As per Ryan Sohmer's comic (http://www.leasticoulddo.com/comic/20170605/), it is quite clear that the US government has no contact with aliens, wizards, or psychics.
Because there is NO way that Donald "Covfefe" Trump could have kept that to himself. Similarly, Bin Laden was the author behind 911 and Obama had him killed.
What, you think doubling processing power and number of sensors is not going to increase safety? Not to mention the fact that one of the cars is usually ahead of the other, so it gets information about static obstacles before it could normally see them?
Firstly, we are already hacking the planet. We started out by filling the oceans with mercury, the air with carbon dioxide, and fluorocarbons. Of course, all of those are failures. But note they took many years to start affecting things.
Slowly we are learning how to do it right and also learning what to do. By the time we have learned how to actually be effective, we will also have learned the proper safeguards. Our own incompetence will protect us until we learn how do the powerful stuff.
1) The lawyer is a shmuck. They are sizes, not measurements. If I were the judge, I would give him 50 cents in damages and deny his appeals.
2) Companies should simply leave off the word inch.
This is a a 1x4, not a 1 inch x 4 inch. This is a 4x4, not a 4 inch by 4 inch.
Never use the word inch anywhere on the packaging, leave the unit as implied, not specified. If you feel the need to specify the unit somewhere, call it a "lumber standard inch" or maybe an LSI in your paperwork.
Trump will kill this, but only if someone tells him about it. It's not something that he cares about, and it hasn't been heavily politicized, so it is not likely for one of his aids to mention it.
If we stay quiet, he probably will not be aware of this happening until after the agency passes it's rules.
Comcast employees admit they cut the wires, but they claim that they thought the wires were abandoned. This is a pretty good defense against the kind of punishments you listed.
If I were the judge, I would rule as follows:
Comcast, if you declare this was accidental, then your right to service that area is hereby denied. You have 6 months to break up that area into a separate company, which will be given to the plaintiff, in addition to any profits you declared for that area, from the time you acted to the time you give the company away.
If instead you declare this was intentional, give us a list of the employees that committed the theft, and actively help us prosecute them. You now owe the plaintiff twice what they requested, but you can keep the service area.
Lots of jobs already do 4 hours/day, 4 days a week. My boss for example (Joke). Not to mention a ton of people being screwed out of healthcare (you are part time, so I only giv eyou 24 hours a week ) But at the same time, lost of jobs already do 60 hour The question of 'normal' is silly. People have different needs.
The real question is will the legal definition of 'full time' change to 4 hours/day and 4 days/ week, thereby requiring some offer of healthcare/401k for what is now considered part time work
Three possibilities. 1) Driver sees the car slows, put his hands back on the wheel and the car speeds up, again at a reasonable rate. And best of all, he is being trained, like the pavlovian dog he resembles, to KEEP YOUR HANDS ON THE WHEEL. Given how speed oriented most people are, this is by far the most likely.
2) The driver is sick, too stupid to drive, or otherwise incapacitated and the car should come to a stop and attract the attention of the police. They need to deal with this situation.
3) The driver never learns, keeps ignoring the instructions, and they get into an accident, BUT AT A SLOWER SPEED, rather than the high speed they would have gotten into without this system
With current technology, people are trained to ignore meaningless errors.
Proper error handling for anything important require you to take action, especially if you repeat the error.
That is, if they want people to pay attention to a "keep hands on wheels" warning, the speed should drop significantly. Not as if the brake was applied, but instead as if the foot was taken off the gas (even if they tried to floor it.). Oh, and the brake light should flash to let people behind know you are slowing, even though no brake is applied.
Pity so many people think have so much evil in their heart and the desire to blame it on someone that society considers an acceptable victim (sex offenders).
When you want to know someone's deepest, darkest, thoughts, ask them to describe their enemy.
Ask an innocent child to do this and they talk about someone stealing toys. Ask an alt-right person and they talk about other races secretly taking over the world.
The problem is best described as neither cost nor capacity, but instead speed limits. As in 65 mph. Basically, we can't get things physically anywhere unless it is coming from less than 100 miles.
A) Company 1 (United Launch Alliance) refuses to lists net prices in a transparent way.
B) net costs seem to imply that SpaceX is about 7 times cheaper.
