Many regions of the country no longer pronounce "pen" and "pin" differently. It's a random trivial bit I'm using as an example since that particular tidbit is used by linguist who study regional variants in the various English dialects.
I grew up in an area with a thick accent and limited regional vocabulary. I got in fist fights because I learned a significant part of my linguistic abilities reading and I always talked over everyone else's heads. I did not do so intentionally, I simply over estimated the vocabularies of my peers.
If you can sit there an tell me every region of the United States much less the world speaks with the same pattern of enunciation then your understanding of the world and it's languages is inferior even to mine and we shall be force to abscond with you and deposit you in Southern Louisiana where you will receive a much unexpected education in linguistics from the locals.
There's different people making the arguments now. You know those asinine laws that are still on the books but are slowly being removed and are no longer enforced, such as being illegal to buy ice cream on Sunday in some places? Those were enacted before by different people who are no longer with us.
In the case of referencing the previous civil war:
Yes, the South did lose due to attrition. The North lost more people, they just had more to lose, yes they won, but the loses were great on both sides. The environment is very different now, Texas has a huge population, the civilian South is much better armed than the North and face it, the modern idealistic urbanites of the North would be less effective than the modern redneck in armed combat should it move to militia based fighting, and outside of the those seceding defending themselves, as happened initially last time, I doubt it would move to that. There is little point in bringing up that last war, which BTW, was caused by pretty much the same thing that schmuck governor of ours was upset about anyways.
"In the US, states do not have that power as inter-state is a federal power, and anything that interferes with inter-state commerce (or challenges the federal power therein) will have a federal hammer raining on it real fast."
Abuse of that power along with the threats of court-packing that allowed that power to be abused is part of why I put FDR on my list of least like historical figures, right along side Mussolini who wrote him fan mail, Saddam who murdered and abused his own people, and Kim John Ill who is torturing and subjugating his own people today.
Commerce between the states is interstate. The purpose of the clause was to keep states from charging one another tariffs and to prevent exorbitant toll fees from states trading with one another by crossing into others. Wickard v. Filburn took a huge ol' dump right in the middle of the intent of the constitution in that matter and that ruling has been exploited in inexcusable manners every since.
I never said in practice, I said on paper, very different. The federal constraint on the states is not part of the constitution. The fact the interstate commerce clause has been expanded well beyond it's initial intent and the 9th and 10th amendments are ignored in practice does not change the nature of things on paper making my original statement valid as is, I even acknowledged that practice does not match - in the case - parchment.
I'm very open to criticism, however the overwhelming number of people on the Internet who jump at every possible opportunity to tear into ever spelling and grammar error they can to imply low intelligence on the person who made the error has overwhelmed my tolerance of the act. I personally feel that most people who do this are overcompensating for issues they have away from the computer and may even have OCD type issues in relation to those things they need to keep in check. Some of the most brilliant people I have ever met have severe issues with spelling, Sam Clemens is even famously quoted "I have little respect for a man who only knows how to spell a word one way".
I embrace the criticism you are giving as the purpose of your post is beyond pointing out one of the few symptoms of having a mild case of Aspergers I've been unable to completely suppress. I've often wondered if these people who care more about spelling and grammar go around kicking crutches out from under cripples and placing obstacles around the blind.
I don't think the legalities of the situation are moot. My own experiences of having been dragged through the court system tells me no one, even within the legal system respects and law or takes anything at face value and every lawyer and judge I've ever encountered takes joy in making creative interpretations of the written law often to the point of turning it on it's head. If he were to get the Texas legislative body to vote and agree on doing so and were to properly deliver a declaration of secession to the president and to Congress while withdrawing it's representatives and removing federal employees from federal facilities within the state either sending them back to the states from which they came and informing resident federal employees of the current action and giving them choices on what to do while giving a grace period for those who do not wish to be part of the state to leave and maybe even accepting new residents for a period. The military bases would be an interesting dilemma at first, as would the space center.
