1) in a civil proceeding ie. lawsuit, guilt must only be established on a reasonable belief/greater than 50% probability, unlike in a criminal proceeding where guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Ask O.J. Simpson for how that difference can cost you.
2) For better or for worse, crimes/infractions relating to motor vehicle usage are often legislated vastly different from many other charges. A car owner can be found criminally negligent if they knowingly, or with undue caution, give the keys to a bank robber who is about to rob a bank, but that is a harder case to prove than establishing in a civil proceeding that person X had a reasonable knowledge of computers but was willfully blind to the actions of their roomies. You could better protect your butt by telling your room mates they're not to download copyright-infringing material, and documenting that conversation, for example.
Ultimately, these cases often come down to money - it is likely that many of those 50,000 people will settle out of court to avoid a costly action to establish their innocence. That is unfortunately how the law tends to operate in many situations.
How much money have you given the gaim project and why should they care if you have a problem?
Hear that? That's the sound of you demonstrating the point. How much money did he give? Who cares? If you're developing non-commercial F/OSS, you're doing it because you want to, not because it helps in making the payments on the Porsche.
Why should they care? Well, a couple of things here, basic pride in one's work maybe? Because they're the people responsible for the program, so when someone tries to give them honest and constructive feedback, they might want to listen, or at least give a polite, "we'll keep it in mind" response. If developer responsible for NAT issues in Gaim does't care about NAT issues in Gaim, that's fucked.
Ducks are birds. Birds have beaks. Therefore, ducks are completely inferior to pot scrubbers.
Wow. That is an astounding argument. I can't combat that. The way you drew me through your main points, in such an easy, flowing manner...then slammed my head into a wall with an abrubt nonsensical conclusion. You had me at hello!
You must have had a hand in analyzying all that Iraqi weapons intelligence before the war huh?:P
With spelling like, I assume that you don't. Nor do, but thanks for asking.
The parent post had a reasonable concern about possible negative effects of these platforms
Do me a favour, please READ the parent post. You'll see it said this: i'm sure that sucking the energy coming off the ocean that powers weather must have SOME effect
Now go and READ my response, which dealt entirely with the effect of wind turbines on weather patterns and energy transfer from the sea. Did I mention coral reefs, or whales? Did the parent? No.
The sole context of my disagreement with the parent post pertained to kinetic energy transfer from the ocean to the wind turbines (I'm simplifying this pathway, I know, but I'm trying to help you follow me) and how this might affect weather patterns. This was certainly an appropriate thread in which to post your concerns about the environmental effects of these platforms. But please, next time, make sure YOUR off the cuff dismissal of an argument is on topic.
PS - do you have any stats or research that has examined the environmental effects associated with large platforms in the sea, such as oil platforms? Would that research be valid in this situation, given the large sea floor footprint that such platforms possess, a trait not shared by a floating powerstation tethered to an anchor?
I don't have enough information to make up my mind about them yet
Oh nevermind, just enough lack of information to pick a fight. Gotcha.
Try to think about the size of a wind turbine in comparison to the SURFACE AREA OF ANY MAJOR OCEAN. Seriously, for a just a moment. Quick google facts:
Surface area of the Pacific: 166 million square kilometres, 64 million square miles
Typical size of a wind turbine: Blade span (total diameter): 200 - 350 feet Mast height: 150 - 300+ feet
Arranging 4 of these together on a platform the size of a (american) football field (360*160 = 57600 sq. ft.) would mean that you could cover the Pacific with these if you managed to produce a hair under 31 billion platforms...
Let's say you want to have a total of 1000 platforms, each with 4 turbines. This would require (approx) 0.00000322% of the surfacea area of the Pacific. It is unlikely that such turbines would have a measurable effect on global weather patterns.
I'm not trying to flame you here, just want to underscore that the amount of energy contained in global weather patterns and the size of the oceans (from which much of this energy flows from) completely dwarfs almost anything we can realistically throw at it right now. It has been estimated that it would require thousands to millions of times our current planetwide energy output to reach a level where weather patterns could be altered.
Yes. He wishes for both parties in the communication to pay for the use of the pipes. There was a 50%-off sale on net access since the first ISP was created. They're ending the sale real soon.
And that tingling in your brain is just your logical reasoning centre exploding. Pay no attention.
Why not store the data randomly in a dilithium matrix with asynchronous data transfer and AJAX? Maybe some RUBY on RAILS too - I hear that's hot right now. Of course, you'd have to make use of a couple of Heisenberg compensators configured in parallel to keep track account for any memory addressing issues, but no need to state the obvious there.
