The European countries with lower overall population densities than the US are few: Estonia, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Russia, and Iceland.
In Finland for example according to the coverage maps I'm seeing the northern third of the country has spotty coverage if any from all the carriers. The middle third has 3G along highways and 2G elsewhere. The southern third has 4G most places, but some more rural areas are 3G. The whole country is slightly smaller than Montana. The vast majority of Finland's people live near the Baltic and its gulfs, with 20% living in Helsinki alone. The whole country has fewer than 100 towns and cities and a population density overall of about 18 people per square kilometer over a total land area of 338,424 square kilometers with a total population of under 5,500,000 people.
In 1990 about half of US states were lower than Finland in density, and half were higher. Now only 13 states are of lower density. This is because Finland's population is relatively stable. The US birth and immigration rates are higher. The total density of the US is 35 people per square kilometer.
The twenty-fifth most dense US state is Washington, with about 40.5 people per square kilometer, but in 1990 the 25th most dense was Alabama with only 30.7 people per. Alaska has 0.5 people per square kilometer. New Jersey has 467.2 per. Only 13 states have double the density of Finland or more. Fifteen have less than half.
My current state, Texas, is 696,241 square kilometers holding about 28,000,000 people. 40.8 people live per square kilometer, up from just 25 in 1990. Texas has 254 counties. There are 1,216 incorporated cities, only 246 of which are home to more than 10,000 people. Thirty-five cities are home to more than 100,000, with just six cities over half a million in population. Still, nearly one quarter of the population lives in the Houston metro area. Another quarter lives in the Dallas/Forth Worth metro area. Another quarter live in the San Antonio, El Paso, Laredo, Amarillo, Brownsville, Corpus Christi, and Austin metro areas. That means that one quarter or so of the population is spread sporadically throughout an area twice the size of Finland, with fewer in the deserts in the far west of the state. Like Finland, huge population centers are especially well served by a variety of carriers. Some are as cheap as $30 or $35 a month, like Boost Mobile. The most reliable national carriers that don't drop signal driving across the state on highways among the cattle ranches, forests, farm fields, and such are $50 or more.
When I visit friends and family in more rural areas in Missouri and Illinois, where the largest city or town in any direction for a hundred miles is about 50,000 people and my parents live 7 miles from the closest town (of 900 people) and 8 miles from a town of 16,000, I get consistent 4G at their house. I pay $50 a month. I'm okay with that.
The most recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau (2007) counted 39,044 general purpose local governments, which includes 19,492 municipal governments, 16,519 township governments and 3,033 county governments. It has a total land area around 9,600,000 square kilometers. Yes, it costs money to build and operate in this kind of environment.
Selling something as expensive as a car using published information that's intentionally falsified to fool the tester and reviewer is making a financial gain through deliberate misrepresentation. There's a name for that. It's fraud. Fraud is a felony.
There are many people who've been promoting this idea. I'm sure some from before you and some after. It seems to actually have already worked in Germany and possibly elsewhere.
Practically everyone holds some currency. Inflation is also a tax on people holding many types of contracts, including and especially people who have lent money. Lenders are especially taxed by inflation when they have lent at a fixed interest rate.
Non-cash capital is affected when there are other currencies available for exchange. A national economy is not entirely a closed loop.
People get taxed at different rates based on how much they hold in currency and what their contractual obligations are. It still impacts the economy as a whole, since it encourages spending early rather than saving fixed currency at interest that may not keep pace with the inflation.
Mild inflation for someone who owes a large debt at a low fixed rate (like a 4% or 5% mortgage) can be a good thing. The value in inflated dollars goes up, but the amount owed is in pre-inflation dollars. The bank, however, gets less money out of their interest and loses money if the inflation rate outpaces the interest rate. The only consolation is that the asset acting as collateral has appreciated according to inflation in addition to any market appreciation in uninflated dollars.