I don't know what the end results would be. I do know that it would create a complete madhouse on capital hill, the lines of supporting and condemning Texas would not necessarily be drawn along party lines and there would be quite a few flip-flopping on their positions. There is a possibility that Montana and Arizona may actually decide to join Texas in secession, though it's unlikely that any contiguous state except possibly Oklahoma would, Louisiana as a long shot. If the current governor is still in that state and he feels Texas is justified he might actually make that step. I admire him for vocally refusing Obama's orders to pollute the southern shores of his state. I even understand why Obama wanted the oil to come to rest on Louisiana's coast and frankly it disgust me and has caused me to think about these scenarios quite a bit.
I don't know if there would be military action or not. It would be very unpopular among those remaining in the remaining union, even those who don't agree with the resolution passed by Texas and possibly any states that join. There would be a little bit of fracturing within the remaining military ranks, remember, Texas is one of the biggest contributors to the military. There would be quite a few who defect and rejoin Texas, especially those who are not actively deployed. Many who don't immediately defect would do so if ordered to attack their home state, even many of those who are not residents of the seceding states would have a difficult time attacking people who peacefully seceded. Military action would create loads of division and would create as many sympathizers as it does supporters.
I honestly don't know what would happen. What I do know is it would be global news for a long time and create a lot of unrest on every level. Blood would be shed. I don't know how much, even if Texas got it's way and by some miracle there was an amicable agreement there would be some blood shed, that's just the wa
"if those citizens came together during a time of need, appointed some leaders etc., at that point they could probably be called a militia."
Exactly what a proper militia is. Despite others wanting to redefine it into something else a militia is exactly that sentence. Once some form of organization happens a proper militia is forming, full military rank systems need not happen, a "posse" is a militia of sorts. When various militia factions are on the same side but not actively coordinating they are still militiamen.
A loan sniper keeping to himself and not coordinating with other militiamen I personally would consider a militiamen, even if he wasn't organized with the rest as he would be on the same side. I doubt too many of this type could exist, though one with the skills of Simo Häyhä would be very beneficial to the overall cause.
Still Red Dawn is the best movie representation of a "modern militia" I can think of. Can't wait for the remake next November.
We still do depending on your interpretation. The classic militia still very much exist, if an identifiable foreign invader were to invade Texas just about every redneck with a deer rifle will become a sniper and everyone else with a pistol or shotgun will become a sentry or foot soldier. I would best my last dollar to say the average inner city street thug with a pistol wouldn't hesitate to "bust a cap" in a foreign militant given a chance, especially since he knows the law would only not arrest him for it but give him a high-five. Those of us with firearms who not typically carry them would begin to do so and would maintain neighborhood patrols. This would be done rather the government asked us to or not.
This is the classic definition of militia.
If you want to take the re-interpreted to fit their own definition for reasons of wanting to instate stricter gun laws then the Nation Guard and maybe the Coast Guard is the militia, but considering we have the National Guard deployed in a nation that is not attacking us on our own soil or even a neighboring country I have a hard time believing that properly fits the definition as intended.
On paper the the U.S. and E.U. have very similar structures.
After the civil war in the U.S. the "in practice" changed to make us one nation instead of an alliance, but on paper we are still different countries. (Yes, that would mean two unrelated countries name Georgia). Pre-Civil war the term "These United States" was used instead of "The United States" for exactly that reason. Had Rick Perry actually moved on his idle threat to succeed it would have gotten some more people looking at the real structure of things and debating the "legality" of the situation, especially since Texas did join a little differently than the rest of the states, and yes it's relevant once the debates start.
This isn't as dangerous as Jax-Ur's Nova Javelin is it?
Something I think is probably unique to Earth.
on
Is the Earth Special?
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Boobs.
Now I like boobs as much as the next guy. As a matter of fact what got my mind started down the track is staring at alien boobs on all of my favorite SciFi movies and I started thinking to myself "You know, those are kind of weird as far as life is concerned".
