For those of you wondering why this is even news, refer to the following quote from TFA:
Teixeira's story began near Lowe's Motor Speedway on May 14. As recreational vehicles streamed in for race week, revenue investigators were checking fuel tanks of diesel RVs for illegal fuel.
Apparently, the inspectors were looking for people with diesel-engined RV's that may have had dyed diesel fuel (which is not taxed, or taxed at a lower rate than automotive diesel, and is generally used in farm vehicles) in their tanks. They may have also been checking for the use of Low Sulfur Diesel, which is illegal for use in MY2007 diesel engines (which require Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel fuel).
The race mentioned appears to have been a NASCAR event, which makes you wonder why state inspectors might think that farm diesel might end up in road vehicles there...;)
I myself didn't know that there *was* such a thing as "illegal diesel fuel" until I read this article.
OTOH, this is a ridiculous case that ought to be throw out of court. Just another case of overzealous law enforcement officials tossing their weight around.
Sorry, but you seem to have your speculation confused with actual facts. Nowhere have Apple or AT&T announced the iPhone's price *with contract*. The only mention made concerning price is that the 4GB model would be $499 and the 8GB model $599.
As of today:
Verizon Palm Treo 700p and 700w = $499 with 2-year contract T-Mobile Blackberry 8800 = $549 "suggested retail", $200 "instant discount" AT&T 8525 = $599.99 or $449.99 with 2-year contract, $100 "mail-in rebate" for new customers AT&T Palm 750 = $549.99 or $399.99 with 2-year contract, $200 "mail-in rebate" for new customers Sprint Samsung IP-830W = $649.99, $150 "instant savings" for new customers
And you still think that $599 (retail) for an 8GB iPhone is going to be too much? Granted, I doubt there will be any rebates for the iPhone at first, because there's so much anticipation, but there's not reason to believe there won't be *some* sort of discount for a 2-year contract.
Perhaps you're just not the target market. I know plenty of people who are going to be lined up for this puppy on Day 1, and will have no trouble affording it. Hell, I spend $200/month just on my cell plans, the hardware is almost an after thought.
Actually, what it looks like is that the "standard" iPhone apps are the same Dashboard widgets that are already available in Mac OS X...and guess how Dashboard widgets are built? That's right, with the same WebKit that underlies Safari! HTML, CSS, and Javascript, with Cocoa hooks available. So, in a sense they *are* "non-Safari" apps, in another sense they're just Safari apps.
I think it's pretty clear that the iPhone will be running Mac OS X, albeit a stripped down version to fit in the memory constraints of the portable form factor. Apple has stated the iPhone runs OS X over and over again, and there's no reason to think that Apple would be this misleading about the product (because there's actually laws about that). So, I expect that most of the Cocoa frameworks will be in there.
Ah, right. Apple can't just come out and tell you about the features of their upcoming products like other companies do. They have to leave "trails of breadcrumbs" instead, that only the coolest, most intelligent people can follow. People like you. You're special.
Well, it's nice that you think I'm special, but you're missing the point. Perhaps you're new here? You might have noticed that I'm not the only one around the Internet calling bullshit on these types of articles, and backing up their reasoning with prescient examples.
Apple *can* come right out and tell everyone about the features of their upcoming products like other companies, but they don't. It's just the way Apple does things. Part of the reason for this is Apple is almost always at the forefront of the technology progress function, and Steve doesn't like tipping off the competition. Part of it is the fact that Apple is a comparatively small company, and tipping off the competition could mean that the competition might start Yet Another FUD Campaign that might drive people away in fear. Sometimes, Apple just wants to gauge the public's reaction before they overinvest in undesired technologies. Yes, it's pretty frustrating at times, but sometimes a preponderence of evidence makes itself clear long before any official announcement.
I expect you'll be quite surprised when Apple releases Dashboard for Windows.
Nothing, I repeat, *nothing* that Apple has released up to this point has indicated that "Web 2.0" apps will be the only type of apps available to the iPhone. Get a clue already. How many clues does Apple have to give you before you see the trail of breadcrumbs?
First of all, go refer to the D5 discussion with SJ and BG. Pay special attention to the part where Steve talks about iPhone apps, particularly why it was felt that a native Google Maps app was more appropriate than a web app.
