No, the US needs to split up into a bunch of separate countries.
The US is split up into a bunch of separate countries (called "States"). The problem is that our equivalent to the EU has been getting uppity since about FDR. To fix it, we just need to reinforce federalism and the separation of powers by weakening the Commerce and Elastic Clauses back to what they were intended to be and (possibly) repealing the 17th Amendment.
(Note: keep the replies arguing the semantics of "federations" vs. "confederations" to yourselves, please!)
On a more realistic note, if there was no such thing as free will, then science would never have developed anything. No thinking "outside the box" allowed;-)
I think your argument is flawed. What makes you think the scientists couldn't be pre-ordained to think outside the box?
Personally, I just assume free will exists: if I'm right, great; if I'm wrong, I was pre-ordained to be so!
The right to property follows from the physical fact that if I'm using an item then nobody else can be using it at the same time, and that it can be convenient not to have to constantly guard the item between uses. The differences between "Hey, I'm using that!" and "Hey, that's mine!" are not great.
You cannot have a language that is composed of a ton of glyphs but yet also have some extremely simple, small, entry system.
A stylus and character recognition is pretty small and simple (for the user; not the person who developed the character recognizer). I wouldn't want to use one for programming, though.
This is why I'd like some type of thing akin to a seal and a printed notice, "warranty void if seal opened". The N1 had this when flipping on OEM unlock.
Installing a different OS on my PC doesn't void its warranty; why should installing a different OS have to void the warranty on my phone?
I think what's lacking here is enforcement of consumer protection laws. Cellular manufacturers/carriers are screwing around with phone owners' personal property rights, and should be punished for it!
Yes, but using unlimited data access on the phone itself is different than using it to tether to a real computer in the same way that using an unmetered water hose to fill up a drinking glass is different than using it to fill up a swimming pool.
Who the fuck cares if it's a "good thing" (in some random asshat's opinion)?! The point is that he has the right to defeat the interlock because he owns the damn car!
I haven't seen glow plugs on anything more than about 15 years old
Are you sure you didn't mean to say less than about 15 years old?
My 12-year-old VW TDI (which has the same engine as 7-year-old VW TDIs) has glow plugs, although I don't need to use them unless it's nearly freezing (and that's on an engine with nearly 200K miles, too).
Most of the race car parts won't work well on the street for the average driver; carbon fiber rotors are great on the track but they don't stop you as short on the street, they just stop you more times in a short period. Indeed, even full-metallic pads have this problem and they also transmit more heat into the brake fluid, meaning you now have to run better fluid or cook it, but they don't fade AT ALL. Even those grooved rotors have less stopping power because of the reduced friction area.
You know, stopping power is irrelevant as long as you have enough of it to lock the wheels; in that case the limiting factor in stopping distance is the tire friction, not the brake friction.
My advice is not to throw your vote away on the same old shit and find a third party to vote for. The system is rigged against third parties, but since it doesn't matter who gets elected, you might as well send a message to the GOP/DNC that you're not apathetic, you're just not voting for them.
What the third parties need to do is form a coalition, and then they might get somewhere.
No, they're not. Both Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich hold beliefs that are *far* out of step with average American politics. The former is the craziest kind of libertarian whacko, and the latter is practically a communist when compared with his contemporaries in the US (and I'm Canadian, I know my communists).
But when people start talking about supporting a libertarian and a communist in the same breath, it ought to make you think it might be American politics that's out of step with America!
'Greenism'? Surveillance would be brilliant to monitor emails for emissions regulation avoidance. Republicans? Hey, gotta catch those crooks who threaten the property rights of honest people. Democrats? Human society can only be nice if we can detect and catch those who might harm it or escape their responsibilities to their fellow man.
I note that you omitted 'Libertarianism' from that list...
By the way, the Greens are pretty strong on civil liberties and privacy too (closer to Libertarians than to Republicans or Democrats).
Basically, if you make a phone call to any of the targeted regions (Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Yemen, etc.), the NSA is recording it--whether it's by cell, landline, or satellite (they have agreements with all the major satellite communications companies).
But not if it's by (end-user encrypted) VoIP -- hence this article. So while the NSA is powerful, it's not omniscient.
The federal government has been using an even scarier description of commerce since long before the Obama administration: It says it has the power to tell you, the individual, what sorts of plants you're allowed to grow on your own property, even when you plan to consume them yourself (or not at all).
(That's why the other politicians feel so threatened about the states suing over Obamacare: it messes not only with health care but also with drug regulation and a whole host of other things whose justification is based on the interstate commerce clause.)
"From time to time the Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Jefferson, founder of the Democrats
Jefferson was the founder of the Democratic-Republicans, which has little ideologically in common with the modern Democratic Party (or the Republican Party, for that matter!).