I'll use life on our own planet as an example. Only mammals have boobs.
Other animals do indeed feed on another, there's a lot of really unappealing vomit sharing in many types of life and poop sharing in the insect world that I think would probably be more common among the stars (Slurm for example) as it's even more common here. There are nutrient transfers that happen on our planet that are different than the insect ones I just mentioned might be out there as well as some we haven't thought of, but I keep thinking of boobs, cause I think of them all the time, and I just don't see them as something that are likely to exist on alien babes. I'm not discouraging my favorite Sci-Fi writers by any means, whatever happens keep the boobs on your alien babes, but when I think of the possibility of meeting real alien babes it saddens me when I realize evolution is unlikely to have included boobs into the equation.
The consensus on/. is what the tech industry is going to do, like it or not. We are the ones who are driving out DRM, slowly. We are the ones who made sure SCO failed. We predicted Microsoft 's decline in dominance unless they stop acting like assholes.
We predict and drive the tech sector,/. is the helm and our excellent but not completely flawless mod system keeps the GNAA from driving.
Just like everything else in the tech sector/. will be subject to the judgment of/. It will either work well or the consensus will stop it. I hope it works well, I want the folks who run the joint to make a few bucks, but if it doesn't there will be no choice but to stop or fail.
Yes, I think/. has a lot in common with Anonymous only less coordinated, a mass of individuals working separately toward the same goals motivated by the rational consensus reached here.
It's what Handbrake rips to by default, I generally don't download from the Internet and it's a format supported by my PSP, leftover old iPhone I gave my daughter, my Android phone, every PC I have and my LG BluRay player. I wouldn't call Handbrake, the PSP, or my Android phone Apple centric products. Besides, everything else I've tested it with (granted, not everything on the list) is fine with either extension. Only the Samsung player forced me to rename the files, and Handbrake fought my efforts to rip directly to the MP4 extension, and my LG player doesn't care if it's coming over the USB or Ethernet port it's going to play it.
Why are you criticizing the format itself, that's way beside the point.//note - I do have some cool movies from the various Blender movie projects downloaded, but I don't violate copyrights and I have the Case Logic DVD albums to prove it.
I found their BluRay player to border on false advertising.
Crappiest DLNA support I've ever seen, tech support that doesn't care, and yes it will support your MPEG4 encoded file from a USB port (not DLNA), but only if it has an MP4 extension, not if it has the more common M4V extension. I bought it because it said DLNA on the box. The thing was slow to respond to every button push on the remote and I even had it lock up a few times. I gave it away, bought an LG and I've been happy with it every since.
Samsung screens over have a bad habit of having a vertical section of screen go gray, usually about 1/3. We've had to replace many of those.
I used to be a Samsung fan, their mobile phones were great, their monitors were beautiful, but not reliable. Their CRT TV's were great, I finally quit buying their products, five years ago they were a top pick, but three years ago they start a slow downward slide in quality.
The docking at speed idea has crossed my mind, and I think it's great, but of course safety is an incredible hurdle.
One thing I really really want is the ability to carry our passenger cars on trains. I used to make a five hour drive, with the return five hour drive, at least twice a month. I always wondered how much fuel could be saved by putting both me and my vehicle on a train. Not to mention the ability to catch some Z's while in transit would be nice. People wanting their cars with them when they arrive is a major consideration when it comes to travel.
One idea I keep coming back to is a roller coaster approach. Instead of a train why not individual un-powered cars? We could have solar and windmills all along the tracks (transmitting power back to the grid hopefully) running electric motors that turn chains and fling modular cars along the tracks. You can even setup a fling - coast system. Get about three times as many flingers as you need and having a few broken ones doesn't even really matter. Using something akin to RFID you can set your destination when you get on the system and at a preset exit your car is diverted off the track to a load/unload zone. I figure the "cars" could be akin to shipping containers. They could carry cargo without passengers, they could carry designated passenger cars, they could carry passengers in/with their vehicles. Variable scale on the same system. If you work it right the electricity that propels the system could be used to charge hybrids/electric vehicles and to keep the batteries on classic vehicles charged so the passengers can continue to listen to the radio, use laptops etc.. If you really do it right a tube can be brought in the window with air conditioning, heat, and maybe even a power outlet or two. The possibilities of the modular train, be it roller coaster or not, are endless.
