Read more carefully the clause you quoted. It says AMONG the states. Not inside a state. For example Congress has zero authority to force me to replace the stairs into my office with a ramp (only the Maryland legislature can do that).
>>>Then obviously you didn't read the ADA, which covers it explicitly at the start.
Thanks. Now show me *in the constitution* where Congress was given authority to regulate private business. They certainly have the authority over commerce among the states, but PER THE 10th AMENDMENT do not have authority over businesses that exist wholly *inside* a state. Like a private store. Or a private office. Or a private school. Or a private farm. Or.....
>>>not so great for the rest of us who get cut off from all non-CC'ed content.
I've seen lots of non-Captioned content over broadcast TV (channels: thisTV, retroTV, antennaTV). The owner only has to broadcast CC if it's available, but if it's an old or obscure movie/show that doesn't have CC, they can still send it out for the enjoyment of hearing folk.
I can't figure out how the Congress has power to regulate private businesses and impose the ADA. Maybe it's through the corporate licensing. Anyway: Yes the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ruled long-ago that broadcast TV must carry closed captioning. Then they extended it to cable TV (by what authority I have no idea). Including captioning on netflix really isn't a big deal..... it's encoded in the video steams of VHS tapes, DVDs, and Blurays so netflix just needs to dump that CC to the internet stream.
No it sucks. Used to be there were so many shows* I couldn't keep-up. (I had to tape them and catchup during Christmas hiatus and summer break.) Now the channels are mostly filled with reality crap, even the National Geographic (!) and Syfy Channel (building cars == fantasy or sci-fi??). I often flip through the cable when on business trips, and wonder why anyone would pay for it.
* * The 90s; Just off the top of my head: Seinfeld, Friends, Quantum Leap, Star Trek TNG, Babylon 5, DS9, Voyager, Twilight Zone, X-Files, Sliders, Buffy, Angel, Xena, Hercules, Timetrax, Ren & Stimpy..........
Agree on Caprica (though it had a great 5-episode ending... watch it on syfy or hulu). Walking Dead is better in comic book form because you can read at your own place, plus it's about 5 seasons ahead of the TV show's current location in the plot.
Maybe look to the past: The 90s. Hercules was blah, but its spinoff Xena was quite good from season 2 onward. Also Star Trek DS9 and Babylon 5 (my top 2 favorites) and Outer Limits and Twilight Zone and X-Files and Sliders (season 1,2). Basically TV was better in the 90s.
I've learned not to try to tell people what to do, especially since they rarely listen (like my brother who spent $70/month on Dish when I had advised spending 1/3 that amount). Instead I tell them what works for me and let them decide:
SETUP 1 :
- free TV via an antenna. Attached to all the rooms in the house. Both an old VCR and DVR that I use to tape stuff while I'm sleeping. - supplemented by Hulu.com over PC or roku - supplemented by DVD purchases of shows not on hulu (like Games of Thrones). Supplemented by uTorrent if the DVD has not been released yet. - I also read a lot of mystery or sci-fi magazines online if nothing's on.
SETUP 2 (if I lived where antennas are not allowed) - $25 a month Dish service for cable on two sets - supplemented by hulu, DVD, torrent, et cetera
>>>every time USA, France, Germany, anybody, tries to talk to the leadership in Iran they are met with a very disingenuous leadership who will talk round in circles
Source? Last I heard Iran allowed UN inspection teams to enter the country and look at the labs. ALSO you seem to be unaware that Iran is allowed to develop nuclear capability under the terms of the Nonproliferation Treaty. It's not a crime for them to purify uranium below 29% purity. You appear to hate Iran simply because you were TOLD to hate Iran, without any logical reason for doing so. You're a "useful idiot" of the politicians.
>>>So no -- the US was not at war with Japan prior to Pearl Harbor.
A distinction that matters not when you're Japan and your soldiers are getting blown to bits by U.S. airplanes flown by U.S. servicemen by direction of a U.S. general answering to the U.S. president. Next I suppose you'll claim the U.S. was not at war with Iraq in the 1990s (even though we blew-up a lot of them). If you cannot understand that our victims would desire revenge after watching their comrades die, then you must have ZERO empathy.
There were U.S. planes striking Japan's supply lines and southern Chinese bases BEFORE Pearl Harbor happened. The U.S. (or more precisely: President Roosevelt) started the aggression first..... nobody should have been surprised that Japan struck back to get revenge.
