Yes, there are times Godwin's law should be applied. And when your government is reading your mail (email, phone calls, social media). and monitoring your travel (street camers, license plate scanners on police cruisers), and your police are being militarized.
Essentially, the only reason most American's do not realize they are living in a police state is because most American's are decent folk and indoctrinated to submit to authority. As such, very few American's ever conflict with the state on a level to feel the police state.
The deranged genocide of millions is NOT a requirement for a police state. While Hitler and Stalin killed millions, much of the Soviet Republics police state history was not under the auspices of genocide. A police state, by necessity does not need to be a deranged murderous state, in order to be a police state.
So yes, with all of that happening. I think we've reached high time to be justified in enacting Godwin's Law.
Note that probably 60% of the land mass is near vacant (13 persons per square mile or less). In fact most of the population is focused on the southeast coast, and Harnosand (sp?). Much of the rest doesn't get beyond 65 people per square mile. And I'd wager, even in those areas, much of that population is in a singular village or town.
Why does that matter? Because in the U.S. we sprawl a lot more...when you get to rural areas of Pennsylvania, you don't have a little village or town, you have continuous homes spread along roads. The amount of cabling to run a long line into a town or village and then short likes to homes. Is a lot lot less than the spider-web that America must run.
The POINT of my post, is that this article is comparing worm filled apples to moldy oranges.
Complaining that America's average internet service is 9th in the world as some sort of failure, is ignoring the vast demographic differences. And I hold to my statement, that most of the other countries do not have a broad a spread of populace to cover. That America reaches most of it's citizens, even in lower population density areas. While pointing to nations like Sweden and Canada, as having a lower population density per territory, than America is a red herring. Because a huge part of that population is consolidated. Nearly ALL Canadians live a short distance from the southern border. And most of the time, those not in the populated regions are left without such access.
In America, we have broader spreads of population. That's why I compared LA to Hong Kong. The point is, in order to reach the same number of people, Hong Kong needs to run far less cable than America. The point is, in order to reach a high portion of its citizens, Americans need to run a lot more cable than pretty much any other nation. The point is, the amount of cable run per citizen, is probably higher for America THAN ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE PLANET.
And we still come in on the top 10 list. That says a lot. And if we compared apples to apples, I do believe America would be #1 by nearly a magnitude over most other nations.
***
As for the price of our internet and cell service, that's a totally valid criticism.
Hong Kong SIZE: 426 sq miles POPULATION: 7 million DENSITY: 16.5K / sq mile
Los Angeles SIZE: 503 sq miles POPULATION: 4 million DENSITY: 8K / sq mile
Los Angeles is half the population density of Hong Kong. Furthermore, the LA Metro area, which has a population of 12 million.
Let's just look at LA county, which has a population of 10 million, spread over 4,752 sq miles.. For a density of 2K/sq mile.
See the difference?
Southern Connecticut is a great example. No, it's not as dense as NY, but the entire southern half of Connecticut is fairly heavily populated. But you can't really point to a city as the demographic. It's one continous moderate density sprawl.
Connecticut SIZE: 5,550 sq miles POPULATION: 3.5 million DENSITY: 739/sq mile
The result is that to wire most of Connecticut's population one must cover thousands of square miles. Note, Connecticut is 4th dense state. So let's compare the math. For Hong Kong to wire 3.5 million people, they need to cable 426 miles vs Connecticut, same population, must wire over 5,000 sq miles.
So to achieve the same connectivity, Connecticut must wire 10x the area of Hong Kong. Now, we're not talking about a rural/country area. Yes, some parts of the NW/NE Connecticut are rural. Even if we allowed Connecticut to only connect 90% of it's population, we'd still be required to wire around 3,500 square miled (7x Hong Kong).
Remember, this is the 4th most dense state in the United States. I would wager, that few countries spread as much cable to reach as many people over as great an area as the U.S.
1/2 Population density, but that is an average of population/territory. It's an irrelevant figure. Canada has the same thing, but 90% of Canadians live in a very small area of Canada's territory (surprisingly, almost all within a 100 miles of U.S. border).
I wager, that Sweden, only has to wire a few major metropolis areas to cover 90% of it's population. So a better measure would be, in order to provide coverage to 90% of your population, how much land mass do you need to wire. And in this, no country on the planet comes close to America.
If you graphed this out, we would likely appear an order of magnitude higher than any other nation.
Seriously, factor in land mass, coverage, vs population density. And we pretty much kick butt. Every year I see this post, and every year I think DAMN, SLASHDOTTERS ARE !@#$% DUMB !@#$
Okay, Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong (wait are they a country or a province now), Switzerland, etc. What do ALL of these nations have in common?