I've got an Amazon account and a Kindle Keyboard, considering the Nook has better specs I would rather get it than the Kindle Fire. Really, it doesn't matter which I get, if I get one I want a tablet, not an e-reader out of the deal. I don't like doing large amounts of reading on an LCD, that's why I have my e-ink Kindle to begin with. If however I decided I wanted an online movie/music repository I would just stick with Amazon for simplicity sakes. On that note I buy and rip CD's/DVD's so it's almost moot.
Thanks for the info though, it's a step in the right direction toward "nullifying the argument".
So, communism is the overabundance of government to the point that government becomes irrelevant.
Anarchy is a shortcut that just eliminates the government to begin with to achieve a state of communism.
Not actually the first time I've thought of this. The problem is never has a communist government on this Earth, at least not in modern times strove for a irrelevance. They've all been something like China which has slowly been ethnically cleansing it's people to only allow for Han Chinese and executes people who aren't on board with the plan. Establishing an ideology, expanding borders - say Tibet, and racially cleansing by execution or more slowly breeding out is fascism. At least the Soviets weren't really into the racial cleansing part.
Slashdot Mirror
Many regions of the country no longer pronounce "pen" and "pin" differently. It's a random trivial bit I'm using as an example since that particular tidbit is used by linguist who study regional variants in the various English dialects.
I grew up in an area with a thick accent and limited regional vocabulary. I got in fist fights because I learned a significant part of my linguistic abilities reading and I always talked over everyone else's heads. I did not do so intentionally, I simply over estimated the vocabularies of my peers.
If you can sit there an tell me every region of the United States much less the world speaks with the same pattern of enunciation then your understanding of the world and it's languages is inferior even to mine and we shall be force to abscond with you and deposit you in Southern Louisiana where you will receive a much unexpected education in linguistics from the locals.
There's different people making the arguments now. You know those asinine laws that are still on the books but are slowly being removed and are no longer enforced, such as being illegal to buy ice cream on Sunday in some places? Those were enacted before by different people who are no longer with us.
In the case of referencing the previous civil war:
Yes, the South did lose due to attrition. The North lost more people, they just had more to lose, yes they won, but the loses were great on both sides. The environment is very different now, Texas has a huge population, the civilian South is much better armed than the North and face it, the modern idealistic urbanites of the North would be less effective than the modern redneck in armed combat should it move to militia based fighting, and outside of the those seceding defending themselves, as happened initially last time, I doubt it would move to that. There is little point in bringing up that last war, which BTW, was caused by pretty much the same thing that schmuck governor of ours was upset about anyways.
"In the US, states do not have that power as inter-state is a federal power, and anything that interferes with inter-state commerce (or challenges the federal power therein) will have a federal hammer raining on it real fast."
Abuse of that power along with the threats of court-packing that allowed that power to be abused is part of why I put FDR on my list of least like historical figures, right along side Mussolini who wrote him fan mail, Saddam who murdered and abused his own people, and Kim John Ill who is torturing and subjugating his own people today.
Commerce between the states is interstate. The purpose of the clause was to keep states from charging one another tariffs and to prevent exorbitant toll fees from states trading with one another by crossing into others. Wickard v. Filburn took a huge ol' dump right in the middle of the intent of the constitution in that matter and that ruling has been exploited in inexcusable manners every since.
I never said in practice, I said on paper, very different. The federal constraint on the states is not part of the constitution. The fact the interstate commerce clause has been expanded well beyond it's initial intent and the 9th and 10th amendments are ignored in practice does not change the nature of things on paper making my original statement valid as is, I even acknowledged that practice does not match - in the case - parchment.