I wish people would learn history, especially reporters who are very influential in shaping readers' views. Quote: "Thereâ(TM)s a strong likelihood that the next Pearl Harbor we confront could very well be a cyberattack that cripples our power systems, our grid, our security systems, our financial systems, our governmental system," said Leon Panetta, the U.S. defense secretary. In the case of Iran, it seems, it was the United States playing the role of 1941 Japan.
The 1941 attack did not happen in a vacuum. The U.S. had already been at war against Japan for several years, bombing & killing their soldiers in China. Just like we're doing with Iran now (except via the internet).
There have been several/. stories about the EU acting against a corporation and in favor of the customer. Like the browser choice screen in Opera v. Microsoft.
>>>There are other very powerful interests who want to keep the Internet open and operational.
Then how come Apple, Google, Microsoft, Comcast, et cetera who originally killed SOPA are not turning-round to back the CISPA? It wasn't so much about protecting us or the internet, but about winning immunity for themselves from being sued by disgruntled customers (which SOPA did not do but CISPA does).
>>>Another man is kind of an utter dick, makes abusive business deals, and after years of being a multi-millionaire without contributing anything to society, dies of cancer, and he gets worshiped like some kind of god
No not really. When the ink was barely-dry on the Bill of Rights, our Congress and 2nd president signed a law that made free speech and press illegal (guess they thought the first amendment & their oath meant nothing). In response our 3rd president, who repealed the law, said liberty requires constant vigilance by the electorate else it will be lost.
That appears to be how the European Union operates. The Constitution was rejected, so they turned it into the Lisbon Treaty. The Irish rejected the treaty so they held a second vote 6 months later, so they could get the "yes" vote desired. In Denmark they canceled the election and just acceded to the treaty automagically.
NOW it appears they'll use the same approach with ACTA: It matters not how the EU Parliament votes, we'll just rewrite it and submit it a second time or third time until we get a "yes". Of course the U.S. ain't much better: TARP failed the first time so they rewrote it and tried a second time. When the Supreme Court rejects a law as unconstitutional, the Congress simply passes the law a second time (minus the objectionable bits).
Apple's made a career of ripping-off schools. I remember the Apples in our school that just sat there..... collecting dust. And then becoming obsolete junk. One innovative teacher actually attempted to use them for teaching us reading, but she quickly realized that the software was crap, and costs 10x just sending us to the library to read some books. (Note this was all pre-wikipedia and other online resources.)
So please excuse me if I am skeptical of Apple's marketers who are paid to sell crap we don't need. They promised that Apple IIs and Classic Macs would revolutionize education, and it didn't happen. They lied back then..... probably lying now about tablets. (Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.)
>>>While I've watched computers go from useless technology, foisted on schools....
Computers have always been sought by schools, even in the 80s/early 90s when they were more of a *hindrance* to education than a help. Computers were a waste then (we used to play games while the teachers stupidly praised us), and I bet tablets will be a waste now. Schools love to spend money on the latest fad. If you could convince them "wearing bell bottom legs will help kids learn" they'd go spend millions on bell bottomed uniforms.
That's why the Amazon Tablet (including kindle) is so successful. It was designed to consume and backed by a massive library of videos (and books) to make the consumption even easier.
No you don't. In the 1920s the newest technology was the shortwave radio which allowed worldwide communication. Did teachers suddenly needs radios in every classroom to be teachers? No. In the 1950s the newest technology was the TV. Did teachers suddenly needs TVs to be teachers? No. Now it's the tablet. (And the answer is still no.)
>>>you are a fucking luddite if you think that
Do you speak like that in front of your students? And no not a luddite. I just don't see how I am supposed to enter my engineering equations into a tablet. Or how students are supposed to do it either.
>>>>> In the "real world" a company that wasted money frivolously would die out >> >>And yet this never seems to happen
You need to read the whole sentence: "...and so that tempers exuberance." That means most companies try to avoid overspending, because they don't want to end-up like these companies: Montgomery Wards Atari Commodore Circuit City I'm sure other people can provide more examples. Governments and their schools do not need to fear ending up bankrupt. They just spend, spend, spend and then raise the taxes.
Slashdot Mirror
Read more carefully the clause you quoted. It says AMONG the states. Not inside a state. For example Congress has zero authority to force me to replace the stairs into my office with a ramp (only the Maryland legislature can do that).
>>>Then obviously you didn't read the ADA, which covers it explicitly at the start.
Thanks. Now show me *in the constitution* where Congress was given authority to regulate private business. They certainly have the authority over commerce among the states, but PER THE 10th AMENDMENT do not have authority over businesses that exist wholly *inside* a state. Like a private store. Or a private office. Or a private school. Or a private farm. Or.....
