Telephony in the US isn't the free market. The reason is because the barriers to entry are so high because of governmental regulation. If the government didn't regulate the telcom market, then we might actually see some competition instead of a cartel or massive price collusion.
"Improving the sample rate from 44.1kHz to 192kHz moves the Nyqvist frequency from 22.05kHz to 96kHz.
Now I'm pretty sure I don't care about frequencies between 22.05kHz and 96kHz. Double blind tests make it unlikely most people can even hear them."
____________________
True, but the higher the Nyquist freq, the more gentle the slope that the low pass filter can be. The more gentle the slope, the less phase that is introduced. Less phase means the more accurate the reproduction of the original audio which of course means it sounds better.
Remember we must have brickwall filters on the upper end of the spectrum in order to prevent aliasing. The higher up in the spectrum those filters exist, the better the final product.
Yes IAAAE (I Am An Audio Engineer)
Re:Lets create the Urban Scouts!!!
on
Explosives Camp
·
· Score: 1
I'm an Eagle Scout and would love to go through an urban survival course heh heh heh.... On the other hand I did learn some of that in college... I'm 25 now:-)
Healthcare is expensive in this country because of regulation of the marketplace. If the government didn't have such a high cost of doing business imposed upon the healthcare market, we might see lower prices. Also not to mention that the FDA is absolutely unconstitutional. Also the government is the worst organization to handle anything because governments are always the least efficient organizations.
But the idea of national healthcare comes down to property. Why should I give up my property that I earned to someone else who hasn't earned it? Shouldn't I have a choice of whether or not to be charitable? Besides if if my donations are at the threat of jail time then it really isn't charity. Real charity comes from the heart and can't be forced; otherwise it's outright theft.
When the Constitution was written the phrase "to regulate" meant "to make regular". If you remember the reason the Constitution was written after the Articles of Confederation was to fix trade and monetary problems within the States. They didn't want trade wars and every single State to have its own currency because of the chaos it was causing. So the only goal of the interstate commerce clause was to ensure that commerce was made regular between the states.
This is also an example of when interpreting the Constitution and other documents we should look at original meaning, not original intent. What did the words mean at the time they were written down?
There are two books you should read: "Constitutional Chaos" and "The Constitution in Exile". Both are available at Amazon.
When the Constitution was written the phrase "to regulate" meant "to make regular". If you remember the reason the Constitution was written after the Articles of Confederation was to fix trade and monetary problems within the States. They didn't want trade wars and every single State to have its own currency because of the chaos it was causing. So the only goal of the interstate commerce clause was to ensure that commerce was made regular between the states.
This is also an example of when interpreting the Constitution and other documents we should look at original meaning, not original intent. What did the words mean at the time they were written down?
Constitutional Chaos and The Constitution in Exile both touch on these subjects.
One cannot have their identity stolen. But someone can use one's identity fraudulently or falsely. The same thing applies to copyrights, trademarks, patents, etc...
Intellectual property by it's very nature is hard, if not impossible, to steal. But infringing on rights, or using IP fraudulently is a different aspect entirely.
The federal government is not authorized by the Constitution to regulate the credit industry. I hope no legislation of this nature becomes law because it would be unconstitutional.
This book details how the peak oil theory is false, and that oil is abiogenic: Black Gold Stranglehold: Myth of Scarcity and Politics of Oil by Corsi and Smith (available at Amazon)
Ron Paul won both the MSNBC and the FOX polls after both debates.
RP has had more hits on YouTube than any other RP candidate.
Also he is 4th in fund raising, and is rumored to have more than McCain at this point.
And most scientific polls that you are probably referring to don't even bother to mention Ron Paul which would explain why he is "so low in the polls".
He actually does have a chance of winning the GOP nomination, and if he gets the nomination, he will beat any Democrat in the general election; he's a guaranteed win.
He ran under the Libertarian Party ticket back in the 80's for President. As far as I know he has never renounced his LP membership and is still on good terms with the LP.
Ron Paul is actually in the House of Reps which is easier to get elected in to than the Senate. Largely he is there because he was an OB/GYN and has delivered over 4000 babies in his home district.
