Maybe because its so obvious to everyone else. Since we are talking about cars, lets use a computer analogy- is it easier to update and maintain a software application on a single very large server that serves a lot of people? Or is it easier to update and maintain that same application on 100,000 different computers? If you do decide your application needs an update (or tightening of emissions in this context), you only have to modify one source, rather than 100,000.
100% of gasoline powered cars rely on fossil fuels
~66% of electricity in the us is generated using fossil fuels, 39% is from coal
In some sense we are trading the smoke-plumes around, but keep in mind it is vastly more efficient to regulate and control the pollution out of one stack than one million different little stacks.
This only means they didn't need to cheat to win that specific game. There is a preponderance of evidence that they were both knowingly and intentionally breaking the rules. This is called cheating to most people who aren't from the New England area. There is an established pattern of cheating through the entire season, which throws into question their "championship".
So do you think whipping people into a violent frenzy, where attempted murder is the expected outcome and defence with deadly force is a necessity, is a reasonable way to make a persuasive argument?
There is also the "fighting words" legal doctrine:
In 1942, the U.S. Supreme Court established the doctrine by a 9–0 decision in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire. It held that "insulting or 'fighting words,' those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are among the "well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech the prevention and punishment of [which] have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem."
This event wasn't about showing different artwork, some of which just happened to offend. This event was intended to insult a religion while wearing a mantle of "free speech", and its not unreasonable to assume that they had a specific goal of inciting a breach of the peace. Not everything has one side right and the other side wrong, sometimes both parties are wrong.
Same here. 1 can of aspartame based diet soda and like clockwork I get a blinding headache which prevents me from doing just about anything.
Funny how the aspartame lobby talks about safe it is, and how only.0001% of people have side effects, but within an hour of the story being posted there are many multiple anecdotes about how this product causes agonizing pain. It is still a small percentage of people, but it is more than the FDA claims.
And what happens when we actually prove that Autism disorder is caused by bad vaccines?
Did you pay any attention to the news this week? The study that took years and years, involving almost 100,000 kids, conclusively showing that there is no link? Even if there is a link, its statistically so tiny as to be irrelevant.
And yes, the state can and does take away children from parents if the state doesn't like how they are being raised. It happens daily. Parenthood isn't some right that supercedes other individuals safety.
The fact is, FORCING vaccines doesn't protect ANYONE from ANYTHING.
I'm going to have to disagree with you on this point, since I didn't catch polio, or measles, or a wide variety of other diseases, and that is almost entirely due to the state forcing vaccinations on other people.
In fact, the Measles outbreak at Disneyland had almost nothing to do with the no-vaccine advocates
So you are saying there is no connection between a low vaccination rate, and outbreaks of disease? You can make that claim, but the CDC, the AMA, and most reputable doctors, strongly disagree with that notion. Not just in general, but in this specific outbreak where a study found that the low vaccination rate was responsible.
There is really only one legitimate broad category that would require shutting off cell service: Mass uprising, revolutionary activity, organized protests, and riots. Think of the Ferguson riots, but slightly more extreme, with organized looting and organized attacks against government installations. When tempers flare, just a few hotheads on each side could escalate the situation to full-scale combat. We've seen several examples in Egypt, Turkey, & Syria, along with other countries affected by the Arab spring uprisings. I am absolutely certain the govt had backup plans to shut down cell service in Ferguson if rioting got out of hand and became a broader threat.
The government has a compelling reason to plan for these scenarios where several dozen or perhaps even hundreds of cells of motivated actors coordinate assaults. Do you remember last year when dozens of militia groups decided to converge and "protect the southern border", and brought a shit-ton of assault rifles with them? What if something outrageous happened- imagine if there was a false report of an attack on one of the militia group from the Mexican army. Or hell, imagine a few mexican soldiers did have a shooting confrontation with some of those militia members? The call to arms would be broadcast very quickly via cell phone among the groups there, and that kind of crowd panic could easily turn nasty. Backup could be called from miles away. Scouting missions could be sent against a nominally hostile army and those scouts can communicate back with the main force. If those militias were thrown into a combat situation, what exactly do you think would happen if the govt tried to step in and disarm them? One very real alternative that can save lives and slow down further escalation is to shut down communication.
