Given the many things the Federal government does in excess of the authority granted by the Constitution, I'm sure this could be legitimized without a Constitutional amendment. After all, Prohibition required an amendment, and now it doesn't (just affects a different product). There are few politicians who give a damn about what the Constitution says. Sadly, it's already almost completely irrelevant, with the exception of a couple amendments. They'd just say the Commerce Clause covers it, which is their rationalization for almost everything they do now.
Especially since they use the free space of an always-on OOB control channel that is required for all cellular operation in the first place. It's hardware and a channel that is already required, and text messaging doesn't impact it at all and costs virtually nothing to administer. What they charge is nearly 100% profit.
Leave it running for a while and that memory footprint will grow and grow. Depending on the sites, it would probably end up somewhere between 250MB and 500MB. At least, that's where it ends up whenever I forget to close it for a while.
Done that a number of times, and Opera comes out ahead in a vast majority of cases. I have to close Chrome and Firefox far more often as a result of aggressive resource consumption compared to Opera.
Absolutely nothing, but it's apparently not good to use software you can't see the source for. It doesn't matter if the software is faster, lighter, and integrates features years before anyone else does. Not OSS = bad.
This right here is the crux of the argument. If they can apply this to one set of circumstances, you can bet your ass it will be expanded at a later time. The Supreme Court is no longer capable of overturning past SCOTUS decisions, and as a result things like this will become entrenched in US government, to be expanded whenever it is politically expedient to go so.
This decision, no matter how limited, is absolutely sickening. Maybe they figure that, because we're at war, they are justified in repealing habeas corpus. Unfortunately, it won't be un-repealed when the wars end.
They also use it because Monsanto sues farmers who don't. When a farm that doesn't use Monsanto seeds is surrounded by farms that do, they cross-pollinate, and then Monsanto sues them for patent infringement. As a result, Monsanto now controls the vast majority of food crops in the United States, through their patented seeds. This is a problem that is the creation of one company and the fucked-up Supreme Court that said genetic material could be patented.
As memory increases in density and capacity, bit errors become vastly more common. The barriers to its use in home machines are manufacturers too cheap to put ECC support into chipsets and ignorance amongst even most tech-savvy consumers about the actual rate of correctable memory errors.
The person who replied to you seemed neither hell-bent on telling you the chip was broken, nor pissed that you got more cores for free. You seem to completely miss the perfectly valid point that it is entirely possible there is something wrong with one of the disabled cores that you won't find out about until it bites you. It's possible you got a perfectly functional chip. It's also possible you have one with something broken that hasn't cropped up because the conditions haven't been met.
Unless you have the manufacturer's test software, the entirety of the point was: You don't, and can't, actually know for sure. That's it. No bitching, pissing, or moaning. Just a simple fact. If it works for you forever without errors great. The certainty that will happen, though, does not exist.
Really the only difference between countries in their bribery and government contracts is the how they go about it. It's like the difference between a girlfriend who's only there for your bank account (assuming you both know that's the reason), a high-priced call girl, a middle-class hooker, and a crackwhore. They're all selling it. The only difference is in the terms used and how likely you are to lose your wallet to the pimp.
Not to mention that typical overdraft fees at credit unions are vastly lower than at most banks. Like half or better lower.
There are lots of ways to protect yourself from bank fees. It just requires some searching and a bit of research for those not already familiar. People who get screwed typically get screwed because they don't know any better and have never done anything about the fact that they don't know any better.
The "except" is not a big difference, in fact it's not a difference at all when comparing fraudulent use (with possession of the card) of the two types. A debit card can be used with a signature, exactly as a credit card can. If they're not going to check an ID with one, they're not going to check an ID with the other. The "nobody holds my debit card... internet use..." has no bearing as the argument can be used just the same for credit cards. If it's never lost it doesn't matter.
Increased security measures have increased costs. The average prices are built-in, and credit cards aren't going away. Smart shoppers get the average merchant costs lowered by debit card users, so like most things a higher percentage of burden is on the backs of those who pay less attention to the ramifications of their actions. I'm perfectly fine with all that.
The only time any of that comparison would be valid is with a debit card that cannot ever be used as a credit card. I wish you the best in finding one of those that is accepted at all standard terminals. If you have, you're lucky.
This really is a good answer. Not necessarily the low limit, but credit cards have far more protections than debit cards and are used in an identical manner (well, except for signature vs pin). If it's a credit account with the same bank your checking or savings account is with, it's usually pretty simple to transfer the money from your bank account to pay off the credit account monthly. Doing so incurs no additional cost. If the card is charged maliciously, you still have all the money in your bank account, and once the investigation is complete you don't pay interest on the balance that was on your card. It's a win-win.
If you absolutely have to have a card, there is no additional hardship doing it this way. Even if you have bad credit, you can get a secured card through your bank.
Self in the metaphysical sense is awareness. Just because awareness may cease entirely at death does not mean the metaphysical "self" does not exist during life.