Second of all, "No SDK required" != "No SDK available". The SDK already exists, but is not required to develop apps targeted to the iPhone. It's called Mac OS X+XCode+Dashcode. Curious that the "Webclip" feature coming in Leopard was conspicously demo'd by Steve, and yet is missing from both versions of the Safari 3 Public Beta...hmm? Safari for Windows exists because of the iPhone, plain and simple.
The "Mystery 12th App"? Obviously the "Movies" widget that Steve demo'd. Just as that came on, I realized one of the most commonly accessed apps on my Palm phone, my Nokia 770, and my other cell phone (Samsung SPH-m610), is movie listings. Of course Apple, with the largest movie preview site on the Internet, would provide such a feature for the iPhone.
It's been obvious since the first intro of the iPhone to anyone with a modicum of intelligence that all the apps on the iPhone are the exact same things that run under Dashboard on Mac OS X. Why would anyone think that Apple would reimplement already existing code when they've already shown that the iPhone and AppleTV both run Mac OS X, especially given the extreme emphasis put on the fact that the iPhone runs the same WebKit engine as the regular desktop OS?
I going to laugh to see all the naysayers tripping over themselves to get ahold of an iPhone and a Mac in a few months once they realize they've missed the boat
I haven't seen or heard anything to indicate that "Web 2.0" (whatever that means) will be the *only* development platform for the iPhone.
Remember the "Web Clip" feature that His Steveness has been talking up for a year already? Wondering why that isn't in the Safari 3 Public Beta? Still wondering why Apple is making Safari for Windows?
I still maintain my belief that Dashcode will also be a development environment for the iPhone. After watching the keynote, I realized that one of the most common items I use Internet access on a portable device to look up is local movie listings. My bet is the 12th app is the "Movies" widget that His Steveness demo'd at WWDC. Funny how that widget seems to be the perfect size for a iPhone screen, and even it's UI almost looks like a iPhone.
Over the years, Apple has proven themselves to be the only technology company out there that is consistently capable of establishing entirely new paradigms in computing. They did it with the Apple II, the Mac, the Newton, the iPod, and I expect the iPhone will be no different. Watch closely, you're seeing history in the making once again.
I'm not really a heavy PC gamer (I much prefer pen, paper, imagination, and actual people games), but even I know that the Civ IV issue is a problem with the Mac demo version of the game only. It took me quite a long time to find this out online, but once I did, I went out and bought the DVD. It plays absolutely fine on the GMA950 in my Dec. 2006 vintage C2D MacBook.
Of course, I'm also running a triple-boot setup with XP Pro and FC6 (soon to be FC7). I really don't like to buy Windows version games, but I did break down and buy NWN2, because I got it for 50% off at a closing CompUSA. I also did play around with EVE Online for a bit, and I recently bought ProFantasy Software's suite of RPG tools, all of which will probably never be available on anything other than Windows.
In the interests of fairness, it should be noted that the original misquoted quotation was from Stephen Decatur, and reads thusly:
"Our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations may she always be in the right; but right or wrong, our country!"
and to elaborate, the British author G. K. Chesterson has also said:
"'My country, right or wrong' is a thing that no patriot would think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying 'My mother, drunk or sober.'"
Meanwhile, the Ayn Rand tribe would have left the sick and injured to die, reducing their tribe's size and its genetic diversity (and hence their adaptability) as well as possibly losing the benefit of those who might have recovered if cared for. This would have damaged the tribe's survival chances relative to the altruistic tribe.
That is a gross mischaracterization of what Rand referred to as "rational self-interest". The pursuit of rational self-interest does not necessarily preclude so-called "altruistic" acts. Rand's opposition was to the principle of "ethical altruism", which is a totally different beast. "Ethical Altruism" essentially states that one has a moral duty to forgo self-interest.
If one wishes to contemplate Objectivism's ethics, one must first contemplate Objectivism's epistemology. It would be more accurate to say that the "Ayn Rand tribe" would rationally assess the likelihood that caring for the sick and injured would have a positive affect on one's own well-being or "happiness" before choosing to provide assistance, or not.
On top of which, your absolutist position on the Relativism v. Absolutism debate creates a false dichotomy concerning the relative merits of the two positions.
There are also lots of examples of dynamic societies where only those who "produce" at a rate that is wildly outside the statistical norm ever have to "share most of it". This is what we refer to as "progressive taxation". Properly applied, it works better than any other scheme of taxation.