A) Small Land Mass AND/OR B) High Population Densities
Both have to be factored, I mean sure you can point to Canada. It has a huge land mass, and an average population density far lower than the US. But in reality, 90% of Canadians live in within a short distance from the southern Canadian/US border. 90% of Canadian population is grouped together. So the amount of cabling needed to reach 90% of Canada's population is far far less than the U.S.
The United States has one of the most spread out populations. We have cities, like most advanced nations. But then we have urban sprawl, and suburbs after suburbs. These are moderate population densities spread over tens of miles. That's a LOT of cable/fiber.
Lastly, we have massive amounts of rural areas. And amazingly, even many of those have internet be it cabled or wireless. And that's damn impressive. And if instead of using such stupid things as who has the fastest internet, or who reaches the highest percentage of their citizens with broadband. You measured who manages to reach the most backwatered, rural, and broadest amounst of land.
Who has more land area wired than the U.S. with broadband? NO ONE!!!!!
And actually, two wrongs do often make a right. It's all in the eyes of the beholder as to who or what was wrong. Our Founding Father's were considered by the British to be acting upon wrong, by engaging in wrong.
And wasn't there a recent scientific journal publication that linked wars and conflicts largely to famines and food shortages.
God, I'm hungry....kill, kill, kill. But I don't believe in you. You're just a figment, brought on by my starving state. Hey look, that guy has a chicken and some eggs. Kill. Kill. Kill.
No, I think the thousands of unemployed programmers will find jobs. Good jobs, which equate to $50,000 job in the 1970's. Oh, what is that in today's world $200,000.
Here is the sad truth, today, my salary is the equivalent of a $15,000 job when I was born. (mid-70's)
Simple regulation. Goods coming in receive tariffs like we used to, based on ethics. In other words, much of western Europe has similar rights & protections, so they trade freely. A nation that might not meet those levels would pay varying tariffs. Maybe 20% for Russia. 40% for Chinese goods. Korea and Japan would trade freely. Cuba might have a 200% tariff.
They basically, (Cable/Phone)...should be at this point, running cable to regions, and setting up "local" towers. This would not necessarily be your normal cell service. But would be similar.
Basically, this way those in rural areas could get broadband internet. And IF there was an obstruction, the homeowner could erect an antenna and run a line into their home at their cost.
Many of the implementations are strictly forbidden by U.S. law (mostly due to it being outdated). It's a long time problem in the U.S. automobile industry. Just changing to newer better headlights took an immense campaign because the law stated they had to be x,y,z.
Somewhere along the way, some bigot, racist, or what not....helped produced the food you eat. Perhaps, in the same light, you should cease eating and starve.
Also, realize that this is one person of thousands who made this film.
And you probably totally can't afford one. At least most average joes cannot. As the going rate on a transferable (pre-1986 built) fully automatic rifle is about $10K-$20K (& up)
That 5x as much, would mean 5x as many jobs. Those jobs would pay taxes. The rest of the $$$ they'd spend on goods and services. Creating more jobs, which would in turn ALSO pay taxes.
Because, the government is what's making it uneconomical to hire US.
First off, we were founded on the principal of having tariffs. Having kept tariffs, we'd have kept much of our manufacturing and middle-class.
Second, when you claim an American worker costs to much, but point to all the mandated costs the American government has placed upon U.S. workers and business. Then for that reason, go elsewhere. It's not because of capitalism, but regulation.
Simple way to bring back jobs to America. Mandate ALL contracts abroad must maintain the same benefits and protections. Yes, healthcare must be provided, they must pay into social security, etc, etc.
Same way to deal with illegal alien employers. Don't fine them for employing illegal aliens. Fine them for not paying minimum wage. And well, if they're paying minimum wage. Let them be.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, there are times Godwin's law should be applied. And when your government is reading your mail (email, phone calls, social media). and monitoring your travel (street camers, license plate scanners on police cruisers), and your police are being militarized.
Exhibit 1: Listening to your communication
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/354590/greenwald-nsa-has-trillions-e-mails-and-phone-calls-betsy-woodruff
Exhibit 2: Monitoring your travel
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2013/07/28/18740565.php
Exhibit 3: Militarization of police
http://www.forbes.com/sites/bradlockwood/2011/11/30/the-militarizing-of-local-police/
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/4203345
***
Essentially, the only reason most American's do not realize they are living in a police state is because most American's are decent folk and indoctrinated to submit to authority. As such, very few American's ever conflict with the state on a level to feel the police state.
The deranged genocide of millions is NOT a requirement for a police state. While Hitler and Stalin killed millions, much of the Soviet Republics police state history was not under the auspices of genocide. A police state, by necessity does not need to be a deranged murderous state, in order to be a police state.
So yes, with all of that happening. I think we've reached high time to be justified in enacting Godwin's Law.
Iz me.....Nazi-katz,
First off, it might knock some sense into Washington.
Second, if we can't buy goods from anyone else, we'd have to....wait for it....wait...."Make them in the U.S.A."
