Because government run projects ALWAYS finish cheaper & faster than private companies. [/sarcasm]
The real answer is competition. Outlaw all forms of ISP monopoly agreements, including city and building level. Let tiny municipal ISP's start up and compete against Comcast. Let Google Fiber deploy anywhere they good and well please. Make it legal for anyone to buy a big pipe & resell to their neighborhood.
This is commonly the result of the government promising something free. The taxes get collected, no doubt, but the promised freebie never quite pans out.
There were a few easter eggs on the original Palm Pilot. One showed the Development Team Credits with a photo, another was dancing palm trees in the Giraffe app.
I used to have a web site listing a lot more, but it's been lost many ISP's ago...
Sounds like someone hasn't watched "It's a Wonderful Life". Aside from being a sappy Christmas movie, it also tells the fundamentals of how banks work.
Why else would everyone withdrawing their money at once (aka a run on a bank) cause it to collapse?
>It violates our constitutional prohibition on establishment of a religion
You, like most people, are misunderstanding several parts of that line.
There's a Federal Constitutional ban on the establishment of religion. 1) Federal. Back when the US was first founded, the states & regions had official religions. That was a good thing. Didn't like the religion of your current state? Move to one do you like. It was a marketplace of faiths & ideas, and the federal ban was so that one flavor wouldn't be mandated on the whole country - like in good old mother England.
2) Establishment. This means the Federal Government advocating, promoting and enforcing a single official religion. It says nothing about banning particular religions, though that is against the spirit of freedom the country was founded. It also says nothing about the neo-atheist notion of "protecting" people from religion, which is a very recent idea and bears no foundation in any of this nation's documents and ideals. Nuts, the first 2 sentences of the Declaration of Independence cite God as the basis and authority for the document & founding of a new country.
All that to say that the establishment clause has no bearing on immigration. I believe that there is no constitutional basis for or against immigration or it's limitations, short of Congress having the authority to pass laws on how to regulate it.
You're missing my point- I really don't think owning a car is cheaper for most people. There are cheaper options everywhere. Nuts, many people could walk to work. It might take an hour or two, but it's an option.
Likewise- when people buy a car, very rarely do they but the cheapest car they can afford.
Cars are about freedom, convenience, practicality, and in many cases image. Cost is a very very minor factor.
I want to leave my junk in the back seat, and not have it stolen by the next random person to use the car. I don't want my car to smell like smoke, or sweaty unwashed guy. I want to get my car RIGHT NOW, not in 30 or even 10 minutes.
I really see no up side to automated side sharing that doesn't exist today with your typical taxi. There is no game changer here.
All of this hype over self-driving car sharing... it's going to flop big time. Car sharing happens now - it's called a taxi. It only works in very large cities, and with a very small part of the population. This automated business merely hold the potential to bring cost down a bit. There's no other real up side.
Put another way - if using a taxi & uber is so much cheaper than buying a car yourself, why do the vast majority of people still buy a car? (Hint: There's more to life than cost per mile.)
That's odd. I don't know anyone who doesn't leave their devices on 24x7.
System defaults for power save settings make it a very, very minor thing in the overall household/business power bill. For a business, compare the man-hours cost of waiting for computers vs the electrical costs of a low-power mode computer.
As for life-span, that debate has been going on for longer than the +25 years I've been in the industry. It's so close between the two that other factors take priority.
>but some outsourcing companies have learned to provide very good quality services,
Now *that's* funny. I have never seen, nor have I ever heard of an outsourcing project that resulted in anything but plummeting satisfaction, vastly slower service, and greatly increased costs.
Sure, it's a good idea to kill of germs with UV light - but that ain't self cleaning. Someone sprinkles all over the seat, and leaves shaving hair in the sink, and you're going to need a lot more than a black light bulb.
Sounds like this is a PR stunt to make passengers happy, without doing much on their end.
I do wonder how all the plastics in the room will hold up with the extra UV light.
Where I live, roads with no lines results in lots of idiots driving down the center of the road, and parked cars half sticking out into the road. Any traffic in the opposing direction turns into a game of chicken, with the loser pulling half off the road & stopping until the winner passes.
I guess that after a while, in high traffic areas, traffic would turn into India's chaotic jumble of cars weaving all over the place.
There's a concept called "decoupling" - where a utility's profit is not based on the amount of power sold, but on other factors. (Say, reliability, low cost, customer satisfaction, etc). Many utilities do this, via their local regulating body of government.
With that in place, the utility doesn't care how much (or little) power you use - at least on a profit level. If the government offers a bonus to the utility for successfully implementing "green" power or a Demand Response system, then there's a lot of incentive for the utility to make that happen.
This isn't rocket surgery. Utilities are just like any other company. So many people have already decided that utilities are evil that they can't see how a small change to the rules can be good for everyone.
Slashdot Mirror
Because government run projects ALWAYS finish cheaper & faster than private companies. [/sarcasm]
The real answer is competition. Outlaw all forms of ISP monopoly agreements, including city and building level. Let tiny municipal ISP's start up and compete against Comcast. Let Google Fiber deploy anywhere they good and well please. Make it legal for anyone to buy a big pipe & resell to their neighborhood.
Yes, unless you're a "PC Master Race" gamer.
This is commonly the result of the government promising something free.
The taxes get collected, no doubt, but the promised freebie never quite pans out.
Keep that in mind when voting.
Lidocaine has me curious. When is a topical analgesic useful as a pill?
Then put another machine on the other side of town.
That's kind of like saying that a gas powered generator is useless because it can only power one house.