Then it states that SpaceX must be taking a loss.
BULL.
The company that refuses to lists net prices in a transparent way are the people that you should suspect of shenanigans. In this case, the evidence implies they are overcharging.
But I suspect that the comparison is not as bad as it looks. SpaceX may be launching only tiny payloads into low earth orbit while ULA may be launching huge payloads into high orbit.
It's the heat loss in winter. The green party insists on everything being as insulated as possible and you lose a lot of heat via the windows. So they want them all removed.
I'm as environmentally progressive as the next guy, but this is taking it too far.;Q
Manufacturers cheat for several reason, one of which is some are as crazy as you, so they would rather violate the spirit of regulations if they can't be punished for it, even if ti costs them money. Others are simply too stupid to do what's best, or thought they came up with a better plan. But most importantly, without a FEDERAL REGULATION, they would have to spend their own money to research what would be cheating. They don't want to do that, especially as the Fed has already done it once, no need for every corporation to repeat the same work.
Second of all, the fraud laws are hellish to enforce, mainly because the companies pay high priced lawyers to skate around the fraud. It's a lot harder to skate around a simple, clear regulation. It is a lot easier to prove disobedience to a regulation than it is to prove deception.
Thirdly, basically, what you suggested California do, and then foolishly suggested the other states blindly follow is EXACTLY what the federal government is required to do. I know you are paranoid enough to think they federal government is evil, but the STATES ARE ALWAYS WORSE THAN THE FED. States get stuck with second rate employees that can't get a job in the federal government. Local = corrupt. National = bigger labor pool, more reporters checking on them, more government checks and balances.
Finally if we used your idea, then while most of the states would follow California, a bunch of idiot states would object, saying they don't follow libtards, and create their own standard.
Even if their red state regulations were in fact better than California's, it wouldn't matter because there would be two sets of standards, forcing businesses that want to sell nationally to deal with TWICE the regulations.
Why do you hate capitalism so much? Is Russia paying you to undermine our government?
The technology was barely there in the 70s to make it profitable. I think most likely, a few really wealthy people (captains of industry) would get it in the 10940s, and the upper class (millionaires) would slowly get them in the 60's.
Maybe the general public would have got them ten years earlier.
1) To prevent Fraud. It's a regulation on what you have to do to say "Energy Efficient". If you don't regulate, than some businesses will reduce power by 1% and say "Buy our 'Green' product." and paint their 1% lower item greeen. The reason to legislate is to stop businesses from lying and claiming things like "No reasonable person would think VitaminWater TM had vitamins in it."
2) To ensure uniformity. Don't want 5 different businesses using made up terms like "Green", "Lite", "Low Power", "Energy GOOD", and what not, forcing the consumer to research what each thing does.
3) Because despite what libertarians think, the government has a better success rate than business. The problem is that governments failures are public and stick around way too long (Afghanistan, Vietnam, Veterans Healthcare - note all three are MILITARY failures),, while the business failures tend to fade away like New Coke, Colgate TV dinners, and the Delorean (all of which died in less than 4 years)
No, it's about racists that think China doesn't have internet access. More than 1/2 of China has internet access, although most of them use mobile platforms. (https://thenextweb.com/asia/2014/01/16/chinas-internet-population-numbered-618m-end-2013-81-connecting-via-mobile/) To get numbers like that it means that even rice farmers get the internet.
India has similar numbers.
Basically, the population of most countries is currently in large cities and people living in large cities get the internet. It is cheap compared to it's benefit.
Slashdot Mirror
What's with the boxing? Who the hell taught them to fight like men? WHY?
And marsupials are just flip-floppers. Birth but still inside the mother's pouch? Come on out already. Are they going for a second birthday?
As per Ryan Sohmer's comic (http://www.leasticoulddo.com/comic/20170605/), it is quite clear that the US government has no contact with aliens, wizards, or psychics.
Because there is NO way that Donald "Covfefe" Trump could have kept that to himself. Similarly, Bin Laden was the author behind 911 and Obama had him killed.
And water is wet.
What, you think doubling processing power and number of sensors is not going to increase safety? Not to mention the fact that one of the cars is usually ahead of the other, so it gets information about static obstacles before it could normally see them?
