The "high-speed" stuff is a red herring (side note: ars technica articles re legal issues should always be taken with a grain of salt). The complaint is really about failure to 'deplatform' after repeated cases of illegal use.
Worse, there isn't an institution in Washington with an interest in protecting federalism anymore. And, as one would predict, power has centralized (much to the chagrin of D's nowadays).
A bit off topic, but... it's *not* illegal to decrypt material that you've purchased under the DMCA. It's just illegal to decrypt material you rent (e.g., stream) or to 'traffiic' in decryption devices.
This is one of the reasons copyright owners love streaming services.
"Mr. Murry...disclosed that the Trump administration 'hasn't actually been using it for the past six months.'" That sounds a whole lot like leaking current intelligence methods. I'd suspend Mr. Murry's clearances for awhile.
It's just switched from being a growth market to a mature market. And, as such, the game becomes how to take market share* away from your competitors.
*arguably, this was always the case. It was just new media taking market share from newspapers, televised sports, movies, etc. Now, new media is also competing against new media.
To each their own, I guess... I sorta prefer scripted games because it might be several months(!) between play sessions. As opposed to open world games, where I've forgotten all of the silly sub-quests and sub-characters during the gap.
Personally, I have doubts about my ability to detect fire in my carry-on in an overhead compartment - at least any quicker than would the on-board smoke detectors.
And, of course, dealing with fire/smoke in the passenger compartment has it's own set of issues. In some ways, it would be worse than in the hold.
Question, do planes have a fire suppression system in the hold?
True as far as it goes... but the commentary world collectively decided to centralize on a handful of proprietary* platforms. Obviously, there as been much regret lately over that decision. And, while a few people with well-known existing brands (e.g., David Rubin, Jordan Peterson) have tried to break out, I suspect it would be very hard for 2nd tier and up-and-comers to make the same move.
*I'm still surprised that proprietary formats won the Internet. 15 years ago, I would have bet the house on open standards.
Yea, anyone with any sense would start with some form of 'personalized rapid transit' nowadays. The only complicating factor is existing investment legacy systems; I could see older cities concluding they should stick with subways/trains for awhile.
That said, this train seems more like a new project than an expansion project. The planners here blew it
... It wouldn't have enabled any growth to occur at all. I would have just been an expense.
It's arguably worse than that...to the extent that high speed rail interferes with our existing, world-class(!!) freight rail system, it might be negative growth. Most plans rely shared infrastructure to keep costs down, and so, will require priority.
But more generally, I agree. High speed rail lacks a killer app. We already have a faster mode (air), a cheaper mode (bus), and a more flexible mode (car). Why would one pick rail over those?
> For someone like the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times to purchase large numbers of papers, and become so large that they control all the news: local, national and international.
"And," not "or" The problem is there are hundreds of newspapers that all distribute the same exact content from AP/Reuters. That just isn't going to work in a market with zero marginal costs (as opposed to the local monopolies for which that business model was developed). Frankly, I'm surprised that they haven't started loyalty programs for their free news i.e., kick back some of their advertising revenue to the readers.
The long term solution is to borrow the British model: 3-4 national conglomerates that own their content and can monetize it accross a variety of platforms. Presumably, a R leaning group (fox), a D leaning group (msm survivor), a government propaganda group (npr/pbs), and maybe a business info group (WSJ or bloomberg).
I'm skeptical too, but... I suppose the theory is that Uber can bankrupt the startup via predatory pricing, then return to monopoly profits afterwords.
The major airlines have been relatively successful with the strategy over the years
"Regular users have been using this feature for years to to register free trial accounts at online services using the same email address, but spelled out in different ways." vs "one group in particular use [sic] 56 'dotted' variations of a Gmail address to...submit 48 credit card applications...resulting in the approval of at least $65,000 in fraudulent credit."
I'm not sure I see the difference. Most free trial accounts are limited to one/person...
Slashdot Mirror
"for only a few bucks a month" is still more than zero
The "high-speed" stuff is a red herring (side note: ars technica articles re legal issues should always be taken with a grain of salt). The complaint is really about failure to 'deplatform' after repeated cases of illegal use.
Worse, there isn't an institution in Washington with an interest in protecting federalism anymore. And, as one would predict, power has centralized (much to the chagrin of D's nowadays).
A bit off topic, but... it's *not* illegal to decrypt material that you've purchased under the DMCA. It's just illegal to decrypt material you rent (e.g., stream) or to 'traffiic' in decryption devices.
This is one of the reasons copyright owners love streaming services.