Oh, no...it's quite true that people with more money than sense almost always choose Windows over Macintosh. It's the people with money *and* sense that go Mac. The poor shlubs with sense but no money use Free Software.
The problem with that is that the entire Zune team would never actually use their own product, because the iPod is at this point so far superior that you'd have to be brain-dead to even *use* a Zune, let alone *buy* one.
After all, as poorly regarded in the marketplace the Zune seems to be, it's quite apparent that Microsoft is semi-serious about making the Zune a "player" in the market. In order to do this, Microsoft needs to at least get their own people using their own companies' product, and if they have to use cult mentality to do it to overcome the fact that no thinking person would at this point choose a Zune over an iPod, then that's what they need to do. If Microsoft's own people don't use the Zune on a daily basis and discover for themselves why it is that the Zune is a flop, then they're never going to be able to improve it. Of course, they may *still* not get it...they are after all *Microsoft* people.
But what do I know, I *like* brown. I want a brown iPod. I always buy my accessories in both black and brown.
Actually, the disproportionate representation also extends to the House of Representatives, as well, because the number of House seats is (currently) fixed at 435. For the system to be more fair, we should probably apportion seats among the states by the ratio of their population to that of the least most populous state. However, I did some calculations around this idea awhile back, and it turns out that overall, the rural states would still have the advantage in the Electoral College.
Actually, in that direction, we refer to it as "out the Island"...of course, to the west and south, everything is "Jersey", and to the north, everything further north than Yonkers is "upstate somewhere"...
This is the one issue that you would find agreement on across most sections of the political spectrum. Ask the common man on the street if this is a problem that needs to stop and he will say yes. It doesn't matter if he is a Republican or a Democrat. Unfortunately our political leaders have failed us miserably on this issue. The Republicans are owned by big business that likes cheap labor and the Democrats are owned by the PC crowd that feels bad for them and is afraid of being labeled racists. Both parties want the Hispanic vote.
and from Guppy06 (410832):
The Republicans are backed by the "law and order" type with a xenophobic streak (folks at Free Republic are calling for Bush's impeachment over immigration) while the Democrats are owned by labor unions who don't like non-unionized cheap labor. Congress is together in opposing Bush's proposals on this one.
And now you see why nothing substantial will ever be done to fix this issue in a positive manner. There are no voices with sufficient access to the legislature that can articulate these issues in a rational fashion without ulterior motives.
*All* US employers are required to keep a Form I-9 for *every* employee for three years from inital hire date to one year after termination, whichever is longer. All we really need to add to this is a requirement to file those forms with DHS and IRS, and a mechanism for reviewing the forms.
This can be easily done at far lower expense to the public than this "no-work" database proposal.
I once received a strange call from an officer in the United States Air Force as part of an identity theft investigation. Needless to say, I was a little skeptical of the origin of the call, but the officer made an appointment with me for me to come out to his office on a nearby Air Force Base. It turns out that he was investigating the activities of an airman who was passing off bad checks and randomly changing a digit or two in his social security number in an attempt to get around some of the electronic check verification schemes. It just so happened that one of the iterations he used turned out to be *my* SSN. The activity in question all took place on the other side of the continent, and fortunately didn't result in any detrimental effects to myself. The officer did provide me with some helpful publications on how to discover any aberrant financial records that might affect me.
On the other hand, I'd prefer that 70-year-old technology to something that can be more easily used to absolutely identify a particular individual. The possibilities for abuse are far too great.
This "no-work" database idea needs to be shot down immediately, with prejudice. Thanks to ideas like this generated by non-intelligent governance and an apathetic populace, the terrorists of all derivations are winning. How much longer before we may as well light what's left of our practically gutted Constitution on fire and dance on the ashes? It is becoming more and more clear each passing year that the Great American Experiment has utterly failed.
Slashdot Mirror
For those of you wondering why this is even news, refer to the following quote from TFA:
;)
Teixeira's story began near Lowe's Motor Speedway on May 14. As recreational vehicles streamed in for race week, revenue investigators were checking fuel tanks of diesel RVs for illegal fuel.
Apparently, the inspectors were looking for people with diesel-engined RV's that may have had dyed diesel fuel (which is not taxed, or taxed at a lower rate than automotive diesel, and is generally used in farm vehicles) in their tanks. They may have also been checking for the use of Low Sulfur Diesel, which is illegal for use in MY2007 diesel engines (which require Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel fuel).
