"So, why should it be any different for law enforcement?"
Because law enforcement officers have guns, and can coerce you, physically, to comply with their wishes. They can and should be held to a higher standard than your wife checking on who you're seeing on the side.
There is a difference between killing civilians inadvertantly in the course of fighting a battle, and targeting civilians because it is politically advantageous to do so.
Good for you. What's your bankroll look like? I bet it's smaller than AT&T's.
"If you think that any new law will actually benefit you,"
I'm absolutely certain that the telcos, absent laws preventing them from doing so, will increase their profit margins and provide no better service, because they don't have to. They're a cartel.
Wake me up when I can package together all my preferred plugins and configuration mojo into a portable thingy. I hate re-un-mess-up Firefox every time I need to install it.
I apologize. I proceeded from the assumption that you thought abusive monopolies were a bad thing.
"How easy is it to get phone service these days?" Relatively easy. Why? "How's the customer service?" Bad. However, we're also not using pulse dialing. I'll take that development.
Would you really prefer to lease everything that attaches to the telephone system from AT&T?
I'm a big fan of free markets. However, that means free from abusive monopolies, as well as free from intrusive legislation. I will be glad to accept a modest amount of legislation to prevent abusive monopolies.
The real solution is simple. Run the physical plant of the telcos as a public utility, and sell access to data solutions providers of various stripes. AT&T can compete on a level field with everybody else, and live or die by the quality of their products.
That's precisely the part I find so objectionable. "Because A=A, you must subject your judgement and reasoning to mine, because I've already done the reasoning, and I'm right, and you're wrong. QED."
Yeah. No. I think a cult is a remarkably apt definition.
Oh, nonono. Not libertarian. Lower-case l libertarian is just fine. Objectivist. They get really crabby if you don't capitalize the O. Ayn Rand was an Objectivist, not a libertarian.
I like libertarians. Objectivists...too much drinking of the Kool Aid.
I've been reading the Belisarius series by David Drake and friends. It's fun epic fantasy kinda-alternate-history goodness, and you can get the first four novels at the Baen free library. w00t.
Yeah, that scared the hell out of me. Martin can still pull it together, though. Jordan burned me out with, what? Six tomes of absolutely nothing happening? I'm just not going to wade through those to get to the last books, which might be relatively OK.
I'll just be glad I read the first couple, and pretend he passed away after The Great Hunt.
And I'm still bitter at Goodkind turning into Crazy Objectivist Sermon Guy.
"Taxis and Limousines both drive on public roads"...as do a bunch of privately owned vehicles, who pay not a cent to the taxi and limousine folks. Next completely irrelevant car analogy?
Why doesn't the vendor have some authentication and location system for phones that are reported stolen? It's not like T-Mobile doesn't know exactly where the device is located.
Oh wait...this way they get to sell another phone. Question answered.
Slashdot Mirror
"We slashdotters are no different."
Hmm. I must have missed the place where I was supposed to sign your manifesto.
You're welcome to your opinions. Please don't try to pass them off as mine.
I don't think you should be able to arrest people, but thanks for playing.
"So, why should it be any different for law enforcement?"
Because law enforcement officers have guns, and can coerce you, physically, to comply with their wishes. They can and should be held to a higher standard than your wife checking on who you're seeing on the side.
There is a difference between killing civilians inadvertantly in the course of fighting a battle, and targeting civilians because it is politically advantageous to do so.
Both are bad. One is worse.
"They've stayed out so far."
And so it shall ever be, right? Uh huh.
"I will fight for them to stay out in the future"
Good for you. What's your bankroll look like? I bet it's smaller than AT&T's.
"If you think that any new law will actually benefit you,"
I'm absolutely certain that the telcos, absent laws preventing them from doing so, will increase their profit margins and provide no better service, because they don't have to. They're a cartel.
What did you do to your iPods?
Nice thought. What color is the sky on your planet?
There you go, then. But how is a telco monopoly going to get us closer to that end state?
That's certainly GM's theory. Where's their stock price again?
Wake me up when I can package together all my preferred plugins and configuration mojo into a portable thingy. I hate re-un-mess-up Firefox every time I need to install it.
I apologize. I proceeded from the assumption that you thought abusive monopolies were a bad thing.
"How easy is it to get phone service these days?" Relatively easy. Why?
"How's the customer service?" Bad. However, we're also not using pulse dialing. I'll take that development.
Would you really prefer to lease everything that attaches to the telephone system from AT&T?
I'm a big fan of free markets. However, that means free from abusive monopolies, as well as free from intrusive legislation. I will be glad to accept a modest amount of legislation to prevent abusive monopolies.
The real solution is simple. Run the physical plant of the telcos as a public utility, and sell access to data solutions providers of various stripes. AT&T can compete on a level field with everybody else, and live or die by the quality of their products.
"The alternative is trusting Congress to legislate your best interests. "
Since YOUR alternative is trusting Congress to legislate the telco's best interest, yes, I would prefer this scenario.
What, you don't think that the telcos will buy the laws that are convenient to them?
Yeah, your strategy worked GREAT on AT&T.
Wait, what was that commercial I saw? AT&T is now the 800lb telco gorilla?
That's precisely the part I find so objectionable. "Because A=A, you must subject your judgement and reasoning to mine, because I've already done the reasoning, and I'm right, and you're wrong. QED."
Yeah. No. I think a cult is a remarkably apt definition.
Oh, nonono. Not libertarian. Lower-case l libertarian is just fine. Objectivist. They get really crabby if you don't capitalize the O. Ayn Rand was an Objectivist, not a libertarian.
I like libertarians. Objectivists...too much drinking of the Kool Aid.
I've been reading the Belisarius series by David Drake and friends. It's fun epic fantasy kinda-alternate-history goodness, and you can get the first four novels at the Baen free library. w00t.
Oregon. It's a state. You memorized them in geography class in high school. : )
Yeah, that scared the hell out of me. Martin can still pull it together, though. Jordan burned me out with, what? Six tomes of absolutely nothing happening? I'm just not going to wade through those to get to the last books, which might be relatively OK.
I'll just be glad I read the first couple, and pretend he passed away after The Great Hunt.
And I'm still bitter at Goodkind turning into Crazy Objectivist Sermon Guy.
Or you could live in Portland, OR, where you can't throw an empty without hitting a really fine microbrewery.
Good American beer is plentiful. Steer clear of the big names, and you'll do fine.
I'm so glad that George R. R. Martin has freed me from any desire to read more Wheel of Time.
Martin really, really needs to not do two things: 1) die, and 2) contract a case of Robert Jordan-itis.
If it weren't for the speed of light and orbital mechanics dictating a truly awful latency, it'd be perfect.
"Taxis and Limousines both drive on public roads" ...as do a bunch of privately owned vehicles, who pay not a cent to the taxi and limousine folks. Next completely irrelevant car analogy?
Why doesn't the vendor have some authentication and location system for phones that are reported stolen? It's not like T-Mobile doesn't know exactly where the device is located.
Oh wait...this way they get to sell another phone. Question answered.
If you want to give money to strangers, go ahead. If you don't, don't. Caveat money-givers-to-people-they-don't-know-latinsoundi ngsuffixo.
That reads like a transcript of Koko the gorilla's sign language conversations.
"Layers of encryption and protected access was successfully bypassed"
So was your grammar checker.