I'm sure they would...but cancer cases normally can't qualify b/c lack common facts.
So, the fallback strategy is to try a handful (4-10) of test cases to establish a going rate, then use those data points to settle the rest.
Technically, the electoral college *is* our committee of experts to select the president. Fun fact, each elector is a real person.
The normal argument against the EC is that it's not democratic, not that its members are unqualified.
I agree, so this is just nitpicking...paper ballots arguably violate #2. I can show some the ballot before depositing it into the ballot box.
Vote by mail also makes vote buying trivial.
To be honest, this doesn't sound like something in DARPA's normal wheelhouse. It's not really "defense" nor "advanced."
Are we using DARPA as a slushfund now?
"Mr. Murry...disclosed that the Trump administration 'hasn't actually been using it for the past six months.'" That sounds a whole lot like leaking current intelligence methods. I'd suspend Mr. Murry's clearances for awhile.
Not to mention (according to TFA), "...and a court later secretly blessed it." That is, it wasn't "a raw assertion of executive power...."
It's just switched from being a growth market to a mature market. And, as such, the game becomes how to take market share* away from your competitors.
*arguably, this was always the case. It was just new media taking market share from newspapers, televised sports, movies, etc. Now, new media is also competing against new media.
To each their own, I guess... I sorta prefer scripted games because it might be several months(!) between play sessions. As opposed to open world games, where I've forgotten all of the silly sub-quests and sub-characters during the gap.
"immediately obvious"
Personally, I have doubts about my ability to detect fire in my carry-on in an overhead compartment - at least any quicker than would the on-board smoke detectors.
And, of course, dealing with fire/smoke in the passenger compartment has it's own set of issues. In some ways, it would be worse than in the hold.
Question, do planes have a fire suppression system in the hold?
Given it doesn't apply to carry-on baggage, I'm not sure safety is the point either.
True as far as it goes... but the commentary world collectively decided to centralize on a handful of proprietary* platforms. Obviously, there as been much regret lately over that decision. And, while a few people with well-known existing brands (e.g., David Rubin, Jordan Peterson) have tried to break out, I suspect it would be very hard for 2nd tier and up-and-comers to make the same move.
*I'm still surprised that proprietary formats won the Internet. 15 years ago, I would have bet the house on open standards.
It's part of the executive branch --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Yea, anyone with any sense would start with some form of 'personalized rapid transit' nowadays. The only complicating factor is existing investment legacy systems; I could see older cities concluding they should stick with subways/trains for awhile.
That said, this train seems more like a new project than an expansion project. The planners here blew it
(and yes, PRT has been know for decades)
I suspect they do this already, but there are clauses for delays caused by the government.
... It wouldn't have enabled any growth to occur at all. I would have just been an expense.
It's arguably worse than that...to the extent that high speed rail interferes with our existing, world-class(!!) freight rail system, it might be negative growth. Most plans rely shared infrastructure to keep costs down, and so, will require priority.
But more generally, I agree. High speed rail lacks a killer app. We already have a faster mode (air), a cheaper mode (bus), and a more flexible mode (car). Why would one pick rail over those?
Cars and trains have very different engineering requirements.
So, what stops East CA from building dams all over the place to stop West CA from continuing to have water that they have now?
That's exactly what water rights do.
> For someone like the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times to purchase large numbers of papers, and become so large that they control all the news: local, national and international.
"And," not "or" The problem is there are hundreds of newspapers that all distribute the same exact content from AP/Reuters. That just isn't going to work in a market with zero marginal costs (as opposed to the local monopolies for which that business model was developed). Frankly, I'm surprised that they haven't started loyalty programs for their free news i.e., kick back some of their advertising revenue to the readers.
The long term solution is to borrow the British model: 3-4 national conglomerates that own their content and can monetize it accross a variety of platforms. Presumably, a R leaning group (fox), a D leaning group (msm survivor), a government propaganda group (npr/pbs), and maybe a business info group (WSJ or bloomberg).
I'm skeptical too, but ... I suppose the theory is that Uber can bankrupt the startup via predatory pricing, then return to monopoly profits afterwords.
The major airlines have been relatively successful with the strategy over the years
"Regular users have been using this feature for years to to register free trial accounts at online services using the same email address, but spelled out in different ways."
vs
"one group in particular use [sic] 56 'dotted' variations of a Gmail address to...submit 48 credit card applications...resulting in the approval of at least $65,000 in fraudulent credit."
I'm not sure I see the difference. Most free trial accounts are limited to one/person...