I would like to submit Southern Louisiana as not only not part of the US but not part of the rest of Louisiana.
The further South of I-10 you get in that state the less you're in the US.
I'm very open to criticism, however the overwhelming number of people on the Internet who jump at every possible opportunity to tear into ever spelling and grammar error they can to imply low intelligence on the person who made the error has overwhelmed my tolerance of the act. I personally feel that most people who do this are overcompensating for issues they have away from the computer and may even have OCD type issues in relation to those things they need to keep in check. Some of the most brilliant people I have ever met have severe issues with spelling, Sam Clemens is even famously quoted "I have little respect for a man who only knows how to spell a word one way".
I embrace the criticism you are giving as the purpose of your post is beyond pointing out one of the few symptoms of having a mild case of Aspergers I've been unable to completely suppress. I've often wondered if these people who care more about spelling and grammar go around kicking crutches out from under cripples and placing obstacles around the blind.
I don't think the legalities of the situation are moot. My own experiences of having been dragged through the court system tells me no one, even within the legal system respects and law or takes anything at face value and every lawyer and judge I've ever encountered takes joy in making creative interpretations of the written law often to the point of turning it on it's head. If he were to get the Texas legislative body to vote and agree on doing so and were to properly deliver a declaration of secession to the president and to Congress while withdrawing it's representatives and removing federal employees from federal facilities within the state either sending them back to the states from which they came and informing resident federal employees of the current action and giving them choices on what to do while giving a grace period for those who do not wish to be part of the state to leave and maybe even accepting new residents for a period. The military bases would be an interesting dilemma at first, as would the space center.
I don't know what the end results would be. I do know that it would create a complete madhouse on capital hill, the lines of supporting and condemning Texas would not necessarily be drawn along party lines and there would be quite a few flip-flopping on their positions. There is a possibility that Montana and Arizona may actually decide to join Texas in secession, though it's unlikely that any contiguous state except possibly Oklahoma would, Louisiana as a long shot. If the current governor is still in that state and he feels Texas is justified he might actually make that step. I admire him for vocally refusing Obama's orders to pollute the southern shores of his state. I even understand why Obama wanted the oil to come to rest on Louisiana's coast and frankly it disgust me and has caused me to think about these scenarios quite a bit.
I don't know if there would be military action or not. It would be very unpopular among those remaining in the remaining union, even those who don't agree with the resolution passed by Texas and possibly any states that join. There would be a little bit of fracturing within the remaining military ranks, remember, Texas is one of the biggest contributors to the military. There would be quite a few who defect and rejoin Texas, especially those who are not actively deployed. Many who don't immediately defect would do so if ordered to attack their home state, even many of those who are not residents of the seceding states would have a difficult time attacking people who peacefully seceded. Military action would create loads of division and would create as many sympathizers as it does supporters.
I honestly don't know what would happen. What I do know is it would be global news for a long time and create a lot of unrest on every level. Blood would be shed. I don't know how much, even if Texas got it's way and by some miracle there was an amicable agreement there would be some blood shed, that's just the wa
I'm a Ron Paul type. Perry has shat on me personally, and even if he hadn't I don't like his politics.
"if those citizens came together during a time of need, appointed some leaders etc., at that point they could probably be called a militia."
Exactly what a proper militia is. Despite others wanting to redefine it into something else a militia is exactly that sentence. Once some form of organization happens a proper militia is forming, full military rank systems need not happen, a "posse" is a militia of sorts. When various militia factions are on the same side but not actively coordinating they are still militiamen.
A loan sniper keeping to himself and not coordinating with other militiamen I personally would consider a militiamen, even if he wasn't organized with the rest as he would be on the same side. I doubt too many of this type could exist, though one with the skills of Simo Häyhä would be very beneficial to the overall cause.
Still Red Dawn is the best movie representation of a "modern militia" I can think of. Can't wait for the remake next November.
