Except when you enter a MicroCenter, you are stepping foot on their property. When you anonymously request a public web page from a web server, you're standing on the public sidewalk at the walk-up window. Since you as a taxpayer own that sidewalk, can the store owner restrain you from your own property as a way to make you stop placing orders at the window?
From TFA:
[Orin Kerr, a legal scholar at George Washington University] argues sites wanting to limit access to their site should be required to use a technical mechanism like a password to signal that the website is not, in fact, available to the public.
By making data publicly available to individuals to help LinkedIn gain exposure but trying to restrict it from other web sites who wish to use that same data for financial gain, it seems LinkedIn is trying to have their cake and eat it too.
It might be politically easier to increase the standard deduction above what most people make. It would achieve much the same result as eliminating the mortgage interest deduction, and people won't complain about losing the deduction when they aren't paying taxes anyway.
Let's hope they just wanted to get something up quickly and will replace them with higher quality versions once they've had a chance to clean, rescan, and digitally restore the original films. 16mm films should give us sharp but grainy 1080p video, while 35mm is good for up to 4k.
It pisses me off that drivers think their gasoline taxes pay for the roads, when in fact gasoline taxes and other user fees pay less than half of the cost of the roads.
Then they build bike paths to get bicycles out of their way and expect bicyclists to pay for them.
Then they complain about bicycles rolling through stop signs while selectively ignoring drivers who don't come to a complete stop.
And by the way, did you know that drivers violate the right of way of pedestrians more often than the other way around? We need more crosswalk stings in order to get those drivers off the road.
That plant can only store 100 mWh. How many of those plants would we have to build for two weeks worth of storage?
That's easy to find out. Build some plants, auction just enough of their output kWh by kWh to keep a 2-week reserve, and keep building plants until the profit from building another one drops to zero.
It's funny how leftists are called fascists when historically fascism has been closely associated with dirigism (heavy government influence over the means of production) and just ask a conservative if businesses ought to be allowed to build as little parking as they want. "No because then they might not build enough and so people will start using liberal forms of transportation like buses, bikes, and walking!"
Free speech does not mean that the government has to publish whatever you want to say.
That's true. Free speech only means that you can say whatever you want without fear of retaliation. But this kind of political censorship is clearly retaliation for saying something the government didn't want you to say.
For people who want to help the poor, there's charity and various NGOs.
Charities so far have failed to eliminate the cycle of poverty, but maybe if they keep doing the same thing over and over again they will get different results!
How would you eliminate the cycle of poverty? Education is supposed to be the great equalizer but poverty makes it hard to study and learn and so equal access to education tilts the playing field in favor of the wealthy.
To get rid of mosquitoes, you get rid of standing water, right? And to get rid of pigeons, you get rid of places to roost. So it stands to reason that getting rid of places to park would reduce automobile traffic. Yet cities do the exact opposite by forcing businesses and property owners to build more parking than the market really wants, and then we wonder why there's so much traffic. (Our legislators just aren't very bright...)
So one alternative to pricing the roads according to demand is to reduce demand for the roads by eliminating minimum parking requirements and let the market decide how much parking to provide. This would also make the land more productive, bringing more jobs and tax revenue and housing to the city.
Have you seen Tokyo's population? That city could definitely use a decrease. Who the fuck wants to live in such close proximity to that many people?
Civilized people. Cultured people. That's what a civilization, a civilized society is—people living in close proximity to each other. The closer you live to your neighbors, the more civilized you are, by definition.
In the USA, the goal seems to be to live as far from your neighbors as possible, and that's kind of sad.
Education is supposed to be the great equalizer, but equal education for all won't end the cycle of poverty because poverty creates a cognitive load that puts poor people at a disadvantage compared to their wealthier classmates. The playing field is tilted in favor of the wealthy.
So how would you end the cycle of poverty? This is an important question because the lives of people trapped in poverty are dependent on the government, and that's a bad thing, right?
It appears that Trump's mental health may really be in question. Is there no one that can order him to sit a professional exam with a team of non partisan psychiatrists?
Do you think his supporters would believe the results?
Uber is dependent on people using their own cars. Most people don't have wheelchair accessible cars, and those who do aren't likely to be willing to use that vehicle to drive some random stranger around.
Why wouldn't Uber drivers be willing to drive random strangers around?
