Don't worry, Time Warner screws their customers in completely different ways that I'm hoping that Charter will remedy. Like their absolute abuse of the CCI flag on cable television that requires you to use either one of their absolutely terrible set top boxes, TiVo, or Windows Media Center (a dead product).
No other cable company does this, which leaves every other subscriber not paying Time Warner open to using the myriad of other roll-your-own DVR solutions out there with a CableCard and tuner.
If Charter wants to make me a happy customer, they can just stop flagging everything CopyOnce. In fact, if Time Warner wanted to make me a happy customer, they could do the same. And I've told them this on many occasions.
The solar cells aren't from New York, yet. The SolarCity / Silevo factory doesn't come on line until at least June of this year, and won't reach full capacity until some time in 2017.
Yeah ok, I'll just build a massive water tower in my back yard with a huge noisy pump to fill with water, and run a big noisy turbine at night off that water. I'm sure that the county and local zoning authorities will have no problems with this, and neither will any of my neighbors.
Or I could put a fucking battery on the wall in the garage and call it a day.
Given that it's unlikely that solar panels can be legally made in the US or western Europe
Except for the billion dollar solar panel manufacturing plant being built by SolarCity in Buffalo, NY right now? Due to start production this year, and ramp to capacity some time in 2017.
Yeah, try to Google for 5 seconds before asserting something completely false.
You seem to be arguing with me, when I was agreeing with the idea that encryption is important, no matter the excuse used to try to abolish it. My use of numbers, which you decry, was only to put a scope on the issue of terror attacks, and why the disproportionate fear and over-response is disproportionate and overreach.
What is it about digital communications that makes it any different from written communications?
We all use the United States Postal Service to send letters, bills, renumeration for bills, etc., and none of it is subject to Government snooping. What gives them the legal right to snoop electronic communications?
Answer: nothing. There is no legal difference between me encrypting an email and sending it, and me encoding a piece of written correspondence with a one-time pad and putting a stamp on it. The Government cannot and should not be able to do jack shit about it without a proper legal warrant, approved by a sitting judge.
Absent that warrant, Director Clapper can go fist himself. And if he has a problem with that, he can review the 1st and 4th amendments.
First, please point out an instance of a terror attack that could have been prevented if it wasn't for the wide use of encryption, because there isn't one.
Second, the total aggregate count of people that have died to terror attacks doesn't even come close to the amount of people that die each year from choosing to smoke tobacco, so I'll take the encryption.
Well, when China stops "engag[ing] in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein", I guess we'll know that anyone gives a shit about the UN declaration of human rights.
And the 14th Amendment which completely invalidates his citation of a Supreme Court case:
"No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The Equal Protection clause throws out his whole argument.
2. The Bill of Rights was not meant to enumerate specific rights, but rather raise the bar so high on restricting or revoking those rights as to make it legally impossible.
I assure you that the Earth will go right on living whether humanity is here or not. The planet got by just fine before us, and will get by just fine after we're fertilizer and everything we created is dust.
Time for Mr. Trump to take an 8th Grade civics course. He cannot levy taxes by executive fiat. It's a power directly denied to him by the Constitution. And there's no fucking way he'll be able to get Congress to do it.
Why is anyone even listening to this Dorito-tinted muppet when he says things like this?
If both Democrats and Republicans are saying the same things about her, don't those things transcend from being talking points into actual things? Sounds like consensus agreement to me.
Unfortunately for you, the First Amendment allows for the freedom of association.
Under your proposed changes, the EFF, NRA, Heritage Foundation, NOW, AARP, etc. would also be tossed out - political organizations that existed long before Citizens United. Also, where do you draw the line? Are unions now banned from directing their membership which candidates and issues are important to the unions? How do you draw that line in legal language?
These are just some of the many issues that come about when you start saying that some organizations are allowed to participate in politics, and others are not. Who gets restricted? Who doesn't?
What you call "unreasonable amount of power that smaller states have" is what the founding fathers called "equal representation in a Federal Republic."
Because that's what the United States is - a Republic.
So you are confirming that the great-grandparent post's assertion that Republicans only win local and state elections because money is complete horseshit. Both parties, near as it matters, have access to the same amount of resources.
After all, it couldn't possibly be that Republicans win the local elections because the local municipalities like the Republican candidates more. It's got to be MONEY.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't worry, Time Warner screws their customers in completely different ways that I'm hoping that Charter will remedy. Like their absolute abuse of the CCI flag on cable television that requires you to use either one of their absolutely terrible set top boxes, TiVo, or Windows Media Center (a dead product).
No other cable company does this, which leaves every other subscriber not paying Time Warner open to using the myriad of other roll-your-own DVR solutions out there with a CableCard and tuner.
If Charter wants to make me a happy customer, they can just stop flagging everything CopyOnce. In fact, if Time Warner wanted to make me a happy customer, they could do the same. And I've told them this on many occasions.