Some how I do not believe my existence as a phonetic speller has much to do with my comprehension or use of our spoken language.
We still do depending on your interpretation. The classic militia still very much exist, if an identifiable foreign invader were to invade Texas just about every redneck with a deer rifle will become a sniper and everyone else with a pistol or shotgun will become a sentry or foot soldier. I would best my last dollar to say the average inner city street thug with a pistol wouldn't hesitate to "bust a cap" in a foreign militant given a chance, especially since he knows the law would only not arrest him for it but give him a high-five. Those of us with firearms who not typically carry them would begin to do so and would maintain neighborhood patrols. This would be done rather the government asked us to or not.
This is the classic definition of militia.
If you want to take the re-interpreted to fit their own definition for reasons of wanting to instate stricter gun laws then the Nation Guard and maybe the Coast Guard is the militia, but considering we have the National Guard deployed in a nation that is not attacking us on our own soil or even a neighboring country I have a hard time believing that properly fits the definition as intended.
Once again nit-picking spelling, especially in a post dedicated to doing so rarely contributes anything to the substance of the conversation at hand.
On paper the the U.S. and E.U. have very similar structures.
After the civil war in the U.S. the "in practice" changed to make us one nation instead of an alliance, but on paper we are still different countries. (Yes, that would mean two unrelated countries name Georgia). Pre-Civil war the term "These United States" was used instead of "The United States" for exactly that reason. Had Rick Perry actually moved on his idle threat to succeed it would have gotten some more people looking at the real structure of things and debating the "legality" of the situation, especially since Texas did join a little differently than the rest of the states, and yes it's relevant once the debates start.
This isn't as dangerous as Jax-Ur's Nova Javelin is it?
Boobs.
Now I like boobs as much as the next guy. As a matter of fact what got my mind started down the track is staring at alien boobs on all of my favorite SciFi movies and I started thinking to myself "You know, those are kind of weird as far as life is concerned".
I'll use life on our own planet as an example. Only mammals have boobs.
Other animals do indeed feed on another, there's a lot of really unappealing vomit sharing in many types of life and poop sharing in the insect world that I think would probably be more common among the stars (Slurm for example) as it's even more common here. There are nutrient transfers that happen on our planet that are different than the insect ones I just mentioned might be out there as well as some we haven't thought of, but I keep thinking of boobs, cause I think of them all the time, and I just don't see them as something that are likely to exist on alien babes. I'm not discouraging my favorite Sci-Fi writers by any means, whatever happens keep the boobs on your alien babes, but when I think of the possibility of meeting real alien babes it saddens me when I realize evolution is unlikely to have included boobs into the equation.
My experience tells me /. IS the community.
The consensus on /. is what the tech industry is going to do, like it or not. We are the ones who are driving out DRM, slowly. We are the ones who made sure SCO failed. We predicted Microsoft 's decline in dominance unless they stop acting like assholes.
We predict and drive the tech sector, /. is the helm and our excellent but not completely flawless mod system keeps the GNAA from driving.
Just like everything else in the tech sector /. will be subject to the judgment of /. It will either work well or the consensus will stop it. I hope it works well, I want the folks who run the joint to make a few bucks, but if it doesn't there will be no choice but to stop or fail.
Yes, I think /. has a lot in common with Anonymous only less coordinated, a mass of individuals working separately toward the same goals motivated by the rational consensus reached here.
They weren't hard to identify anyways, but an official label on those accounts would help.
It's what Handbrake rips to by default, I generally don't download from the Internet and it's a format supported by my PSP, leftover old iPhone I gave my daughter, my Android phone, every PC I have and my LG BluRay player. I wouldn't call Handbrake, the PSP, or my Android phone Apple centric products. Besides, everything else I've tested it with (granted, not everything on the list) is fine with either extension. Only the Samsung player forced me to rename the files, and Handbrake fought my efforts to rip directly to the MP4 extension, and my LG player doesn't care if it's coming over the USB or Ethernet port it's going to play it.