Slashdot Mirror
Except when you enter a MicroCenter, you are stepping foot on their property. When you anonymously request a public web page from a web server, you're standing on the public sidewalk at the walk-up window. Since you as a taxpayer own that sidewalk, can the store owner restrain you from your own property as a way to make you stop placing orders at the window?
From TFA:
By making data publicly available to individuals to help LinkedIn gain exposure but trying to restrict it from other web sites who wish to use that same data for financial gain, it seems LinkedIn is trying to have their cake and eat it too.
It might be politically easier to increase the standard deduction above what most people make. It would achieve much the same result as eliminating the mortgage interest deduction, and people won't complain about losing the deduction when they aren't paying taxes anyway.
Why is it a problem if having more than one kid is a problem? Do we want population overshoot?
Dammit, I thought my google-fu was failing because I couldn't find any reference to those movies online anywhere, just the actual space missions.
I am not a smart man.
Let's hope they just wanted to get something up quickly and will replace them with higher quality versions once they've had a chance to clean, rescan, and digitally restore the original films. 16mm films should give us sharp but grainy 1080p video, while 35mm is good for up to 4k.
It pisses me off that drivers think their gasoline taxes pay for the roads, when in fact gasoline taxes and other user fees pay less than half of the cost of the roads.
Then they build bike paths to get bicycles out of their way and expect bicyclists to pay for them.
Then they complain about bicycles rolling through stop signs while selectively ignoring drivers who don't come to a complete stop.
And by the way, did you know that drivers violate the right of way of pedestrians more often than the other way around? We need more crosswalk stings in order to get those drivers off the road.
Please write a book.
That's easy to find out. Build some plants, auction just enough of their output kWh by kWh to keep a 2-week reserve, and keep building plants until the profit from building another one drops to zero.
It's funny how leftists are called fascists when historically fascism has been closely associated with dirigism (heavy government influence over the means of production) and just ask a conservative if businesses ought to be allowed to build as little parking as they want. "No because then they might not build enough and so people will start using liberal forms of transportation like buses, bikes, and walking!"
And here's a vice mayor trying to shakedown the owner of a small grocery store for campaign contributions. It's pretty egregious.
That's true. Free speech only means that you can say whatever you want without fear of retaliation. But this kind of political censorship is clearly retaliation for saying something the government didn't want you to say.
If Chicago turns $57,000 workers into $77,000 workers, then does it also turn $77,000 workers into $97,000 workers?
What should we do about our socialized roads?
Charities so far have failed to eliminate the cycle of poverty, but maybe if they keep doing the same thing over and over again they will get different results!
How would you eliminate the cycle of poverty? Education is supposed to be the great equalizer but poverty makes it hard to study and learn and so equal access to education tilts the playing field in favor of the wealthy.
Are you joking? Do you really want government to lose money on things people aren't willing to pay market rates for?
Are you joking? Do you really think eliminating traffic congestion is worth nothing to businesses?
Show me a place where having fewer places to park causes congestion and I'll show you a place where parking is priced below market equilibrium.
To get rid of mosquitoes, you get rid of standing water, right? And to get rid of pigeons, you get rid of places to roost. So it stands to reason that getting rid of places to park would reduce automobile traffic. Yet cities do the exact opposite by forcing businesses and property owners to build more parking than the market really wants, and then we wonder why there's so much traffic. (Our legislators just aren't very bright...)
So one alternative to pricing the roads according to demand is to reduce demand for the roads by eliminating minimum parking requirements and let the market decide how much parking to provide. This would also make the land more productive, bringing more jobs and tax revenue and housing to the city.
Civilized people. Cultured people. That's what a civilization, a civilized society is—people living in close proximity to each other. The closer you live to your neighbors, the more civilized you are, by definition.
In the USA, the goal seems to be to live as far from your neighbors as possible, and that's kind of sad.
How would you end the cycle of poverty?
Education is supposed to be the great equalizer, but equal education for all won't end the cycle of poverty because poverty creates a cognitive load that puts poor people at a disadvantage compared to their wealthier classmates. The playing field is tilted in favor of the wealthy.
So how would you end the cycle of poverty? This is an important question because the lives of people trapped in poverty are dependent on the government, and that's a bad thing, right?
Now what should we do about our socialized roads?
Do you think his supporters would believe the results?
Two would be better.
I don't like paying taxes, so making it easier for the disabled to switch from public transportation to Uber sounds like a very good idea to me!
Why wouldn't Uber drivers be willing to drive random strangers around?