Also if you look at his stats, over 80%+ of his contributions are from individuals, not corporations or PACs.
If Ron Paul wins the Republican nomination, he WILL win the Presidency because of his non-interventionist stance (he's the only Rep running who voted against the Iraq invasion), and because he will draw independent conservatives and libertarians out of the woodwork to vote for him. Unfortunately the Republican Party has lost their ideas on conservatism and non-interventionism and even though Ron Paul is the most conservative candidate running, he is highly despised in the GOP.
No, because as long as there isn't marketplace collusion (rare) then the respective healthcare institutions and companies would be competing for your business which means you could shop around and vote with your feet. If the government did it, there would be no choice, and no options. Not to mention it is unconstitutional for the federal government to be involved in healthcare, or regulating the healthcare/insurance industry.
Actually healthcare would cost a LOT less if the federal government didn't regulate the industry. If the FDA (which is unconstitutional anyway) didn't exist, then there would not be such a huge cost of overhead in drug development.
And government is always the LEAST efficient bureaucracy of all so socialized medicine would be even worse than what we have now, not to mention unconstitutional.
Check out Black Gold Stranglehold by Jerome R., Ph.D. Corsi and, Craig R. Smith.
They explain in this book that oil is a natural product of the earth, isn't a bunch of rotten animal carcasses, and is actually quite renewable. It's a damn good read.
Actually it is, but in copyright law there is an exemption for architecture and buildings because it would be obviously too cumbersome and restrictive to limit people from taking skyline pictures or drawings etc...
Slashdot Mirror
Telephony in the US isn't the free market. The reason is because the barriers to entry are so high because of governmental regulation. If the government didn't regulate the telcom market, then we might actually see some competition instead of a cartel or massive price collusion.
Thanks for the belly laugh tonight!
"Improving the sample rate from 44.1kHz to 192kHz moves the Nyqvist frequency from 22.05kHz to 96kHz.
Now I'm pretty sure I don't care about frequencies between 22.05kHz and 96kHz. Double blind tests make it unlikely most people can even hear them."
____________________
True, but the higher the Nyquist freq, the more gentle the slope that the low pass filter can be. The more gentle the slope, the less phase that is introduced. Less phase means the more accurate the reproduction of the original audio which of course means it sounds better.
Remember we must have brickwall filters on the upper end of the spectrum in order to prevent aliasing. The higher up in the spectrum those filters exist, the better the final product.
Yes IAAAE (I Am An Audio Engineer)
I'm an Eagle Scout and would love to go through an urban survival course heh heh heh.... On the other hand I did learn some of that in college... I'm 25 now :-)
This is one reason why government shouldn't fund R&D unless it applies to defense.
Healthcare is expensive in this country because of regulation of the marketplace. If the government didn't have such a high cost of doing business imposed upon the healthcare market, we might see lower prices. Also not to mention that the FDA is absolutely unconstitutional. Also the government is the worst organization to handle anything because governments are always the least efficient organizations.
But the idea of national healthcare comes down to property. Why should I give up my property that I earned to someone else who hasn't earned it? Shouldn't I have a choice of whether or not to be charitable? Besides if if my donations are at the threat of jail time then it really isn't charity. Real charity comes from the heart and can't be forced; otherwise it's outright theft.
Being born into the lower class has nothing to do with working for minimum wage.
When the Constitution was written the phrase "to regulate" meant "to make regular". If you remember the reason the Constitution was written after the Articles of Confederation was to fix trade and monetary problems within the States. They didn't want trade wars and every single State to have its own currency because of the chaos it was causing. So the only goal of the interstate commerce clause was to ensure that commerce was made regular between the states.
This is also an example of when interpreting the Constitution and other documents we should look at original meaning, not original intent. What did the words mean at the time they were written down?
There are two books you should read: "Constitutional Chaos" and "The Constitution in Exile". Both are available at Amazon.