Just pointing out, that you list some of the major cities, and in both cases for US and Sweden it approaches about 30%-40% of population.
LA Metro
POPULATION: 18 million
SIZE: 34K sq mi
DENSITY: 526.5/sq mi
Sweden
POPULATION: 10 million
SIZE: 450K sq mil
DENSITY: 53.9/sq mil
Per the above, one would assume that to achieve a 90% coverage, that Sweden had to run far more cable than the LA Metro did.
15% of Sweden's population is considered rural, what percent
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/sweden/population-density-people-per-sq-km-wb-data.html
But let's look at a map of Sweden with population densities.
http://chatt.hdsb.ca/~1lauriesar/FOV1-00144A6C/S0FD9D1B9.0/19102011_55200_2.jpg
Note that probably 60% of the land mass is near vacant (13 persons per square mile or less). In fact most of the population is focused on the southeast coast, and Harnosand (sp?). Much of the rest doesn't get beyond 65 people per square mile. And I'd wager, even in those areas, much of that population is in a singular village or town.
Why does that matter? Because in the U.S. we sprawl a lot more...when you get to rural areas of Pennsylvania, you don't have a little village or town, you have continuous homes spread along roads. The amount of cabling to run a long line into a town or village and then short likes to homes. Is a lot lot less than the spider-web that America must run.
In the amount of cable we've run per citizen... That is the real measure of connectivity.
The POINT of my post, is that this article is comparing worm filled apples to moldy oranges.
Complaining that America's average internet service is 9th in the world as some sort of failure, is ignoring the vast demographic differences. And I hold to my statement, that most of the other countries do not have a broad a spread of populace to cover. That America reaches most of it's citizens, even in lower population density areas. While pointing to nations like Sweden and Canada, as having a lower population density per territory, than America is a red herring. Because a huge part of that population is consolidated. Nearly ALL Canadians live a short distance from the southern border. And most of the time, those not in the populated regions are left without such access.
In America, we have broader spreads of population. That's why I compared LA to Hong Kong. The point is, in order to reach the same number of people, Hong Kong needs to run far less cable than America. The point is, in order to reach a high portion of its citizens, Americans need to run a lot more cable than pretty much any other nation. The point is, the amount of cable run per citizen, is probably higher for America THAN ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE PLANET.
And we still come in on the top 10 list. That says a lot. And if we compared apples to apples, I do believe America would be #1 by nearly a magnitude over most other nations.
***
As for the price of our internet and cell service, that's a totally valid criticism.
Hong Kong
SIZE: 426 sq miles
POPULATION: 7 million
DENSITY: 16.5K / sq mile
Los Angeles
SIZE: 503 sq miles
POPULATION: 4 million
DENSITY: 8K / sq mile
Los Angeles is half the population density of Hong Kong. Furthermore, the LA Metro area, which has a population of 12 million.
Let's just look at LA county, which has a population of 10 million, spread over 4,752 sq miles.. For a density of 2K/sq mile.
See the difference?
Southern Connecticut is a great example. No, it's not as dense as NY, but the entire southern half of Connecticut is fairly heavily populated. But you can't really point to a city as the demographic. It's one continous moderate density sprawl.
Connecticut
SIZE: 5,550 sq miles
POPULATION: 3.5 million
DENSITY: 739/sq mile
The result is that to wire most of Connecticut's population one must cover thousands of square miles. Note, Connecticut is 4th dense state. So let's compare the math. For Hong Kong to wire 3.5 million people, they need to cable 426 miles vs Connecticut, same population, must wire over 5,000 sq miles.
So to achieve the same connectivity, Connecticut must wire 10x the area of Hong Kong. Now, we're not talking about a rural/country area. Yes, some parts of the NW/NE Connecticut are rural. Even if we allowed Connecticut to only connect 90% of it's population, we'd still be required to wire around 3,500 square miled (7x Hong Kong).
Remember, this is the 4th most dense state in the United States. I would wager, that few countries spread as much cable to reach as many people over as great an area as the U.S.
Per the links, 82% of rural communities have access high speed internet (25mbps service), 98% can access basic broadband (6mbps).
http://www.broadbandmap.gov/blog/
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2013/ntia-explores-broadband-availability-new-report-series
"And over there, you can get 100Mbps service in a town of 200 people somewhere north of the Arctic Circle."
Where? I am very skeptical of this claim.
Fine, and we'll stop paying taxes and supporting all the millions of assholes living in the cities.
1/2 Population density, but that is an average of population/territory. It's an irrelevant figure. Canada has the same thing, but 90% of Canadians live in a very small area of Canada's territory (surprisingly, almost all within a 100 miles of U.S. border).
I wager, that Sweden, only has to wire a few major metropolis areas to cover 90% of it's population. So a better measure would be, in order to provide coverage to 90% of your population, how much land mass do you need to wire. And in this, no country on the planet comes close to America.