>>> I get channel lineup information from schedulesdirect on yearly subscription.
Interesting. Why not just use the TVguide built into the over-the-air broadcast?
>>>not so great for the rest of us who get cut off from all non-CC'ed content.
I've seen lots of non-Captioned content over broadcast TV (channels: thisTV, retroTV, antennaTV). The owner only has to broadcast CC if it's available, but if it's an old or obscure movie/show that doesn't have CC, they can still send it out for the enjoyment of hearing folk.
I can't figure out how the Congress has power to regulate private businesses and impose the ADA. Maybe it's through the corporate licensing.
Anyway:
Yes the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ruled long-ago that broadcast TV must carry closed captioning. Then they extended it to cable TV (by what authority I have no idea). Including captioning on netflix really isn't a big deal..... it's encoded in the video steams of VHS tapes, DVDs, and Blurays so netflix just needs to dump that CC to the internet stream.
Just realized how wordy I was. Short version:
SETUP 1 :
- free antennaTV + DVR
+ Hulu
+ DVD or uTorrent
+ clarkesworldmagazine.com, asimovs.com
SETUP 2 (if antennas not allowed)
- $25/mo Dish
+ hulu, DVD, etc
No it sucks. Used to be there were so many shows* I couldn't keep-up. (I had to tape them and catchup during Christmas hiatus and summer break.) Now the channels are mostly filled with reality crap, even the National Geographic (!) and Syfy Channel (building cars == fantasy or sci-fi??). I often flip through the cable when on business trips, and wonder why anyone would pay for it.
*
* The 90s; Just off the top of my head:
Seinfeld, Friends, Quantum Leap, Star Trek TNG, Babylon 5, DS9, Voyager, Twilight Zone, X-Files, Sliders, Buffy, Angel, Xena, Hercules, Timetrax, Ren & Stimpy..........
>>>Game of thrones? Lord of the rings with tits.
I fail to see the drawback.
>>>Caprica 1? Zzzzz. Walking Dead? Nothing ever happens
Agree on Caprica (though it had a great 5-episode ending... watch it on syfy or hulu). Walking Dead is better in comic book form because you can read at your own place, plus it's about 5 seasons ahead of the TV show's current location in the plot.
Maybe look to the past: The 90s. Hercules was blah, but its spinoff Xena was quite good from season 2 onward. Also Star Trek DS9 and Babylon 5 (my top 2 favorites) and Outer Limits and Twilight Zone and X-Files and Sliders (season 1,2). Basically TV was better in the 90s.
I've learned not to try to tell people what to do, especially since they rarely listen (like my brother who spent $70/month on Dish when I had advised spending 1/3 that amount). Instead I tell them what works for me and let them decide:
SETUP 1 :
- free TV via an antenna. Attached to all the rooms in the house. Both an old VCR and DVR that I use to tape stuff while I'm sleeping.
- supplemented by Hulu.com over PC or roku
- supplemented by DVD purchases of shows not on hulu (like Games of Thrones). Supplemented by uTorrent if the DVD has not been released yet.
- I also read a lot of mystery or sci-fi magazines online if nothing's on.
SETUP 2 (if I lived where antennas are not allowed)
- $25 a month Dish service for cable on two sets
- supplemented by hulu, DVD, torrent, et cetera
>>>every time USA, France, Germany, anybody, tries to talk to the leadership in Iran they are met with a very disingenuous leadership who will talk round in circles
Source?
Last I heard Iran allowed UN inspection teams to enter the country and look at the labs. ALSO you seem to be unaware that Iran is allowed to develop nuclear capability under the terms of the Nonproliferation Treaty. It's not a crime for them to purify uranium below 29% purity. You appear to hate Iran simply because you were TOLD to hate Iran, without any logical reason for doing so. You're a "useful idiot" of the politicians.
>>>So no -- the US was not at war with Japan prior to Pearl Harbor.
A distinction that matters not when you're Japan and your soldiers are getting blown to bits by U.S. airplanes flown by U.S. servicemen by direction of a U.S. general answering to the U.S. president. Next I suppose you'll claim the U.S. was not at war with Iraq in the 1990s (even though we blew-up a lot of them). If you cannot understand that our victims would desire revenge after watching their comrades die, then you must have ZERO empathy.
There were U.S. planes striking Japan's supply lines and southern Chinese bases BEFORE Pearl Harbor happened. The U.S. (or more precisely: President Roosevelt) started the aggression first..... nobody should have been surprised that Japan struck back to get revenge.
