So a convincing spoof would require access to their database.
A convincing spoof to knowledgable users, yes. However, since the public at large is already fooled by VIRES ALRET!!1 emails, I don't see how this will really work.
The main reason gas is preferred is because of heat control. With gas, you can quickly adjust the amount of heat going to your pan. Electric takes time to both heat up and cool down.
It's my understanding that miniPCI is a standard. The way these things work is that any device meeting the standard should work in any device that supports the standard. That is not happening here, as devices are being arbitrarily excluded by manufacturer/model.
I'm sure IBM went out of their way to say "Hey! You can only use what we say in this computer!" to everyone who bought it so that customers could make this informed decision.
I doubt Congress would step in because most congressmen are or were lawyers.
This makes no sense in the context of the current actions of the legislature. The Congress just approved a measure, which has been signed into law by the President, that will limit class action lawsuits. They have also said that they want to limit medical malpractice, tobacco, and asbestos suits. These basis of these actions is a clause in the Constitution (Article III) that grants the legislature power to limit the Court's jurisdiction. This power is very, very, rarely used, and these actions would represent a large shift in the use of this power.
In short, the Congress has shown that it is more than willing; it is eager to step in, as long as it will help the great god Business.
Furthermore, Google made it extremely easy to switch the mapping service to two of their comptetitors, MapQuest and Yahoo! Maps. Microsoft would never ever do a thing like that.
That's because Microsoft knows how to act like a publicly owned company.
As nice as it is, it's completely bonkers to include the option of using your competitors. IMO, this is a sign from Google that they do not trust Google Maps yet.
Oh, spare us. The tone of your post was clearly against the idea of global warming.
I think that you need to upgrade your browser. The one that you're using is apparently not displaying text properly as it's putting in words that aren't there.
It's not a problem with this user's browser, it's a problem with your head. There are these little things in language called context and connotation. Look 'em up.
Living in an urban area is more dangerous than the country, but it has nothing to do with terrorism. There's simply more of our modern death machine, the car.
I guess you are trying to generalize about southerns now, since NASCAR's following is mostly in the more rural section of the country.
Actually, you introduced this generalization. NASCAR fans constitute a broad cross section of Americans. They are much more diverse than most people realize.
The State doesn't care what you're buying. It's only concerned about the amount you paid for it. As long as you're not audited, you would never have to disclose what the specific purchases were.
It seems to me that the protection should be in the audit process. I.E. the State can review your receipts but cannot keep that data, or something similar.
There are privacy concerns, but I think a system could be devised that can protect privacy and still collect tax.
Fine with me. I don't see any reason why I, and everyone else, shouldn't be paying taxes on out-of-state purchases. The only reason it exists now is because of loopholes and enforcement difficulties.
Of course, I think sales/use taxes are regressive and should be eliminated, but I've accepted the reality that this is highly unlikely.
Now, even though I live in a state with a lot of sales tax, they don't charge me if I buy stuff from a store in Delaware.
That's technically correct. However, they probably charge you if you use the stuff you bought in Delaware in your home state.
If your tax form has a line for "Use Tax", you are affected by this. Most states have it specifically to address the case of out-of-state purchases. It's loosely enforced, unless a large chunk of your income is unaccounted for. NJ once thought that I owed them ~$250 in use tax (thats about ~$4,200 in purchases), but I called them up and said I had no out-of-state purchases. They said "Ok. No problem." I was surprised at how easy it was, but that's probably because my income for that year was like $6,000 (I was still in high school at the time).
You should try to brew regular and decaf and slowly step down the amount of caffeine by adjusting the mixture. This way you will still be drinking coffee (and keeping the habit of getting up at work, or making the coffee at home, however you do it), but will be taking in less and less caffeine. If you have multiple cups per day, which sounds likely, you can also try to have a stronger cup in the morning, and weaker cups later in the day. You will probably feel more tired this way, but you will be slowly fighting the addiction. I haven't gone caffeine free, mainly because I don't want to, but I am no longer at the point where I get the headaches if I don't have caffeine, and do fine on the weekends without it.