The world might change, but the logical conclusion from your post is that authors who write for the money (ie to make a living doing it) need to get with the times and start charging next to nothing for their product - ie stop making a living at it.
This is brain dead from the start. So all published work from now on should only be from those writing for the love of their craft who expect almost no compensation? Yeah and musicians should only write music for the goodness of humanity.
Now don't get me wrong - music (ie CDs) are WAY overpriced and a new model needs to take hold there, but you can't expect people to be paid almost nothing for something that they devoted their time to, even if the "physical" costs of the product are nothing.
Writing to make a living is not a "failed incentive" - it's a way of life. In your future utopia, once all those pesky artists who want compensation are gone, all we'll be left with is the blog musings of 14-year old virgins. (No, not slashdot).
Yes you COULD use technology to make an illegal duplicate of a library audio book. You could also use a scanner, or 'gasp' a photocopier to make an illegal copy of an entire physical library book. (quick, someone mod me insightful too)
Of course the question is, is the point of this technology to prevent piracy? Of course not. If someone is low-life enough to go to the trouble of making an unauthorized copy of a book from a public library, well, that's their life, and thankfully not mine.
This is one of the few legitimate uses for DRM technology - it takes the entire mechanism of a library, and brings it into the digital age. You borrow an item, and after a set period of time (agreed upon BEFORE you take the item) you return it (ie, don't use it anymore). This just saves you a drive back to the library.
Of course, since this is/., someone may counter all of this by pointing out that the cost of these files is almost nil, therefore why should the library care how many copies it lets out? But of course, the cost to the library for a set number of copies of the digital work was NOT free, therefore it's in the libraries best interest to try and enforce a digital borrowing equivalent.
However, through the cookies scheme, I'm the only one not getting paid.
Wrong. Wrong. Very wrong. I know that some here have the mentality that information should be free. Unfortunately the electric companies, the hardware companies, and the bandwith companies can't give away their resources.
So if you like a site enough to visit it and use their information, then consider that your renumeration for the collection of your browsing habits. After all, you're using their service, and they're using you to make money to pay the bills and turn a profit.
The only objection I have is if a site's privacy policy doesn't explicitly state that cookies are in use on a site and/or what information is collected.
Thinking this one out, I don't think it would sell very well. Say you're a "roadcaster" - you buy the equipment, load up your mp3s, make up a stream list and turn it on. Now your listeners have invested in similar equipment to tune in to your music. For the same price, I bet they could grab an ipod mini with the FM transmitter attachment and "stream" there own music.
My point is, anyone technically savvy enough to get into this at the beginning is probably already able to listen to their OWN favourite music.
that's probably overkill. A thimble would work just as well...
Allow me to predict the next front page story....
on
Google TrustRank
·
· Score: 1
Google has reported that it is now indexing more pages than it previously indexed. This is exciting news for Slashdot readers as it means that there will be something more interesting than John Cleese whoring himself out to comment on. Google also mentioned something about Google, GoogleLabs, PageRank, Google, and...oh yeah, Google.
Think I'm being a dink? See for yourself. I'm as big a user of Google as the next person, but I'm actually missing the news for nerds stuff, not the Google press releases. Is there some pending buyout of OSDL by the behemoth that is Google that we should know about?
Yes thank you. Since when is using technology to help you make decisions for your kids (which is your right) such a crime? I love that this story falls under censorship. A technology that allows PARENTS (not a government) to decide what is viewed in THEIR house is somehow ominous and oppressive? I was a kid once, and damn straight my friends and I snuck games and movies we probably shouldn't have.
Some might argue that some PG or PG13 type games deserve some filtering by parents - that's a personal choice. But if you can screen R^H "Mature" rated games from your 15 year old, is this such a bad thing?
Some may be, but the vast majority of DVDs sold in Canada are English with French dubbing available. Same goes for videogames. What really sucks for our francophone neighbours is that to save costs, the english (colour) packaging is maintained, but crappy B&W french inserts are added to DVDs and games to comply with bilinguilism.
If I understand this French ruling correctly, it means that completely different DVDs, stripped of copy protections, must be supplied to France.
See that was the part of the post where you were supposed to infer that they were joking.
I believe that he was pointing out the irony that many times, men who speak bad about gay (guy + guy) sex are the same guys who grab a porno or penthouse featuring lesbian (girl + girl) scenes, to which they have no objection.