I read the article but see nothing about "dangerous precedents". Where did /. get that from?
I wish people would learn history, especially reporters who are very influential in shaping readers' views. Quote: "Thereâ(TM)s a strong likelihood that the next Pearl Harbor we confront could very well be a cyberattack that cripples our power systems, our grid, our security systems, our financial systems, our governmental system," said Leon Panetta, the U.S. defense secretary. In the case of Iran, it seems, it was the United States playing the role of 1941 Japan.
The 1941 attack did not happen in a vacuum. The U.S. had already been at war against Japan for several years, bombing & killing their soldiers in China. Just like we're doing with Iran now (except via the internet).
There have been several /. stories about the EU acting against a corporation and in favor of the customer. Like the browser choice screen in Opera v. Microsoft.
>>>There are other very powerful interests who want to keep the Internet open and operational.
Then how come Apple, Google, Microsoft, Comcast, et cetera who originally killed SOPA are not turning-round to back the CISPA? It wasn't so much about protecting us or the internet, but about winning immunity for themselves from being sued by disgruntled customers (which SOPA did not do but CISPA does).
When the merd' hits the fan, the soldiers will refuse to nuke Americans. The gun owners will ultimately win.
>>>Another man is kind of an utter dick, makes abusive business deals, and after years of being a multi-millionaire without contributing anything to society, dies of cancer, and he gets worshiped like some kind of god
ATTN Applebots!
Use your modpoints!
No not really. When the ink was barely-dry on the Bill of Rights, our Congress and 2nd president signed a law that made free speech and press illegal (guess they thought the first amendment & their oath meant nothing). In response our 3rd president, who repealed the law, said liberty requires constant vigilance by the electorate else it will be lost.
That appears to be how the European Union operates. The Constitution was rejected, so they turned it into the Lisbon Treaty. The Irish rejected the treaty so they held a second vote 6 months later, so they could get the "yes" vote desired. In Denmark they canceled the election and just acceded to the treaty automagically.
NOW it appears they'll use the same approach with ACTA: It matters not how the EU Parliament votes, we'll just rewrite it and submit it a second time or third time until we get a "yes". Of course the U.S. ain't much better: TARP failed the first time so they rewrote it and tried a second time. When the Supreme Court rejects a law as unconstitutional, the Congress simply passes the law a second time (minus the objectionable bits).
Apple's made a career of ripping-off schools. I remember the Apples in our school that just sat there..... collecting dust. And then becoming obsolete junk. One innovative teacher actually attempted to use them for teaching us reading, but she quickly realized that the software was crap, and costs 10x just sending us to the library to read some books. (Note this was all pre-wikipedia and other online resources.)
So please excuse me if I am skeptical of Apple's marketers who are paid to sell crap we don't need. They promised that Apple IIs and Classic Macs would revolutionize education, and it didn't happen. They lied back then..... probably lying now about tablets. (Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.)
>>>While I've watched computers go from useless technology, foisted on schools....
Computers have always been sought by schools, even in the 80s/early 90s when they were more of a *hindrance* to education than a help. Computers were a waste then (we used to play games while the teachers stupidly praised us), and I bet tablets will be a waste now. Schools love to spend money on the latest fad. If you could convince them "wearing bell bottom legs will help kids learn" they'd go spend millions on bell bottomed uniforms.
>>>give it a new paradigm/name ('consume mostly')
That's why the Amazon Tablet (including kindle) is so successful. It was designed to consume and backed by a massive library of videos (and books) to make the consumption even easier.
>>>We need to learn how to use them to teach with
No you don't.
In the 1920s the newest technology was the shortwave radio which allowed worldwide communication. Did teachers suddenly needs radios in every classroom to be teachers? No. In the 1950s the newest technology was the TV. Did teachers suddenly needs TVs to be teachers? No. Now it's the tablet. (And the answer is still no.)
>>>you are a fucking luddite if you think that
Do you speak like that in front of your students? And no not a luddite. I just don't see how I am supposed to enter my engineering equations into a tablet. Or how students are supposed to do it either.
>>>>> In the "real world" a company that wasted money frivolously would die out
>>
>>And yet this never seems to happen
You need to read the whole sentence: "...and so that tempers exuberance." That means most companies try to avoid overspending, because they don't want to end-up like these companies:
Montgomery Wards
Atari
Commodore
Circuit City
I'm sure other people can provide more examples. Governments and their schools do not need to fear ending up bankrupt. They just spend, spend, spend and then raise the taxes.