A good portion of the 'high upfront cost' is that the company still has to keep the construction workers on the payroll while they grind the injunctions through the court system to get them lifted. Lawyers aren't cheap. Neither are construction crews. And when the injunction is lifted, they have to inspect 100% and repair any damage caused to the portions of the plant exposed to the elements while work is stopped waiting for the courts to dismiss those injunctions.
Check out the history of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant in Perry, Ohio. Lotta lawsuits, lotta injunctions against putting various reactors online. They never did bring it all the way up.
Does it matter? The econutters will do their damnedest to make sure none of these puppies go online. They've got a track record of going apeshit as soon as they hear the word 'nuclear'. And considering the units will be manufactured 'elsewhere' and shipped to the site, they'll scream that the terrorrorrorrorists will be able to shortstop one of them and make a WMD or something. This tells me that this idea, great in concept, just ain't gonna fly.
Pity. Thorium reactors are much safer all the way around and don't contain plutonium.
I live in two states that have manditory insurance laws, as I've already noted. In neither state has my premiums decreased by more than $50/year in the 15 years I've had insurance with this company. No accidents whatsoever, zero 'points' on my license, not even a parking ticket in those 15 years.
As if insurance companies are going to lower your premiums. What they'll do with this data is, increase premiums on those they now know are 'unsafe'.
This is bogus. Insurance companies want nothing more than to get as many safe drivers on their rolls as possible. That means offering them the lowest premiums they can. It's a fiercely competitive market (don't tell me you don't see, hear, or read at least one GEICO, Progressive, Nationwide, or Esurance commercial every day of your life). They have no incentive for punitive pricing. Unless of course they plan to start illegally colluding with each other on prices.
The two states I live in, Arizona and Ohio, each have manditory insurance laws. In fact, if you drop your insurance in Mohave County Arizona and don't go with somebody else, 5 days later a deputy sheriff comes out to your house with a screwdriver to confiscate your license plates. I shopped around for insurance in both of these states, and the rates are comparable if you search for standards (state minimums, full coverage with x deductible, etc). I haven't had as much as a parking ticket in 15 years, yet my rates haven't gone down much. Maybe 50 bucks a year.
As for the rest of your comment, call my Congresscritters? I don't have enough bribe money^F^Fcampaign contributions to affect their vote.
Reread the 'exceptions' clauses of the proposed legislation. Be afraid. Be VERY afraid.
There is no exception clause to Sec. 31406
GP reverenced Sec 1131(a) and Sec. 30166 not Sec. 31406. I'm not personally familiar with any of these, but the existance of the loophole says the cops CAN download the data 'pursuant to an investigation or inspection' under those sections, doesn't say anything about a warrant, and in today's climate, assume the worst.
Yeah, it's kinda hard to justify a TSA Keystone Kop in every car, so they're doing the next best thing. After all, we wouldn't want those terrorrorrorrorrists to win, now, would we?
(C) the information is retrieved pursuant to an investigation or inspection authorized under section 1131(a) or 30166 of title 49, United States Code, and the personally identifiable information of the owner, lessee, or driver of the vehicle and the vehicle identification number is not disclosed in connection with the retrieved information; or
As in, those Federally mandated emissions checks most states have in place? Or a New Years Eve 'drunk stop' checkpoint designed to get drunk drivers off the road? Yeah, on first glance, the proposed legislation respects the privacy of the owner, but clauses like this open big wide gaping loopholes just begging for abuse. "Your Honor, at the time I was manning a manditory drunk driver intervention checkpoint and the suspect was acting in a suspcious manner, so persuant to statutes, I did a standard 'read' of his car's black box and found..."
If they are indeed just local data recorders, I don't really see a problem, as they could be used to make insurance arguments a lot less painful.
As if insurance companies are going to lower your premiums. What they'll do with this data is, increase premiums on those they now know are 'unsafe'. As in, you actually drive your car instead of keeping it safely in the garage. Or drive through 'unsafe' neighborhoods because it's the only fast way to work. Or drive 'too much', because statistics say an accident is inevitable, and the more you drive, the more likely you are to have an accident. Or, on Jan 1, you acellerated 10 miles an hour over the speed limit and did some sharp turns, no matter that you were manuevering to get out of an accident.
It's only really a privacy concern for the overly paranoid if they are data-transmission-enabled.
or, you know, if a cop can pull a quick download off it at a routine traffic stop or 'manditory spot inspection' with or without a warrant. Or probable cause. Or because he's bored and his sergeant is hassling him to get that ticket book filled out so that the city can make up the revenue shortfall from lost taxes as people move out of the area searching for jobs. Ignore the 5th Ammendment aspects of that black box for a moment and think it through. Those black boxes are meant to be used, and not necessarily in your favor. You really think they won't be downloaded and analysed at any excuse? You really think there won't be rulings that they somehow magically don't violate your 5th Ammendment rights? Maybe you're insufficiently paranoid.
The TSA agent is appealing to the authority of his trainers and supervisors.
These morons get training? What, to not piss on their hands or something? We're dealing with the 'not the brightest crayons in the box' types here, otherwise they'd have real jobs.
Meanwhile, any kids who might have seen his protest will soon enough be fondled by the TSA, but that's somehow considered perfectly fine by the feds.
Kinda makes you wonder if the TSA screens any of their Keystone Kops for sex offenses, don't it? When is a 'sex crime' not a sex crime? When you're on the government payroll?
The plot? You sure about that? The few times I've bothered watching the Playboy Channel, the shows didn't have a plot. A concept, yeah, but no plot other than 'everybody gets their rocks off'.
And now you know why I don't bother with buying a smartphone. My fossil Motorola minibrick does just fine, thank you. Hell, it doesn't even have a CAMERA.