Since text doesn't convey emotion or emphasis very well, I find it helpful to reread a post a few times before replying.
If I'm wrong and the grandparent was serious, then that same line I just cited proves my point anyway.
Actually I have used it, thanks for asking. Since it was called Phoenix.
I do realizet that the google page is now the default for firefox. but at least a year ago, it was still pointing here: http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/cen tral.ht ml
In fact, I just installed Gentoo 2005.0 and the default for Firefox is still the mozilla.org site.
...isn't it? Firefox 1.0 was accompanied by a big download push, where techies actively encouraged mom, dad, sis, gramps, dog, and everyone else they could think of to get and install Firefox.
Thing is, Firefox defaults to the Firefox website! So you had a huge push to download and install firefox, and people being what they are (lazy), a whole bunch of firefox installs all pointing at the firefox website everytime they fire up. Let's see how this trend continues for another year or so before we get uber excited.
They may not be friendly because "Why is x.org NOT in debian-unstable?" is a stupid question and they've probably been asked that a million times. Try google instead of expecting other people to answer your trivial questions for you.
Thanks, it's been a bad day, and I needed a good laugh. It's like the parent said "Longtime Debian users are abusive, loud-mouthed drunkards."
And then you staggered in, wreaking of Jack Daniels and yelling, while slurring every other word, "Yeah, well you're a f%#!ing idiot."
I remember when i first cracked my teeth on OSS - it was FreeBSD. I found that often the forums seemed to be full of some 'old guard' that didn't want us noobs coming in an wrecking everything. I was more than happy to oblige =)
That's why I bounce back and forth between Gentoo and (K)ubuntu - both represent a new take on Linux with recent -> bleeding edge enhancements. I'm not posting to say either of them are the Linux Holy Grail, just two that I've been happy with, backed by a community of users who actually enjoy helping others out.
Documentation is huge also - I like what Ubuntu has done here - and easy to follow startup guide that someone who is brand-spaking new can follow. In less than an hour you have a fully functional multimedia-capable desktop, without paying the M$FT tax. What could be better? YMMV.
I love it when Slashbots just start spouting off stuff about which thy have absolutely no clue. Where to begin....
Then terrorists started coming in through Canada because it was so easy.
Actually according to the head of Interpol, you're full of it and then some. Oh and who's this commie, UN-loving, left wing tree-hugger Nobel guy anyway? Turns out he was "a former law professor at New York University and one-time chief law enforcement officer for the U.S. Treasury Department". He must not have a clue, EH? Of course, another post already mentioned that the 9/11 terrorists had US Immigration visas, but pay no attention to that.
How reliable do you think it is for someone at the border to have to check each and every ID to make sure it matches one of the 50 valid formats that we have?
Actually, quite. If you've ever worked as a Customs/Immigration officer (which I have), you would know that border guards have access to a handly little book that gives minute details and colour pictures of every federal, provincial, territorial, and state-issued ID from North America. So it really isn't that hard to spot a fake card in practice (just ask any 18-year old Michiganian trying to come and drink in Canada with a fake ID).
Oh, I really liked this one too:
Get a passport so we'll know you have a right to come back without further hassle
Can't speak about the US here, but in Commie Canada, all citizens have the right to enter the country as they wish(see paragraph 6.1). Let me repeat - it is ILLEGAL for a Canadian citizen to be detained while entering Canada, unless there is an outstanding warrant for their arrest or they are contravening the Customs Act in some manner.
Your comments leave me to believe you were flamebaiting, but I in case you weren't, I had to take a swing at it.
If you penalize people for making more money you reduce the incentives to go to college, be successful, etc..
Seriously? Assuming you are here....How many smart successful people at some point say "You know, I want to work harder and make more money, but with all the taxes I pay, why the remaining $500K a year is just barely getting me through. I think I'll quit my job as a high flying Wall St. type and just kind of slum it up on the streets. Yeah.
I take your overall point, and I do agree that a cap (eg $30K and under being exempt) is a good idea (barring the temporary financial crisis and probable melt-down that such a transition COULD cause), but please don't make overstated and/or ridiculous claims to back up your arguments.
Something more realistic would be "Rich people might leave for other less taxed countries, or would find ways to avoid paying owed taxes, thereby decreasing actual tax revenue."