If you graphed this out, we would likely appear an order of magnitude higher than any other nation.
Seriously, factor in land mass, coverage, vs population density. And we pretty much kick butt. Every year I see this post, and every year I think DAMN, SLASHDOTTERS ARE !@#$% DUMB !@#$
Okay, Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong (wait are they a country or a province now), Switzerland, etc. What do ALL of these nations have in common?
A) Small Land Mass
AND/OR
B) High Population Densities
Both have to be factored, I mean sure you can point to Canada. It has a huge land mass, and an average population density far lower than the US. But in reality, 90% of Canadians live in within a short distance from the southern Canadian/US border. 90% of Canadian population is grouped together. So the amount of cabling needed to reach 90% of Canada's population is far far less than the U.S.
The United States has one of the most spread out populations. We have cities, like most advanced nations. But then we have urban sprawl, and suburbs after suburbs. These are moderate population densities spread over tens of miles. That's a LOT of cable/fiber.
Lastly, we have massive amounts of rural areas. And amazingly, even many of those have internet be it cabled or wireless. And that's damn impressive. And if instead of using such stupid things as who has the fastest internet, or who reaches the highest percentage of their citizens with broadband. You measured who manages to reach the most backwatered, rural, and broadest amounst of land.
Who has more land area wired than the U.S. with broadband? NO ONE!!!!!
WE'RE #1
And you get a positive.
And actually, two wrongs do often make a right. It's all in the eyes of the beholder as to who or what was wrong. Our Founding Father's were considered by the British to be acting upon wrong, by engaging in wrong.
We exist today as a nation for that reason.
Maybe non-technically illegal. But blatantly unconstitutional and immoral. Oh, and Constitution trumps legal.
And wasn't there a recent scientific journal publication that linked wars and conflicts largely to famines and food shortages.
God, I'm hungry....kill, kill, kill. But I don't believe in you. You're just a figment, brought on by my starving state. Hey look, that guy has a chicken and some eggs. Kill. Kill. Kill.
Cause Atheist Russia and Atheist China have had no conflicts or negativity on the world.
Please tell me atheists aren't that DUMB?
No, I think the thousands of unemployed programmers will find jobs. Good jobs, which equate to $50,000 job in the 1970's. Oh, what is that in today's world $200,000.
Here is the sad truth, today, my salary is the equivalent of a $15,000 job when I was born. (mid-70's)
Simple regulation. Goods coming in receive tariffs like we used to, based on ethics. In other words, much of western Europe has similar rights & protections, so they trade freely. A nation that might not meet those levels would pay varying tariffs. Maybe 20% for Russia. 40% for Chinese goods. Korea and Japan would trade freely. Cuba might have a 200% tariff.
Live in Pennsylvania. And you realize there are still a lot of poor folk in the rural country.
Guess trailer trash don't deserve phone or internet service?
They basically, (Cable/Phone)...should be at this point, running cable to regions, and setting up "local" towers. This would not necessarily be your normal cell service. But would be similar.
Basically, this way those in rural areas could get broadband internet. And IF there was an obstruction, the homeowner could erect an antenna and run a line into their home at their cost.
Many of the implementations are strictly forbidden by U.S. law (mostly due to it being outdated). It's a long time problem in the U.S. automobile industry. Just changing to newer better headlights took an immense campaign because the law stated they had to be x,y,z.
Somewhere along the way, some bigot, racist, or what not....helped produced the food you eat. Perhaps, in the same light, you should cease eating and starve.
Also, realize that this is one person of thousands who made this film.
You can get a semi-automatic, self-loading firearm. That shoots one bullet for every trigger pull. (Of course, double-action revolvers do that too.)
And you probably totally can't afford one. At least most average joes cannot. As the going rate on a transferable (pre-1986 built) fully automatic rifle is about $10K-$20K (& up)
http://www.gunbroker.com/Machine-Guns/BI.aspx
Good, and then guess what...
That 5x as much, would mean 5x as many jobs. Those jobs would pay taxes. The rest of the $$$ they'd spend on goods and services. Creating more jobs, which would in turn ALSO pay taxes.
Because, the government is what's making it uneconomical to hire US.
First off, we were founded on the principal of having tariffs. Having kept tariffs, we'd have kept much of our manufacturing and middle-class.
Second, when you claim an American worker costs to much, but point to all the mandated costs the American government has placed upon U.S. workers and business. Then for that reason, go elsewhere. It's not because of capitalism, but regulation.
Simple way to bring back jobs to America. Mandate ALL contracts abroad must maintain the same benefits and protections. Yes, healthcare must be provided, they must pay into social security, etc, etc.
Same way to deal with illegal alien employers. Don't fine them for employing illegal aliens. Fine them for not paying minimum wage. And well, if they're paying minimum wage. Let them be.