Firstly, we are already hacking the planet. We started out by filling the oceans with mercury, the air with carbon dioxide, and fluorocarbons. Of course, all of those are failures. But note they took many years to start affecting things.
Slowly we are learning how to do it right and also learning what to do. By the time we have learned how to actually be effective, we will also have learned the proper safeguards. Our own incompetence will protect us until we learn how do the powerful stuff.
A size 2 dress is not twice as big as a size 1 dress.
Sizes do not have to be mathematically additive, nor do implied units.
1) The lawyer is a shmuck. They are sizes, not measurements. If I were the judge, I would give him 50 cents in damages and deny his appeals.
2) Companies should simply leave off the word inch.
This is a a 1x4, not a 1 inch x 4 inch. This is a 4x4, not a 4 inch by 4 inch.
Never use the word inch anywhere on the packaging, leave the unit as implied, not specified. If you feel the need to specify the unit somewhere, call it a "lumber standard inch" or maybe an LSI in your paperwork.
Trump will kill this, but only if someone tells him about it. It's not something that he cares about, and it hasn't been heavily politicized, so it is not likely for one of his aids to mention it.
If we stay quiet, he probably will not be aware of this happening until after the agency passes it's rules.
Comcast employees admit they cut the wires, but they claim that they thought the wires were abandoned. This is a pretty good defense against the kind of punishments you listed.
If I were the judge, I would rule as follows:
Comcast, if you declare this was accidental, then your right to service that area is hereby denied. You have 6 months to break up that area into a separate company, which will be given to the plaintiff, in addition to any profits you declared for that area, from the time you acted to the time you give the company away.
If instead you declare this was intentional, give us a list of the employees that committed the theft, and actively help us prosecute them. You now owe the plaintiff twice what they requested, but you can keep the service area.
Lots of jobs already do 4 hours /day, 4 days a week. My boss for example (Joke). Not to mention a ton of people being screwed out of healthcare (you are part time, so I only giv eyou 24 hours a week ) But at the same time, lost of jobs already do 60 hour The question of 'normal' is silly. People have different needs.
The real question is will the legal definition of 'full time' change to 4 hours/day and 4 days/ week, thereby requiring some offer of healthcare/401k for what is now considered part time work
Three possibilities.
1) Driver sees the car slows, put his hands back on the wheel and the car speeds up, again at a reasonable rate. And best of all, he is being trained, like the pavlovian dog he resembles, to KEEP YOUR HANDS ON THE WHEEL. Given how speed oriented most people are, this is by far the most likely.
2) The driver is sick, too stupid to drive, or otherwise incapacitated and the car should come to a stop and attract the attention of the police. They need to deal with this situation.
3) The driver never learns, keeps ignoring the instructions, and they get into an accident, BUT AT A SLOWER SPEED, rather than the high speed they would have gotten into without this system
With current technology, people are trained to ignore meaningless errors.
Proper error handling for anything important require you to take action, especially if you repeat the error.
That is, if they want people to pay attention to a "keep hands on wheels" warning, the speed should drop significantly. Not as if the brake was applied, but instead as if the foot was taken off the gas (even if they tried to floor it.). Oh, and the brake light should flash to let people behind know you are slowing, even though no brake is applied.
Did you not read all of my comment? I repeat - To know someone's deepest, darkest thoughts, ask them what their enemy thinks.
You have revealed what your own deepest, darkest thoughts are. Thanks for the warning.
Pay me $10 for UPTO 3 Lamborghinis.
Pay me $20 for UPTO ...
You want to advertise the term upto, you better demonstrate that number is a reasonable expectation for what you provide.
Otherwise, you are simply committing fraud.
Makes one feel better about this country.
Pity so many people think have so much evil in their heart and the desire to blame it on someone that society considers an acceptable victim (sex offenders).
When you want to know someone's deepest, darkest, thoughts, ask them to describe their enemy.
Ask an innocent child to do this and they talk about someone stealing toys. Ask an alt-right person and they talk about other races secretly taking over the world.
If a new idea is obvious, someone else will have tried and failed.
Real innovation almost always is surprisingly simplistic after it is done, but totally unthinkable before it is done.
Which is why the old guard thought the new guard would fail, they had no concept of the new guard's new idea.
The problem is best described as neither cost nor capacity, but instead speed limits. As in 65 mph. Basically, we can't get things physically anywhere unless it is coming from less than 100 miles.