Also, if you drink sodas with caffeine, keep an eye on that. Sodas do have less caffeine than coffee, but if you ratchet up your soda intake to offset coffee, you will likely end up with a caffeine addiction and diabetes or other health problems on top of it.
Only if you (incorrectly) believe that fuel effeciency has nothing to do with road wear.
I do believe that. Correllation != Causation. How many times do we have to say it here?
A hybrid will use less gas than a standard car of similar weight. However, they will cause roughly the same amount of road wear (assuming that road wear is largely a function of weight). It's a loophole.
Continuing in the vein of hypotheticals, do you think that a car that uses no gas should pay no taxes for using the roads?
There was a study during the election last year that showed that Mass. actually has some of the lowest taxes/fees in the nation (expressed as dollars taxed/dollars earned). I think it came up after Zell Miller made a taxachusetts reference in his keynote speech. IIRC, Georgians pay more per dollar earned in taxes/fees than Mass'ians.
"Taxachusetts" is a right wing myth, in the vein of 'welfare queens', the social security 'crisis', and Iraqi WMDs.
As another poster has mentioned, this seems to violate the ban on the taxation of interstate commerce.
It does in spirit, but not in letter. A use tax is just that: a tax for using an item. It is not a tax on the transaction, thus interstate commerce is untouched.
It's my understanding that if you really, really want to, you should be able to get a refund of the sales tax where you bought the item. You are then supposed to pay a use tax (at a rate equal to the sales tax) in your home state.
Slashdot Mirror
So a convincing spoof would require access to their database.
A convincing spoof to knowledgable users, yes. However, since the public at large is already fooled by VIRES ALRET!!1 emails, I don't see how this will really work.
Have you ever used a MS product that didn't piss you off in some subtle way?
Have you ever used a product that didn't piss you off in some subtle way?
Digital with a multi-globe redundant system
I didn't know google had a colo on mars...
That link says nothing about high school graduates.
Except that we actually do elect our officials, so what they want is what we want (generally). That's a notable difference from 1984.
The main reason gas is preferred is because of heat control. With gas, you can quickly adjust the amount of heat going to your pan. Electric takes time to both heat up and cool down.
It's my understanding that miniPCI is a standard. The way these things work is that any device meeting the standard should work in any device that supports the standard. That is not happening here, as devices are being arbitrarily excluded by manufacturer/model.
Since the Dell card is rebranded, this shouldn't be taken as an indication that your Gateway isn't going to lock you out in the future.
What I don't hear about is apple and there slots not taking anything but "AIRPORT" cards? why is nobody bitching about that?
I think this is simply because we don't expect openness with Apple. Their hardware is generally proprietary, while PC hardware is not.
If you don't like it, don't buy it...
I'm sure IBM went out of their way to say "Hey! You can only use what we say in this computer!" to everyone who bought it so that customers could make this informed decision.
Surely they did this, right?
I doubt Congress would step in because most congressmen are or were lawyers.
This makes no sense in the context of the current actions of the legislature. The Congress just approved a measure, which has been signed into law by the President, that will limit class action lawsuits. They have also said that they want to limit medical malpractice, tobacco, and asbestos suits. These basis of these actions is a clause in the Constitution (Article III) that grants the legislature power to limit the Court's jurisdiction. This power is very, very, rarely used, and these actions would represent a large shift in the use of this power.
In short, the Congress has shown that it is more than willing; it is eager to step in, as long as it will help the great god Business.
Furthermore, Google made it extremely easy to switch the mapping service to two of their comptetitors, MapQuest and Yahoo! Maps. Microsoft would never ever do a thing like that.
That's because Microsoft knows how to act like a publicly owned company.
As nice as it is, it's completely bonkers to include the option of using your competitors. IMO, this is a sign from Google that they do not trust Google Maps yet.
Oh, spare us. The tone of your post was clearly against the idea of global warming.
I think that you need to upgrade your browser. The one that you're using is apparently not displaying text properly as it's putting in words that aren't there.