Too rapid of inflation is bad for everyone, because wage increases tend to fall well behind the inflation rate for consumer goods. People eventually catch up if they make it through, but often experience hardship in the meantime.
They wouldn't be able to pay for this purely out of tax revenues already collected. It would require printing money and sending checks against money that hadn't been in the economy yet. That influx of money would cause some level of price inflation. It would also, however, create more demand for goods and generate more sales of goods. That would create some jobs and encourage further automation. Eventually when there's nothing left to automate, the businesses selling everything will be the primary sources of taxes. Workers will be lightly taxed and most of all of them will have subsidized incomes. Those not working are subsidized to the baseline.
The whole idea is basically turning corporate subsidies on their heads. Companies used to get subsidies for creating jobs and keeping their product prices down. Now much of those go back to the stockholders or other owners since automation is cutting production costs and cutting some jobs. As the jobs go away, though, the demand for the products goes away. It's largely a consumer economy, so it needs consumers to spend money. Stop subsidizing the corporations who are automating away the means to consume. Start subsidizing the consumers who then buy the products.
It's not necessarily the best plan, but that's the part necessary to understand before praising it or dismissing it.
Another competing but potentially complementary option is that if fewer person hours are needed but we have so many people, lower the number of hours before overtime kicks in. If we cut everyone's hours by 20%, 20% more people might get hired. Still, though, people wouldn't want to give up 20% of their pay, so giving more people jobs at the same pay rate for fewer hours does -- guess what -- inflate prices.
Right now new capital enters the system via debt. Businesses and consumers borrow money the banks don't actually have. If it doesn't get to the consumers, it doesn't keep circulating. If it doesn't keep circulating, more businesses lay people off and there are fewer consumers spending less money.
The basic income idea is to put new money into circulation not from taxes necessarily, but probably from printing it into circulation. That creates some inflation, which is basically debt spread evenly across the entire economy. Then the economy keeps the money flowing, because there's a steady supply of it to people who aren't currently employed. It makes banks a secondary source of entry for currency rather than the primary one.
The government doesn't have to keep track of this program for rent, that program for health insurance, this other program for some other type of assistance, and then a complex tax code. The basic income subsidy and a simplified tax code makes the government much more streamlined so the tax rate can actually be lower or more of the money put into the subsidy.
It might not be an ideal solution, but it's not expected to be "free". It's actually a very profound macroeconomic idea for adjusting to booming per-worker productivity and a simultaneous lack of jobs. The problem it's trying to solve is that the reason the job market is so soft is that so few people need to work to produce the things that make everyone able to live comfortably. Demand for labor is down, which is causing demand for products to be down (via lack of means to pay). If more people could pay, more products could be sold. The corporations wouldn't need tax breaks as subsidies because nearly all products are subsidized on the buyer's side. Most of the tax burden could eventually be shifted onto the people owning the automation.
This is especially true of us folks not using the password feature. Patterns and PINs are not included in this attack. I'm going to go out on a sturdy limb here and say my fingerprint scan isn't either.
We understand where you stand on surveillance. Where do you stand on these issues?:
firearms abortion gay marriage investing in prisons and drug stings vs. investing in job training and job creation legalizing marijuana keeping the FCC from preventing flashing of consumer electronics with new firmware net neutrality the Keystone XL pipeline amnesty for illegal immigrants streamlining guest worker visas for legal immigrants HB-1 visa quotas lowering the skyrocketing levels of student debt making healthcare affordable or subsidizing paying for it investing in our roads and bridges making Internet a common utility like water and electricity
A warlord despot running his local area and acting as a vassal to a stronger warlord in the next town is a form of government. It's called feudalism. Europe had it a few hundred years ago.
So, shut down inbound communications by watching your citizens more closely and jailing people for repeating things they find to contain truth? I'm not sure that's how you win the hearts and minds of people upset over spying and censorship.
