"While I wouldnt mind if the spectrum was freed so that there could be some unlicensed bands to enable 802.11 style equipment for consumer use, I'm sure licenses for the newly freed TV bands will be auctioned off to megacorps instead."
Yes, they will be auctioned; part of the point is for the Feds to make money.
" I'm just hoping that they dont just sit on them to prevent competition for high speed services"
Unlikely; one of the basic FCC rules is that licenses must be used. If a licensee doesn't use the spectrum, it becomes subject to having the frequencies reassigned to someone else.
From his Journal: "A deacde ago, a fringe Maoist communist group in Nepal lost parliamentary elections coming in 3rd behind a Marxist communist party and a Socialist party. In 1996 it declared a Peoples war in order to establish a republic under its leader. From 1996 to 2001 this was a minor conflict that involved skirmishes between small ill-equipped groups and the police. Only about 1000 people were killed in those 5 years and that was considered a lot. Around that time, the they began to attack army barracks and loot them. The military is an apolitical institution and had been un affected by the conflict until now. In response the military began operations and within a week the communists were on the verge of defeat. AI and other so called human rights grousp stepped in and pressured the Socialists to stop the offensive an have cese fire. During the cese fire the maoists regrouped and got modern guns, landmines and bombs to replace their homemade guns and began a new offensive. This time better trained and equipped, the death toll surged to 6000 -mostly civillians- in just two years. There was a second attempt at a ceasefile last year (again under pressure from AI and other groups) and it ended up having the same result; adding fuel to the conflict. As of today the death toll approaches 10,000. None of this would have happened had a bunch of aging hippies not stepped in. In the end the people that are getting killed are not the aging hippes or anyone they knew, just ordinary people who happen to step on landmines or die in a crossfire."
"In most other countries you have at least enough money for food and a place to live even if you are unemployed."
Uh, no. You are referring to "Western" countries with extensive welfare systems: Western Europe, Canada, and (believe it or not)the US. In the other hundered or so countries, you starve and die, and the government (even if their is one) could give a shit.
Yes, homelessness and hunger are problems in the US, but 1. They are only loosely coupled with joblessness, 2. The US has tried an extensive welfare system, and it didn't work out too well for us
Your rant would have more traction if you had picked a diffeent company than AOL. It's hard to say that the terminated employees' "careers are destroyed" when AOL has only been in busines 10 years +/-. That's assuming there are any employees that have been with the company that long.
My father in law was canned from Bethlehem Steel after 30 years, and he WAS middle management. That was a career. I don't think having 5 years as a code jockey or DB administrator at AOL counts.
He changed his prediction method for the final count just recently on the basis of "closer reflecting reality" (possible misquote).
He was doing linear fit for each state using all of the polls conducted in that state. Apparently, this wasn't giving accurate enough results, so he pulled it down while he re-worked it. I was expecting changing to a more realistic curve fit, like a logarithmic fit or something else with an assymptote, but instead what shows up is another straight line fit, BUT WITH A SMALLER SAMPLE! The only thing that changed was now he show Kerry winning where he showed bush winning before. That is a classic trick used in shoddy research. Don't like the results? Throw away some data.
I was going to chalk it up to technical incompetence, but now that I know who it is, that excuse certainly doesn't fly.
Sounds more like advocacy than objective data analysis. I guess I shouldn't have expected more.
"You cant renew a license or buy another station with unpaid fines. So to start a legal fight regarding a fine would essentially mean shutting down Viacom."
Bullshit. It's not like license renewals are a daily thing; more like every few years. Also, there are procedures for handling renewals when there is a dispute like this. The FCC jackbooted thugs aren't going to cut the cables to the transmitters the second a stations license comes up for renewal and there is a fine in dispute.
As for "buy another station," are we now in favor of huge media conglomerates aquiring more stations? I thought we were against that? Besides which, are you seriously arguing that Viacom will shut down because the are delayed from buying another station? Oh, Please!
"Shutting down Viacom" is just a propaganda tactic being used by Stern and his bosses. There cause may be just, but tactics like these make them look like clowns.
"Michael Powell is the head of the FCC, and is responsible for this nonsense. I hope he's replaced very soon."
You are aware that the "comission" in "Federal Communications Commission" implies more than one person? No? Let me enlighten you. The Commission proper has five members, currently 3 Republican and 2 Democrat. During the Clinton years it was 3 Democrat, 2 Republican. Why? Powell, and before him Reed Hunt (sp?), are the Commission Chairmen, and, although they are theoretically appointed to a 5 year term, traditionally they step down when the President that appointed them leaves office.
