Straw man argument. The point is that when all states do this...and they will have to do this as less and less gas is used in vehicles, then your point goes away entirely.
I've been saying it for years. Adding tracking technology is absolutely ridiculous when a simple (already performed) reading of the odometer at annual inspection would do the exact same thing.
It's why travel expense are now done per diem rather than individually expensed. it's massive overhead when you can do 'enough' by just giving your people the rated per diem amount for the city and calling it a day.
Sure it might be nice to charge people different amounts on different roads, but do we seriously need that level of minutia...that we don't have now?
Let alone no 'increase' in security it's measurably made security WORSE as lots and lots of websites can still use the watered down tools/certificates created by that misguided policy.
but you can start a mile north of the south pole (yes I looked it up!) and the solution still works.
But to be pedantic, there isn't anywhere on earth that you can currently stand on the surface of the earth that actually works. water at the north pole and way way too much ice to be on the 'surface' at the south pole:)
Indeed many others would have the ability to do this. Only the US Gov't ALSO has the ability to legally go kill people based on hunches (or manufactured meta data...)
Indeed and I give you 3 words for needing a paper trail.
National Security Agency.
They hack everything already. You do NOT want them hacking the votes. Given the complete lack of oversight and their already loose definition of 'legal' and 'overseas'...it sets up a perfect storm of an unanswerable rogue agency wagging the dog to get the pro-forma oversight they 'want'.
The problem with the 'market' is last mile delivery is by it's very nature a natural monopoly. Why is Telecom any different than traditional utilities in this instance? I don't want to have 5+ sets of wire run all over town. That makes for a massive barrier to entry for any significant competition.
And what 'lawfully owned' property was this? An M-16? An AK-47? A 100 round clip? There is simply NO reason for military weapons to be in civilian hands. That you *want* it isn't enough to override the safety of society.
I'd say your argument is fatally flawed. If McConnell and Feinstein are your 'norms', saying Wyden is comparable to Cruz is downright laughable.
Cruz is a lunatic, a House member who happens to be in the Senate. He has no interest in governing. Wyden is a thoughtful and respected leader, whereas Cruz is 'worshiped'. Wyden is trying to STOP Feinstein, Cruz complains McConnell didn't go far enough in his abject obstructionism.
Both sides have their extremes but the extremes in the Dem caucus are a far far cry from the disaster that is the Tea Party and their ilk.
Some people do see the justice system as a method for taking revenge
How people see it is likewise irrelevant. It's put in place expressly to prevent 'revenge' from being the method of retribution.
Again, changing the punishment to life incarceration doesn't make the problem go away.
Given that we've just found out that the FBI has screwed up 1000s of cases including 30+ who are now dead and perhaps wouldn't be...life is infinitely better.
No, the person's life is just as wasted
That tells us plenty about your opinion...I'd wager most people on death row would see it slightly differently. And 100% of those now dead would see it differently. Being 'free' for even an hour is still probably worth, quite seriously, millions of dollars to those people (and the local populace who gets to pay it)
If they remain a threat, just eliminate said threat.
Worked well when fighting the mythical Lernaean Hydra...unless of course you've discovered the modern equivalent of torching the stumps after every each head is cut off; we seem to be missing that part of the story currently.
I'm all for whatever works. The Ion Bridge method described above requires vast areas of water separated from other areas. So the basic problem is the same as hydro power. It's great but not scaleable to meet the needs of more than the relative local area. From the descriptions & googling it doesn't seem quite ready to supply water for LA.
The thing about solar to electricity to batteries to whatever is not that there is loss along the way. Basically any system has that. It's that efficiency is significantly less of an issue when your fuel is free.
It's why US cars in the 50s got 7 mph and nobody really cared. Gas was plentiful and cheap. Now imagine if it was free and fell on your own land? You can draw the power for the current tech desalination plant from all over the city.
Come up with a better desal process? Great! in the meantime LA needs water right now and solar can easily supply the needs of current tech with very little planning.
Why wouldn't we use the single most abundant energy source on the planet to power something that is energy intensive? Oh and said energy source has no fuel costs?
"Interconnection: New Authority to Address Concerns
For the first time the Commission can address issues that may arise in the exchange of traffic between mass-market broadband providers and other networks and services. Under the authority provided by the Order, the Commission can hear complaints and take appropriate enforcement action if it determines the interconnection activities of ISPs are not just and reasonable."
