I haven't taken a look at plans in the past year, but a year ago I looked at all of the plans available to find the cheapest possible service for someone that doesn't have many needs.
I ended up with TMobile pay as you go plan. They had a unique feature that if you put $100 on your account, the money would stay in your account for 1 year. $100 a year for a cell phone service is hard to beat.
This obviously won't work for someone that uses their phone quite a bit, but it is perfect for someone that can mostly use land lines and wireless internet. It's also perfect for a child whom you want to give a phone, but make them responsible for their own account balance.
We run a small IT services firm. Small enough that "management" does a fair portion of the work. What we came up with is that every employee can choose whether or not they want to be on-call (with absolutely no pressure to be in our out of the schedule). We then scheduled the people to be on call without pay. If a call happened to come in during off hours, we would charge double our normal rates for the service, and the technician performing the labor would keep half. If you want to have the chance of making extra money, they you get participate. If your life is too busy to be on call: opt out. So far so good, but then we don't get a lot of calls during holidays.
If you blindly followed the vaccination recommendations that existed when my first son was born, and the doctors happened to use vaccinations that were preserved with compounds containing mercury (which was common as it saved the doctor money to buy in bulk), you would have give your child unsafe levels of mercury. The same people that defined the levels of mercury considered unsafe were telling you to give your kids the vaccinations that resulted in this unsafe level. Once this was discovered the government quickly discouraged the use of this preservative agent, but it is still completely legal. Most doctors were then made aware of the problem and asked to dispose of the vaccinations, but they didn't have to. They didn't want to admit to fault, but at the same time they created a government fund to help alleviate the medical complications of people who's children were affected. As a parent, I take umbrage to the attitudes that some have for parents that choose not to blindly follow the counsel of those whose motives might be suspect. As others have pointed out, your local doctor is most likely not a specialist and can only pass along his education, which he has received from the drug companies. Japan, after much research decided to not give infants vaccinations until the age of 2. They subsequently became the nation with the lowest infant mortality in the world. After continuing their research, they changed their policy recently to start administering vaccination earlier in life, but still none at birth. This is just an example of some of the information that a parent might me able to obtain on the internet. My family has decided that we will do vaccinations, but not on the schedule recommended to us by our physicians. My wife is blessed to be able to stay at home, so we don't have our kids exposed to daycare etc. Our chance for exposure is greatly reduced during their first few years of life so we wait until they are a little older to receive the vaccinations. Everyone's situation is different. If it ain't broke, don't fix it (and prevention should always be measured in terms of risk). It scares me when people (like John Edwards on his campaign trail) start talking about putting parents in jail that don't vaccinate their children when told to do so.
For residential, most likely. It's already dying with G. For business, I don't think we'll move away from wires for quite some time. It's just too reliable, secure, etc.
Politics is an arena of corruption and intrique. You have a lot of people jockeying for power, money, and ratings. A lot of things happen in politics that isn't fair and you get people doing their best to do their jobs getting put into hard situations. You've got constant pressure from reporters, political spies, higher-ups etc. There are laws in place, but there are also balances in place to make sure that they law is fairly applied.
I have no problem what happened here. The whole thing got started by a politically motivated investigation. It ended up with the Judicial Branch of government finding that Scooter Libby had broken the law and they sentenced him to jail for 30 months, imposed a fine, and by being a convicted felon is now classified as such. George Bush is now using his constitutional power to overturn the jail portion of the sentence. If the President of the United States feels that jail time isn't warranted from the crimes this man committed, then he's within his right to make it so.
Presidential Pardon has been used by most of the recent presidents to clean up the records of those found in others political crosshairs. President Clinton pardonned many people from both sides of the political spectrum on his way out. Let's not forget that Bill himself committed perjury to the Grand Jury during the whole Monica situation.
The rest of the world should follow Arizona's example. Don't touch your clocks. I grew up here in AZ, and for the life of me I can't understand why people want to mess with their clocks. If you want more daylight, get up earlier, or stay up later, whatever floats your boat. I'm usually a fan of the Founding Fathers, but Ben Franklin was off his rocker when he dreamed this one up.
On the xbox there is a title called Fuzion Frenzy. It is a collection of tons of small games that you can play over and over again with up to 4 people. My 5 year can sometimes play with the best of us at some of the games. One of the funnest mini game is sumo where everyone is in a gerbil cage trying to roll around and knock everyone else off. Very simple, yet fun games.
I beleive there was something similar called Mario Party, although I've never played it.
Something that most people don't realize is that to safeguard freedom/liberty, one must protect against those things that can rob someone of their freedom.
On the surface it might seem like an abridgement to freedom when you ban the use cocaine. But when you look at it in the context of that substance robbing the freedom of the user and enslaving them to addiction, by banning cocaine you are preserving the freedom of the potential victim.
The ultimate problem that this generates is a discussion of who actually has the right to decide where to draw the line. Is pornography addictive? Alcohol? Do these things have negative affects on society and the freedom and liberty of those indirectly involved with the consumers of these "vices".
