You will also be charged a monthly FUSF (Federal Universal Service Fund) cost recovery fee to help cover charges from our data transport supplier pursuant to state and federal telecom regulations. This fee is not a tax or government required charge. New residential customers only. $12.99/mo is an online only, 12-month promotional rate for AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet Express with an ongoing rate of $29.99/mo after the promotional term upon the successful completion of an online order by eligible customers. $16.99/mo is a 6-month promotional rate, available through any AT&T sales channel as part of a qualifying bundle of AT&T services or at select retailers, for AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet Express with an ongoing rate of $29.99/mo after the promotional term. $17.99/mo is an online only, 12-month promotional rate for AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet Pro with an ongoing rate of $34.99/mo after the promotional term upon the successful completion of an online order by eligible customers. $21.99/mo is a 6-month promotional rate, available through any AT&T sales channel as part of a qualifying bundle of AT&T services or at select retailers, for AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet Pro with an ongoing rate of $34.99/mo after the promotional term. We do not guarantee that online orders can be successfully processed for every requesting customer. Static IP products not included. This is a limited time offer and is only available for AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet. Offer not valid with any other AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet promotion. Purchase of local service from the applicable AT&T incumbent local exchange carrier and promotional term required. $99 early termination fee. If you drop a required component of the qualifying bundle, you will revert to the applicable non-promotional rate for high-speed Internet. $150-$200 additional charge will apply if technician install is required or desired. Equipment charges may be included and will appear on the first bill. Equipment rebate postcard, with rebate terms and conditions, will be included with equipment if self-installed or by mail, if technician installs. Rebate must be postmarked within 90 days of AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet service activation. Mail-in equipment rebate offer is valid in the following states: AR,CA,CT,IL,IN,KS,MI,MO,NV,OH,OK,TX,WI. Rebate void where prohibited, taxed or restricted by law. Rebate may not be assigned, transferred or sold. AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet packages with month to month terms are not eligible for an equipment rebate. One equipment rebate allowed per high-speed Internet line. High-speed Internet account must be in service for a minimum of 60 days to be eligible for rebate. Customers are not eligible to receive a rebate that would exceed total purchase price of equipment and account must not be in delinquent status. Rebate check will be mailed to the customer's billing address within 10-12 weeks of receipt of the rebate postcard. We are not responsible for late, lost, misdirected, or postage due mail or mail damaged by the U.S. Post Office. Rebate is offered by AT&T Internet Services and cannot be applied to your AT&T local exchange carrier bill. Some customers may need to purchase additional equipment (i.e. Ethernet card and/or cables). Billing begins on service activation date. Service not available in all areas. Subject to change without notice. Maximum speed achieved depends on customer location. Acceptance of Terms of Service required. Taxes and additional fees & surcharges extra. Other restrictions, including credit restrictions and qualification, apply. AT&T products and services are provided in specific geographic areas by subsidiaries and affiliates of AT&T Inc. AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet is provided by AT&T Internet Services with customized content, services, and applications from Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo!, the Yahoo! logos and other product and service names are the trademarks and/or registered trademarks of
I'm trying to assert that capitalism and democracy should be done with an honorable and moral hand, one that creates a sustainable economy without environmental pollution so that nation can grow into a prosperous and productive place, one with a competitive economy and school system.
Well I'll agree with you there, in principle. I guess we disagree in practice. I see where we are now as the first step down that very road. Let's meet back here in 30 years and see what happened!:-)
You're getting your Marxist issues convoluted; I thought we were talking about "sweatshops"?
You keep accusing American companies of robbery and other nefarious deeds, and honestly I don't really know whether that's true or not. I suspect you don't either, from your lack of references and actual facts.
But the core point is and was this: American factories in Asia are good for their workers and the host nation in general. You think you're being compassionate and I'm being heartless, but you're the one who thinks he knows what's good for everybody else and wants to enforce it. My position, that of freedom, is the one which leads to prosperity, upward mobility, and justice. Yours leads them back to the Stone Age.
Why would a shoe factory buy up all the farmland, whether it was from the owner or the government?
In any case, we're arguing about the concept of American manufacturing in Asia, not how any particular one came to be. I'm still saying that everybody's better off with them than without them.
Cameras aren't allowed inside because bedwetters in the West, such as yourself, would take everything out of context to score political points.
If somebody else bought the farming land, then the owners decided they were better off selling. So now there's money in their pockets, and they can go to work at the factory if they want!
You and I don't have to decide when working in a factory is better than farming; the potential workers do, and are.
What's your solution, anyway? Do you believe in the Magic Wage Fairy? Do you want the UN to go in, guns blazing, to force all the business out of developing areas, leaving them in squalor forever?