These are the scenarios the govt is planning against, where thousands of its own citizens might rampage against some percieved threat. These aren't ridiculous what-if scenarios, but real events that happened within the past 12 months, that very easily could have spun into chaos.
If you were correct, then there would be no taxis. But there are a lot, and theres a lot of new competition in the sector as the internet tightens the margins. There is always the same basic need: lower cost. I drive my car for maybe an hour a day on average. But I pay for it 24 hours a day. Taxis are so much more convenient, but cost a lot because of the human driver.
When you pass a cyclist using a bike lane, YOU are using that lane too. The cyclist in a dedicated lane grants you a speed increase. Or would you prefer the cyclist should be right in front of you using the road at 15mph, and not allowing you any room to pass?
Every browser uses javascript. Mozilla allows people to use plugins, some of which make it much easier to manage js. But bad javascript on a website, can only make that website suck. It's the ActiveX controls built into IE with the idea of breaking web compatibility and getting browser lock-in, along with Browser Helper Objects, which makes the whole browser suck. BHO's are responsible for those million toolbars.
Using IE makes you more vulnerable to malware, because of poor design. There is no fix. IE = Malware in the eyes of techies. No matter what version number they put out, with whatever security enhancements, they have to escape that branding.
Small claims court- You don't need to pay a lawyer, you can just present your side of the story to a judge or jury
Worst case scenario, you lose half a day and get nothing, and spend ~$100 on court fees.
But there is a chance, especially with a jury, that you will get reimbursed the laptops cost, and either way Lenovo will spend thousands of dollars in legal fees.
Who uses the same stock OS that has the specific drivers for that exact model's hardware already loaded..?
Should I instead hope that Microsoft has a generic driver that will work with whatever fancy new hardware features exist?
Or should I instead wipe out whatever software they pre-installed, and then circle right back around to the manufacturers website, to re-install their driver software after navigating 20 different subpages to find the right version?
Here's my legitimate question back- are you buying new models with cutting edge hardware, and using those features?
And yes.. I regretfully write this on my month old Lenovo that I was strongly considering formatting with Ubuntu, but decided to keep on its stock Windows. Lesson learned.
You can say this about every product available on every market on earth. Look at the baker- he didn't grind the flour; the miller didn't grow the wheat and sugar cane; the farmer didn't find the seeds growing wild; all of this is the combined efforts of thousands of human generations. Somebody else mined the coal and somebody else turned it into electricity. Somebody else filtered the water. The baker combines all of these things, some that he acquired at cost, and maybe some that are freely given, and makes his final product and sells it. 99+% of the work was done by others, going back in history for thousands of years to reach this current stage. We call it civilization.
We ALL stand on the shoulders of giants, in every profession, in every walk of life. Why are they not allowed to charge for their work when the baker can?
You clearly haven't spent much time riding in public transit of any major city if you think air travellers and bus travellers are in the same economic brackets.
How many emails do you think they are getting from HQ today? And doesn't the HQ have a history of executing people who do the wrong thing?
If somebody had a bone to pick with a group that operated in China, might they not target that group in China as well? Perhaps it flies under the radar because the scope isn't as large or easily detectable.
Letters have traveled through various postal systems for hundreds of years now. By giving your letter to a postal carrier, you are relinquishing control of it and letting it be processed by a centralized system. Therefore, anyone who sends a private correspondance through a postal system, should have no expectation of privacy. ?
Are network packets really that different? Because technology makes it easier to look at the content of the packet without breaking any wax seals, or having to steam the glue, that makes it ok to look? The 4th amendment protects paper packets, why not electronic packets? The US was founded with personal privacy enshrined as a core principal, so a lot of thick numbskulls like myself carry that expectation across different spectrums.
(Note: In this particular case, I'm not surprised that Uber employees can access Uber data, especially in this example where the reporter called out being late to a meeting with Uber executives while seated in an Uber car)
Hitchiking is actually illegal in many states. Most of them only reference soliciting a ride on the street itself, but some outlaw the whole concept.