Slashdot Mirror
IANAL, but there's 2 distinctions to be made:
1) in a civil proceeding ie. lawsuit, guilt must only be established on a reasonable belief/greater than 50% probability, unlike in a criminal proceeding where guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Ask O.J. Simpson for how that difference can cost you.
2) For better or for worse, crimes/infractions relating to motor vehicle usage are often legislated vastly different from many other charges. A car owner can be found criminally negligent if they knowingly, or with undue caution, give the keys to a bank robber who is about to rob a bank, but that is a harder case to prove than establishing in a civil proceeding that person X had a reasonable knowledge of computers but was willfully blind to the actions of their roomies. You could better protect your butt by telling your room mates they're not to download copyright-infringing material, and documenting that conversation, for example.
Ultimately, these cases often come down to money - it is likely that many of those 50,000 people will settle out of court to avoid a costly action to establish their innocence. That is unfortunately how the law tends to operate in many situations.
How much money have you given the gaim project and why should they care if you have a problem?
Hear that? That's the sound of you demonstrating the point. How much money did he give? Who cares? If you're developing non-commercial F/OSS, you're doing it because you want to, not because it helps in making the payments on the Porsche.
Why should they care? Well, a couple of things here, basic pride in one's work maybe? Because they're the people responsible for the program, so when someone tries to give them honest and constructive feedback, they might want to listen, or at least give a polite, "we'll keep it in mind" response. If developer responsible for NAT issues in Gaim does't care about NAT issues in Gaim, that's fucked.
Ducks are birds. Birds have beaks. Therefore, ducks are completely inferior to pot scrubbers.
:P
Wow. That is an astounding argument. I can't combat that. The way you drew me through your main points, in such an easy, flowing manner...then slammed my head into a wall with an abrubt nonsensical conclusion. You had me at hello!
You must have had a hand in analyzying all that Iraqi weapons intelligence before the war huh?
With spelling like, I assume that you don't. Nor do, but thanks for asking.
Do me a favour, please READ the parent post. You'll see it said this:
i'm sure that sucking the energy coming off the ocean that powers weather must have SOME effect
Now go and READ my response, which dealt entirely with the effect of wind turbines on weather patterns and energy transfer from the sea. Did I mention coral reefs, or whales? Did the parent? No.
The sole context of my disagreement with the parent post pertained to kinetic energy transfer from the ocean to the wind turbines (I'm simplifying this pathway, I know, but I'm trying to help you follow me) and how this might affect weather patterns. This was certainly an appropriate thread in which to post your concerns about the environmental effects of these platforms. But please, next time, make sure YOUR off the cuff dismissal of an argument is on topic.
PS - do you have any stats or research that has examined the environmental effects associated with large platforms in the sea, such as oil platforms? Would that research be valid in this situation, given the large sea floor footprint that such platforms possess, a trait not shared by a floating powerstation tethered to an anchor?
Oh nevermind, just enough lack of information to pick a fight. Gotcha.
Try to think about the size of a wind turbine in comparison to the SURFACE AREA OF ANY MAJOR OCEAN. Seriously, for a just a moment. Quick google facts:
Surface area of the Pacific:
166 million square kilometres, 64 million square miles
Typical size of a wind turbine:
Blade span (total diameter): 200 - 350 feet
Mast height: 150 - 300+ feet
Arranging 4 of these together on a platform the size of a (american) football field (360*160 = 57600 sq. ft.) would mean that you could cover the Pacific with these if you managed to produce a hair under 31 billion platforms...
Let's say you want to have a total of 1000 platforms, each with 4 turbines. This would require (approx) 0.00000322% of the surfacea area of the Pacific. It is unlikely that such turbines would have a measurable effect on global weather patterns.
I'm not trying to flame you here, just want to underscore that the amount of energy contained in global weather patterns and the size of the oceans (from which much of this energy flows from) completely dwarfs almost anything we can realistically throw at it right now. It has been estimated that it would require thousands to millions of times our current planetwide energy output to reach a level where weather patterns could be altered.
Yes. He wishes for both parties in the communication to pay for the use of the pipes. There was a 50%-off sale on net access since the first ISP was created. They're ending the sale real soon.
And that tingling in your brain is just your logical reasoning centre exploding. Pay no attention.
Why not store the data randomly in a dilithium matrix with asynchronous data transfer and AJAX? Maybe some RUBY on RAILS too - I hear that's hot right now. Of course, you'd have to make use of a couple of Heisenberg compensators configured in parallel to keep track account for any memory addressing issues, but no need to state the obvious there.