Which behavior? Um, both Comcast and Verizon throttling Netflix unless Netflix paid a bribe, i mean, extra fee? And Verizon even kept right on throttling after being paid said 'bribe'.
I already paid Verizon to give me access to the internet (up AND down) at set speeds, they don't get to then charge the content provider that I have specifically requested content from another fee.
If there were any competition, people who were having their Netflix traffic throttled would switch to another ISP, but there aren't any other ISPs for most consumers.
The Internet has been fine up to now without FCC intervention.
So it's not 'free' then right? There aren't laws governing the behavior of the ISPs so it can't be free.
'Freedom' is the express lack of restrictions, i.e. 'freedom of movement'. 'rule of law' specifically limits what is allowed and/or acceptable to society for the benefit of said society.
FCC regulation of UTILITIES is a restriction of the utility operator's activity for the benefit of society. You don't have 4 water systems in your town, you don't have 4 electric grids. Why should we have to have 4 sets of internet infrastructure to have competition?
ISPs, through franchising, have become defacto monopolies in entire areas and are behaving as such. Unless you build entirely separate infrastructure (i.e. 4 water systems) there is no competition and thus no free market. That is ALL the FCC is enforcing here - as a defacto monopoly you can't favor or disfavor traffic on your infrastructure.
It's impossible to 100% fully implement any ideology, but looking on a scale, economically free countries, almost uniformly, are more prosperous.
Economies that balance free market with regulations are the ones that do the best.
Full scale anarchy is the only truly 'free' market. I.e. whatever I want to do is justified since I want to do it.
Too many libertarians and other supposedly 'free market' proponents conveniently forget the role regulations play in creating a level playing field...like net neutrality.
Slashdot Mirror
Straw man argument. The point is that when all states do this...and they will have to do this as less and less gas is used in vehicles, then your point goes away entirely.
I've been saying it for years. Adding tracking technology is absolutely ridiculous when a simple (already performed) reading of the odometer at annual inspection would do the exact same thing.
It's why travel expense are now done per diem rather than individually expensed. it's massive overhead when you can do 'enough' by just giving your people the rated per diem amount for the city and calling it a day.
Sure it might be nice to charge people different amounts on different roads, but do we seriously need that level of minutia...that we don't have now?
To be fair...idiocy isn't any more prevalent than it ever has been. It's just that it's broadcast to the world now instead of just the local bar.
Let alone no 'increase' in security it's measurably made security WORSE as lots and lots of websites can still use the watered down tools/certificates created by that misguided policy.
but you can start a mile north of the south pole (yes I looked it up!) and the solution still works.
:)
But to be pedantic, there isn't anywhere on earth that you can currently stand on the surface of the earth that actually works. water at the north pole and way way too much ice to be on the 'surface' at the south pole
Indeed many others would have the ability to do this. Only the US Gov't ALSO has the ability to legally go kill people based on hunches (or manufactured meta data...)
Indeed and I give you 3 words for needing a paper trail.
National Security Agency.
They hack everything already. You do NOT want them hacking the votes. Given the complete lack of oversight and their already loose definition of 'legal' and 'overseas'...it sets up a perfect storm of an unanswerable rogue agency wagging the dog to get the pro-forma oversight they 'want'.
more than 2 separate 4K video streams?
As others have noted, not having to wait hours for downloads has benefits to productivity as well as creativity.
I don't claim to be a gun expert. I do claim that no *civilian* needs an assault rifle...or 100 round clip.
Feel free to try and explain why you NEED those...
The problem with the 'market' is last mile delivery is by it's very nature a natural monopoly. Why is Telecom any different than traditional utilities in this instance? I don't want to have 5+ sets of wire run all over town. That makes for a massive barrier to entry for any significant competition.
And what 'lawfully owned' property was this? An M-16? An AK-47? A 100 round clip? There is simply NO reason for military weapons to be in civilian hands. That you *want* it isn't enough to override the safety of society.
My favorite description of Netanyahu's speech is "He entered the leader of Israel. He left as the leading contender for the 2016 GOP nomination."
I'd say your argument is fatally flawed. If McConnell and Feinstein are your 'norms', saying Wyden is comparable to Cruz is downright laughable.
Cruz is a lunatic, a House member who happens to be in the Senate. He has no interest in governing. Wyden is a thoughtful and respected leader, whereas Cruz is 'worshiped'. Wyden is trying to STOP Feinstein, Cruz complains McConnell didn't go far enough in his abject obstructionism.