None of the hotel regulations apply to taking $20 for someone crashing in a spare bedroom for a night.
Thats not actually true. Lots of states Attornery Generals have filed legal paperwork again Airbnb and couchsurfing homes to class them as hotels, subject to normal hotel / bed&breakfast regulations.
Every single person on this earth is motivated to get food, and have food, and if possible, have even more food. It is genetically programmed to the infinite degree. Particular farming practices, and particular strains of crops may work better in different regions of the world, but every farmer wants more food. The ONLY farmers who may not care about increased yields are suburbanites who have plenty of money and food, and farm as a fun hobby. ALL commercial farmers want more. ALL subsistence farmers want more.
A lot of schools, maybe the vast majority(?), already have video surveillance systems. Where do you think that video footage of the Columbine shooters walking around inside the school came from?? That was 15 years ago, and cameras have gotten much cheaper and more widespread since then.
I wish them the best of luck in sales to the good people of Luxembourg, Ireland, and small carribean islands. I'm sure their total revenues after dropping the costly US market will improve tremendously.
People who watch no news of any kind, are more informed about current events than viewers of Fox News. For sure you can expect certain kinds of distortion for left and right wing biases from every station, but Fox News takes viewers several steps beyond political slant, to full on fabrications that suit their storyline.
Nobody is stealing 500 euro bills, because normal people don't carry them. If you stole them from a bank, any attempt to spend those bills would get way too much attention. It also follows then that any attempt to pass off counterfeit bills that are huge values, will also get a lot of extra scrutiny, which is not productive. There are more $20 counterfeit bills in active circulation than $100 bills.
That leaves criminals with really only one reason to use the extra large bills, laundering & transferring money. Now, where does the money that needs to be laundered come from? This conversation is entirely about cracking down on drugs, gambling & prostitution.
Slashdot Mirror
Google is adding gossip that is enhancing the user experience for 13 year old girls on one hand
...and making the default experience worse for more serious minded people, since they now have to or some combination thereof to disable junk results
Maybe because its so obvious to everyone else. Since we are talking about cars, lets use a computer analogy- is it easier to update and maintain a software application on a single very large server that serves a lot of people? Or is it easier to update and maintain that same application on 100,000 different computers? If you do decide your application needs an update (or tightening of emissions in this context), you only have to modify one source, rather than 100,000.
100% of gasoline powered cars rely on fossil fuels
~66% of electricity in the us is generated using fossil fuels, 39% is from coal
In some sense we are trading the smoke-plumes around, but keep in mind it is vastly more efficient to regulate and control the pollution out of one stack than one million different little stacks.
This only means they didn't need to cheat to win that specific game. There is a preponderance of evidence that they were both knowingly and intentionally breaking the rules. This is called cheating to most people who aren't from the New England area. There is an established pattern of cheating through the entire season, which throws into question their "championship".
So do you think whipping people into a violent frenzy, where attempted murder is the expected outcome and defence with deadly force is a necessity, is a reasonable way to make a persuasive argument?
There is also the "fighting words" legal doctrine:
In 1942, the U.S. Supreme Court established the doctrine by a 9–0 decision in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire. It held that "insulting or 'fighting words,' those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are among the "well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech the prevention and punishment of [which] have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem."
This event wasn't about showing different artwork, some of which just happened to offend. This event was intended to insult a religion while wearing a mantle of "free speech", and its not unreasonable to assume that they had a specific goal of inciting a breach of the peace. Not everything has one side right and the other side wrong, sometimes both parties are wrong.
Same here. 1 can of aspartame based diet soda and like clockwork I get a blinding headache which prevents me from doing just about anything.
.0001% of people have side effects, but within an hour of the story being posted there are many multiple anecdotes about how this product causes agonizing pain. It is still a small percentage of people, but it is more than the FDA claims.
Funny how the aspartame lobby talks about safe it is, and how only
And what happens when we actually prove that Autism disorder is caused by bad vaccines?
Did you pay any attention to the news this week? The study that took years and years, involving almost 100,000 kids, conclusively showing that there is no link? Even if there is a link, its statistically so tiny as to be irrelevant.