Yeah, and to top it all off, some STUPID editor posted this "question" to "Ask Slashdot". This place is just going to hell.
The world might change, but the logical conclusion from your post is that authors who write for the money (ie to make a living doing it) need to get with the times and start charging next to nothing for their product - ie stop making a living at it.
This is brain dead from the start. So all published work from now on should only be from those writing for the love of their craft who expect almost no compensation? Yeah and musicians should only write music for the goodness of humanity.
Now don't get me wrong - music (ie CDs) are WAY overpriced and a new model needs to take hold there, but you can't expect people to be paid almost nothing for something that they devoted their time to, even if the "physical" costs of the product are nothing.
Writing to make a living is not a "failed incentive" - it's a way of life. In your future utopia, once all those pesky artists who want compensation are gone, all we'll be left with is the blog musings of 14-year old virgins. (No, not slashdot).
Yes you COULD use technology to make an illegal duplicate of a library audio book. You could also use a scanner, or 'gasp' a photocopier to make an illegal copy of an entire physical library book. (quick, someone mod me insightful too)
/., someone may counter all of this by pointing out that the cost of these files is almost nil, therefore why should the library care how many copies it lets out? But of course, the cost to the library for a set number of copies of the digital work was NOT free, therefore it's in the libraries best interest to try and enforce a digital borrowing equivalent.
Of course the question is, is the point of this technology to prevent piracy? Of course not. If someone is low-life enough to go to the trouble of making an unauthorized copy of a book from a public library, well, that's their life, and thankfully not mine.
This is one of the few legitimate uses for DRM technology - it takes the entire mechanism of a library, and brings it into the digital age. You borrow an item, and after a set period of time (agreed upon BEFORE you take the item) you return it (ie, don't use it anymore). This just saves you a drive back to the library.
Of course, since this is
Imagine if you hooked up enough of these into a pay-as-you-go Beowulf cluster!
Story posted at 8:40am.
No comments as of 10:50.
Like a web browser, it appears that the need for Slashdot comments on a Google Empire Expansion story are also irrelevant.
So if you like a site enough to visit it and use their information, then consider that your renumeration for the collection of your browsing habits. After all, you're using their service, and they're using you to make money to pay the bills and turn a profit.
The only objection I have is if a site's privacy policy doesn't explicitly state that cookies are in use on a site and/or what information is collected.
Thinking this one out, I don't think it would sell very well. Say you're a "roadcaster" - you buy the equipment, load up your mp3s, make up a stream list and turn it on. Now your listeners have invested in similar equipment to tune in to your music. For the same price, I bet they could grab an ipod mini with the FM transmitter attachment and "stream" there own music.
My point is, anyone technically savvy enough to get into this at the beginning is probably already able to listen to their OWN favourite music.
Let's water all our crops with salt water. Because soil salination is a great thing. Near a lake this is of course feasible, but near an ocean?
its not rocket science
Please tell me you don't design rockets.
yeesh.
that's probably overkill. A thimble would work just as well...
Google has reported that it is now indexing more pages than it previously indexed. This is exciting news for Slashdot readers as it means that there will be something more interesting than John Cleese whoring himself out to comment on. Google also mentioned something about Google, GoogleLabs, PageRank, Google, and...oh yeah, Google.
Think I'm being a dink? See for yourself. I'm as big a user of Google as the next person, but I'm actually missing the news for nerds stuff, not the Google press releases. Is there some pending buyout of OSDL by the behemoth that is Google that we should know about?
Yes thank you. Since when is using technology to help you make decisions for your kids (which is your right) such a crime? I love that this story falls under censorship. A technology that allows PARENTS (not a government) to decide what is viewed in THEIR house is somehow ominous and oppressive? I was a kid once, and damn straight my friends and I snuck games and movies we probably shouldn't have.
Some might argue that some PG or PG13 type games deserve some filtering by parents - that's a personal choice. But if you can screen R^H "Mature" rated games from your 15 year old, is this such a bad thing?
Some may be, but the vast majority of DVDs sold in Canada are English with French dubbing available. Same goes for videogames. What really sucks for our francophone neighbours is that to save costs, the english (colour) packaging is maintained, but crappy B&W french inserts are added to DVDs and games to comply with bilinguilism.
If I understand this French ruling correctly, it means that completely different DVDs, stripped of copy protections, must be supplied to France.
Girl + Girl = good (its perfectly natural)
See that was the part of the post where you were supposed to infer that they were joking.