The race mentioned appears to have been a NASCAR event, which makes you wonder why state inspectors might think that farm diesel might end up in road vehicles there...
I myself didn't know that there *was* such a thing as "illegal diesel fuel" until I read this article.
OTOH, this is a ridiculous case that ought to be throw out of court. Just another case of overzealous law enforcement officials tossing their weight around.
Sorry, but you seem to have your speculation confused with actual facts. Nowhere have Apple or AT&T announced the iPhone's price *with contract*. The only mention made concerning price is that the 4GB model would be $499 and the 8GB model $599.
As of today:
Verizon Palm Treo 700p and 700w = $499 with 2-year contract
T-Mobile Blackberry 8800 = $549 "suggested retail", $200 "instant discount"
AT&T 8525 = $599.99 or $449.99 with 2-year contract, $100 "mail-in rebate" for new customers
AT&T Palm 750 = $549.99 or $399.99 with 2-year contract, $200 "mail-in rebate" for new customers
Sprint Samsung IP-830W = $649.99, $150 "instant savings" for new customers
And you still think that $599 (retail) for an 8GB iPhone is going to be too much? Granted, I doubt there will be any rebates for the iPhone at first, because there's so much anticipation, but there's not reason to believe there won't be *some* sort of discount for a 2-year contract.
Perhaps you're just not the target market. I know plenty of people who are going to be lined up for this puppy on Day 1, and will have no trouble affording it. Hell, I spend $200/month just on my cell plans, the hardware is almost an after thought.
Actually, what it looks like is that the "standard" iPhone apps are the same Dashboard widgets that are already available in Mac OS X...and guess how Dashboard widgets are built? That's right, with the same WebKit that underlies Safari! HTML, CSS, and Javascript, with Cocoa hooks available. So, in a sense they *are* "non-Safari" apps, in another sense they're just Safari apps.
I think it's pretty clear that the iPhone will be running Mac OS X, albeit a stripped down version to fit in the memory constraints of the portable form factor. Apple has stated the iPhone runs OS X over and over again, and there's no reason to think that Apple would be this misleading about the product (because there's actually laws about that). So, I expect that most of the Cocoa frameworks will be in there.
Ah, right. Apple can't just come out and tell you about the features of their upcoming products like other companies do. They have to leave "trails of breadcrumbs" instead, that only the coolest, most intelligent people can follow. People like you. You're special.
Well, it's nice that you think I'm special, but you're missing the point. Perhaps you're new here? You might have noticed that I'm not the only one around the Internet calling bullshit on these types of articles, and backing up their reasoning with prescient examples.
Apple *can* come right out and tell everyone about the features of their upcoming products like other companies, but they don't. It's just the way Apple does things. Part of the reason for this is Apple is almost always at the forefront of the technology progress function, and Steve doesn't like tipping off the competition. Part of it is the fact that Apple is a comparatively small company, and tipping off the competition could mean that the competition might start Yet Another FUD Campaign that might drive people away in fear. Sometimes, Apple just wants to gauge the public's reaction before they overinvest in undesired technologies. Yes, it's pretty frustrating at times, but sometimes a preponderence of evidence makes itself clear long before any official announcement.
I expect you'll be quite surprised when Apple releases Dashboard for Windows.
Nothing, I repeat, *nothing* that Apple has released up to this point has indicated that "Web 2.0" apps will be the only type of apps available to the iPhone. Get a clue already. How many clues does Apple have to give you before you see the trail of breadcrumbs?
First of all, go refer to the D5 discussion with SJ and BG. Pay special attention to the part where Steve talks about iPhone apps, particularly why it was felt that a native Google Maps app was more appropriate than a web app.
Second of all, "No SDK required" != "No SDK available". The SDK already exists, but is not required to develop apps targeted to the iPhone. It's called Mac OS X+XCode+Dashcode. Curious that the "Webclip" feature coming in Leopard was conspicously demo'd by Steve, and yet is missing from both versions of the Safari 3 Public Beta...hmm? Safari for Windows exists because of the iPhone, plain and simple.
The "Mystery 12th App"? Obviously the "Movies" widget that Steve demo'd. Just as that came on, I realized one of the most commonly accessed apps on my Palm phone, my Nokia 770, and my other cell phone (Samsung SPH-m610), is movie listings. Of course Apple, with the largest movie preview site on the Internet, would provide such a feature for the iPhone.