A Centrist, or an Undecided Voter, is what the rest of us are -- typically socially liberal and fiscally conservative. The resounding problem with the US two-party system is that Republicans have to go insane rightist to win their primaries, and Democrats have to go insane leftist to win their primaries. In the end, the "undecided" voters usually have to weigh which they prefer -- social responsibility of some of the Democrats, or fiscal responsibility of some of the Republicans
No, the real resounding problem is that in the choice between left-authoritarianism and right-authoritarianism, the majority don't have the option of choosing non-authoritarianism!
Tell you what: how about you look around and post a link here, rather than trying to lead everyone else on a wild goose chase? 'Cause otherwise nobody's going to believe you.
I think you're thinking of welfare; social security doesn't kick in until you're 65. And if the guy were inclined to steal my property in the first place, he'd probably still do so despite being on welfare.
Slashdot Mirror
The "... and he is right" part turned it into your opinion.
The US is split up into a bunch of separate countries (called "States"). The problem is that our equivalent to the EU has been getting uppity since about FDR. To fix it, we just need to reinforce federalism and the separation of powers by weakening the Commerce and Elastic Clauses back to what they were intended to be and (possibly) repealing the 17th Amendment.
(Note: keep the replies arguing the semantics of "federations" vs. "confederations" to yourselves, please!)
I think your argument is flawed. What makes you think the scientists couldn't be pre-ordained to think outside the box?
Personally, I just assume free will exists: if I'm right, great; if I'm wrong, I was pre-ordained to be so!
The right to property follows from the physical fact that if I'm using an item then nobody else can be using it at the same time, and that it can be convenient not to have to constantly guard the item between uses. The differences between "Hey, I'm using that!" and "Hey, that's mine!" are not great.
A stylus and character recognition is pretty small and simple (for the user; not the person who developed the character recognizer). I wouldn't want to use one for programming, though.
Installing a different OS on my PC doesn't void its warranty; why should installing a different OS have to void the warranty on my phone?
I think what's lacking here is enforcement of consumer protection laws. Cellular manufacturers/carriers are screwing around with phone owners' personal property rights, and should be punished for it!
Yes, but using unlimited data access on the phone itself is different than using it to tether to a real computer in the same way that using an unmetered water hose to fill up a drinking glass is different than using it to fill up a swimming pool.
Who the fuck cares if it's a "good thing" (in some random asshat's opinion)?! The point is that he has the right to defeat the interlock because he owns the damn car!
If you can't install a new OS, then it isn't really rooted!
Are you sure you didn't mean to say less than about 15 years old?
My 12-year-old VW TDI (which has the same engine as 7-year-old VW TDIs) has glow plugs, although I don't need to use them unless it's nearly freezing (and that's on an engine with nearly 200K miles, too).
You know, stopping power is irrelevant as long as you have enough of it to lock the wheels; in that case the limiting factor in stopping distance is the tire friction, not the brake friction.
A libertarian (which is another way of saying the same thing as chill and TheRaven64).
What the third parties need to do is form a coalition, and then they might get somewhere.
But when people start talking about supporting a libertarian and a communist in the same breath, it ought to make you think it might be American politics that's out of step with America!
I note that you omitted 'Libertarianism' from that list...
By the way, the Greens are pretty strong on civil liberties and privacy too (closer to Libertarians than to Republicans or Democrats).
Communism has been done the right way plenty of times, most notably among various indigenous tribes. The key is that it only works on a small scale.
But not if it's by (end-user encrypted) VoIP -- hence this article. So while the NSA is powerful, it's not omniscient.
Take note that that's box number three; after that there's only one left...
The federal government has been using an even scarier description of commerce since long before the Obama administration: It says it has the power to tell you, the individual, what sorts of plants you're allowed to grow on your own property, even when you plan to consume them yourself (or not at all).
(That's why the other politicians feel so threatened about the states suing over Obamacare: it messes not only with health care but also with drug regulation and a whole host of other things whose justification is based on the interstate commerce clause.)
Jefferson was the founder of the Democratic-Republicans, which has little ideologically in common with the modern Democratic Party (or the Republican Party, for that matter!).
Who says? It'd make me more likely to vote for him next time!
Except that the board of directors and the major stakeholders are all also executives who collude to gorge themselves on everybody else's dime.
No, the real resounding problem is that in the choice between left-authoritarianism and right-authoritarianism, the majority don't have the option of choosing non-authoritarianism!
Tell you what: how about you look around and post a link here, rather than trying to lead everyone else on a wild goose chase? 'Cause otherwise nobody's going to believe you.
I think you're thinking of welfare; social security doesn't kick in until you're 65. And if the guy were inclined to steal my property in the first place, he'd probably still do so despite being on welfare.