Michael Powell might be "head of the FCC" in one sense, but he is far from a dictator. And if you look at the actual votes on commission decisions, the votes are often unanimous or 4-1, which means the Democrats on the board commonly go with the Republicans.
Also remember that, under the previous commissioner, there were also shenanigans of this sort. The commission may be filled with political hacks, but they are bipartisan hacks.
I found mine in Physics 21 when we hit Relativity. I just flat out don't get it. I can do the math, and get the right answers, but I couldn't truly explain it.
In the simplest sense, I would be offering to vote a certain way if I get "consideration". Consideration doesn't have to be money, it can be goods, or a favor.
Actually, my post was meant to be taken lightly; I am fully opposed to this sort of scheme specifically on the basis of vote selling.
"These people are doing this research to try and save lives and cure diseases."
Don't forget the grant money and the prestige. Just because the aren't "somewhere beteen Dr Mengele and Dr Frankenstein" doesn't mean they are saints either.
"Anyone who says we should not do this is mad."
Thanks for the overbroad characterization there. I know it's hard to believe, but it is perfectly possible to think about this issue in a reasonable manner, devoid of politics or religion, and STILL come to the conclusion that human cloning is a Bad Idea.
"I am an asmatic If I had the choice I would perefer not to be one."
Sorry to hear about that, and if that influences your opinion about the issue, that's fine. But it is hardly an excuse to paint anyone who hold a different opinion as "mad". Oh yes, and I also have a chronic condition, a musculo-skeletal defect, and I still think human cloning is a Bad Idea.
"Wal*Mart stands to lose more than the publishers (the RIAA doesn't stand to lose anything, it's an industry group, not a publisher"
Yes, but then the actual publishers have a problem - losing 20 % of sales. It's just like OPEC - ALL of the suppliers must stick together to keep prices high.
Scenario: RIAA says "Screw You" and tells its members to stop selling to Wal-Mart.
Sales at record companies drop. Stocks go down. Investors throw a shit fit.
1 record company caves in. Wal-mart not only carries them, but promotes them heavily. Sales go up, investors are happy, other record companies bitter.
Rest of record companies cave in. Prices are lower at Wal Mart, and RIAA weakened by it's inability to fulfill its role for the labels.
"By definition, liberals are peaceful. No true liberal believes in using violence or the threat of violence to further their cause. "
So I guess all of the liberals in the Clinton Administration who advocated getting involved militarily in the Former Yugoslavia were really just raving conservatives under cover. And the conservatives who didn't want to get invloved were liberals?
You can blithely flip off your own personal "definition" of Liberal to suit your argument and exclude various leftist groups, yet I suppose you would erupt at the thought of a definition of Conservative that didn't include right wing crazies.
Sorry - anyone who walks around believing he is the definition of a political ideology is both intolerant and ignorant. I'm surprised you haven't been beaten by your own peers for your insufferable smugness.
I think a more proper analogy would be an American that had traumatic brain surgery as a child, made a full recovery, and has been working its ass off for 120 years and finally twisted a knee so bad it has to take a day off work.
Slashdot Mirror
"While I wouldnt mind if the spectrum was freed so that there could be some unlicensed bands to enable 802.11 style equipment for consumer use, I'm sure licenses for the newly freed TV bands will be auctioned off to megacorps instead."
Yes, they will be auctioned; part of the point is for the Feds to make money.
" I'm just hoping that they dont just sit on them to prevent competition for high speed services"
Unlikely; one of the basic FCC rules is that licenses must be used. If a licensee doesn't use the spectrum, it becomes subject to having the frequencies reassigned to someone else.
Yes, there are ugly US made cars. And there good looking French made cars. The Citroen DS is still ugly.
Lighten up, Francis.
For those who can't see the sites yet, it looks like a Citroen, which is French for "ugly."