Both sides have their extremes but the extremes in the Dem caucus are a far far cry from the disaster that is the Tea Party and their ilk.
and bad guy's 14 children now hate you and join ISIS. Now what?
Congrats, you're a hammer and, amazingly, to you the world looks like nails.
Some people do see the justice system as a method for taking revenge
How people see it is likewise irrelevant. It's put in place expressly to prevent 'revenge' from being the method of retribution.
Again, changing the punishment to life incarceration doesn't make the problem go away.
Given that we've just found out that the FBI has screwed up 1000s of cases including 30+ who are now dead and perhaps wouldn't be...life is infinitely better.
No, the person's life is just as wasted
That tells us plenty about your opinion...I'd wager most people on death row would see it slightly differently. And 100% of those now dead would see it differently. Being 'free' for even an hour is still probably worth, quite seriously, millions of dollars to those people (and the local populace who gets to pay it)
If they remain a threat, just eliminate said threat.
Worked well when fighting the mythical Lernaean Hydra...unless of course you've discovered the modern equivalent of torching the stumps after every each head is cut off; we seem to be missing that part of the story currently.
Drone strikes make MORE terrorists not less.
Nope, remove the subsidies the agriculture industry is getting. You have a problem with paying a fair share for water?
Fresh water is a scarce resource...
I'm all for whatever works. The Ion Bridge method described above requires vast areas of water separated from other areas. So the basic problem is the same as hydro power. It's great but not scaleable to meet the needs of more than the relative local area. From the descriptions & googling it doesn't seem quite ready to supply water for LA.
The thing about solar to electricity to batteries to whatever is not that there is loss along the way. Basically any system has that. It's that efficiency is significantly less of an issue when your fuel is free.
It's why US cars in the 50s got 7 mph and nobody really cared. Gas was plentiful and cheap. Now imagine if it was free and fell on your own land? You can draw the power for the current tech desalination plant from all over the city.
Come up with a better desal process? Great! in the meantime LA needs water right now and solar can easily supply the needs of current tech with very little planning.
don't rely on electricity as their power source
Why wouldn't we use the single most abundant energy source on the planet to power something that is energy intensive? Oh and said energy source has no fuel costs?
from the FCCs own press release
"Interconnection: New Authority to Address Concerns
For the first time the Commission can address issues that may arise in the exchange of traffic between mass-market broadband providers and other networks and services. Under the authority provided by the Order, the Commission can hear complaints and take appropriate enforcement action if it determines the interconnection activities of ISPs are not just and reasonable."
This. Much.
Owning both the wires AND content on those wires makes it ever so convenient to throttle competing content to favor your own.
Which behavior? Um, both Comcast and Verizon throttling Netflix unless Netflix paid a bribe, i mean, extra fee? And Verizon even kept right on throttling after being paid said 'bribe'.
I already paid Verizon to give me access to the internet (up AND down) at set speeds, they don't get to then charge the content provider that I have specifically requested content from another fee.
If there were any competition, people who were having their Netflix traffic throttled would switch to another ISP, but there aren't any other ISPs for most consumers.
No, freedom implies rule of law.
The Internet has been fine up to now without FCC intervention.
So it's not 'free' then right? There aren't laws governing the behavior of the ISPs so it can't be free.
'Freedom' is the express lack of restrictions, i.e. 'freedom of movement'. 'rule of law' specifically limits what is allowed and/or acceptable to society for the benefit of said society.
FCC regulation of UTILITIES is a restriction of the utility operator's activity for the benefit of society. You don't have 4 water systems in your town, you don't have 4 electric grids. Why should we have to have 4 sets of internet infrastructure to have competition?
ISPs, through franchising, have become defacto monopolies in entire areas and are behaving as such. Unless you build entirely separate infrastructure (i.e. 4 water systems) there is no competition and thus no free market. That is ALL the FCC is enforcing here - as a defacto monopoly you can't favor or disfavor traffic on your infrastructure.
It's impossible to 100% fully implement any ideology, but looking on a scale, economically free countries, almost uniformly, are more prosperous.
Economies that balance free market with regulations are the ones that do the best.
Full scale anarchy is the only truly 'free' market. I.e. whatever I want to do is justified since I want to do it.
Too many libertarians and other supposedly 'free market' proponents conveniently forget the role regulations play in creating a level playing field...like net neutrality.