Facts in the summary:
A) Company 1 (United Launch Alliance) refuses to lists net prices in a transparent way.
B) net costs seem to imply that SpaceX is about 7 times cheaper.
Then it states that SpaceX must be taking a loss.
BULL.
The company that refuses to lists net prices in a transparent way are the people that you should suspect of shenanigans. In this case, the evidence implies they are overcharging.
But I suspect that the comparison is not as bad as it looks. SpaceX may be launching only tiny payloads into low earth orbit while ULA may be launching huge payloads into high orbit.
Australia's refusal to let their citizens buy/watch foreign films has cost them billions of dollars.
Hey, you gotta point out both sides of the problem.
They could send you coupons, but they can't stop you from seeing anything you want to see.
Hotels tried to do something similar to force people to use their in-hotel wifi but they got slammed by the FCC.
/sarcasm activated/
It's the heat loss in winter. The green party insists on everything being as insulated as possible and you lose a lot of heat via the windows. So they want them all removed.
I'm as environmentally progressive as the next guy, but this is taking it too far. ;Q
Manufacturers cheat for several reason, one of which is some are as crazy as you, so they would rather violate the spirit of regulations if they can't be punished for it, even if ti costs them money. Others are simply too stupid to do what's best, or thought they came up with a better plan. But most importantly, without a FEDERAL REGULATION, they would have to spend their own money to research what would be cheating. They don't want to do that, especially as the Fed has already done it once, no need for every corporation to repeat the same work.
Second of all, the fraud laws are hellish to enforce, mainly because the companies pay high priced lawyers to skate around the fraud. It's a lot harder to skate around a simple, clear regulation. It is a lot easier to prove disobedience to a regulation than it is to prove deception.
Thirdly, basically, what you suggested California do, and then foolishly suggested the other states blindly follow is EXACTLY what the federal government is required to do. I know you are paranoid enough to think they federal government is evil, but the STATES ARE ALWAYS WORSE THAN THE FED. States get stuck with second rate employees that can't get a job in the federal government. Local = corrupt. National = bigger labor pool, more reporters checking on them, more government checks and balances.
Finally if we used your idea, then while most of the states would follow California, a bunch of idiot states would object, saying they don't follow libtards, and create their own standard.
Even if their red state regulations were in fact better than California's, it wouldn't matter because there would be two sets of standards, forcing businesses that want to sell nationally to deal with TWICE the regulations.
Why do you hate capitalism so much? Is Russia paying you to undermine our government?
The technology was barely there in the 70s to make it profitable. I think most likely, a few really wealthy people (captains of industry) would get it in the 10940s, and the upper class (millionaires) would slowly get them in the 60's.
Maybe the general public would have got them ten years earlier.
Answers to your questions:
1) To prevent Fraud. It's a regulation on what you have to do to say "Energy Efficient". If you don't regulate, than some businesses will reduce power by 1% and say "Buy our 'Green' product." and paint their 1% lower item greeen. The reason to legislate is to stop businesses from lying and claiming things like "No reasonable person would think VitaminWater TM had vitamins in it."
2) To ensure uniformity. Don't want 5 different businesses using made up terms like "Green", "Lite", "Low Power", "Energy GOOD", and what not, forcing the consumer to research what each thing does.
3) Because despite what libertarians think, the government has a better success rate than business. The problem is that governments failures are public and stick around way too long (Afghanistan, Vietnam, Veterans Healthcare - note all three are MILITARY failures),, while the business failures tend to fade away like New Coke, Colgate TV dinners, and the Delorean (all of which died in less than 4 years)
No, it's about racists that think China doesn't have internet access. More than 1/2 of China has internet access, although most of them use mobile platforms. (https://thenextweb.com/asia/2014/01/16/chinas-internet-population-numbered-618m-end-2013-81-connecting-via-mobile/) To get numbers like that it means that even rice farmers get the internet.
India has similar numbers.
Basically, the population of most countries is currently in large cities and people living in large cities get the internet. It is cheap compared to it's benefit.
Less than 1 download per person. If this was a food try before you buy) , that means not everyone took one.
Sounds to me like people are most likely trying to get reasonable service that is not available for sale, rather than pirating.