(For the automotive impaired, think the car in "European Vacation")
From his Journal:
"A deacde ago, a fringe Maoist communist group in Nepal lost parliamentary elections coming in 3rd behind a Marxist communist party and a Socialist party. In 1996 it declared a Peoples war in order to establish a republic under its leader. From 1996 to 2001 this was a minor conflict that involved skirmishes between small ill-equipped groups and the police. Only about 1000 people were killed in those 5 years and that was considered a lot. Around that time, the they began to attack army barracks and loot them. The military is an apolitical institution and had been un affected by the conflict until now. In response the military began operations and within a week the communists were on the verge of defeat. AI and other so called human rights grousp stepped in and pressured the Socialists to stop the offensive an have cese fire. During the cese fire the maoists regrouped and got modern guns, landmines and bombs to replace their homemade guns and began a new offensive. This time better trained and equipped, the death toll surged to 6000 -mostly civillians- in just two years. There was a second attempt at a ceasefile last year (again under pressure from AI and other groups) and it ended up having the same result; adding fuel to the conflict. As of today the death toll approaches 10,000. None of this would have happened had a bunch of aging hippies not stepped in. In the end the people that are getting killed are not the aging hippes or anyone they knew, just ordinary people who happen to step on landmines or die in a crossfire."
"In most other countries you have at least enough money for food and a place to live even if you are unemployed."
Uh, no. You are referring to "Western" countries with extensive welfare systems: Western Europe, Canada, and (believe it or not)the US. In the other hundered or so countries, you starve and die, and the government (even if their is one) could give a shit.
Yes, homelessness and hunger are problems in the US, but
1. They are only loosely coupled with joblessness,
2. The US has tried an extensive welfare system, and it didn't work out too well for us
Are you putting your money where your mouth is and not having kids?
If yes, good - less competition for my kids.
If no, are you saying that its all the folks in the "brown" countries who should stop having kids?
Oh, and it's "fewer" people, not "less." I wouldn't have noticed except you went to pains to emphasize it.
wiped the dust off the panels. Now they are waiting irritatedly for their 2 grebnaks.
Your rant would have more traction if you had picked a diffeent company than AOL. It's hard to say that the terminated employees' "careers are destroyed" when AOL has only been in busines 10 years +/-. That's assuming there are any employees that have been with the company that long.
My father in law was canned from Bethlehem Steel after 30 years, and he WAS middle management. That was a career. I don't think having 5 years as a code jockey or DB administrator at AOL counts.
Come home after a flight to CA.
R2.0: "Where's my pocketknife?" (normally in back pocket, left on nightstand due to TSA.)
R3.0(age 4): "I know, I know!" (Makes beeline for nightstand. Knife isn't there) "I don't know where it is."
R2.0: "Were you playing with my pocketknife?"
R3.0: "No."
R2.0: "Then how did you know where it was and why isn't it there anymore?"
Still haven't found it.
He changed his prediction method for the final count just recently on the basis of "closer reflecting reality" (possible misquote).
He was doing linear fit for each state using all of the polls conducted in that state. Apparently, this wasn't giving accurate enough results, so he pulled it down while he re-worked it. I was expecting changing to a more realistic curve fit, like a logarithmic fit or something else with an assymptote, but instead what shows up is another straight line fit, BUT WITH A SMALLER SAMPLE! The only thing that changed was now he show Kerry winning where he showed bush winning before. That is a classic trick used in shoddy research. Don't like the results? Throw away some data.
I was going to chalk it up to technical incompetence, but now that I know who it is, that excuse certainly doesn't fly.
Sounds more like advocacy than objective data analysis. I guess I shouldn't have expected more.
My opinion is that all statistically signifigant but otherwise non-related predictors like these eventually fail.
Dutch beat the Zero Factor (although I was REALLY hoping for it to be reestablished during the Clinton years.)
Dutch also beat (I think) the World Series predictor: NL=DEM
Lets say I'm not too worried about the 'Skins competence having anything to do with the competence of the electorate.
Since the Red Sox won the Series the end of the world must be rapidly approaching.
Yes, but it requires a warming lubricant.
"You cant renew a license or buy another station with unpaid fines. So to start a legal fight regarding a fine would essentially mean shutting down Viacom."
Bullshit. It's not like license renewals are a daily thing; more like every few years. Also, there are procedures for handling renewals when there is a dispute like this. The FCC jackbooted thugs aren't going to cut the cables to the transmitters the second a stations license comes up for renewal and there is a fine in dispute.
As for "buy another station," are we now in favor of huge media conglomerates aquiring more stations? I thought we were against that? Besides which, are you seriously arguing that Viacom will shut down because the are delayed from buying another station? Oh, Please!
"Shutting down Viacom" is just a propaganda tactic being used by Stern and his bosses. There cause may be just, but tactics like these make them look like clowns.