And yes, the state can and does take away children from parents if the state doesn't like how they are being raised. It happens daily. Parenthood isn't some right that supercedes other individuals safety.
The fact is, FORCING vaccines doesn't protect ANYONE from ANYTHING.
I'm going to have to disagree with you on this point, since I didn't catch polio, or measles, or a wide variety of other diseases, and that is almost entirely due to the state forcing vaccinations on other people.
In fact, the Measles outbreak at Disneyland had almost nothing to do with the no-vaccine advocates
So you are saying there is no connection between a low vaccination rate, and outbreaks of disease? You can make that claim, but the CDC, the AMA, and most reputable doctors, strongly disagree with that notion. Not just in general, but in this specific outbreak where a study found that the low vaccination rate was responsible.
There is really only one legitimate broad category that would require shutting off cell service: Mass uprising, revolutionary activity, organized protests, and riots. Think of the Ferguson riots, but slightly more extreme, with organized looting and organized attacks against government installations. When tempers flare, just a few hotheads on each side could escalate the situation to full-scale combat. We've seen several examples in Egypt, Turkey, & Syria, along with other countries affected by the Arab spring uprisings. I am absolutely certain the govt had backup plans to shut down cell service in Ferguson if rioting got out of hand and became a broader threat.
The government has a compelling reason to plan for these scenarios where several dozen or perhaps even hundreds of cells of motivated actors coordinate assaults. Do you remember last year when dozens of militia groups decided to converge and "protect the southern border", and brought a shit-ton of assault rifles with them? What if something outrageous happened- imagine if there was a false report of an attack on one of the militia group from the Mexican army. Or hell, imagine a few mexican soldiers did have a shooting confrontation with some of those militia members? The call to arms would be broadcast very quickly via cell phone among the groups there, and that kind of crowd panic could easily turn nasty. Backup could be called from miles away. Scouting missions could be sent against a nominally hostile army and those scouts can communicate back with the main force. If those militias were thrown into a combat situation, what exactly do you think would happen if the govt tried to step in and disarm them? One very real alternative that can save lives and slow down further escalation is to shut down communication.
These are the scenarios the govt is planning against, where thousands of its own citizens might rampage against some percieved threat. These aren't ridiculous what-if scenarios, but real events that happened within the past 12 months, that very easily could have spun into chaos.
If you were correct, then there would be no taxis. But there are a lot, and theres a lot of new competition in the sector as the internet tightens the margins. There is always the same basic need: lower cost. I drive my car for maybe an hour a day on average. But I pay for it 24 hours a day. Taxis are so much more convenient, but cost a lot because of the human driver.
Human drivers have even more bugs
GP provides a perfect example. He is claiming that he can drink and drive and still be a better driver: "I'm not that drunk".
When you pass a cyclist using a bike lane, YOU are using that lane too. The cyclist in a dedicated lane grants you a speed increase. Or would you prefer the cyclist should be right in front of you using the road at 15mph, and not allowing you any room to pass?
What exactly does Facebook have to offer the New York Times?
Eyeballs. Ad Revenue.
New York Times has a pretty big distribution, 2.3 million people per day.
Facebook has 890 million users per day.
Every browser uses javascript. Mozilla allows people to use plugins, some of which make it much easier to manage js. But bad javascript on a website, can only make that website suck. It's the ActiveX controls built into IE with the idea of breaking web compatibility and getting browser lock-in, along with Browser Helper Objects, which makes the whole browser suck. BHO's are responsible for those million toolbars.
Using IE makes you more vulnerable to malware, because of poor design. There is no fix. IE = Malware in the eyes of techies. No matter what version number they put out, with whatever security enhancements, they have to escape that branding.
Small claims court- You don't need to pay a lawyer, you can just present your side of the story to a judge or jury
Worst case scenario, you lose half a day and get nothing, and spend ~$100 on court fees.
But there is a chance, especially with a jury, that you will get reimbursed the laptops cost, and either way Lenovo will spend thousands of dollars in legal fees.
Who uses the same stock OS that has the specific drivers for that exact model's hardware already loaded..?