If self-maintaining, self-propagating, self-aware machines are created at some point in the future, capable of their own direction, learning, personality, etc, does that mean they have some eternal afterlife? A sufficiently advanced computer may well be completely indistinguishable from a person except in physical manifestation. Self-awareness is not an argument that an eternal soul exists, nor is arguing that an eternal soul does not exist the same thing as saying there is no "self." Again, that's something you made up in your head (or the person who argued such from an atheistic standpoint leaves something to be desired in the common sense department, but since you used the term "implication" I'm assuming the former).
At a basic level, biology is just a different implementation of electromechanics. Until someone can provide some evidence for the existence of continuing particle or energy cohesion following death, the concept of an eternal soul will remain entirely within the province of metaphysics. Is it possible an eternal soul exist? Sure. It's also possible that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists. Maintaining an unequivocal position that one does is as silly as maintaining an unequivocal position that one doesn't. That's why it's called metaphysics. It's glorified mental masturbation. Much like the physical variety, it's enjoyable at times to engage in, but sad to base your entire life around.
I don't see any ambiguity in the word prescriptive; it simply means that they don't like the government to tell them to save energy.
If you had read the last sentence of the summary, let alone the article, you would know your conclusion is false. Also, the definition of what "prescriptive" means depends on the context. Were it not for the context that states the government is reasonable in demanding energy efficiency but unreasonable in prescribing exactly what measures are required to achieve that efficiency, the term would be very ambiguous in what exactly it meant.
Last I checked the atoms that people are made up of exist before they are born, and continue to exist after they die. The only thing that changes is which other atoms they are attached to at any given point in the process. That does not mean people who do not believe in a god do not believe in existence.
There is no implication of nonexistence. That's something you made up in your head.
From the bulk buys I've seen, drives tend to fail in large numbers from the same batch.
Prior to SATA, I've never actually had a Seagate drive fail. I have Seagate drives that ran 24/7 for 5-6 years that were fine when they were retired.
Not so much experience with the newer consumer models, though there was the 7200.(10|11)? model that had serious, serious problems across the entire line.
I thought there was an account that employment taxes went into that is used to make sure funding for such programs exist in the future.
Oh, wait, I was thinking about a world where politicians actually kept their word and didn't spend money they had no right to spend. My mistake, sorry about that.
Heh, children are an investment in future society to fund your future lifestyle because politicians can't be trusted to actually invest and save what they promised they would invest and save, and instead spend it on expanding benefits in an unsustainable manner. What a refreshingly honest assessment of how politics works.
Slashdot Mirror
Given the many things the Federal government does in excess of the authority granted by the Constitution, I'm sure this could be legitimized without a Constitutional amendment. After all, Prohibition required an amendment, and now it doesn't (just affects a different product). There are few politicians who give a damn about what the Constitution says. Sadly, it's already almost completely irrelevant, with the exception of a couple amendments. They'd just say the Commerce Clause covers it, which is their rationalization for almost everything they do now.
Given the way US debt works, it will never be paid off, regardless of how they enforce the tax laws.
Especially since they use the free space of an always-on OOB control channel that is required for all cellular operation in the first place. It's hardware and a channel that is already required, and text messaging doesn't impact it at all and costs virtually nothing to administer. What they charge is nearly 100% profit.
Leave it running for a while and that memory footprint will grow and grow. Depending on the sites, it would probably end up somewhere between 250MB and 500MB. At least, that's where it ends up whenever I forget to close it for a while.
It's also the browser that powers the web connection on the Wii.
Done that a number of times, and Opera comes out ahead in a vast majority of cases. I have to close Chrome and Firefox far more often as a result of aggressive resource consumption compared to Opera.
Absolutely nothing, but it's apparently not good to use software you can't see the source for. It doesn't matter if the software is faster, lighter, and integrates features years before anyone else does. Not OSS = bad.
Terry Childs, is that you?
This right here is the crux of the argument. If they can apply this to one set of circumstances, you can bet your ass it will be expanded at a later time. The Supreme Court is no longer capable of overturning past SCOTUS decisions, and as a result things like this will become entrenched in US government, to be expanded whenever it is politically expedient to go so.
This decision, no matter how limited, is absolutely sickening. Maybe they figure that, because we're at war, they are justified in repealing habeas corpus. Unfortunately, it won't be un-repealed when the wars end.
They weren't mistakes. The Smurfs did it.
They also use it because Monsanto sues farmers who don't. When a farm that doesn't use Monsanto seeds is surrounded by farms that do, they cross-pollinate, and then Monsanto sues them for patent infringement. As a result, Monsanto now controls the vast majority of food crops in the United States, through their patented seeds. This is a problem that is the creation of one company and the fucked-up Supreme Court that said genetic material could be patented.
As memory increases in density and capacity, bit errors become vastly more common. The barriers to its use in home machines are manufacturers too cheap to put ECC support into chipsets and ignorance amongst even most tech-savvy consumers about the actual rate of correctable memory errors.
Yes, probably more often than you might expect.
The person who replied to you seemed neither hell-bent on telling you the chip was broken, nor pissed that you got more cores for free. You seem to completely miss the perfectly valid point that it is entirely possible there is something wrong with one of the disabled cores that you won't find out about until it bites you. It's possible you got a perfectly functional chip. It's also possible you have one with something broken that hasn't cropped up because the conditions haven't been met.