Considering OS X is largely made of free software, the leading browser seems to be Google's spin of Chromium, Facebook uses PHP and developed Hack and developed the HHVM for PHP and Hack, Microsoft's putting WebM and VP9 into its proprietary browser, Android is the leading phone OS, and most web services run on Linux or FreeBSD with Apache or Nginx as the web server running apps in PHP, Node, Python, Perl, or Java against MariaDB, PostgreSQL, or some other free database I'd have to guess you're either extremely biased in your viewpoint or haven't really thought about your assertion.
Different people have different things tying them to Windows (or Mac, or Windows/Mac). Many of them have mostly equivalent software that does run on Linux, but require retraining people or missing features some people actually require.
Quickbooks Peachtree Oculus lots of games Exchange MS Office Adobe Creative Suite Filemaker Pro and software built around it Alpha Five and software built around it Lots of business-specific apps built in older Visual Basic versions, or with VBA, or even QuickBasic Many things put together using C, C++, Pascal, or other libraries that are thin wrappers around Windows-specific libraries without a lot of abstraction.
There's a lot of legacy apps that people run once in a while that could be made to work elsewhere if there was still development around them. Many of them aren't developed at all any longer. Some will run under Wine, or with faked up shim support libraries, or could be reimplemented in more modern and more portable ways if there's enough interest in doing so.
Sorry, I don't see that. There's no paper trail at all. Neither the hosting company nor the RBL have any access to anything concrete other than the sender IP. You could certainly try contacting the postmaster, hope the range is owned by someone reputable, and ask for details, but good luck getting that. For example, in Europe data protection law would prevent that company giving out details of a customer they've hosted that was spamming to a third party (even if they are spammers, they can terminate them certainly, but you won't get the info you need).
Europe doesn't have subpoenas and courts? If there's a sustained campaign to interfere with your business and defame it unfairly that's not punishable by civil and criminal penalties?
RBLs generally aren't used to outright block mail. A responsible mail host will assign a score (using something like SpamAssassin) to different traits. Presence on a particular blacklist is worth a certain number of points on that score. Other things like what's in the subject line, whether the server connecting to your server is following the RFCs strictly, the Bayesian analysis of the message vs. spam received in the past, and stuff like that feeds into the score.
This will mostly make messages from your domain or about your domain score higher in these spam filter.
The decision to actually kick a domain off of hosting is a final and drastic step taken by actual people. It will involve the hosting company notifying the domain's owner a number of times about the spamvertising if the spam isn't coming directly from them. The hosting company will check the WHOIS for where the spam is coming from to see if it's something obvious like the same company or the same physical postal address as the site being advertised. They'll contact the admin of the IP range sending the spam and get the IP range added to IP RBLs along the way, too, so just spamming from one place won't keep the site being spamvertised.
If there's a pattern of this happening and it's not the site owner doing it, then there's a strong paper trail about who is doing it. Getting to the point of kicking someone off is pretty rare, but it is an option in the end for the hosting company if it keeps happening. The hosting company can't afford to get all of its IPs blacklisted, after all, because of a few problem users. Usually this does turn out to be the site owner's own doing, but if it isn't and they still get kicked, it sucks but there are always other hosting companies.
Anti-spam blacklists do blacklist the domain and the IP thats host the web sites within that domain when a domain is advertised in spam messages. It's known in the industry as "spamvertising". It can get a domain kicked off of hosting if the email is clearly spam and advertises the domain even if the spam was sent through another company.
The specific host that sent it to your mail server is the only one in the email headers that can really be trusted to be real, and that's because of your own mail server logging that it received the connection from there. Let them defend themselves to Spamhaus, SpamCop, or whoever else. There are methods established for them to do that. They then provide logs showing how it got through their servers and explain what they are doing to minimize that sort of traffic.
Slashdot Mirror
The European countries with lower overall population densities than the US are few: Estonia, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Russia, and Iceland.