Right now the government has the legal right and responsibility to decide what to safeguard it's citizens against. For better or for worse, it's in their hands. They had the right to try prohibition and it failed miserably. Nowadays the mere idea of banning alcohol is almost laughable, yet at one time in history it was the opinion of most US citizens to be a move in the right direction.
The biggest failing with the government having the power to make these decisions is that no one can completely trust the wisdom of the government. This is why so many religious people believe that they need to lobby for their religious stance. God is the one person that does know what is best for his children (so goes the thinking of a believer). In the minds of a religious activist, they are trying to curtail the possible pain and suffering generated by indulging in things that God has warned will end up "enslaving" us to the "devil". To those that don't share their beliefs, it's just down right scary that some arbitrary set of standards found in a questionably biased history book(Bible, Koran, etc.) would dictate what they can and can't decide to do. So they end up counter-lobbying in an effort to ensure that their ideals are adhered to.
As it stands now, we currently have the choice to become addicted to pr0n and alcohol, but not cocaine and meth. This is where our government has drawn the line. If the government decided to take away another so called "freedom" in an effort to protect us from the enslaving affects that it can have, then so be it. Since we are not a country run by God, we'll have to rely on our politicians to come up with those rules, and our politicians are elected by the people.
The United States was framed in such a way that it is very difficult to abridge the fundamental rights (read Bill of Rights) of and individual, but when the majority of the country decides that something isn't good for society, we should expect that the majority should be heard and the laws should follow. The rights of the minority or individual shouldn't extend much farther than what is given to them in the constitution and Bill for Rights, the rest of the "rights" should be fair game to be extended or abridged as needed to insure a stable society.
A good application of what I'm talking about is smoking laws. Look what general public opinion is doing to generate laws that take away individual freedom for the common safety and good of us all.
This is pure political BS. ICANN is, as many have said, a private institution. Besides that, the structure of the internet is such that every country (or the EU) could implement their own pseudo-root servers that governs all national traffic. That way if some foreign power decides to do something that really hurts them, they just stop communicating with the rest of the internet and have a national setwork until they get things resolved. To my understanding, China does something similar (albeit for entirely different motives). There is nothing wrong with the Internet, and these countries should firmly be told to figure it out on their own. I lived in Europe for a while and whereas here might not be the place to get into it, they couldn't even keep their postal systems running 100% of the time. They have a great system, just very succeptible to strikes, etc. I shudder to imagine what the internet would be like in their hands, sometimes a capitalist mentality is just better when it concerns services that everyone relies on. ICANN has a proven track record, let them keep it.
Slashdot Mirror
I haven't taken a look at plans in the past year, but a year ago I looked at all of the plans available to find the cheapest possible service for someone that doesn't have many needs. I ended up with TMobile pay as you go plan. They had a unique feature that if you put $100 on your account, the money would stay in your account for 1 year. $100 a year for a cell phone service is hard to beat. This obviously won't work for someone that uses their phone quite a bit, but it is perfect for someone that can mostly use land lines and wireless internet. It's also perfect for a child whom you want to give a phone, but make them responsible for their own account balance.
We run a small IT services firm. Small enough that "management" does a fair portion of the work. What we came up with is that every employee can choose whether or not they want to be on-call (with absolutely no pressure to be in our out of the schedule). We then scheduled the people to be on call without pay. If a call happened to come in during off hours, we would charge double our normal rates for the service, and the technician performing the labor would keep half. If you want to have the chance of making extra money, they you get participate. If your life is too busy to be on call: opt out. So far so good, but then we don't get a lot of calls during holidays.
If you blindly followed the vaccination recommendations that existed when my first son was born, and the doctors happened to use vaccinations that were preserved with compounds containing mercury (which was common as it saved the doctor money to buy in bulk), you would have give your child unsafe levels of mercury. The same people that defined the levels of mercury considered unsafe were telling you to give your kids the vaccinations that resulted in this unsafe level. Once this was discovered the government quickly discouraged the use of this preservative agent, but it is still completely legal. Most doctors were then made aware of the problem and asked to dispose of the vaccinations, but they didn't have to. They didn't want to admit to fault, but at the same time they created a government fund to help alleviate the medical complications of people who's children were affected. As a parent, I take umbrage to the attitudes that some have for parents that choose not to blindly follow the counsel of those whose motives might be suspect. As others have pointed out, your local doctor is most likely not a specialist and can only pass along his education, which he has received from the drug companies. Japan, after much research decided to not give infants vaccinations until the age of 2. They subsequently became the nation with the lowest infant mortality in the world. After continuing their research, they changed their policy recently to start administering vaccination earlier in life, but still none at birth. This is just an example of some of the information that a parent might me able to obtain on the internet. My family has decided that we will do vaccinations, but not on the schedule recommended to us by our physicians. My wife is blessed to be able to stay at home, so we don't have our kids exposed to daycare etc. Our chance for exposure is greatly reduced during their first few years of life so we wait until they are a little older to receive the vaccinations. Everyone's situation is different. If it ain't broke, don't fix it (and prevention should always be measured in terms of risk). It scares me when people (like John Edwards on his campaign trail) start talking about putting parents in jail that don't vaccinate their children when told to do so.
