Legalize, tax it, require registration, inspections, etc. Legal protection for johns when prostitutes have up-to-date paperwork, prosecution for johns when they don't. Trafficking would plummet over the course of the first decade.
The criminalization of prostitution doesn't fix any of those negative aspects. Decriminalization allows us to tax it. When we tax something we keep records and make requirements/offer services to the workers in that industry. Those requirements/services would be aimed at reducing the issues you're speaking of above. There will still be illegal prostitution, but legalization would greatly diminish that.
Prohibition didn't solve the evils of alcohol, they exacerbated them. The war on drugs hasn't stopped drug us, it's simply exacerbated the negative affect it had on society.
The first-order vs. higher-order stuff you're prattling about above is not directly connected with party affiliation. Stupid people only think about first-order affects. There are stupid people on either end of the spectrum.
Meanwhile, please point me to one member of congress presenting a "proper solution that provides far more balance and tries to avoid unintended side effects" for the ills of sex workers and their clients. By which I mean a solution other than "more prison, bigger guns."
Many on the left would love to decriminalize sex work. I think if you look at opinion-pieces on this, you'll find virtually everyone for legalization to be either a libertarian or a liberal.
Dude, there's a core of a good idea, here. But you don't tax anything 100%. You add $50 to the license plate fee for non-hybrid ICEs and you wait. When someone gets a new car, it'll be a hybrid. As the number of non-hybrid ICEs goes down (and thus the number of people you're going to piss off goes down) you raise the license plate fee by $10 each year. The rich won't care and will drive their muscle cars. The poor won't vote you out of office -- at least historically that's a safe bet. And you can easily justify tax breaks to help the poor buy newer cars, since used electrics have very low resale values. You leverage the hand-me-down process and incentivize it.
California's health-care costs on asthma and other pollution-correlated health problems would go down and the movement of money for all this stuff is subject to sales taxes. Win, win, win.
Go slow, figure out how to make money on it, encourage your domestic industries (Tesla, charging station providers, and anyone else you can get local), and make the taxes IRRITATING, not crushing.
https://www.theecoexperts.co.u... -- "The standard solar panel has an input rate of around 1000 Watts per square meter, however on the solar panels available at present you will only gain roughly 15-20% efficiency at best. Therefore if your solar panel was 1 square meter in size, then it would likely only produce around 150-200W in good sunlight."
Teslas get something like 3 miles per kwh.
So If you are carting three square meters of panels around with you, you're gonna go 1.5-ish miles per hour -- you'd sit for ~5 hours to drive ~7 miles. It makes way more sense to have roadside solar panel accumulators and charge a LOT for the energy they produce so that they're only used for emergencies. Put them in the right places and they'd pay for themselves quickly. (As opposed to free super-chargers which work on the slurpie-selling business model.)
Very nastily put, but correct. They entered those addresses into their computers along with the plan type, and then they said YEP! Contract Approved! No check of location vs. cell tower location/coverage. Address to UTC coordinates is now trivial to compute, and they had UTC coordinates of every tower. To not do the math meant setting up the customers up to be dropped. Customers bought hardware to match their network, dropped other carriers, etc up networking, etc. Verizon did no due diligence where due diligence was easy.
This is not because someone outside of Verizon was greedy. This is because many people INSIDE Verizon were both greedy and incompetent.
Ajit Pai is truly a stinking pile of shit, but if you think he's the biggest stinking pile of shit to work in our government, then you clearly haven't been paying attention.
So as soon as someone is sued because their crappy camera was part of the botnet, there will be grounds against D-Link by the defendant of that lawsuit.
Seems a little weird. If I run over someone because my car is poorly designed and spontaneously backs up without warning, does the victim sue me or the car company?
It's not implausible at all. Music can mean using technology and being ANAL. I know a number of musicians who would do a great job in this field.
But clearly, she did not.
That said, I doubt very much that she'll have trouble finding another job. Probably in security. The suit-set knows how to spin. After all, her resume will say she "oversaw the security overhaul of a major financial firm after the largest data leak in history."
There's that keyword "compliance". That specifically means box ticking.
Security with compliance in mind often means "are the passwords 8 chars with letters, numbers, specials, and case mixing? YES. Ergo 'P@ssw0rd' works fine."