Slashdot Mirror
A good portion of the 'high upfront cost' is that the company still has to keep the construction workers on the payroll while they grind the injunctions through the court system to get them lifted. Lawyers aren't cheap. Neither are construction crews. And when the injunction is lifted, they have to inspect 100% and repair any damage caused to the portions of the plant exposed to the elements while work is stopped waiting for the courts to dismiss those injunctions.
Check out the history of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant in Perry, Ohio. Lotta lawsuits, lotta injunctions against putting various reactors online. They never did bring it all the way up.
Does it matter? The econutters will do their damnedest to make sure none of these puppies go online. They've got a track record of going apeshit as soon as they hear the word 'nuclear'. And considering the units will be manufactured 'elsewhere' and shipped to the site, they'll scream that the terrorrorrorrorists will be able to shortstop one of them and make a WMD or something. This tells me that this idea, great in concept, just ain't gonna fly.
Pity. Thorium reactors are much safer all the way around and don't contain plutonium.
I don't see why not. Of course, the cops will have a cable to hook up to the box 'just in case'.
I live in two states that have manditory insurance laws, as I've already noted. In neither state has my premiums decreased by more than $50/year in the 15 years I've had insurance with this company. No accidents whatsoever, zero 'points' on my license, not even a parking ticket in those 15 years.
The two states I live in, Arizona and Ohio, each have manditory insurance laws. In fact, if you drop your insurance in Mohave County Arizona and don't go with somebody else, 5 days later a deputy sheriff comes out to your house with a screwdriver to confiscate your license plates. I shopped around for insurance in both of these states, and the rates are comparable if you search for standards (state minimums, full coverage with x deductible, etc). I haven't had as much as a parking ticket in 15 years, yet my rates haven't gone down much. Maybe 50 bucks a year.
As for the rest of your comment, call my Congresscritters? I don't have enough bribe money^F^Fcampaign contributions to affect their vote.
GP reverenced Sec 1131(a) and Sec. 30166 not Sec. 31406. I'm not personally familiar with any of these, but the existance of the loophole says the cops CAN download the data 'pursuant to an investigation or inspection' under those sections, doesn't say anything about a warrant, and in today's climate, assume the worst.
Why would I want to go to Washington DC in the first place, let alone park beside Congress????
They'll believe the computer over you. It's easier.
BTW, what's the fine and how many points do you get on your license for driving 4050 mph over the speed limit, anyways?
Yeah, it's kinda hard to justify a TSA Keystone Kop in every car, so they're doing the next best thing. After all, we wouldn't want those terrorrorrorrorrists to win, now, would we?
Reread the 'exceptions' clauses of the proposed legislation. Be afraid. Be VERY afraid.
As in, those Federally mandated emissions checks most states have in place? Or a New Years Eve 'drunk stop' checkpoint designed to get drunk drivers off the road? Yeah, on first glance, the proposed legislation respects the privacy of the owner, but clauses like this open big wide gaping loopholes just begging for abuse. "Your Honor, at the time I was manning a manditory drunk driver intervention checkpoint and the suspect was acting in a suspcious manner, so persuant to statutes, I did a standard 'read' of his car's black box and found ..."
As if insurance companies are going to lower your premiums. What they'll do with this data is, increase premiums on those they now know are 'unsafe'. As in, you actually drive your car instead of keeping it safely in the garage. Or drive through 'unsafe' neighborhoods because it's the only fast way to work. Or drive 'too much', because statistics say an accident is inevitable, and the more you drive, the more likely you are to have an accident. Or, on Jan 1, you acellerated 10 miles an hour over the speed limit and did some sharp turns, no matter that you were manuevering to get out of an accident.
or, you know, if a cop can pull a quick download off it at a routine traffic stop or 'manditory spot inspection' with or without a warrant. Or probable cause. Or because he's bored and his sergeant is hassling him to get that ticket book filled out so that the city can make up the revenue shortfall from lost taxes as people move out of the area searching for jobs. Ignore the 5th Ammendment aspects of that black box for a moment and think it through. Those black boxes are meant to be used, and not necessarily in your favor. You really think they won't be downloaded and analysed at any excuse? You really think there won't be rulings that they somehow magically don't violate your 5th Ammendment rights? Maybe you're insufficiently paranoid.
These morons get training? What, to not piss on their hands or something? We're dealing with the 'not the brightest crayons in the box' types here, otherwise they'd have real jobs.
Kinda makes you wonder if the TSA screens any of their Keystone Kops for sex offenses, don't it? When is a 'sex crime' not a sex crime? When you're on the government payroll?
Name?
Social Security number?
Place of (former) employment?
CORRIE, baby, Corrie! From what I hear, Coronation Street's numbers outweigh Downton Abbey.
I agree, and this is an important victory over BREIN and the rest of teh MAFIAAs. Keep up the good work, Holland!!
To get streaming media, of course. Current laws under purchasing negociations are going to turn the internet into Cable TV 2.0.
That's 'Cylon-American', you insensitive clod!!! 'Toaster' is offensive to us!
The plot? You sure about that? The few times I've bothered watching the Playboy Channel, the shows didn't have a plot. A concept, yeah, but no plot other than 'everybody gets their rocks off'.
And now you know why I don't bother with buying a smartphone. My fossil Motorola minibrick does just fine, thank you. Hell, it doesn't even have a CAMERA.
Lock & load...
For a revolution in the US, you need 2 things.
1. Everybody needs to go a day without eating.
2. Shut off the internet & the cable tv.
You'll have a new government in place in the morning.
More likely, it was more of a case of the studio going "Here's the deal. Take it or leave it. No? NEXT!"