In Finland for example according to the coverage maps I'm seeing the northern third of the country has spotty coverage if any from all the carriers. The middle third has 3G along highways and 2G elsewhere. The southern third has 4G most places, but some more rural areas are 3G. The whole country is slightly smaller than Montana. The vast majority of Finland's people live near the Baltic and its gulfs, with 20% living in Helsinki alone. The whole country has fewer than 100 towns and cities and a population density overall of about 18 people per square kilometer over a total land area of 338,424 square kilometers with a total population of under 5,500,000 people.
In 1990 about half of US states were lower than Finland in density, and half were higher. Now only 13 states are of lower density. This is because Finland's population is relatively stable. The US birth and immigration rates are higher. The total density of the US is 35 people per square kilometer.
The twenty-fifth most dense US state is Washington, with about 40.5 people per square kilometer, but in 1990 the 25th most dense was Alabama with only 30.7 people per. Alaska has 0.5 people per square kilometer. New Jersey has 467.2 per. Only 13 states have double the density of Finland or more. Fifteen have less than half.
My current state, Texas, is 696,241 square kilometers holding about 28,000,000 people. 40.8 people live per square kilometer, up from just 25 in 1990. Texas has 254 counties. There are 1,216 incorporated cities, only 246 of which are home to more than 10,000 people. Thirty-five cities are home to more than 100,000, with just six cities over half a million in population. Still, nearly one quarter of the population lives in the Houston metro area. Another quarter lives in the Dallas/Forth Worth metro area. Another quarter live in the San Antonio, El Paso, Laredo, Amarillo, Brownsville, Corpus Christi, and Austin metro areas. That means that one quarter or so of the population is spread sporadically throughout an area twice the size of Finland, with fewer in the deserts in the far west of the state. Like Finland, huge population centers are especially well served by a variety of carriers. Some are as cheap as $30 or $35 a month, like Boost Mobile. The most reliable national carriers that don't drop signal driving across the state on highways among the cattle ranches, forests, farm fields, and such are $50 or more.
When I visit friends and family in more rural areas in Missouri and Illinois, where the largest city or town in any direction for a hundred miles is about 50,000 people and my parents live 7 miles from the closest town (of 900 people) and 8 miles from a town of 16,000, I get consistent 4G at their house. I pay $50 a month. I'm okay with that.
The most recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau (2007) counted 39,044 general purpose local governments, which includes 19,492 municipal governments, 16,519 township governments and 3,033 county governments. It has a total land area around 9,600,000 square kilometers. Yes, it costs money to build and operate in this kind of environment.
Back in my day we called this a bullet. "Death ray" sounds megalomaniacal.
Selling something as expensive as a car using published information that's intentionally falsified to fool the tester and reviewer is making a financial gain through deliberate misrepresentation. There's a name for that. It's fraud. Fraud is a felony.
There are many people who've been promoting this idea. I'm sure some from before you and some after. It seems to actually have already worked in Germany and possibly elsewhere.
http://www.neweconomics.org/bl...
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-...
Practically everyone holds some currency. Inflation is also a tax on people holding many types of contracts, including and especially people who have lent money. Lenders are especially taxed by inflation when they have lent at a fixed interest rate.
Non-cash capital is affected when there are other currencies available for exchange. A national economy is not entirely a closed loop.
People get taxed at different rates based on how much they hold in currency and what their contractual obligations are. It still impacts the economy as a whole, since it encourages spending early rather than saving fixed currency at interest that may not keep pace with the inflation.
Mild inflation for someone who owes a large debt at a low fixed rate (like a 4% or 5% mortgage) can be a good thing. The value in inflated dollars goes up, but the amount owed is in pre-inflation dollars. The bank, however, gets less money out of their interest and loses money if the inflation rate outpaces the interest rate. The only consolation is that the asset acting as collateral has appreciated according to inflation in addition to any market appreciation in uninflated dollars.