For residential, most likely. It's already dying with G. For business, I don't think we'll move away from wires for quite some time. It's just too reliable, secure, etc.
Politics is an arena of corruption and intrique. You have a lot of people jockeying for power, money, and ratings. A lot of things happen in politics that isn't fair and you get people doing their best to do their jobs getting put into hard situations. You've got constant pressure from reporters, political spies, higher-ups etc. There are laws in place, but there are also balances in place to make sure that they law is fairly applied. I have no problem what happened here. The whole thing got started by a politically motivated investigation. It ended up with the Judicial Branch of government finding that Scooter Libby had broken the law and they sentenced him to jail for 30 months, imposed a fine, and by being a convicted felon is now classified as such. George Bush is now using his constitutional power to overturn the jail portion of the sentence. If the President of the United States feels that jail time isn't warranted from the crimes this man committed, then he's within his right to make it so. Presidential Pardon has been used by most of the recent presidents to clean up the records of those found in others political crosshairs. President Clinton pardonned many people from both sides of the political spectrum on his way out. Let's not forget that Bill himself committed perjury to the Grand Jury during the whole Monica situation.
The rest of the world should follow Arizona's example. Don't touch your clocks. I grew up here in AZ, and for the life of me I can't understand why people want to mess with their clocks. If you want more daylight, get up earlier, or stay up later, whatever floats your boat. I'm usually a fan of the Founding Fathers, but Ben Franklin was off his rocker when he dreamed this one up.
On the xbox there is a title called Fuzion Frenzy. It is a collection of tons of small games that you can play over and over again with up to 4 people. My 5 year can sometimes play with the best of us at some of the games. One of the funnest mini game is sumo where everyone is in a gerbil cage trying to roll around and knock everyone else off. Very simple, yet fun games. I beleive there was something similar called Mario Party, although I've never played it.
Something that most people don't realize is that to safeguard freedom/liberty, one must protect against those things that can rob someone of their freedom. On the surface it might seem like an abridgement to freedom when you ban the use cocaine. But when you look at it in the context of that substance robbing the freedom of the user and enslaving them to addiction, by banning cocaine you are preserving the freedom of the potential victim. The ultimate problem that this generates is a discussion of who actually has the right to decide where to draw the line. Is pornography addictive? Alcohol? Do these things have negative affects on society and the freedom and liberty of those indirectly involved with the consumers of these "vices". Right now the government has the legal right and responsibility to decide what to safeguard it's citizens against. For better or for worse, it's in their hands. They had the right to try prohibition and it failed miserably. Nowadays the mere idea of banning alcohol is almost laughable, yet at one time in history it was the opinion of most US citizens to be a move in the right direction. The biggest failing with the government having the power to make these decisions is that no one can completely trust the wisdom of the government. This is why so many religious people believe that they need to lobby for their religious stance. God is the one person that does know what is best for his children (so goes the thinking of a believer). In the minds of a religious activist, they are trying to curtail the possible pain and suffering generated by indulging in things that God has warned will end up "enslaving" us to the "devil". To those that don't share their beliefs, it's just down right scary that some arbitrary set of standards found in a questionably biased history book(Bible, Koran, etc.) would dictate what they can and can't decide to do. So they end up counter-lobbying in an effort to ensure that their ideals are adhered to. As it stands now, we currently have the choice to become addicted to pr0n and alcohol, but not cocaine and meth. This is where our government has drawn the line. If the government decided to take away another so called "freedom" in an effort to protect us from the enslaving affects that it can have, then so be it. Since we are not a country run by God, we'll have to rely on our politicians to come up with those rules, and our politicians are elected by the people. The United States was framed in such a way that it is very difficult to abridge the fundamental rights (read Bill of Rights) of and individual, but when the majority of the country decides that something isn't good for society, we should expect that the majority should be heard and the laws should follow. The rights of the minority or individual shouldn't extend much farther than what is given to them in the constitution and Bill for Rights, the rest of the "rights" should be fair game to be extended or abridged as needed to insure a stable society. A good application of what I'm talking about is smoking laws. Look what general public opinion is doing to generate laws that take away individual freedom for the common safety and good of us all.
This is pure political BS. ICANN is, as many have said, a private institution. Besides that, the structure of the internet is such that every country (or the EU) could implement their own pseudo-root servers that governs all national traffic. That way if some foreign power decides to do something that really hurts them, they just stop communicating with the rest of the internet and have a national setwork until they get things resolved. To my understanding, China does something similar (albeit for entirely different motives). There is nothing wrong with the Internet, and these countries should firmly be told to figure it out on their own. I lived in Europe for a while and whereas here might not be the place to get into it, they couldn't even keep their postal systems running 100% of the time. They have a great system, just very succeptible to strikes, etc. I shudder to imagine what the internet would be like in their hands, sometimes a capitalist mentality is just better when it concerns services that everyone relies on. ICANN has a proven track record, let them keep it.