"Michael Powell is the head of the FCC, and is responsible for this nonsense. I hope he's replaced very soon."
You are aware that the "comission" in "Federal Communications Commission" implies more than one person? No? Let me enlighten you. The Commission proper has five members, currently 3 Republican and 2 Democrat. During the Clinton years it was 3 Democrat, 2 Republican. Why? Powell, and before him Reed Hunt (sp?), are the Commission Chairmen, and, although they are theoretically appointed to a 5 year term, traditionally they step down when the President that appointed them leaves office.
Michael Powell might be "head of the FCC" in one sense, but he is far from a dictator. And if you look at the actual votes on commission decisions, the votes are often unanimous or 4-1, which means the Democrats on the board commonly go with the Republicans.
Also remember that, under the previous commissioner, there were also shenanigans of this sort. The commission may be filled with political hacks, but they are bipartisan hacks.
"A Man has got to know his limitations."
I found mine in Physics 21 when we hit Relativity. I just flat out don't get it. I can do the math, and get the right answers, but I couldn't truly explain it.
Except for those pesky anti-trust laws. Wal-Mart would be all over the RIAA if they tried that, and Wal-Mart has been known to play hardball.
In the simplest sense, I would be offering to vote a certain way if I get "consideration". Consideration doesn't have to be money, it can be goods, or a favor.
Actually, my post was meant to be taken lightly; I am fully opposed to this sort of scheme specifically on the basis of vote selling.
"These people are doing this research to try and save lives and cure diseases."
Don't forget the grant money and the prestige. Just because the aren't "somewhere beteen Dr Mengele and Dr Frankenstein" doesn't mean they are saints either.
"Anyone who says we should not do this is mad."
Thanks for the overbroad characterization there. I know it's hard to believe, but it is perfectly possible to think about this issue in a reasonable manner, devoid of politics or religion, and STILL come to the conclusion that human cloning is a Bad Idea.
"I am an asmatic If I had the choice I would perefer not to be one."
Sorry to hear about that, and if that influences your opinion about the issue, that's fine. But it is hardly an excuse to paint anyone who hold a different opinion as "mad". Oh yes, and I also have a chronic condition, a musculo-skeletal defect, and I still think human cloning is a Bad Idea.
"Wal*Mart stands to lose more than the publishers (the RIAA doesn't stand to lose anything, it's an industry group, not a publisher"
Yes, but then the actual publishers have a problem - losing 20 % of sales. It's just like OPEC - ALL of the suppliers must stick together to keep prices high.
Scenario: RIAA says "Screw You" and tells its members to stop selling to Wal-Mart.
Sales at record companies drop. Stocks go down. Investors throw a shit fit.
1 record company caves in. Wal-mart not only carries them, but promotes them heavily. Sales go up, investors are happy, other record companies bitter.
Rest of record companies cave in. Prices are lower at Wal Mart, and RIAA weakened by it's inability to fulfill its role for the labels.
Still looking for the downside...
"Wal-Mart - STFU, or no soup for you. Stop bugging us or the only records you'll be getting are old Hootie albums and OMC's How Bizarre"
God I wish the RIAA would do that. The Wal-Mart would unleash its legal dogs on the RIAA and, more importantly, its lobbying dogs on Congress.
Now THAT'S Entertainment!
I would. I live in MD, and Bush has a snowball's chance in hell here, and I'm sympathetic to the Libertarian position.
Wait a minute, that would be selling my vote.
Damned ethics...
Please add a constraint such that said data must be fully accessible using only one hand for input devices while the other hand is otherwise occupied.
"By definition, liberals are peaceful. No true liberal believes in using violence or the threat of violence to further their cause. "
So I guess all of the liberals in the Clinton Administration who advocated getting involved militarily in the Former Yugoslavia were really just raving conservatives under cover. And the conservatives who didn't want to get invloved were liberals?
You can blithely flip off your own personal "definition" of Liberal to suit your argument and exclude various leftist groups, yet I suppose you would erupt at the thought of a definition of Conservative that didn't include right wing crazies.
Sorry - anyone who walks around believing he is the definition of a political ideology is both intolerant and ignorant. I'm surprised you haven't been beaten by your own peers for your insufferable smugness.
I think a more proper analogy would be an American that had traumatic brain surgery as a child, made a full recovery, and has been working its ass off for 120 years and finally twisted a knee so bad it has to take a day off work.