When the Constitution was written the phrase "to regulate" meant "to make regular". If you remember the reason the Constitution was written after the Articles of Confederation was to fix trade and monetary problems within the States. They didn't want trade wars and every single State to have its own currency because of the chaos it was causing. So the only goal of the interstate commerce clause was to ensure that commerce was made regular between the states.
This is also an example of when interpreting the Constitution and other documents we should look at original meaning, not original intent. What did the words mean at the time they were written down?
Constitutional Chaos and The Constitution in Exile both touch on these subjects.
One cannot have their identity stolen. But someone can use one's identity fraudulently or falsely. The same thing applies to copyrights, trademarks, patents, etc...
Intellectual property by it's very nature is hard, if not impossible, to steal. But infringing on rights, or using IP fraudulently is a different aspect entirely.
The federal government is not authorized by the Constitution to regulate the credit industry. I hope no legislation of this nature becomes law because it would be unconstitutional.
Wiki for a guy named "Dave Ramsey" and read his story. I think you'll enjoy the read
Two points -
We can already make petroleum in the lab, in fact these guys are already doing it:
http://discovermagazine.com/2006/apr/anything-oil
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anything_into_oil
This book details how the peak oil theory is false, and that oil is abiogenic:
Black Gold Stranglehold: Myth of Scarcity and Politics of Oil by Corsi and Smith
(available at Amazon)
Interestingly enough Ron Paul's odds were slashed from 200:1 to 15:1 back in March by Sportsbook a popular gambling website. That's a HUGE increase.t ml
http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-Odds-053107.h
No bet for me though, I'd rather donate my money to RP's campaign instead of giving it to someone else.
Ron Paul won both the MSNBC and the FOX polls after both debates.
RP has had more hits on YouTube than any other RP candidate.
Also he is 4th in fund raising, and is rumored to have more than McCain at this point.
And most scientific polls that you are probably referring to don't even bother to mention Ron Paul which would explain why he is "so low in the polls".
He actually does have a chance of winning the GOP nomination, and if he gets the nomination, he will beat any Democrat in the general election; he's a guaranteed win.
You should read more here:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/
He ran under the Libertarian Party ticket back in the 80's for President. As far as I know he has never renounced his LP membership and is still on good terms with the LP.
Ron Paul is actually in the House of Reps which is easier to get elected in to than the Senate. Largely he is there because he was an OB/GYN and has delivered over 4000 babies in his home district.
Also if you look at his stats, over 80%+ of his contributions are from individuals, not corporations or PACs.
If Ron Paul wins the Republican nomination, he WILL win the Presidency because of his non-interventionist stance (he's the only Rep running who voted against the Iraq invasion), and because he will draw independent conservatives and libertarians out of the woodwork to vote for him. Unfortunately the Republican Party has lost their ideas on conservatism and non-interventionism and even though Ron Paul is the most conservative candidate running, he is highly despised in the GOP.
The exception to the corrupt politician list is US Rep Ron Paul of Texas. You can check is voting record and he votes "no" on almost everything.
To get the government under control again, we need to vote for him for President.
Yes - it's a sarcastic joke
You must be new here...
Free trade and free markets will do the trick.
No, because as long as there isn't marketplace collusion (rare) then the respective healthcare institutions and companies would be competing for your business which means you could shop around and vote with your feet. If the government did it, there would be no choice, and no options. Not to mention it is unconstitutional for the federal government to be involved in healthcare, or regulating the healthcare/insurance industry.
Actually healthcare would cost a LOT less if the federal government didn't regulate the industry. If the FDA (which is unconstitutional anyway) didn't exist, then there would not be such a huge cost of overhead in drug development.
And government is always the LEAST efficient bureaucracy of all so socialized medicine would be even worse than what we have now, not to mention unconstitutional.
... and went bankrupt. It was called TennCare.
Check out Black Gold Stranglehold by Jerome R., Ph.D. Corsi and, Craig R. Smith.
They explain in this book that oil is a natural product of the earth, isn't a bunch of rotten animal carcasses, and is actually quite renewable. It's a damn good read.
Actually it is, but in copyright law there is an exemption for architecture and buildings because it would be obviously too cumbersome and restrictive to limit people from taking skyline pictures or drawings etc...