Sounds like the perfect place to start installing behind-the-meter battery storage.
I love how you say that, and SCTY is up at least $2 today. And, was up yesterday. In fact, they're trading at their highest price of 2016.
What was your point again?
The solar cells aren't from New York, yet. The SolarCity / Silevo factory doesn't come on line until at least June of this year, and won't reach full capacity until some time in 2017.
Clearly you suck at Google then. Colorado has laws about rooftop runoff and rain barrels, prohibiting them.
You do know that it's possible to recycle batteries from cars into batteries for homes, right?
Yeah ok, I'll just build a massive water tower in my back yard with a huge noisy pump to fill with water, and run a big noisy turbine at night off that water. I'm sure that the county and local zoning authorities will have no problems with this, and neither will any of my neighbors.
Or I could put a fucking battery on the wall in the garage and call it a day.
Damn. I guess we'd better do nothing until someone comes up with a solution that addresses THE WHOLE WORLD AT ONCE.
Clearly you can't start somewhere, and grow from there. That would never work!
Or it's an emerging market that has absolutely no market penetration whatsoever at this time.
Everything starts somewhere.
Given that it's unlikely that solar panels can be legally made in the US or western Europe
Except for the billion dollar solar panel manufacturing plant being built by SolarCity in Buffalo, NY right now? Due to start production this year, and ramp to capacity some time in 2017.
Yeah, try to Google for 5 seconds before asserting something completely false.
You seem to be arguing with me, when I was agreeing with the idea that encryption is important, no matter the excuse used to try to abolish it. My use of numbers, which you decry, was only to put a scope on the issue of terror attacks, and why the disproportionate fear and over-response is disproportionate and overreach.
Sorry for being too subtle, I guess.
What is it about digital communications that makes it any different from written communications?
We all use the United States Postal Service to send letters, bills, renumeration for bills, etc., and none of it is subject to Government snooping. What gives them the legal right to snoop electronic communications?
Answer: nothing. There is no legal difference between me encrypting an email and sending it, and me encoding a piece of written correspondence with a one-time pad and putting a stamp on it. The Government cannot and should not be able to do jack shit about it without a proper legal warrant, approved by a sitting judge.
Absent that warrant, Director Clapper can go fist himself. And if he has a problem with that, he can review the 1st and 4th amendments.
You can't possibly be serious.
First, please point out an instance of a terror attack that could have been prevented if it wasn't for the wide use of encryption, because there isn't one.
Second, the total aggregate count of people that have died to terror attacks doesn't even come close to the amount of people that die each year from choosing to smoke tobacco, so I'll take the encryption.
Well, when China stops "engag[ing] in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein", I guess we'll know that anyone gives a shit about the UN declaration of human rights.
And the 14th Amendment which completely invalidates his citation of a Supreme Court case:
"No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The Equal Protection clause throws out his whole argument.
Please read the 10th amendment. Then read it again. And once more. Then realize how what you wrote is completely incorrect.
This story is about pollutants observed in Europe, and the regulations and testing in Europe. And diesel passenger vehicles commonly found in Europe.
Another fail, Anonymous Coward.
Guess what - cars that run on gasoline / petrol are moving to high-pressure fuel systems and direct injection now too. Because it's better.
1. Woosh.
2. The Bill of Rights was not meant to enumerate specific rights, but rather raise the bar so high on restricting or revoking those rights as to make it legally impossible.
So you've been wrong twice now.
I assure you that the Earth will go right on living whether humanity is here or not. The planet got by just fine before us, and will get by just fine after we're fertilizer and everything we created is dust.
Time for Mr. Trump to take an 8th Grade civics course. He cannot levy taxes by executive fiat. It's a power directly denied to him by the Constitution. And there's no fucking way he'll be able to get Congress to do it.
Why is anyone even listening to this Dorito-tinted muppet when he says things like this?
If both Democrats and Republicans are saying the same things about her, don't those things transcend from being talking points into actual things? Sounds like consensus agreement to me.
Unfortunately for you, the First Amendment allows for the freedom of association.
Under your proposed changes, the EFF, NRA, Heritage Foundation, NOW, AARP, etc. would also be tossed out - political organizations that existed long before Citizens United. Also, where do you draw the line? Are unions now banned from directing their membership which candidates and issues are important to the unions? How do you draw that line in legal language?
These are just some of the many issues that come about when you start saying that some organizations are allowed to participate in politics, and others are not. Who gets restricted? Who doesn't?
What you call "unreasonable amount of power that smaller states have" is what the founding fathers called "equal representation in a Federal Republic."
Because that's what the United States is - a Republic.
So you are confirming that the great-grandparent post's assertion that Republicans only win local and state elections because money is complete horseshit. Both parties, near as it matters, have access to the same amount of resources.
After all, it couldn't possibly be that Republicans win the local elections because the local municipalities like the Republican candidates more. It's got to be MONEY.