Unless you have the manufacturer's test software, the entirety of the point was: You don't, and can't, actually know for sure. That's it. No bitching, pissing, or moaning. Just a simple fact. If it works for you forever without errors great. The certainty that will happen, though, does not exist.
It involves grave robbing, a good bit of surgical skill, and a lightning-powered electrical apparatus for reanimation.
Really the only difference between countries in their bribery and government contracts is the how they go about it. It's like the difference between a girlfriend who's only there for your bank account (assuming you both know that's the reason), a high-priced call girl, a middle-class hooker, and a crackwhore. They're all selling it. The only difference is in the terms used and how likely you are to lose your wallet to the pimp.
Not to mention that typical overdraft fees at credit unions are vastly lower than at most banks. Like half or better lower.
There are lots of ways to protect yourself from bank fees. It just requires some searching and a bit of research for those not already familiar. People who get screwed typically get screwed because they don't know any better and have never done anything about the fact that they don't know any better.
The "except" is not a big difference, in fact it's not a difference at all when comparing fraudulent use (with possession of the card) of the two types. A debit card can be used with a signature, exactly as a credit card can. If they're not going to check an ID with one, they're not going to check an ID with the other. The "nobody holds my debit card ... internet use ..." has no bearing as the argument can be used just the same for credit cards. If it's never lost it doesn't matter.
Increased security measures have increased costs. The average prices are built-in, and credit cards aren't going away. Smart shoppers get the average merchant costs lowered by debit card users, so like most things a higher percentage of burden is on the backs of those who pay less attention to the ramifications of their actions. I'm perfectly fine with all that.
The only time any of that comparison would be valid is with a debit card that cannot ever be used as a credit card. I wish you the best in finding one of those that is accepted at all standard terminals. If you have, you're lucky.
This really is a good answer. Not necessarily the low limit, but credit cards have far more protections than debit cards and are used in an identical manner (well, except for signature vs pin). If it's a credit account with the same bank your checking or savings account is with, it's usually pretty simple to transfer the money from your bank account to pay off the credit account monthly. Doing so incurs no additional cost. If the card is charged maliciously, you still have all the money in your bank account, and once the investigation is complete you don't pay interest on the balance that was on your card. It's a win-win.
If you absolutely have to have a card, there is no additional hardship doing it this way. Even if you have bad credit, you can get a secured card through your bank.
Self in the metaphysical sense is awareness. Just because awareness may cease entirely at death does not mean the metaphysical "self" does not exist during life.
If self-maintaining, self-propagating, self-aware machines are created at some point in the future, capable of their own direction, learning, personality, etc, does that mean they have some eternal afterlife? A sufficiently advanced computer may well be completely indistinguishable from a person except in physical manifestation. Self-awareness is not an argument that an eternal soul exists, nor is arguing that an eternal soul does not exist the same thing as saying there is no "self." Again, that's something you made up in your head (or the person who argued such from an atheistic standpoint leaves something to be desired in the common sense department, but since you used the term "implication" I'm assuming the former).
At a basic level, biology is just a different implementation of electromechanics. Until someone can provide some evidence for the existence of continuing particle or energy cohesion following death, the concept of an eternal soul will remain entirely within the province of metaphysics. Is it possible an eternal soul exist? Sure. It's also possible that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists. Maintaining an unequivocal position that one does is as silly as maintaining an unequivocal position that one doesn't. That's why it's called metaphysics. It's glorified mental masturbation. Much like the physical variety, it's enjoyable at times to engage in, but sad to base your entire life around.
If you had read the last sentence of the summary, let alone the article, you would know your conclusion is false. Also, the definition of what "prescriptive" means depends on the context. Were it not for the context that states the government is reasonable in demanding energy efficiency but unreasonable in prescribing exactly what measures are required to achieve that efficiency, the term would be very ambiguous in what exactly it meant.
Brand XYZ better watch out, Apple is probably already drawing up the lawsuit.
Last I checked the atoms that people are made up of exist before they are born, and continue to exist after they die. The only thing that changes is which other atoms they are attached to at any given point in the process. That does not mean people who do not believe in a god do not believe in existence.
There is no implication of nonexistence. That's something you made up in your head.
From the bulk buys I've seen, drives tend to fail in large numbers from the same batch.
Prior to SATA, I've never actually had a Seagate drive fail. I have Seagate drives that ran 24/7 for 5-6 years that were fine when they were retired.
Not so much experience with the newer consumer models, though there was the 7200.(10|11)? model that had serious, serious problems across the entire line.
I thought there was an account that employment taxes went into that is used to make sure funding for such programs exist in the future.
Oh, wait, I was thinking about a world where politicians actually kept their word and didn't spend money they had no right to spend. My mistake, sorry about that.
Heh, children are an investment in future society to fund your future lifestyle because politicians can't be trusted to actually invest and save what they promised they would invest and save, and instead spend it on expanding benefits in an unsustainable manner. What a refreshingly honest assessment of how politics works.