Or in this case "Did the application conform to security standards? NO. Did you fill out a form for an exemption? YES. Then you're fine."
Agreed. A music major could be a great security officer. She clearly wasn't. They're trying to hide it.
The conclusion here should not be you need a technical degree to fill a technical role. It should either be 1. that the idiots at Equifax are also sleezebags. Or 2. that the sleezebags at Equifax are also idiots.
Clearly both are logically true, but which states the case with the proper emphasis?
If I wear through 2 pounds of brake pads over 50,000 miles, and maybe (completely guessing here) 3 times that on the tires, I'm putting less than 10 pounds of crap on the road/in the air. That's really worst case.
During that time, I'm burning through 8,000 pounds of gas in my 50 MPG car. Since we're not interested in CO or NOx, I guess, how much fine-carbon particulate matter would that produce?
This is a mote vs. beam issue and not even worth thinking about. Such statements give excuses not to push to get cars all-electric. So this supposed expert is not helping his stated cause but hurting it. He's either an idiot or in someone's pay.
But if we have to consider this, then with electric cars come modern tractions control, so less tire spinning and loss of tire mass, autonomous driving, so less wasted movement and fast starts/stops, collision sensors, so more safety for bicyclists, autonomous/flock systems also reduce stop and go traffic, and thus reduce brake/tires wear, and while this isn't what this 'expert' is talking about, there's no engine idling which is a major polluter in stop and go traffic.
What is not known to most about the "study", is that is was conducted by a German inventor/small business owner of speciality hydraulic (fluid) hybrid technology patents and consulting company, and a 2nd year Edinburgh college student he hired as a summer intern to assist with the study and use the college's name to lend more legitimacy to the study - so no, it was not conducted by "scientists from the University of Edinburgh" as has been erroneously reported by various media outlets. (you can do your own online research into Peter Achten* and his company "INNAS - Fluid Power Innovation")'
Get the electric vehicles in place, use that as an economic lever (EVs are just plain cheaper) to get older cars and especially trucks off the road, then work on better brake pads and more bicycles.
By central network here I mean the central torus of the three remaining antennae of the wifi router -- I would expect one of three situations... 1. Really, you get most of your reception from one, two improves things by 20% or somesuch, the fourth adds just a few percent. You put 4 antennae on your router because it looks good. 2. It's 25% per. Remove one and you have 75% of your network power. 3. The router is designed to do clever stuff with 4, and removing one whacks out the whole system such that it's only half as good. or perhaps situation #4... 4. Removing an antenna doesn't do much to hurt things, but multiplexing that one antenna all over the house confuses the hell out of the router and ruins everything.
OK, this is extremely clever and intriguing. Has someone here tried this?
I look at my router and the four antennae coming out of it. If I multiplex one of those antennae all over the house, is that going to reduce the power/interfere with some possible magic noise reduction tech in the thing for my central network? Does spreading things out more than make up for that?
I think that you forgot to add that she's a boring speaker and clearly in the pocket of the the financial industry.
But " Honestly, I think I'd rather be associated with moronic Trump voters than with the condescending assholes who were vocal Hillary supporters." Really? REALLY? The guy was obviously a sociopath, obviously a moron, and obviously didn't have the best interests of anyone but himself at heart. That was clear from the first month. You want to be associated with people who voted for that instead of the boring business as usual smug woman? "I don't like our home's color. Let's burn it down."
Not sure on the details, but my experience with their 10 Mb product matches your statement: they had overloaded routers and high latencies throughout their network.
Slashdot Mirror
So they're saying we should be wary of the consumptive nature of the hive mind in the trunk?
I should have expected no less from Borg Warner.
Fly to Reno on a Friday afternoon. The plane is full of attractive women.
That's a huge part of it. But another part of the problem is having friends with facebook accounts who post pictures with you in them.
Or have pictures with you in them and post those to their google account, etc.
The moment you have an account you need (linkdin?), your association list is already known.
Legalize, tax it, require registration, inspections, etc. Legal protection for johns when prostitutes have up-to-date paperwork, prosecution for johns when they don't. Trafficking would plummet over the course of the first decade.
Dude, the whole EU is lefty-society. All the Nordic countries are way lefty.