It's been obvious since the first intro of the iPhone to anyone with a modicum of intelligence that all the apps on the iPhone are the exact same things that run under Dashboard on Mac OS X. Why would anyone think that Apple would reimplement already existing code when they've already shown that the iPhone and AppleTV both run Mac OS X, especially given the extreme emphasis put on the fact that the iPhone runs the same WebKit engine as the regular desktop OS?
I going to laugh to see all the naysayers tripping over themselves to get ahold of an iPhone and a Mac in a few months once they realize they've missed the boat
I haven't seen or heard anything to indicate that "Web 2.0" (whatever that means) will be the *only* development platform for the iPhone.
Remember the "Web Clip" feature that His Steveness has been talking up for a year already? Wondering why that isn't in the Safari 3 Public Beta? Still wondering why Apple is making Safari for Windows?
I still maintain my belief that Dashcode will also be a development environment for the iPhone. After watching the keynote, I realized that one of the most common items I use Internet access on a portable device to look up is local movie listings. My bet is the 12th app is the "Movies" widget that His Steveness demo'd at WWDC. Funny how that widget seems to be the perfect size for a iPhone screen, and even it's UI almost looks like a iPhone.
Over the years, Apple has proven themselves to be the only technology company out there that is consistently capable of establishing entirely new paradigms in computing. They did it with the Apple II, the Mac, the Newton, the iPod, and I expect the iPhone will be no different. Watch closely, you're seeing history in the making once again.
I'm not really a heavy PC gamer (I much prefer pen, paper, imagination, and actual people games), but even I know that the Civ IV issue is a problem with the Mac demo version of the game only. It took me quite a long time to find this out online, but once I did, I went out and bought the DVD. It plays absolutely fine on the GMA950 in my Dec. 2006 vintage C2D MacBook.
Of course, I'm also running a triple-boot setup with XP Pro and FC6 (soon to be FC7). I really don't like to buy Windows version games, but I did break down and buy NWN2, because I got it for 50% off at a closing CompUSA. I also did play around with EVE Online for a bit, and I recently bought ProFantasy Software's suite of RPG tools, all of which will probably never be available on anything other than Windows.
In the interests of fairness, it should be noted that the original misquoted quotation was from Stephen Decatur, and reads thusly:
"Our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations may she always be in the right; but right or wrong, our country!"
and to elaborate, the British author G. K. Chesterson has also said:
"'My country, right or wrong' is a thing that no patriot would think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying 'My mother, drunk or sober.'"
Meanwhile, the Ayn Rand tribe would have left the sick and injured to die, reducing their tribe's size and its genetic diversity (and hence their adaptability) as well as possibly losing the benefit of those who might have recovered if cared for. This would have damaged the tribe's survival chances relative to the altruistic tribe.
That is a gross mischaracterization of what Rand referred to as "rational self-interest". The pursuit of rational self-interest does not necessarily preclude so-called "altruistic" acts. Rand's opposition was to the principle of "ethical altruism", which is a totally different beast. "Ethical Altruism" essentially states that one has a moral duty to forgo self-interest.
If one wishes to contemplate Objectivism's ethics, one must first contemplate Objectivism's epistemology. It would be more accurate to say that the "Ayn Rand tribe" would rationally assess the likelihood that caring for the sick and injured would have a positive affect on one's own well-being or "happiness" before choosing to provide assistance, or not.
The Shaker said, "God would know." That's a guilt culture right there.
No, that's a shame culture. In a guilt culture, the joiner would reply, "*I* would know."
On top of which, your absolutist position on the Relativism v. Absolutism debate creates a false dichotomy concerning the relative merits of the two positions.
You are confusing Objectivism with Absolutism. Somewhere, Leonard Peikoff is experiencing apoplexy, and Ayn Rand is flipping over in her grave.
There are also lots of examples of dynamic societies where only those who "produce" at a rate that is wildly outside the statistical norm ever have to "share most of it". This is what we refer to as "progressive taxation". Properly applied, it works better than any other scheme of taxation.
'My country, right or wrong'? Please.
If you're going to quote someone, at least bother to make an accurate quotation.
Oh, no...it's quite true that people with more money than sense almost always choose Windows over Macintosh. It's the people with money *and* sense that go Mac. The poor shlubs with sense but no money use Free Software.