You've just proven my point. Okay, so they know how to farm. Therefore, working in an American factory for the offered wages are a better deal for them than farming. They're better off with the factory than without it. What's the problem?
I wonder if it's really as much data as all that. Google can just look at a checksum of each file, and only have to transfer and store one copy from a single user. So people's MP3 collections will most likely be already in the index, as well as any PDFs, or DOCs that are available on the Web, or on a coworker's or friend's computer even.
What percentage of your hard drive is files that are unique to you? It's still going to be significant, but manageable I think.
It's a fallacy to point out the total energy used by such TVs. I only control my TV. I control those 4W. Those 4W make no difference.
The sheer arrogance of that statement astonishes me. Yes, on your own you won't make a difference, but when EVERYONE has your attitude you're in for one helluva shock when the oil and gas reserves run out. I also hate to break it to you but I bet my right hand that no new, reliable, large scale energy source is going to appear within my lifetime.
Look, my workstation averages 230W. The 4W of my TV is less than 2% of that, and my workstation is only a tiny part of my overall energy usage. Even if there are 6 billion of me, and our standby TVs are increasing our energy usage by.09%, 4W each does not bring affect the timetable of your Armaggedon.
I just got one of those Kill-a-Watts from ThinkGeek for Christmas. My 27" Sony TV uses ~100W while active (peaking at about 120 for a white screen). When it's "off", it uses 4W.
It's a fallacy to point out the total energy used by such TVs. I only control my TV. I control those 4W. Those 4W make no difference.
50-100 years before serious energy problems? Are you basing that on anything but intuition? There are plenty of energy alternatives out there, it just hasn't made economic sense to develop one. Once it does, we will.
Okay... Suppose it costs an extra $10 for the battery, smart circuitry to run it, design costs, etc etc.
Suppose disabling the transformer for standby saves you 2W. Suppose it's on standby year-round. That's 8,760 hours, or 17.52 kWh. Say 8 cents per kWh, you're now saving $1.40 per year.
It would take over seven years for you to make up the initial cost.
Slashdot Mirror
Just because those other inventions weren't the mark doesn't mean this one isn't.
Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
The safest path argument is compelling, but others are more concerned about the safest path for preserving freedom.
Hear, hear!
Do tell
Sounds like you're method's older than the tone generator. Same general idea though. Good times.
Did you have to dial with a tone generator too? I still have mine!
Norton could be described as spyware. Norton assumes your system is there to do nothing but run Norton.
You keep accusing American companies of robbery and other nefarious deeds, and honestly I don't really know whether that's true or not. I suspect you don't either, from your lack of references and actual facts.
But the core point is and was this: American factories in Asia are good for their workers and the host nation in general. You think you're being compassionate and I'm being heartless, but you're the one who thinks he knows what's good for everybody else and wants to enforce it. My position, that of freedom, is the one which leads to prosperity, upward mobility, and justice. Yours leads them back to the Stone Age.
In any case, we're arguing about the concept of American manufacturing in Asia, not how any particular one came to be. I'm still saying that everybody's better off with them than without them.
Cameras aren't allowed inside because bedwetters in the West, such as yourself, would take everything out of context to score political points.
You and I don't have to decide when working in a factory is better than farming; the potential workers do, and are.
What's your solution, anyway? Do you believe in the Magic Wage Fairy? Do you want the UN to go in, guns blazing, to force all the business out of developing areas, leaving them in squalor forever?
You've just proven my point. Okay, so they know how to farm. Therefore, working in an American factory for the offered wages are a better deal for them than farming. They're better off with the factory than without it. What's the problem?
I think we've identified the problem. Try studying anything but political science to get an idea of how the world works.
It's that work, which is a reasonable wage there, which prevents people from starving.
harrased the crap out of them? That must be messy!
What percentage of your hard drive is files that are unique to you? It's still going to be significant, but manageable I think.
It's a fallacy to point out the total energy used by such TVs. I only control my TV. I control those 4W. Those 4W make no difference.
50-100 years before serious energy problems? Are you basing that on anything but intuition? There are plenty of energy alternatives out there, it just hasn't made economic sense to develop one. Once it does, we will.
Meanwhile we're filling the landfills and oceans with dinky little transformer-saving batteries.
Okay... Suppose it costs an extra $10 for the battery, smart circuitry to run it, design costs, etc etc. Suppose disabling the transformer for standby saves you 2W. Suppose it's on standby year-round. That's 8,760 hours, or 17.52 kWh. Say 8 cents per kWh, you're now saving $1.40 per year. It would take over seven years for you to make up the initial cost.
Which is absorbed by the walls or other objects in the room and released as heat! :-)
A: It's not a lot. It's exactly as much as the "minimum amounts of heat" you feel them giving off.