"Chiropractors may be effective at giving temporary relief for back pain, so if you just want the pain to go away for a few days they may be a good solution."
The mainstream medical equivalent is to prescribe a dozen opiate pills to achieve the same result, but with significant downsides. Which is bullshit?
Really, the manufacturers track threats and release mitigations better than you can, and are built for exactly what you're asking. Daisy-chain ones from different vendors if you're really anal.
"Governments can't make people give up their basic human rights in exchange for some exemptions from some laws."
Really? Really?? Are you claiming that exemption from law should come at no cost? Be specific, and provide examples of how that law would be effective if everyone were exempt.
The problem with Citizens United, and the claimed free speech rights, is that corporations are a special legal case. Corporations are not people, they are an artificial legal construct which provides special privileges to an organization of people - tax and liability benefits, mostly.
There should be no issue with laws restricting corporate speech. Such laws don't remove any right to free speech. People can still speak collectively, just without the special benefits given to corporations. To answer your specific claim, "It doesn't mention people at all in regards to free speech," I'll note that the Constitution also doesn't mention corporations at all, so they have no right to exist. The law which allows them to be created simply needs to say that speech is not an allowed purpose of a corporation. Organizations of people can then make their choice - free speech rights, or the legal benefits of incorporation. The Declaration of Independence wasn't published by a corporation. As I said, they're entirely a figment of the law, and there's no reason they should have any rights at all, only the privileges and benefits defined by law.
"I don't really want a 'nanny state' as you call it; I still have some bumper stickers I had made up years ago that say "I DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN A CHILDPROOFED WORLD!", but at the same time things such as e-cigs/vaping are under the purview of the FDA, and as such I'd like them to do their job."
Even if the PDF docs are B/W, with no dots, what does it matter? It's the printers which do the marking, so the next printer to output it will still mark it. What reportedly got her discovered was that she leaked a printed copy - this wouldn't do anything about that. The claim that's what inspired this is nothing but marketing, trying to hype the work based on current events.
I suppose he's thinking of the case where one scans to PDF, and distributes the electronic version.
"But they keep dropping the price they pay me per kwh and raising the price I pay them."
It's perfectly reasonable for them to charge more than they pay. They have transmission lines, maintenance personnel, and other basic costs to cover. There's no reason they should transport energy you generate to another customer, and pay/charge the same on both sides. And, as there's more private energy sources connecting to the grid, that price difference will increase, since they'll be making less from power generation.
No, he isn't. Just one significant objective difference is that in the first case, the parties were personally known to each other, and the murder was a response to a specific harm.
There's state law, and there's federal law. They can differ, and some crimes are covered by both, so could be prosecuted under either. There's also the supremacy clause, which makes federal law supreme.
a small number of large farm operations "produces the vast majority of the nation's food."
Your claim seems to imply that those large farms aren't family ones. The facts are clearly spelled out at the previously provided link:
Most million-dollar farms (90
percent) are family farms. Only 3
percent are nonfamily corporations,
and 80 percent of these corporations
report no more than 10
shareholders.
Family farms comprise 99 percent of U.S. farms, accounting for 89 percent of production. Small farms make up 90 percent of farms, operating nearly half of farmland. Still, large family farms accounted for 42 percent of production in 2015.
Or, require the parties to pay for their own damn private "elections" instead of taxpayers paying to reduce the party choice to a single candidate. But it's a matter of degree, open primaries are better than those which require party membership.
Slashdot Mirror
"Chiropractors may be effective at giving temporary relief for back pain, so if you just want the pain to go away for a few days they may be a good solution."
The mainstream medical equivalent is to prescribe a dozen opiate pills to achieve the same result, but with significant downsides. Which is bullshit?
"The company had limited growth potential."
If that's the case, why did Comcast come into the same market?
Firewall?
Really, the manufacturers track threats and release mitigations better than you can, and are built for exactly what you're asking. Daisy-chain ones from different vendors if you're really anal.