Why are you criticizing the format itself, that's way beside the point. //note - I do have some cool movies from the various Blender movie projects downloaded, but I don't violate copyrights and I have the Case Logic DVD albums to prove it.
I found their BluRay player to border on false advertising.
Crappiest DLNA support I've ever seen, tech support that doesn't care, and yes it will support your MPEG4 encoded file from a USB port (not DLNA), but only if it has an MP4 extension, not if it has the more common M4V extension. I bought it because it said DLNA on the box. The thing was slow to respond to every button push on the remote and I even had it lock up a few times. I gave it away, bought an LG and I've been happy with it every since.
Samsung screens over have a bad habit of having a vertical section of screen go gray, usually about 1/3. We've had to replace many of those.
I used to be a Samsung fan, their mobile phones were great, their monitors were beautiful, but not reliable. Their CRT TV's were great, I finally quit buying their products, five years ago they were a top pick, but three years ago they start a slow downward slide in quality.
LG disagrees.
Repeat the Philadelphia experiment! I still want to know what happened! - for real
The docking at speed idea has crossed my mind, and I think it's great, but of course safety is an incredible hurdle.
One thing I really really want is the ability to carry our passenger cars on trains. I used to make a five hour drive, with the return five hour drive, at least twice a month. I always wondered how much fuel could be saved by putting both me and my vehicle on a train. Not to mention the ability to catch some Z's while in transit would be nice. People wanting their cars with them when they arrive is a major consideration when it comes to travel.
One idea I keep coming back to is a roller coaster approach. Instead of a train why not individual un-powered cars? We could have solar and windmills all along the tracks (transmitting power back to the grid hopefully) running electric motors that turn chains and fling modular cars along the tracks. You can even setup a fling - coast system. Get about three times as many flingers as you need and having a few broken ones doesn't even really matter. Using something akin to RFID you can set your destination when you get on the system and at a preset exit your car is diverted off the track to a load/unload zone. I figure the "cars" could be akin to shipping containers. They could carry cargo without passengers, they could carry designated passenger cars, they could carry passengers in/with their vehicles. Variable scale on the same system. If you work it right the electricity that propels the system could be used to charge hybrids/electric vehicles and to keep the batteries on classic vehicles charged so the passengers can continue to listen to the radio, use laptops etc.. If you really do it right a tube can be brought in the window with air conditioning, heat, and maybe even a power outlet or two. The possibilities of the modular train, be it roller coaster or not, are endless.
The US Constitution is important in the fact that it list some rights and enumerates them so they should never be contested.
What is just as important about it if not more so is that it LIMITS the power of the federal government.
Well, we see how that worked out.
I've got an Amazon account and a Kindle Keyboard, considering the Nook has better specs I would rather get it than the Kindle Fire. Really, it doesn't matter which I get, if I get one I want a tablet, not an e-reader out of the deal. I don't like doing large amounts of reading on an LCD, that's why I have my e-ink Kindle to begin with. If however I decided I wanted an online movie/music repository I would just stick with Amazon for simplicity sakes. On that note I buy and rip CD's/DVD's so it's almost moot.
Thanks for the info though, it's a step in the right direction toward "nullifying the argument".
Will the Nook tablet run the Kindle app?
What if you hack it?
So the existence of some of these places causes the entire nation to become these places?
So, communism is the overabundance of government to the point that government becomes irrelevant.
Anarchy is a shortcut that just eliminates the government to begin with to achieve a state of communism.
Not actually the first time I've thought of this. The problem is never has a communist government on this Earth, at least not in modern times strove for a irrelevance. They've all been something like China which has slowly been ethnically cleansing it's people to only allow for Han Chinese and executes people who aren't on board with the plan. Establishing an ideology, expanding borders - say Tibet, and racially cleansing by execution or more slowly breeding out is fascism. At least the Soviets weren't really into the racial cleansing part.