be illegal.
In particular I suspect that it's to make sure that once you're naked you only fulfil that valid reason, and don't hand out any "extras" that might get your license revoked....
Of course, because we don't already have any laws (just or unjust, I'm not going to go there) that address those concerns.
They are going to care if the girl is underage, aren't they?
Nope .. douchebag strip club owner near me is now in jail for using underage dancers.
You just made AC's point for him(her?). Just because some are willing to break the law by hiring underage dancers, laws already on the books deal with that -- and based on your own words, with some effect too.
You shouldn't have to register your employment choice with the government, unless you provide a professional service that could impact public health and safety and requires verifiable skills (e.g., doctor, lawyer, plumber, etc.). It's not any of the government's business.
There. FTFY.
Seems to me that putting up barriers to women working on the streets getting off the streets is counter-productive.
Would you rather have your daughter working the streets as a prostitute for a pimp or dancing in a strip club with bouncers, etc.?
--Chris Rock
And that goes double for hookers. Just sayin'.
> So who is doing the checking? The strip club doesn't care who dances as long as money comes in.
They do if you make them liable for it.
Dancer missing her ID? $20,000 fine per occurrence. Dancer with fake ID? $20,000 more on top of that fine. Dancer that turns out to be underage? $500,000 fine, plus they lose their liquor license for a year (for serving while minors are present). They'll care plenty.
This is also neatly handled by requiring dancers to be licensed. Then the state does all the ID checking, and the club only needs to verify the license.
Absolutely! And since no one ever carries any state-issued, verifiable document that has a person's age on it, it's really important to have such certificates, since there's absolutely no other way to verify age.
Certification is not necessarily licensing. You wouldn't even need to require the certificates -- just use them as an easy way to prove girls are over 18.
Of course, because the strip clubs have no other way to verify someone's age without a state registration declaring intent to remove their clothes for money.
I mean, they never do that sort of thing when they allow people to enter such a club, or allow them to buy alcohol. We need age verification registration for alcohol purchases too! You'd think we'd have figured something like that out by now.
It's a travesty! Think of the children!
If only we had some sort of state-issued document that verifies your age -- maybe even with a picture on it. I guess that's just a pipe dream, huh?
Are you folks being deliberately obtuse, or have just not looked in your wallet recently? Sigh.
If there's any question about their age, they present the certificate.
And how do you validate the certificate if there is no record of its existence?
Forget certificates. How about a driver's license or state-issued non-driver ID? Of course not. Those are never used for age verification. Sigh.
It is really difficult. Exceedingly so. Because business owners aren't required to verify that someone is allowed to work in the US, so as not to run afoul of the IRS.
And of course these places have no way to verify the age of anyone who comes into their club. It's not like people are ever asked to prove their age to enter an establishment that serves alcohol, which most of these clubs do.
Useless registration rules to raise barriers to getting into this kind of work. Our Puritan forbears would be proud.
All it takes for facebook to fail is for ordinary users walking away in sufficient numbers.
Already done on my end. Only 499,999,999 more to go. :)
This reminds me back when one insightful person referred to the stretches being done for string theories as "masturbated math." In the mechanico/natural-scientific realm, ex nihilo is mathematically and qualitatively not possible...by definition. That "Science" is being stretched to try and explain origins like this bespeaks much. That we are ignoring that probabilities are a tool to overcome our own limitations of dealing with complexity and at the same time cause-effect is grammatically the same thing as the last statement.
In order for there to be "science," in the modern sense the scientific method must be applied. This requires testable (e.g. collect experimental data, observing events in objective reality, etc.) of hypotheses -- that is, falsifiability.
This work, as well as the various string theories, cannot be tested, so are not falsifiable. Hence, they are not "science" in the modern sense. However, the mathematics underpinning the work may allow for the advancement of real science. Hooray for mathematics!
At the bottom of the article is "Artist's impression of the HL Tauri protoplanetary disk." This is in addition to the image from the actual ALMA observatory.
As soon as I saw the article was from discovery.com, I gleaned enough information from the article to find the actual source and went there. I never saw the referenced "artist's impression." My apologies.