Should I instead hope that Microsoft has a generic driver that will work with whatever fancy new hardware features exist?
Or should I instead wipe out whatever software they pre-installed, and then circle right back around to the manufacturers website, to re-install their driver software after navigating 20 different subpages to find the right version?
Here's my legitimate question back- are you buying new models with cutting edge hardware, and using those features?
And yes.. I regretfully write this on my month old Lenovo that I was strongly considering formatting with Ubuntu, but decided to keep on its stock Windows. Lesson learned.
You can say this about every product available on every market on earth. Look at the baker- he didn't grind the flour; the miller didn't grow the wheat and sugar cane; the farmer didn't find the seeds growing wild; all of this is the combined efforts of thousands of human generations. Somebody else mined the coal and somebody else turned it into electricity. Somebody else filtered the water. The baker combines all of these things, some that he acquired at cost, and maybe some that are freely given, and makes his final product and sells it. 99+% of the work was done by others, going back in history for thousands of years to reach this current stage. We call it civilization.
We ALL stand on the shoulders of giants, in every profession, in every walk of life. Why are they not allowed to charge for their work when the baker can?
You clearly haven't spent much time riding in public transit of any major city if you think air travellers and bus travellers are in the same economic brackets.
How many emails do you think they are getting from HQ today? And doesn't the HQ have a history of executing people who do the wrong thing?
If somebody had a bone to pick with a group that operated in China, might they not target that group in China as well? Perhaps it flies under the radar because the scope isn't as large or easily detectable.
Letters have traveled through various postal systems for hundreds of years now. By giving your letter to a postal carrier, you are relinquishing control of it and letting it be processed by a centralized system. Therefore, anyone who sends a private correspondance through a postal system, should have no expectation of privacy. ?
Are network packets really that different? Because technology makes it easier to look at the content of the packet without breaking any wax seals, or having to steam the glue, that makes it ok to look? The 4th amendment protects paper packets, why not electronic packets? The US was founded with personal privacy enshrined as a core principal, so a lot of thick numbskulls like myself carry that expectation across different spectrums.
(Note: In this particular case, I'm not surprised that Uber employees can access Uber data, especially in this example where the reporter called out being late to a meeting with Uber executives while seated in an Uber car)
Hitchiking is actually illegal in many states. Most of them only reference soliciting a ride on the street itself, but some outlaw the whole concept.
None of the hotel regulations apply to taking $20 for someone crashing in a spare bedroom for a night.
Thats not actually true. Lots of states Attornery Generals have filed legal paperwork again Airbnb and couchsurfing homes to class them as hotels, subject to normal hotel / bed&breakfast regulations.
Every single person on this earth is motivated to get food, and have food, and if possible, have even more food. It is genetically programmed to the infinite degree. Particular farming practices, and particular strains of crops may work better in different regions of the world, but every farmer wants more food. The ONLY farmers who may not care about increased yields are suburbanites who have plenty of money and food, and farm as a fun hobby. ALL commercial farmers want more. ALL subsistence farmers want more.
A lot of schools, maybe the vast majority(?), already have video surveillance systems.
Where do you think that video footage of the Columbine shooters walking around inside the school came from??
That was 15 years ago, and cameras have gotten much cheaper and more widespread since then.
I wish them the best of luck in sales to the good people of Luxembourg, Ireland, and small carribean islands. I'm sure their total revenues after dropping the costly US market will improve tremendously.
People who watch no news of any kind, are more informed about current events than viewers of Fox News. For sure you can expect certain kinds of distortion for left and right wing biases from every station, but Fox News takes viewers several steps beyond political slant, to full on fabrications that suit their storyline.
Nobody is stealing 500 euro bills, because normal people don't carry them. If you stole them from a bank, any attempt to spend those bills would get way too much attention. It also follows then that any attempt to pass off counterfeit bills that are huge values, will also get a lot of extra scrutiny, which is not productive. There are more $20 counterfeit bills in active circulation than $100 bills.
That leaves criminals with really only one reason to use the extra large bills, laundering & transferring money. Now, where does the money that needs to be laundered come from? This conversation is entirely about cracking down on drugs, gambling & prostitution.