"But they do abridge those rights."
You say that as if it were true. It isn't.
"Governments can't make people give up their basic human rights in exchange for some exemptions from some laws."
Really? Really?? Are you claiming that exemption from law should come at no cost? Be specific, and provide examples of how that law would be effective if everyone were exempt.
The problem with Citizens United, and the claimed free speech rights, is that corporations are a special legal case. Corporations are not people, they are an artificial legal construct which provides special privileges to an organization of people - tax and liability benefits, mostly.
There should be no issue with laws restricting corporate speech. Such laws don't remove any right to free speech. People can still speak collectively, just without the special benefits given to corporations. To answer your specific claim, "It doesn't mention people at all in regards to free speech," I'll note that the Constitution also doesn't mention corporations at all, so they have no right to exist. The law which allows them to be created simply needs to say that speech is not an allowed purpose of a corporation. Organizations of people can then make their choice - free speech rights, or the legal benefits of incorporation. The Declaration of Independence wasn't published by a corporation. As I said, they're entirely a figment of the law, and there's no reason they should have any rights at all, only the privileges and benefits defined by law.
And yes, the above includes for-profit media.
Debian Stretch continues to use systemd.
DO NOT WANT.
Unless they're getting paid by the character, that is.
Thanks. Now I know we can drop the "oxy" when referring to you. You're just a moron.
There's a big difference between educating people, and forcing their behavior.
"I don't really want a 'nanny state' as you call it; I still have some bumper stickers I had made up years ago that say "I DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN A CHILDPROOFED WORLD!", but at the same time things such as e-cigs/vaping are under the purview of the FDA, and as such I'd like them to do their job."
You're a walking, talking oxymoron.
"Burning paper and burning dried tobacco leaves produces aromatic hydrocarbons"
You left off grilled chicken and hamburger.
Even if the PDF docs are B/W, with no dots, what does it matter? It's the printers which do the marking, so the next printer to output it will still mark it. What reportedly got her discovered was that she leaked a printed copy - this wouldn't do anything about that. The claim that's what inspired this is nothing but marketing, trying to hype the work based on current events.
I suppose he's thinking of the case where one scans to PDF, and distributes the electronic version.
"if we can all produce electricity for 10c/kwh then why have power companies at all."
Whoosh. It's not production cost, it's distribution. If you want to try to compete with a power company at distribution, go for it.
"But they keep dropping the price they pay me per kwh and raising the price I pay them."
It's perfectly reasonable for them to charge more than they pay. They have transmission lines, maintenance personnel, and other basic costs to cover. There's no reason they should transport energy you generate to another customer, and pay/charge the same on both sides. And, as there's more private energy sources connecting to the grid, that price difference will increase, since they'll be making less from power generation.
No, he isn't. Just one significant objective difference is that in the first case, the parties were personally known to each other, and the murder was a response to a specific harm.
The only difference between murder and execution is the law.
"All speech is free speech. What crowd of imbeciles thinks otherwise?"
The crowd in the theater when someone shouts "Fire!"
"Murder is murder, I'm really a lot less interested in why than what he did."
Why do you think so?
The "why" can make a great deal of difference. Someone killing a person for molesting their kid is different than killing someone randomly.
There's state law, and there's federal law. They can differ, and some crimes are covered by both, so could be prosecuted under either. There's also the supremacy clause, which makes federal law supreme.
I think they already jumped the shark.
Makes one feel like Candide, with Pangloss-Apple trying to convince us that it's the best of all possible worlds.
Your claim seems to imply that those large farms aren't family ones. The facts are clearly spelled out at the previously provided link:
- US Dept. of Agriculture
"...a very sinister appearance. It had a battery behind it, and wires." - more idiots from the government, here to "help.".
Or, require the parties to pay for their own damn private "elections" instead of taxpayers paying to reduce the party choice to a single candidate. But it's a matter of degree, open primaries are better than those which require party membership.