The problem with that is that the entire Zune team would never actually use their own product, because the iPod is at this point so far superior that you'd have to be brain-dead to even *use* a Zune, let alone *buy* one.
After all, as poorly regarded in the marketplace the Zune seems to be, it's quite apparent that Microsoft is semi-serious about making the Zune a "player" in the market. In order to do this, Microsoft needs to at least get their own people using their own companies' product, and if they have to use cult mentality to do it to overcome the fact that no thinking person would at this point choose a Zune over an iPod, then that's what they need to do. If Microsoft's own people don't use the Zune on a daily basis and discover for themselves why it is that the Zune is a flop, then they're never going to be able to improve it. Of course, they may *still* not get it...they are after all *Microsoft* people.
But what do I know, I *like* brown. I want a brown iPod. I always buy my accessories in both black and brown.
Actually, the disproportionate representation also extends to the House of Representatives, as well, because the number of House seats is (currently) fixed at 435. For the system to be more fair, we should probably apportion seats among the states by the ratio of their population to that of the least most populous state. However, I did some calculations around this idea awhile back, and it turns out that overall, the rural states would still have the advantage in the Electoral College.
Actually, in that direction, we refer to it as "out the Island"...of course, to the west and south, everything is "Jersey", and to the north, everything further north than Yonkers is "upstate somewhere"...
What is this? The 1980's?
This is the one issue that you would find agreement on across most sections of the political spectrum. Ask the common man on the street if this is a problem that needs to stop and he will say yes. It doesn't matter if he is a Republican or a Democrat. Unfortunately our political leaders have failed us miserably on this issue. The Republicans are owned by big business that likes cheap labor and the Democrats are owned by the PC crowd that feels bad for them and is afraid of being labeled racists. Both parties want the Hispanic vote.
and from Guppy06 (410832):
The Republicans are backed by the "law and order" type with a xenophobic streak (folks at Free Republic are calling for Bush's impeachment over immigration) while the Democrats are owned by labor unions who don't like non-unionized cheap labor. Congress is together in opposing Bush's proposals on this one.
And now you see why nothing substantial will ever be done to fix this issue in a positive manner. There are no voices with sufficient access to the legislature that can articulate these issues in a rational fashion without ulterior motives.
Obligatory Slashdot Refererence
Slashdot Readers Open Letter to George Walker Bush
Dear Mr. Bush:
You keep using the phrase "love of freedom". We do not think that that phrase means what you think it means.
Sincerely,
The Readers of Slashdot
Perhaps you are not familiar with Form I-9?
http://www.uscis.gov/i-9
*All* US employers are required to keep a Form I-9 for *every* employee for three years from inital hire date to one year after termination, whichever is longer. All we really need to add to this is a requirement to file those forms with DHS and IRS, and a mechanism for reviewing the forms.
This can be easily done at far lower expense to the public than this "no-work" database proposal.
I once received a strange call from an officer in the United States Air Force as part of an identity theft investigation. Needless to say, I was a little skeptical of the origin of the call, but the officer made an appointment with me for me to come out to his office on a nearby Air Force Base. It turns out that he was investigating the activities of an airman who was passing off bad checks and randomly changing a digit or two in his social security number in an attempt to get around some of the electronic check verification schemes. It just so happened that one of the iterations he used turned out to be *my* SSN. The activity in question all took place on the other side of the continent, and fortunately didn't result in any detrimental effects to myself. The officer did provide me with some helpful publications on how to discover any aberrant financial records that might affect me.
On the other hand, I'd prefer that 70-year-old technology to something that can be more easily used to absolutely identify a particular individual. The possibilities for abuse are far too great.
This "no-work" database idea needs to be shot down immediately, with prejudice. Thanks to ideas like this generated by non-intelligent governance and an apathetic populace, the terrorists of all derivations are winning. How much longer before we may as well light what's left of our practically gutted Constitution on fire and dance on the ashes? It is becoming more and more clear each passing year that the Great American Experiment has utterly failed.
Tertiary Obligatory Citation...
/ Documents/bulletins/oet63/oet63rev.pdf
and, Part 15 Spread Spectrum Transmitters in the 2.4GHz bands are limited to 1 W Output Power...
http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology
(see table beginning page 7, specifically pages 20 and 21)