Too rapid of inflation is bad for everyone, because wage increases tend to fall well behind the inflation rate for consumer goods. People eventually catch up if they make it through, but often experience hardship in the meantime.
They wouldn't be able to pay for this purely out of tax revenues already collected. It would require printing money and sending checks against money that hadn't been in the economy yet. That influx of money would cause some level of price inflation. It would also, however, create more demand for goods and generate more sales of goods. That would create some jobs and encourage further automation. Eventually when there's nothing left to automate, the businesses selling everything will be the primary sources of taxes. Workers will be lightly taxed and most of all of them will have subsidized incomes. Those not working are subsidized to the baseline.
The whole idea is basically turning corporate subsidies on their heads. Companies used to get subsidies for creating jobs and keeping their product prices down. Now much of those go back to the stockholders or other owners since automation is cutting production costs and cutting some jobs. As the jobs go away, though, the demand for the products goes away. It's largely a consumer economy, so it needs consumers to spend money. Stop subsidizing the corporations who are automating away the means to consume. Start subsidizing the consumers who then buy the products.
It's not necessarily the best plan, but that's the part necessary to understand before praising it or dismissing it.
Another competing but potentially complementary option is that if fewer person hours are needed but we have so many people, lower the number of hours before overtime kicks in. If we cut everyone's hours by 20%, 20% more people might get hired. Still, though, people wouldn't want to give up 20% of their pay, so giving more people jobs at the same pay rate for fewer hours does -- guess what -- inflate prices.
Inflationary printing and injection.
Right now new capital enters the system via debt. Businesses and consumers borrow money the banks don't actually have. If it doesn't get to the consumers, it doesn't keep circulating. If it doesn't keep circulating, more businesses lay people off and there are fewer consumers spending less money.
The basic income idea is to put new money into circulation not from taxes necessarily, but probably from printing it into circulation. That creates some inflation, which is basically debt spread evenly across the entire economy. Then the economy keeps the money flowing, because there's a steady supply of it to people who aren't currently employed. It makes banks a secondary source of entry for currency rather than the primary one.
The government doesn't have to keep track of this program for rent, that program for health insurance, this other program for some other type of assistance, and then a complex tax code. The basic income subsidy and a simplified tax code makes the government much more streamlined so the tax rate can actually be lower or more of the money put into the subsidy.
It might not be an ideal solution, but it's not expected to be "free". It's actually a very profound macroeconomic idea for adjusting to booming per-worker productivity and a simultaneous lack of jobs. The problem it's trying to solve is that the reason the job market is so soft is that so few people need to work to produce the things that make everyone able to live comfortably. Demand for labor is down, which is causing demand for products to be down (via lack of means to pay). If more people could pay, more products could be sold. The corporations wouldn't need tax breaks as subsidies because nearly all products are subsidized on the buyer's side. Most of the tax burden could eventually be shifted onto the people owning the automation.
Inflation is a tax on everyone.
Thanks. That's quite helpful. There are still some things I'd like answered out of my original list.
This is especially true of us folks not using the password feature. Patterns and PINs are not included in this attack. I'm going to go out on a sturdy limb here and say my fingerprint scan isn't either.
We understand where you stand on surveillance. Where do you stand on these issues?:
firearms
abortion
gay marriage
investing in prisons and drug stings vs. investing in job training and job creation
legalizing marijuana
keeping the FCC from preventing flashing of consumer electronics with new firmware
net neutrality
the Keystone XL pipeline
amnesty for illegal immigrants
streamlining guest worker visas for legal immigrants
HB-1 visa quotas
lowering the skyrocketing levels of student debt
making healthcare affordable or subsidizing paying for it
investing in our roads and bridges
making Internet a common utility like water and electricity
A warlord despot running his local area and acting as a vassal to a stronger warlord in the next town is a form of government. It's called feudalism. Europe had it a few hundred years ago.