You're pointing to dictatorships and saying that's the left.
The criminalization of prostitution doesn't fix any of those negative aspects. Decriminalization allows us to tax it. When we tax something we keep records and make requirements/offer services to the workers in that industry. Those requirements/services would be aimed at reducing the issues you're speaking of above. There will still be illegal prostitution, but legalization would greatly diminish that.
Prohibition didn't solve the evils of alcohol, they exacerbated them. The war on drugs hasn't stopped drug us, it's simply exacerbated the negative affect it had on society.
The first-order vs. higher-order stuff you're prattling about above is not directly connected with party affiliation. Stupid people only think about first-order affects. There are stupid people on either end of the spectrum.
Meanwhile, please point me to one member of congress presenting a "proper solution that provides far more balance and tries to avoid unintended side effects" for the ills of sex workers and their clients. By which I mean a solution other than "more prison, bigger guns."
Many on the left would love to decriminalize sex work. I think if you look at opinion-pieces on this, you'll find virtually everyone for legalization to be either a libertarian or a liberal.
Dude, there's a core of a good idea, here. But you don't tax anything 100%. You add $50 to the license plate fee for non-hybrid ICEs and you wait. When someone gets a new car, it'll be a hybrid. As the number of non-hybrid ICEs goes down (and thus the number of people you're going to piss off goes down) you raise the license plate fee by $10 each year. The rich won't care and will drive their muscle cars. The poor won't vote you out of office -- at least historically that's a safe bet. And you can easily justify tax breaks to help the poor buy newer cars, since used electrics have very low resale values. You leverage the hand-me-down process and incentivize it.
California's health-care costs on asthma and other pollution-correlated health problems would go down and the movement of money for all this stuff is subject to sales taxes. Win, win, win.
Go slow, figure out how to make money on it, encourage your domestic industries (Tesla, charging station providers, and anyone else you can get local), and make the taxes IRRITATING, not crushing.
https://www.theecoexperts.co.u... -- "The standard solar panel has an input rate of around 1000 Watts per square meter, however on the solar panels available at present you will only gain roughly 15-20% efficiency at best. Therefore if your solar panel was 1 square meter in size, then it would likely only produce around 150-200W in good sunlight."
Teslas get something like 3 miles per kwh.
So If you are carting three square meters of panels around with you, you're gonna go 1.5-ish miles per hour -- you'd sit for ~5 hours to drive ~7 miles. It makes way more sense to have roadside solar panel accumulators and charge a LOT for the energy they produce so that they're only used for emergencies. Put them in the right places and they'd pay for themselves quickly. (As opposed to free super-chargers which work on the slurpie-selling business model.)
Very nastily put, but correct. They entered those addresses into their computers along with the plan type, and then they said YEP! Contract Approved! No check of location vs. cell tower location/coverage. Address to UTC coordinates is now trivial to compute, and they had UTC coordinates of every tower. To not do the math meant setting up the customers up to be dropped. Customers bought hardware to match their network, dropped other carriers, etc up networking, etc. Verizon did no due diligence where due diligence was easy.
This is not because someone outside of Verizon was greedy. This is because many people INSIDE Verizon were both greedy and incompetent.
Ajit Pai is truly a stinking pile of shit, but if you think he's the biggest stinking pile of shit to work in our government, then you clearly haven't been paying attention.
Nah, that's just puffery.
So as soon as someone is sued because their crappy camera was part of the botnet, there will be grounds against D-Link by the defendant of that lawsuit.
Seems a little weird. If I run over someone because my car is poorly designed and spontaneously backs up without warning, does the victim sue me or the car company?
It is OBVIOUS that (D)libidoop is better in this regard.
It's also obvious that neither (D)libidoopers or (R)ectalfaces are good enough.
I agree to the pox on both their houses.
It's not implausible at all. Music can mean using technology and being ANAL. I know a number of musicians who would do a great job in this field.
But clearly, she did not.
That said, I doubt very much that she'll have trouble finding another job. Probably in security. The suit-set knows how to spin. After all, her resume will say she "oversaw the security overhaul of a major financial firm after the largest data leak in history."
There's that keyword "compliance". That specifically means box ticking.
