The real question that should be asked, what does this tell about electricity companies and the environment they are working where they can't or want to use the simplest and efficient way to solve the energy problem? We aren't allowed to generate additional electricity in the US. The environmentalists and the NIMBY crowd have effectively prohibited it. These people take electricity for granted. That will continue until the widespread daily blackouts start in a few years.
Are we really to the point where we have to start shutting off hot water heaters because we don't want to re-invest in the electrical infra-structure? Not quite yet. At the rate things are going, rolling blackouts are coming in 3-10 years. Expect to see the first ones soon.
None of these schemes, none of the conservation measures or the CFL bulbs generate a single Watt of electricity.
But not having hot water, or raising the temperature by 4 degrees? Forget about it. You think you are going to have a choice?
Sony also has more, better first-party exclusive games coming out in the future. And the PS3 isn't as loud as the 360 so your movie watching experience won't have as much fan noise.
The 360 and the PS3 are both good systems. XBox Live is indeed an advantage. There's no need for the console war propaganda posts. Having two excellent competing choices is better for gamers.
Did you have the right to know Microsoft's future plans 6 months ago? Does Microsoft have the right to know yours?
Why should they pre-announce a new feature 9-12 months in advance? People might wait to buy an XBox 360 until then. And sales would go down for 360s and fewer games would be made, and Microsoft shareholders would lose, and current 360 owners would lose. I wonder why they might lie?
What would you do? Tell the truth and screw over the 360 owners and the MS shareholders?
MADD could more-correctly be described as a left-wing organization but...
The more important point is that MADD is an anti-freedom organization and needs to be opposed in every way possible by everyone who cares about freedom.
Groups of families would get together and defend their territory from outsiders. As this gradually became more organized, it transformed into "government".
Borders and the defense of borders are basic self-protection and group-protection methods. Self protection is a basic human right.
The spirit of the rights applies to any given person at any given time at any given place as rights cannot be granted or taken away by the government. There's no spirit of any right to cross national borders into the USA carrying anything you want and with no questions asked.
Sovereign governments have always rightfully had the power to control traffic across their borders. That is why governments exist in the first place. At no time did any spirit of any right contradict that.
He's saying that you could decide no to cross the border AT the border. How would that not be probable cause to suspect someone was smuggling something?
"You guys are doing searches today? Well I'll just stay here then. Is there a particular time when you won't be doing searches and I can cross with anything I want? Sometime before 4:20PM usually works best for me."
Why wouldn't you just decide whether you were going to cross before you got there? Who accidentally takes an international flight without thinking through whether they might have to go through customs?
If you have this problem, then I suggest searches at the border aren't your #1 concern.
Why should the government let you in the country if you won't follow the entry procedure?
There's this border there. Governments are established to keep people from coming into their country over the border -- invading armies and other similar folks. That's why governments exist.
I don't accept the argument that "this is how it is, deal with it" as an end to the discussion... Do you think that reality doesn't apply when someone on the Internet doesn't understand or has a counterpoint?
All sovereign governments have always rightfully had the power to control traffic across their borders.
so how do they get to apply conditions to the absolute right of a citizen of a country to return to that country? And an absolute right to bring anything he wants across the border with him?
You don't have a 4th Amendment right to enter the country. The searches are a condition of entry into the US. If that's not good enough for you, you have the option of staying outside the border.
will the vegans be ok with that? Why should anyone care? Who cares whether the vegans approve or disapprove? Do vegans care whether I approve of their lifestyle? Should they?
Vegans are free to eat as they wish. The rest of us don't have to bow to their choices. We don't have to consider their choices at all.
I vote strongly for "take a walk", especially this time of year when it's starting to get nice and warm outside. In what country? Your current country. Walking is best and most easily accomplished in the country where you are.
"Whisper campaigns" are only evil and underhanded and scandalous when your enemies do them. Don't you know?
It's all part of the new moral and ethical code. It goes like this: "we get to win".
Anything -- no matter how despicable, harmful or dishonest -- that causes "us" to win is holy and justified. Anything else fails some moral and ethical test and further demonstrates why "we get to win" -- because the other side is shown to be monstrously evil by the moral and ethical lapses that we've applied to them.
