The bill came up after the head of ATT complained about how "google was using his 'pipes' for free".
And how he wanted to correct that, so that google was paying him.
Never mind that google paid their ISP, and their ISP and ATT ( if they are not the same, I presume not, or he would not have cause to complain ( course, I am stupid, he doesnt have cause to
complain then, but still he did ) ) have either a peering arrangement or a cash arrangement to carry each other's traffic ( you know, the arrangements that make the interconnects between each telco/isp's networks worth much of anything in the first place... )
Google is already paying for the bandwidth they use.
Why should they pay twice?
Not to mention that such an arrangement would freeze out smaller businesses that cannot afford the bandwidth pirate fees. And note that the unpredicablity of such fees will make that especially troublesome for a small business.
If the ISPs and Telcos cant make ends meet on what they charge, then there is an easy, direct, non-extortionate solution to that problem.
Another post in reply to yours has covered the concept that companies can and will act in a cartel'ish manner to increase profitability, so I will say no more.
I hear you. I took a C course at JC a long time ago, the instructor did not know C when he started the course, I probably knew more of C than he did at the end, he gave me a "C" in the class.
I expect you are correct, but what do you want to bet that the ISP's will institute some small fee for so listing.
And some spammers will declare themselves as mailing lists ( they claim to obey opt in now, right, but we know they dont ) and continue.
Here is an idea: find a way to combine this with user moderation, if enough of your list thinks you are spam, and the traffic pattern analysis thinks it might be, then it is. How to moderate is the question. Embed a link in the email? "Click here to vote this email as spam." Or, for the purists, one could send a voting email to the user ( with the above link, and some explaination ), delay, then send the actual email. Or make the original email an embedded attachment to "our" email, send as a unit. Assuming that the traffic pattern analysis determined the item was questionable. Link would point back to a site set up by the maintainer of the MTA.
As far as Gonzales is concerned, if that had been his intent, then I am puzzled why he did not make it clear that the right to due process did not need granting. It was clear to me in reading the section of the transcript that that clarification was needed, I cant help but think it was clear to him, unless that was not what he was arguing.
No plan is perfect. As I have no real hope of mine being enacted, I shant worry about it much.
I will say that I had an idea that the plan was not good some someone, which was why I made the penalty monitary instead of something else like jail time.
In short, it's a problem that's not easily solved.
Maybe if we let the opportunistic "first receivers" get punished along with the actual perps, the urge to buy those stocks will go away. Make the punishment to lose twice what you gained in the transaction.
If he rats them out, then any scenario involving Darl becoming an employee of Microsoft would go right out the door. Not saying I know anything, but I would be far and away less than suprised to find him working there after all the dust has settled.
Battleships at up to 20k yards were having these kinds of troubles.
What I found interesting is that the British had a crude fire control computer in WWI. F.C. Dreyer.
As to the slug/shell/missile correcting it's course, I would presume that shape would not be the huge issue it is for a normal gun, and that fins might be afforded the projectile.
If not, I would think having pop-out fins that came out a millisecond or 12 after the item was subjected to it's launch would suffice. Might even have them stay in until it is on it's terminal dive, for aerodynamic reasons.
With the gun only able to fire 10 times in a day, accuracy will be paramount. In the battleship days, they would expend a tremendous amount of ordinance to gain a small number of hits. In fact, I could see the designers saying something like, well, we dont need a high rate of fire, because we can have a very high probability of hitting.
Matthew 19:4 "Havent you read", he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate."
Yes. I had presumed Adultery was equivilent to sexual relationships outside the context of marriage, I see now that that is not strictly true. And my quick scan of my concordance, I cant find anything specifically saying "no sex before marriage". Of course *I* can never seem to find anything I am specifically looking for at the time I need it, but rather some time later, I run across it and say, "Dang, I wish I had seen that then".
In the "coming to church naked" part I presume you are refering to KJ: "Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon." NIV" "And do nt go up to my alter on steps, lest your nakedness be exposed on it".
I beleive the "nakedness" is spiritual rather than physical.
My translation of the bible is NIV, and the reference to Ex 20:17 is "You shall not covet your neighbors house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant, or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor". Which supports your theory.
I dont know that they know where the ships go down.
What they have is the estimate of the location of a ship that was with a ship that went down, and an estimate of how far and in what direction that ship was. From there, you dont know that the ship will go straight down. The various parts of hood and titanic, for instance, ended up quite far from each other, as I recall.