The Fourth Amendment protects against unwarranted search.
I thought GM already provided that in many vehicles.
So, shut down inbound communications by watching your citizens more closely and jailing people for repeating things they find to contain truth? I'm not sure that's how you win the hearts and minds of people upset over spying and censorship.
Considering OS X is largely made of free software, the leading browser seems to be Google's spin of Chromium, Facebook uses PHP and developed Hack and developed the HHVM for PHP and Hack, Microsoft's putting WebM and VP9 into its proprietary browser, Android is the leading phone OS, and most web services run on Linux or FreeBSD with Apache or Nginx as the web server running apps in PHP, Node, Python, Perl, or Java against MariaDB, PostgreSQL, or some other free database I'd have to guess you're either extremely biased in your viewpoint or haven't really thought about your assertion.
$20 in quantities of 50 or more. It might take a few teachers getting together to do that. Still, less than $25 per piece below that.
Different people have different things tying them to Windows (or Mac, or Windows/Mac). Many of them have mostly equivalent software that does run on Linux, but require retraining people or missing features some people actually require.
Quickbooks
Peachtree
Oculus
lots of games
Exchange
MS Office
Adobe Creative Suite
Filemaker Pro and software built around it
Alpha Five and software built around it
Lots of business-specific apps built in older Visual Basic versions, or with VBA, or even QuickBasic
Many things put together using C, C++, Pascal, or other libraries that are thin wrappers around Windows-specific libraries without a lot of abstraction.
There's a lot of legacy apps that people run once in a while that could be made to work elsewhere if there was still development around them. Many of them aren't developed at all any longer. Some will run under Wine, or with faked up shim support libraries, or could be reimplemented in more modern and more portable ways if there's enough interest in doing so.
Europe doesn't have subpoenas and courts? If there's a sustained campaign to interfere with your business and defame it unfairly that's not punishable by civil and criminal penalties?
You're not really a Houstonian until you've run over a ladder or dodged two.
RBLs generally aren't used to outright block mail. A responsible mail host will assign a score (using something like SpamAssassin) to different traits. Presence on a particular blacklist is worth a certain number of points on that score. Other things like what's in the subject line, whether the server connecting to your server is following the RFCs strictly, the Bayesian analysis of the message vs. spam received in the past, and stuff like that feeds into the score.
This will mostly make messages from your domain or about your domain score higher in these spam filter.
The decision to actually kick a domain off of hosting is a final and drastic step taken by actual people. It will involve the hosting company notifying the domain's owner a number of times about the spamvertising if the spam isn't coming directly from them. The hosting company will check the WHOIS for where the spam is coming from to see if it's something obvious like the same company or the same physical postal address as the site being advertised. They'll contact the admin of the IP range sending the spam and get the IP range added to IP RBLs along the way, too, so just spamming from one place won't keep the site being spamvertised.
If there's a pattern of this happening and it's not the site owner doing it, then there's a strong paper trail about who is doing it. Getting to the point of kicking someone off is pretty rare, but it is an option in the end for the hosting company if it keeps happening. The hosting company can't afford to get all of its IPs blacklisted, after all, because of a few problem users. Usually this does turn out to be the site owner's own doing, but if it isn't and they still get kicked, it sucks but there are always other hosting companies.
Anti-spam blacklists do blacklist the domain and the IP thats host the web sites within that domain when a domain is advertised in spam messages. It's known in the industry as "spamvertising". It can get a domain kicked off of hosting if the email is clearly spam and advertises the domain even if the spam was sent through another company.
The specific host that sent it to your mail server is the only one in the email headers that can really be trusted to be real, and that's because of your own mail server logging that it received the connection from there. Let them defend themselves to Spamhaus, SpamCop, or whoever else. There are methods established for them to do that. They then provide logs showing how it got through their servers and explain what they are doing to minimize that sort of traffic.
Only in PEBKAC 1.2 or newer, unless backported.