I've always wondered who does the "Artist's impression of" things for NASA and various other agencies. Do they just employ some CG artists full time and they're basically on-call to whip something up so they can actually publish one of these articles? How accurate are they or are just going for visual impact instead of real fidelity?
That's a great question. And might even be useful if it applied in this case.
The Atacam Large Milimeter/submilimeter Array (ALMA) is the source for the photos of the HL Tauri system, some 450 light years away.
When you can go to the source?
A paid shill? I wish. My comment was more of a reference to everyone jumping on a bandwagon about whatever topic is hot right now. Fight one fire with another fire.
Understood. I guess we're in violent agreement, eh?
You know, I find it quite interesting just how much people claim anyone who appreciates something that they don't is suddenly a paid shill. And if everyone is paying attention maybe they're not paying anyone... or maybe you just don't understand how social media has changed the face of mass media?
It may well be a matter of appreciation on jfdavis668's part. However, he claims "Everyone else is" using ApplePay. Which is absurd on its face.
As for the media (online and MSM) coverage, it's been orders of magnitude larger than for any other e-wallet/e-pay platform. So I made the inference that Apple is staging a big marketing push for it. That's a reasonable conclusion, IMHO. Whether jfdavis668 is a paid shill or not, is irrelevant.
Go troll someone else, AC.
Everyone else is.
You know, I find it quite interesting just how much press and attention ApplePay is getting. Even in /. comments it seems. I guess their marketing folks are spreading the money around pretty liberally. I wonder how much they'd pay me to shill for them?
Just to clarify what I'm talking about:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/su...
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.co...
https://www.quora.com/Why-does...
https://news.ycombinator.com/i...
http://www.thefrisky.com/2014-...
Not just for Stripe, but for most (all?) of the CC payment processors. They generally do this sort of thing for a wide array of businesses and business models. The worst part is that often they will sign you up. accept your customers' money, then freeze your account, claiming your business is either too fraud prone and/or deals in illegal/inappropriate products/services.
Nothing to see here. Just business as usual. Move along, consumer.
Keep your hands out of my wallet and you can do whatever you like as well.
Why even bother replying? Your claim about eligibility was wrong. It's an often repeated lie from the forked tongues of our politicians. We have to see past the lies.
You are absolutely right. Please give me 40 lashes and post my name in the hall of shame. I'm so sorry. I'm going to kill myself now.
It isn't. Lobbying is talking. Bribing is paying or giving stuff. Lobbyists that are caught paying or giving stuff go to jail for... bribery. Which means the same thing here as other places.
That's just adorable! Do you believe in Santa and the Tooth Fairy too?
An AI.
That may not work out so well either.
This is what you said:
This is not supported by the IPCC conclusions or anything else. There is no plausible scenario under which this can happen. Your fears are utterly irrational. Either you are a liar or a moron, take your pick.
I see that reading comprehension is not your strong suit, so I'll say for the *fourth* time on this thread. My comment was pointing out the idiotic comment by another poster who stated and I quote (note, I'll say it a fifth time. I did not say this. this is a quote from another poster -- cf. http://slashdot.org/comments.p...):
Such a statement is ridiculous on its face and is both unrealistic (as you pointed out), but if by some bizarre series of events it were to happen, there would be enormous dislocations around the world with huge numbers of refugees in the low lying areas around continents and much more so in the island nations around the world.
So. Just to wrap this up for good as I'm tired of repeating myself -- the complete melting of the polar ice caps is not going to happen on any timescale relevant to our civilization. Another poster suggested that -- not me. It was so ridiculous on its face, I didn't realize I needed to state that up front. Apparently, a whole bunch of you just like to pile on without applying any context. My argument was not This is going to happen and we're all going to die next Thursday. My argument was If, somehow, such a catastrophe happened, the impact would be enormously greater than the GP I was replying to suggested.
Okay. I'm done. If you don't get it now you're likely a troll or just an asshole. Either way, go yell at someone else.