It's not a problem with this user's browser, it's a problem with your head. There are these little things in language called context and connotation. Look 'em up.
Thanks!
Mods: See parent post for an example of something that *is* informative. Then mod accordingly.
Living in an urban area is more dangerous than the country, but it has nothing to do with terrorism. There's simply more of our modern death machine, the car.
I guess you are trying to generalize about southerns now, since NASCAR's following is mostly in the more rural section of the country.
Actually, you introduced this generalization. NASCAR fans constitute a broad cross section of Americans. They are much more diverse than most people realize.
The State doesn't care what you're buying. It's only concerned about the amount you paid for it. As long as you're not audited, you would never have to disclose what the specific purchases were.
It seems to me that the protection should be in the audit process. I.E. the State can review your receipts but cannot keep that data, or something similar.
There are privacy concerns, but I think a system could be devised that can protect privacy and still collect tax.
Fine with me. I don't see any reason why I, and everyone else, shouldn't be paying taxes on out-of-state purchases. The only reason it exists now is because of loopholes and enforcement difficulties.
Of course, I think sales/use taxes are regressive and should be eliminated, but I've accepted the reality that this is highly unlikely.
Now, even though I live in a state with a lot of sales tax, they don't charge me if I buy stuff from a store in Delaware.
That's technically correct. However, they probably charge you if you use the stuff you bought in Delaware in your home state.
If your tax form has a line for "Use Tax", you are affected by this. Most states have it specifically to address the case of out-of-state purchases. It's loosely enforced, unless a large chunk of your income is unaccounted for. NJ once thought that I owed them ~$250 in use tax (thats about ~$4,200 in purchases), but I called them up and said I had no out-of-state purchases. They said "Ok. No problem." I was surprised at how easy it was, but that's probably because my income for that year was like $6,000 (I was still in high school at the time).
You should try to brew regular and decaf and slowly step down the amount of caffeine by adjusting the mixture. This way you will still be drinking coffee (and keeping the habit of getting up at work, or making the coffee at home, however you do it), but will be taking in less and less caffeine. If you have multiple cups per day, which sounds likely, you can also try to have a stronger cup in the morning, and weaker cups later in the day. You will probably feel more tired this way, but you will be slowly fighting the addiction. I haven't gone caffeine free, mainly because I don't want to, but I am no longer at the point where I get the headaches if I don't have caffeine, and do fine on the weekends without it.
Also, if you drink sodas with caffeine, keep an eye on that. Sodas do have less caffeine than coffee, but if you ratchet up your soda intake to offset coffee, you will likely end up with a caffeine addiction and diabetes or other health problems on top of it.
Only if you (incorrectly) believe that fuel effeciency has nothing to do with road wear.
I do believe that. Correllation != Causation. How many times do we have to say it here?
A hybrid will use less gas than a standard car of similar weight. However, they will cause roughly the same amount of road wear (assuming that road wear is largely a function of weight). It's a loophole.
Continuing in the vein of hypotheticals, do you think that a car that uses no gas should pay no taxes for using the roads?
Several states (including good old Taxachusetts)
There was a study during the election last year that showed that Mass. actually has some of the lowest taxes/fees in the nation (expressed as dollars taxed/dollars earned). I think it came up after Zell Miller made a taxachusetts reference in his keynote speech. IIRC, Georgians pay more per dollar earned in taxes/fees than Mass'ians.
"Taxachusetts" is a right wing myth, in the vein of 'welfare queens', the social security 'crisis', and Iraqi WMDs.
As another poster has mentioned, this seems to violate the ban on the taxation of interstate commerce.
It does in spirit, but not in letter. A use tax is just that: a tax for using an item. It is not a tax on the transaction, thus interstate commerce is untouched.
It's my understanding that if you really, really want to, you should be able to get a refund of the sales tax where you bought the item. You are then supposed to pay a use tax (at a rate equal to the sales tax) in your home state.
If the government is allowed to pollute the air my kids breath, then I am allowed to pollute the air their kids breath.
Yeah, I hate when the stacks from the power plant are right over the table where I'm eating dinner.