Security with compliance in mind often means "are the passwords 8 chars with letters, numbers, specials, and case mixing? YES. Ergo 'P@ssw0rd' works fine."
Or in this case "Did the application conform to security standards? NO. Did you fill out a form for an exemption? YES. Then you're fine."
Agreed. A music major could be a great security officer. She clearly wasn't. They're trying to hide it.
The conclusion here should not be you need a technical degree to fill a technical role. It should either be
1. that the idiots at Equifax are also sleezebags.
Or 2. that the sleezebags at Equifax are also idiots.
Clearly both are logically true, but which states the case with the proper emphasis?
It's so hard keeping my daughter from watching their two hour advertisements. I'm honestly extremely happy they are pulling out.
Base price for a Yaris: $15,250
Base price for a 435i: $48,150
If you hand me $33k, I'll tell you just how much I love the Yaris and how much I hate the 435i.
If I wear through 2 pounds of brake pads over 50,000 miles, and maybe (completely guessing here) 3 times that on the tires, I'm putting less than 10 pounds of crap on the road/in the air. That's really worst case.
During that time, I'm burning through 8,000 pounds of gas in my 50 MPG car. Since we're not interested in CO or NOx, I guess, how much fine-carbon particulate matter would that produce?
This is a mote vs. beam issue and not even worth thinking about. Such statements give excuses not to push to get cars all-electric. So this supposed expert is not helping his stated cause but hurting it. He's either an idiot or in someone's pay.
But if we have to consider this, then with electric cars come modern tractions control, so less tire spinning and loss of tire mass, autonomous driving, so less wasted movement and fast starts/stops, collision sensors, so more safety for bicyclists, autonomous/flock systems also reduce stop and go traffic, and thus reduce brake/tires wear, and while this isn't what this 'expert' is talking about, there's no engine idling which is a major polluter in stop and go traffic.
There was some buzz that EV's are harder on tires and roads, which has been shown to be biased: https://www.treehugger.com/car...
What is not known to most about the "study", is that is was conducted by a German inventor/small business owner of speciality hydraulic (fluid) hybrid technology patents and consulting company, and a 2nd year Edinburgh college student he hired as a summer intern to assist with the study and use the college's name to lend more legitimacy to the study - so no, it was not conducted by "scientists from the University of Edinburgh" as has been erroneously reported by various media outlets. (you can do your own online research into Peter Achten* and his company "INNAS - Fluid Power Innovation")'
Get the electric vehicles in place, use that as an economic lever (EVs are just plain cheaper) to get older cars and especially trucks off the road, then work on better brake pads and more bicycles.
If you're interested in the particles created by the enormous amount of fuel we burn, see this: http://www.meca.org/resources/...
By central network here I mean the central torus of the three remaining antennae of the wifi router -- I would expect one of three situations...
1. Really, you get most of your reception from one, two improves things by 20% or somesuch, the fourth adds just a few percent. You put 4 antennae on your router because it looks good.
2. It's 25% per. Remove one and you have 75% of your network power.
3. The router is designed to do clever stuff with 4, and removing one whacks out the whole system such that it's only half as good.
or perhaps situation #4...
4. Removing an antenna doesn't do much to hurt things, but multiplexing that one antenna all over the house confuses the hell out of the router and ruins everything.
OK, this is extremely clever and intriguing. Has someone here tried this?
I look at my router and the four antennae coming out of it. If I multiplex one of those antennae all over the house, is that going to reduce the power/interfere with some possible magic noise reduction tech in the thing for my central network? Does spreading things out more than make up for that?
I think that you forgot to add that she's a boring speaker and clearly in the pocket of the the financial industry.
But " Honestly, I think I'd rather be associated with moronic Trump voters than with the condescending assholes who were vocal Hillary supporters." Really? REALLY? The guy was obviously a sociopath, obviously a moron, and obviously didn't have the best interests of anyone but himself at heart. That was clear from the first month. You want to be associated with people who voted for that instead of the boring business as usual smug woman? "I don't like our home's color. Let's burn it down."
Agreed. Systemd is making me look at other distros and consider dumping Ubuntu, which I otherwise like.
Not sure on the details, but my experience with their 10 Mb product matches your statement: they had overloaded routers and high latencies throughout their network.