You may not be aware of it, but you have technically strayed off-topic a bit. Or at least there is need for clarification. There are two quite different kinds of symmetry being discussed here. What the article was talking about was not symmetric bandwidth links (e.g. 10Mbs upstream and 10Mbs downstream), but rather the symmetry in being allowed to use your data transfer (upstream and downstream) to act as a webserver, instead of a webclient. If the FCC version of Net Neutrality was only updated to reflect the latter, then I believe the market would sort out the former. In all likelyhood it doesn't make sense to architect the last mile presuming symmetry which we know doesn't exist at this point in the evolution of the net. The key is to at least allow the current asymmetry to be fully utilized. I.e. allowing full non-discriminatory freedom for all end users to use their share of traffic resources in an application/service/device agnostic way. Myself, 15 years ago, had dreams of getting a full 1.5Mbs/up/down T1 and being able to host something like the 1999 version of slashdot. The fact that 15 years later, GoogleFiber allegedly offers 1Gbs up and down, yet terms of service forbids any commercial server hosting is the problem. It leads to a skewed supply/demand scenario where Google and the rest of the established players tilt the rules of the game in favor of the servers they operate.
While the FCC may be focusing elsewhere -- and on the wrong issues, IMHO, that doesn't mean I can't address the real issue and the real promise of the Internet. In my initial post on this thread I said:
The "evolution" of the last mile is being hobbled (via technology and, yes, as you correctly point out, via abusive terms of service) by those who benefit from such hobbling.
I'm exceptionally lucky on the TOS side, as my ISP connection is server friendly and I even have multiple free static IPV4 addresses. Now, if only I could get decent upload speeds....What's more, my ISP has been absorbed into larger and larger organizations over the years. Said companies have consistently reduced the services offered and and engaged poorer and poorer quality tech support. I expect that they will try to slap me into line in the near to medium term. Sigh.
You are quite correct in talking about the need for "full non-discriminatory freedom" in terms of directionality on internet links. I believe, however, that that can be forced upon the ISPs once a critical mass of folks have symmetric links. Why? Because then there will be much more interest and an actual market in true P2P versions of applications which are now completely centralized. Such centralization aids the corporate thieves in propping up their dying business models as well as the the government law "enforcement" TLAs (Federal, state and local) to log everything we do online.
As I said elsewhere, let's not make the perfect the enemy of the good. Once symmetric links are out there, tools for maximizing the links will be developed (for example, the Diaspora Project is mostly a failure in that regard because most people don't have the upload speeds to support those activities -- so there's no real value in making it simple to implement and use) and should use strong encryption as well. Once enough people see the value in P2P (as the TCP/IP suite is peer-to-peer by design) and can secure their connections to others, it becomes much more difficult (yes, I understand how traffic analysis works so encryption isn't an end solution) to control how people use the
I know it's unusual, so I apologize for the shock, but while I was replying to your post, I was actually agreeing with you.
Specifically, "I really hate how cynical I'm getting, but our corporate and government overlords keep taking our freedoms and most people are cheering them on. Good consumers. No need to be a citizen. Just be a good little consumer.", but just expanding on the mechanism a bit.
The FCC will inevitably kowtow to the corporate and other interests and lock in their vision of what the Internet is and is for, discarding the reality of what it can be and what the rest of us would like it to be.
So, carry on...
Ohhh. My apologies. It's business as usual of course. Rock on. I'd only suggest that rather than focusing your ire on the symptoms (regulatory capture), perhaps focusing on the root cause (the monied interests which are the sources of capture and corruption) instead. Have a lovely Sunday evening.
Where do you think the money for state benefits comes from? A lot of it comes from the feds and is left to the states to come up with rules for dispersal of benefits. And no, a citizen should not have to move because of illegal immigration. The illegals should move back to their country of origin. I have friends trying to come here legally and cannot, meanwhile they flood in from our southern border and are promised amnesty by political hacks. It's disgraceful. If this country now runs on anarchy, surely the rest of us can start choosing laws that we'd like to break. Maybe we should all start by declining federal income tax. It's not illegal to break the law, right?
Yes, I know what block grants are. Do whatever you like, with whoever you like. Please just keep me out of it, kthxbye.