There were a few easter eggs on the original Palm Pilot. One showed the Development Team Credits with a photo, another was dancing palm trees in the Giraffe app.
I used to have a web site listing a lot more, but it's been lost many ISP's ago...
edit: Found it!
https://web.archive.org/web/19...
Sounds like someone hasn't watched "It's a Wonderful Life".
Aside from being a sappy Christmas movie, it also tells the fundamentals of how banks work.
Why else would everyone withdrawing their money at once (aka a run on a bank) cause it to collapse?
I shouldn't have to justify my privacy.
Do you have a lock on your front door? Curtains on the windows? What are you hiding?
You're confusing Bernie with Trump.
Bernie will give everyone a pony.
Trump will yell at the pony telling it how bad it is.
>It violates our constitutional prohibition on establishment of a religion
You, like most people, are misunderstanding several parts of that line.
There's a Federal Constitutional ban on the establishment of religion.
1) Federal. Back when the US was first founded, the states & regions had official religions. That was a good thing. Didn't like the religion of your current state? Move to one do you like. It was a marketplace of faiths & ideas, and the federal ban was so that one flavor wouldn't be mandated on the whole country - like in good old mother England.
2) Establishment. This means the Federal Government advocating, promoting and enforcing a single official religion. It says nothing about banning particular religions, though that is against the spirit of freedom the country was founded. It also says nothing about the neo-atheist notion of "protecting" people from religion, which is a very recent idea and bears no foundation in any of this nation's documents and ideals. Nuts, the first 2 sentences of the Declaration of Independence cite God as the basis and authority for the document & founding of a new country.
All that to say that the establishment clause has no bearing on immigration. I believe that there is no constitutional basis for or against immigration or it's limitations, short of Congress having the authority to pass laws on how to regulate it.
You're missing my point- I really don't think owning a car is cheaper for most people. There are cheaper options everywhere.
Nuts, many people could walk to work. It might take an hour or two, but it's an option.
Likewise- when people buy a car, very rarely do they but the cheapest car they can afford.
Cars are about freedom, convenience, practicality, and in many cases image. Cost is a very very minor factor.
I want to leave my junk in the back seat, and not have it stolen by the next random person to use the car. I don't want my car to smell like smoke, or sweaty unwashed guy. I want to get my car RIGHT NOW, not in 30 or even 10 minutes.
I really see no up side to automated side sharing that doesn't exist today with your typical taxi. There is no game changer here.
All of this hype over self-driving car sharing... it's going to flop big time.
Car sharing happens now - it's called a taxi. It only works in very large cities, and with a very small part of the population. This automated business merely hold the potential to bring cost down a bit. There's no other real up side.
Put another way - if using a taxi & uber is so much cheaper than buying a car yourself, why do the vast majority of people still buy a car? (Hint: There's more to life than cost per mile.)
That's odd. I don't know anyone who doesn't leave their devices on 24x7.
System defaults for power save settings make it a very, very minor thing in the overall household/business power bill.
For a business, compare the man-hours cost of waiting for computers vs the electrical costs of a low-power mode computer.
As for life-span, that debate has been going on for longer than the +25 years I've been in the industry. It's so close between the two that other factors take priority.
>but some outsourcing companies have learned to provide very good quality services,
Now *that's* funny.
I have never seen, nor have I ever heard of an outsourcing project that resulted in anything but plummeting satisfaction, vastly slower service, and greatly increased costs.
Courts have consistently rules that reverse engineering is legal & protected.
Sure, it's a good idea to kill of germs with UV light - but that ain't self cleaning. Someone sprinkles all over the seat, and leaves shaving hair in the sink, and you're going to need a lot more than a black light bulb.
Sounds like this is a PR stunt to make passengers happy, without doing much on their end.
I do wonder how all the plastics in the room will hold up with the extra UV light.
"One computer wiz claims..."
Wait - I thought we stopped using that term back in the 80's.
Can we stop calling everyone who searches for strings in a ROM a "computer wiz"? Please?
I thought this blog posting on PIN numbers looked familiar - then I looked at the publish date. September 3rd, 2012.
Um, guys?
You sound bitter about that. You should really just let it go. Let it go.
Can we just get a story category of "SJW"? That way it's easier to filter out these misleading flame baits.
Same here. Best tip I ever heard: Look for satellite dishes - they point South.
(More correctly, they point to the equator. Reverse the advice if you live Down Under)
Came here to say this.
Where I live, roads with no lines results in lots of idiots driving down the center of the road, and parked cars half sticking out into the road. Any traffic in the opposing direction turns into a game of chicken, with the loser pulling half off the road & stopping until the winner passes.
I guess that after a while, in high traffic areas, traffic would turn into India's chaotic jumble of cars weaving all over the place.
Do not want.
No, they don't. And that too, is part of the problem.
What's the point of having a law, if there is little to no enforcement?
>Second of all, there should be no concept of a downmod.
Look what that did for E-Bay. Single worst decision that site ever did.
There's a concept called "decoupling" - where a utility's profit is not based on the amount of power sold, but on other factors. (Say, reliability, low cost, customer satisfaction, etc). Many utilities do this, via their local regulating body of government.
With that in place, the utility doesn't care how much (or little) power you use - at least on a profit level. If the government offers a bonus to the utility for successfully implementing "green" power or a Demand Response system, then there's a lot of incentive for the utility to make that happen.
This isn't rocket surgery. Utilities are just like any other company. So many people have already decided that utilities are evil that they can't see how a small change to the rules can be good for everyone.