Slashdot Mirror
None of these schemes, none of the conservation measures or the CFL bulbs generate a single Watt of electricity. But not having hot water, or raising the temperature by 4 degrees? Forget about it. You think you are going to have a choice?
Sony also has more, better first-party exclusive games coming out in the future. And the PS3 isn't as loud as the 360 so your movie watching experience won't have as much fan noise.
The 360 and the PS3 are both good systems. XBox Live is indeed an advantage. There's no need for the console war propaganda posts. Having two excellent competing choices is better for gamers.
Did you have the right to know Microsoft's future plans 6 months ago? Does Microsoft have the right to know yours?
Why should they pre-announce a new feature 9-12 months in advance? People might wait to buy an XBox 360 until then. And sales would go down for 360s and fewer games would be made, and Microsoft shareholders would lose, and current 360 owners would lose. I wonder why they might lie?
What would you do? Tell the truth and screw over the 360 owners and the MS shareholders?
MADD could more-correctly be described as a left-wing organization but ...
The more important point is that MADD is an anti-freedom organization and needs to be opposed in every way possible by everyone who cares about freedom.
Hence my not claiming the government has rights.
Try connecting through Dubai next time.
Groups of families would get together and defend their territory from outsiders. As this gradually became more organized, it transformed into "government".
Borders and the defense of borders are basic self-protection and group-protection methods. Self protection is a basic human right.
From April 2, 2008:
World views US 'more positively'
But they have broad powers to control what you carry with you.
Sovereign governments have always rightfully had the power to control traffic across their borders. That is why governments exist in the first place. At no time did any spirit of any right contradict that.
"You guys are doing searches today? Well I'll just stay here then. Is there a particular time when you won't be doing searches and I can cross with anything I want? Sometime before 4:20PM usually works best for me."
Why wouldn't you just decide whether you were going to cross before you got there? Who accidentally takes an international flight without thinking through whether they might have to go through customs?
If you have this problem, then I suggest searches at the border aren't your #1 concern.
There's this border there. Governments are established to keep people from coming into their country over the border -- invading armies and other similar folks. That's why governments exist. I don't accept the argument that "this is how it is, deal with it" as an end to the discussion... Do you think that reality doesn't apply when someone on the Internet doesn't understand or has a counterpoint?
All sovereign governments have always rightfully had the power to control traffic across their borders.
Yeah. That's why I wrote it like that.
I'm not seeing what your point is. You can cross the border and be searched. Or you can not cross the border and not submit to a search.
Are you saying you were flying along and accidentally encountered the US border?
You are correct. That sentence has little relevance and apparently is confusing.
The larger point is clear. Search is a condition of entry into the US.
You don't have a 4th Amendment right to enter the country. The searches are a condition of entry into the US. If that's not good enough for you, you have the option of staying outside the border.
You don't have a 4th Amendment right to cross the US border.
As a condition of allowing you to cross the border, you are subject to search. It is as simple as that.
All governments have always rightfully had the power to control traffic across their borders.
You don't have a 4th Amendment right to cross the US border. Outside the US border, the US has no duty to protect your 4th Amendment rights either.
All governments have always rightfully had the power to control traffic across their borders.
"We look after our customers."
Do you have any more questions?
Vegans are free to eat as they wish. The rest of us don't have to bow to their choices. We don't have to consider their choices at all.
"Whisper campaigns" are only evil and underhanded and scandalous when your enemies do them. Don't you know?
It's all part of the new moral and ethical code. It goes like this: "we get to win".
Anything -- no matter how despicable, harmful or dishonest -- that causes "us" to win is holy and justified. Anything else fails some moral and ethical test and further demonstrates why "we get to win" -- because the other side is shown to be monstrously evil by the moral and ethical lapses that we've applied to them.
Don't you know how important "we" are?
How attractive will $150 for 50 Mbps be compared to Verizon's FiOS offerings?
Well, I live in the Minneapolis area. FiOS is not available here. So I'd say Comcast has the advantage.