As to the biblical reference you site, I dont know that you can claim rape. It is ambiguous as to what the "husband to be"/"rapist" should do if the captive woman does not like the idea. There is the "if she does not please you let her go whereever she wishes". Note, you cant sell her, or take her as a slave.
Sounds like she has some discresion in the matter to me.
On taking multiple wifes, well, I dont know.
And the "killing your own children" part, it is not like "la, te, da, I'm bored, yeah, I know, I'll kill the kids today to alleviate the boredom". The kid would have to be rebellious. In my reading of the verse, I would say the parents have been trying for a long while, to the point where the child is nearly adult ( drunken and gluttonous, I am supposing is something you are not likely to be until close to adulthood ). *Then* you have to take the child to the elders at the city gate, and get them to agree with you on this.
"From a christian standpoint people have original sin and are supposed to feel guilty about their natural desires."
As a Christian, I will say that some ( even many ) Christian may view this subject in this way.
But, sex is a God created thing, and when enjoyed by a married couple as God intended, there is nothing to feel guilty or ashamed of. As for those not married, God created all of us, and understands that we all have urges and desires. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as you dont allow the urge or desire to drive you into sexual activity outside of a marriage.
Slashdot Mirror
Because the Republicans hate our internet freedoms?
My recollection differs from yours.
The bill came up after the head of ATT complained
about how "google was using his 'pipes' for free".
And how he wanted to correct that, so that google
was paying him.
Never mind that google paid their ISP, and their
ISP and ATT ( if they are not the same, I presume
not, or he would not have cause to complain
( course, I am stupid, he doesnt have cause to
complain then, but still he did ) ) have either
a peering arrangement or a cash arrangement to
carry each other's traffic ( you know, the
arrangements that make the interconnects between
each telco/isp's networks worth much of anything
in the first place... )
But, yes, the Democrats backed the bill.
He was being ironic.
Google is already paying for the bandwidth they use.
Why should they pay twice?
Not to mention that such an arrangement would freeze
out smaller businesses that cannot afford the
bandwidth pirate fees. And note that the unpredicablity
of such fees will make that especially troublesome
for a small business.
If the ISPs and Telcos cant make ends meet on what
they charge, then there is an easy, direct, non-extortionate
solution to that problem.
Another post in reply to yours has covered the concept
that companies can and will act in a cartel'ish manner
to increase profitability, so I will say no more.
I hear you. I took a C course
at JC a long time ago, the instructor
did not know C when he started the course,
I probably knew more of C than he did at
the end, he gave me a "C" in the class.
We are waiting to win the spine lottery.
Hopefully it will not be too taxing.
I expect you are correct, but what do you want to bet that
the ISP's will institute some small fee for so listing.
And some spammers will declare themselves as mailing lists
( they claim to obey opt in now, right, but we know they dont )
and continue.
Here is an idea: find a way to combine this with user moderation,
if enough of your list thinks you are spam, and the traffic
pattern analysis thinks it might be, then it is. How to
moderate is the question. Embed a link in the email?
"Click here to vote this email as spam."
Or, for the purists, one could send a voting email to the
user ( with the above link, and some explaination ), delay,
then send the actual email. Or make the original email
an embedded attachment to "our" email, send as a unit.
Assuming that the traffic pattern analysis determined the item
was questionable. Link would point back to a site set up
by the maintainer of the MTA.
I believe you are correct on the rights.
As far as Gonzales is concerned, if that had been his intent,
then I am puzzled why he did not make it clear that the right
to due process did not need granting. It was clear to me
in reading the section of the transcript that that clarification
was needed, I cant help but think it was clear to him, unless
that was not what he was arguing.
Good point.
No plan is perfect. As I have no real hope of mine
being enacted, I shant worry about it much.
I will say that I had an idea that the plan was not
good some someone, which was why I made the penalty
monitary instead of something else like jail time.
Maybe if we let the opportunistic "first receivers" get punished along with
the actual perps, the urge to buy those stocks will go away. Make the
punishment to lose twice what you gained in the transaction.
If he rats them out, then any scenario involving Darl becoming
an employee of Microsoft would go right out the door. Not saying
I know anything, but I would be far and away less than suprised
to find him working there after all the dust has settled.
Battleships at up to 20k yards were having these kinds of troubles.