I believe that he was pointing out the irony that many times, men who speak bad about gay (guy + guy) sex are the same guys who grab a porno or penthouse featuring lesbian (girl + girl) scenes, to which they have no objection.
Since text doesn't convey emotion or emphasis very well, I find it helpful to reread a post a few times before replying.
If I'm wrong and the grandparent was serious, then that same line I just cited proves my point anyway.
Actually I have used it, thanks for asking. Since it was called Phoenix.
n tral.ht ml
I do realizet that the google page is now the default for firefox. but at least a year ago, it was still pointing here:
http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/ce
In fact, I just installed Gentoo 2005.0 and the default for Firefox is still the mozilla.org site.
...isn't it? Firefox 1.0 was accompanied by a big download push, where techies actively encouraged mom, dad, sis, gramps, dog, and everyone else they could think of to get and install Firefox.
Thing is, Firefox defaults to the Firefox website! So you had a huge push to download and install firefox, and people being what they are (lazy), a whole bunch of firefox installs all pointing at the firefox website everytime they fire up. Let's see how this trend continues for another year or so before we get uber excited.
They may not be friendly because "Why is x.org NOT in debian-unstable?" is a stupid question and they've probably been asked that a million times. Try google instead of expecting other people to answer your trivial questions for you.
Thanks, it's been a bad day, and I needed a good laugh. It's like the parent said "Longtime Debian users are abusive, loud-mouthed drunkards."
And then you staggered in, wreaking of Jack Daniels and yelling, while slurring every other word, "Yeah, well you're a f%#!ing idiot."
I remember when i first cracked my teeth on OSS - it was FreeBSD. I found that often the forums seemed to be full of some 'old guard' that didn't want us noobs coming in an wrecking everything. I was more than happy to oblige =)
That's why I bounce back and forth between Gentoo and (K)ubuntu - both represent a new take on Linux with recent -> bleeding edge enhancements. I'm not posting to say either of them are the Linux Holy Grail, just two that I've been happy with, backed by a community of users who actually enjoy helping others out.
Documentation is huge also - I like what Ubuntu has done here - and easy to follow startup guide that someone who is brand-spaking new can follow. In less than an hour you have a fully functional multimedia-capable desktop, without paying the M$FT tax. What could be better? YMMV.
I love it when Slashbots just start spouting off stuff about which thy have absolutely no clue. Where to begin....
Then terrorists started coming in through Canada because it was so easy.
Actually according to the head of Interpol, you're full of it and then some. Oh and who's this commie, UN-loving, left wing tree-hugger Nobel guy anyway? Turns out he was "a former law professor at New York University and one-time chief law enforcement officer for the U.S. Treasury Department". He must not have a clue, EH? Of course, another post already mentioned that the 9/11 terrorists had US Immigration visas, but pay no attention to that.
How reliable do you think it is for someone at the border to have to check each and every ID to make sure it matches one of the 50 valid formats that we have?
Actually, quite. If you've ever worked as a Customs/Immigration officer (which I have), you would know that border guards have access to a handly little book that gives minute details and colour pictures of every federal, provincial, territorial, and state-issued ID from North America. So it really isn't that hard to spot a fake card in practice (just ask any 18-year old Michiganian trying to come and drink in Canada with a fake ID).
Oh, I really liked this one too:
Get a passport so we'll know you have a right to come back without further hassle
Can't speak about the US here, but in Commie Canada, all citizens have the right to enter the country as they wish(see paragraph 6.1). Let me repeat - it is ILLEGAL for a Canadian citizen to be detained while entering Canada, unless there is an outstanding warrant for their arrest or they are contravening the Customs Act in some manner.
Your comments leave me to believe you were flamebaiting, but I in case you weren't, I had to take a swing at it.
If you penalize people for making more money you reduce the incentives to go to college, be successful, etc..
Seriously? Assuming you are here....How many smart successful people at some point say "You know, I want to work harder and make more money, but with all the taxes I pay, why the remaining $500K a year is just barely getting me through. I think I'll quit my job as a high flying Wall St. type and just kind of slum it up on the streets. Yeah.
I take your overall point, and I do agree that a cap (eg $30K and under being exempt) is a good idea (barring the temporary financial crisis and probable melt-down that such a transition COULD cause), but please don't make overstated and/or ridiculous claims to back up your arguments.
Something more realistic would be "Rich people might leave for other less taxed countries, or would find ways to avoid paying owed taxes, thereby decreasing actual tax revenue."