The first 3 links I clicked on took me to websites that did not work....Second what kind of wireless? Hotel rooms, airports? If so they are not the type of ISPs they are talking about here, and are more of just home network maintainers.
Strawman, the OP does not state that we have to have maniciple broadband in order to fix it, he said we need to treat it like a utility. We have utilities that are not owned by the government, namely phone and electric, which are better regulated to provide universal access. Without treating them like a utility we cannot do what even you suggest.
Then you cannot be omnipotent, period, because the definition is "having complete or unlimited power" if you have complete or unlimited power then knowing the future and the ability to change the future would be in that category, In addition you cannot be omniscient because not only would you know the future, but how to change the future meaning you dont know the future.. Of course if there is multiple realities all that goes out the window and you can be both...
Except God knew that was not possible, as he knows everything. So God wanted what he knew he could not have a punished adam and eve for doing what he did not want them to do, however he knew they would. Sounds like a sociopath.
I have no such belief, the belief is that the people outside of the US have less of an understanding in generally, not that US citizens understand this fully in general either.
Because you are requring people to give airtime, and their money in effect, to things they dont believe in, limiting their ability to talk about what they want to be.. It has no bearing on if corps are people or not, the owners of the corps are people, and they can spend their money in any way they want... Giving equal attention to "all sides" is like forcing a science channel to also give equal time to creationists, and hindus, and muslims and all the other groups that have an idea about how the universe and life began. You dont require people to put their effort into things they dont believe in.
You dont need many that know how to set them up, just some that know how to make it easy to make the average citizen be capable of connecting to them. Each citizen does not need their own VPN server.
that is how freedom of speech has always worked here in the US.. Your "requirement" would actually be the first nail in the coffin of the US system, as it would dilute free speech.
You are apparently not an American, as evidenced by your lack of understanding of our founding fathers and their writing of the constitution. Private individuals, or corporations, are not bound by the constitution, only the government is. If we were to bound private individuals it would run counter to everything they stood for. In other words, if you force private people/corporations to say what they dont wanna say then you dont have a democracy or a free people.
It depends, was the Credit card statements laying out where anyone could see them, on the coffee table, that is the only way yoru analogy works. The website he looked at was public, there was NOTHING blocking accessing it.. What if I put up a website, thaylin.net, then you go to it, can I then claim you hacked my system and went to the page without authorization ?
That being said, the fact that they're reading his correspondence with his defense team and then interrogating him about it is a big no-no. It definitely serves as a good basis to appeal the conviction.
Which was the point of the comment you were claiming no to...
What makes him a hypocrite? What right did he invade of others regarding emails, or any thing else? The law he is accused of breaking is silly, accessing a public website should not be against the law.
And in the real world I dont pay on my end for them to access roads, if we wanna compare it to the real world, the suppliers pay for all of that.. So is ATT going to give us the internet access for free to measure up with this analogy?
Yes it is bad. It is like us having to pay ATT, Sprint, TWC, Comcast, and every other network just so I can transfer data from my computer. In other words it is counter to everything the internet has been since we did away with pay per minute connections.
Slashdot Mirror
And you will be back whining in a few years about consume lockins that comes with what you talk about.
The first 3 links I clicked on took me to websites that did not work....Second what kind of wireless? Hotel rooms, airports? If so they are not the type of ISPs they are talking about here, and are more of just home network maintainers.
Strawman, the OP does not state that we have to have maniciple broadband in order to fix it, he said we need to treat it like a utility. We have utilities that are not owned by the government, namely phone and electric, which are better regulated to provide universal access. Without treating them like a utility we cannot do what even you suggest.
His programs? wtf are you smoking, they are bushes programs jsut coming to light and with whom obama supports it seems.
Umm, no, being libertarian is a choice, the others are not.
Then you cannot be omnipotent, period, because the definition is "having complete or unlimited power" if you have complete or unlimited power then knowing the future and the ability to change the future would be in that category, In addition you cannot be omniscient because not only would you know the future, but how to change the future meaning you dont know the future.. Of course if there is multiple realities all that goes out the window and you can be both...
Except God knew that was not possible, as he knows everything. So God wanted what he knew he could not have a punished adam and eve for doing what he did not want them to do, however he knew they would. Sounds like a sociopath.
You cannot be omnipotent without being omniscient. Omnipotent means to be able to do everything, which would include being able to know everything
There is no choice. God already knew the outcome, that restricts their choice in the matter.
I have no such belief, the belief is that the people outside of the US have less of an understanding in generally, not that US citizens understand this fully in general either.
No, it makes no such assumption. The only assumption it makes is that non Americans dont know these things.
Because you are requring people to give airtime, and their money in effect, to things they dont believe in, limiting their ability to talk about what they want to be.. It has no bearing on if corps are people or not, the owners of the corps are people, and they can spend their money in any way they want... Giving equal attention to "all sides" is like forcing a science channel to also give equal time to creationists, and hindus, and muslims and all the other groups that have an idea about how the universe and life began. You dont require people to put their effort into things they dont believe in.
You dont need many that know how to set them up, just some that know how to make it easy to make the average citizen be capable of connecting to them. Each citizen does not need their own VPN server.
that is how freedom of speech has always worked here in the US.. Your "requirement" would actually be the first nail in the coffin of the US system, as it would dilute free speech.
You are apparently not an American, as evidenced by your lack of understanding of our founding fathers and their writing of the constitution. Private individuals, or corporations, are not bound by the constitution, only the government is. If we were to bound private individuals it would run counter to everything they stood for. In other words, if you force private people/corporations to say what they dont wanna say then you dont have a democracy or a free people.
umm, 2 points do not a blip make... There is not enough data there to support either of you.
Discounts for cash, or also charging more for using credit/debt is illegal is many states.
It depends, was the Credit card statements laying out where anyone could see them, on the coffee table, that is the only way yoru analogy works. The website he looked at was public, there was NOTHING blocking accessing it.. What if I put up a website, thaylin.net, then you go to it, can I then claim you hacked my system and went to the page without authorization ?
He did not get prison for accessing others communication, it got it for accessing a public website.
That being said, the fact that they're reading his correspondence with his defense team and then interrogating him about it is a big no-no. It definitely serves as a good basis to appeal the conviction.
Which was the point of the comment you were claiming no to...
Unless they intercepted it completely, such as by masquerading as the lawyers email.
What makes him a hypocrite? What right did he invade of others regarding emails, or any thing else? The law he is accused of breaking is silly, accessing a public website should not be against the law.
And in the real world I dont pay on my end for them to access roads, if we wanna compare it to the real world, the suppliers pay for all of that.. So is ATT going to give us the internet access for free to measure up with this analogy?
Yes it is bad. It is like us having to pay ATT, Sprint, TWC, Comcast, and every other network just so I can transfer data from my computer. In other words it is counter to everything the internet has been since we did away with pay per minute connections.
They dont pay both sides, like ATT wants.