What I found interesting is that the British had a crude fire
control computer in WWI. F.C. Dreyer.
As to the slug/shell/missile correcting it's course, I would
presume that shape would not be the huge issue it is for a
normal gun, and that fins might be afforded the projectile.
If not, I would think having pop-out fins that came out a
millisecond or 12 after the item was subjected to it's launch
would suffice. Might even have them stay in until it is on
it's terminal dive, for aerodynamic reasons.
With the gun only able to fire 10 times in a day, accuracy will
be paramount. In the battleship days, they would expend a tremendous
amount of ordinance to gain a small number of hits. In fact, I
could see the designers saying something like, well, we dont
need a high rate of fire, because we can have a very high probability
of hitting.
USS Bainbridge.
Terminal guidance, to correct for any unknowns that
perturb the tragectory while in flight.
And if the unit can report back that it was about to
hit something, that might reduce the need for battle
damage assessment type flights.
I've always been afraid of fresh fruit.
You have to enable it.
It's on the tools menu.
AutoAstroTurf is on by default, so like, no worries.
What an excellent point!
... ) see Marriage
My concordance has
Marriage: state of being married, see Married
Married: united in wedlock, (
I would offer:
"The union of a man and a woman."
Matthew 19:4
"Havent you read", he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them
male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and
mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? So they
are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let not
man separate."
So, marriage is "what God has joined together".
Yes. I had presumed Adultery was equivilent to sexual relationships
outside the context of marriage, I see now that that is not strictly
true. And my quick scan of my concordance, I cant find anything
specifically saying "no sex before marriage". Of course *I* can
never seem to find anything I am specifically looking for at the time
I need it, but rather some time later, I run across it and say, "Dang,
I wish I had seen that then".
In the "coming to church naked" part I presume you are refering to
KJ: "Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon."
NIV" "And do nt go up to my alter on steps, lest your nakedness be exposed on it".
I beleive the "nakedness" is spiritual rather than physical.
My translation of the bible is NIV, and the reference to Ex 20:17 is
"You shall not covet your neighbors house. You shall not covet your
neighbor's wife, or his manservant, or maidservant, his ox or donkey,
or anything that belongs to your neighbor". Which supports your theory.
We all have our priorities, eh?
:-)
Good luck with your life also.
I dont know that they know where the ships go down.
What they have is the estimate of the location of a ship that
was with a ship that went down, and an estimate of how far and
in what direction that ship was. From there, you dont know
that the ship will go straight down. The various parts of
hood and titanic, for instance, ended up quite far from each
other, as I recall.
Perhaps the test is so that *we* know what we are made of?
In forming things in the physical world we heat and stress
things to make them as we want them. Perhaps it is the
same here?
I will grant you that God could easily make us exactly as
he wants us to turn out, but that would prevent much excersize
of free will.
I dont know all the answers. I dont think anyone does. We all
have to proceed as we see best. I am doing so. I presume you
are also doing so.
Exodus 20:14.
As to the biblical reference you site, I dont know
that you can claim rape. It is ambiguous as to what
the "husband to be"/"rapist" should do if the captive
woman does not like the idea. There is the "if she
does not please you let her go whereever she wishes".
Note, you cant sell her, or take her as a slave.
Sounds like she has some discresion in the matter to me.
On taking multiple wifes, well, I dont know.
And the "killing your own children" part, it is not like
"la, te, da, I'm bored, yeah, I know, I'll kill the
kids today to alleviate the boredom". The kid would
have to be rebellious. In my reading of the verse, I
would say the parents have been trying for a long while,
to the point where the child is nearly adult ( drunken
and gluttonous, I am supposing is something you are not
likely to be until close to adulthood ). *Then* you
have to take the child to the elders at the city gate,
and get them to agree with you on this.
You have to make your own decisions on life and how to live it.
Did I involve a government in this? I am unaware of how I did so.
We are tested by many trials in life. This is one of them.
"From a christian standpoint people have original sin and are supposed to feel guilty about their natural desires."
As a Christian, I will say that some ( even many ) Christian may view this subject in this way.
But, sex is a God created thing, and when enjoyed by a married couple as God intended, there
is nothing to feel guilty or ashamed of. As for those not married, God created all of us, and
understands that we all have urges and desires. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as you
dont allow the urge or desire to drive you into sexual activity outside of a marriage.