Lol.. Like I said, for treatments of ailments that happen to be a lot like your reality- only in your head.
Now do I need to spell that out? Placebos are particularly effective on people who are not ill but think they are- a condition commonly referred to as hypochondria. It's similar to your Schizophrenia but more limited to ones body.
Now on a more serious note, I have only once ever recommended anyone not seek professional treatment for an ailment. It was a specific type of cancer along a specific progression and I have seen people wither away while being treated. The cancer is quick to kill once it develops enough to cause functional problems in the body. In this stage, treatment is a long shot and most of the extension on life is spend vomiting from Chemo or sedated and unconscious because the amount of pain killers needed would kill you anyways. I told someone with it about watching them try to save my grandmother and how miserable she was the last 5 months of her conscious life (lived sedated for 2 more months) compared to the usual 2-3 weeks of bothering before death. That person chose to be treated and before being so far gone he couldn't communicate any more, told some people he should have listened to me. Outside of that, it all exists in your head.
Yes, anyone within the range of the gases as they expand would hear it. Any microphone within this range and any sensor capable of picking up sounds would hear it too.
I think ypu started yo see it but tripped and fell right past it. In all your examples you mentioned situations where you sought out their advice. Now suppose ghat didn't happen and a doctor came up to you out of the blue and said take these pills. Imagine a lawyer who is not your lawyer walking up to you suggesting you do the no contest thing.
Thats were we are with the situation today. The vast amount of exposure someone has with a real scientist is where they say the world is ending and a politician steps up saying vote for me, i eill fix everything and it will only require part of the freedom you have today.
Mine is what. When the repeat it i saw yes. Then they look confused and i say what the fuck is the difference its just a damn coffe i could get anywhere else for one fifth the price so what is my name.
Its a little more complicated than that. First, these monopolies are piggybacking on infrastructure and right of ways granted by laws in most cases that were intended to remedy a public need as defined by the government. They recieved tax benifits, exclusivity, and the benifit of time before there ever was an ability to deliver internet on that infrastructure. Why it was ever considered separate is a question that muddles the mix.
Next comes the question of consumer protections. If you purchase service with speeds up to 10 meg, no matter how it is spun, you simply are not getting that if they slow your access down in order to make these fast lanes. Along these same lines, there are still benifits in yhe form of tax breaks and grants to expand infrastructure for delivering broadband to underserved areas. Now does the broadband definition still apply if the connection to your work or school VPN is slower because netflix paid for fast access and your neighbor is binging on movies the first four months of his unemployment?
Now do not get me wrong. If they can create a fast lane without slowing any other customer down below the speeds they purchased and it is optional, i do not have a problem with it. It likely will not be that way though.
Ahh. My troll is back. I was wondering what happened to you.
So you think you can work me over with a dildo so well that i would be begging you to stop.while i know you wouldn't be capable on your own, i don't know whether to be flattered by your interest or scared that you think you would be superman in any relationship with me. Oh well, at least i know what drives you now. I'm not gay but i do not care that you are. So hug hug kiss kiss and please stay on topic as you cowardly troll me.
No it is not relevant in the real world. All the other sources will not dry up tomorrow. In the real world, technology advances and the amount of oil in reserve will increase as the ability to access oil in place increases (if that confuses you, look up oil reserves for more information). Further more, new oil is not likely to extend the amount we have in matters of time available but make oil cheaper and increase the usage. That is the real world- the world where life goes on past simple mems.
But there would be an atmosphere of sorts or are we forgetting that an explosion is basically a chemical reaction that releases energy and gases rapidly?
That mass has to go somewhere and some of it will be condensed enough to be an atmosphere before it dissipates.
Lol.. then this isn't exactly designed with you in mind.
The concept is that whenever, doing whatever, that you are doing, you can easily deploy this thing, it will follow you and then return ready to do it again. So it is not comparable to a tripod and a camera as you sometimes never know what you might come across when hiking, biking or whatever. Even in a city environment (I don't know about using around cops at they might shoot it or arrest you or something), there can be times when you want something documented. With this, you do not need to lug around a camera and tripod and hope all the action happens only have you set it up and is times perfectly with the timer on the camera. You simply think hmm.. This is interesting, I want video/pictures, undo a clasp, make a gesture with your hand, a few seconds later, you have them.
You are missing the key elements here _in_Iowa_. If the sale took place via mail order or internet and the consumer went to them via one of those methods, it would be interstate commerce. However, once they start conducting parts of the sale in Iowa, it becomes an intrastate commerce transaction and all the rules effecting others in the state will apply. This is the entire idea behind the substantial nexus concept the courts use to determine if a company from another state is subject to the taxing laws and jurisdiction of any certain state.
But lets look at this from a much broader perspective. You purchase clothing and food that likely was made in another state or perhaps even another country. This is interstate commerce by no means. However, once that food and clothing is located within the state, it if hasn't already changed hands of ownership from the original marketer to you, it then becomes subject to state laws. So if they decide to open a mall with a food court, they do not get to claim interstate commerce and exempt themselves from the rules and regulations of your state and local laws because they are selling to you in your state. If they operated a website and you purchased the items online and they shipped them to you from out of state, they would/may not be (depending on if they advertise directly in the state, store product there and so on to create that substantial nexus again).
Now this is muddled a bit with how the Supreme Court has expanded the meaning of interstate commerce to shoe horn laws and regulation in that the federal government should have no business dealing with unless the US constitution is amended. But as of now, it is still the way described- Once I advertise or do anything with the sale in your state, I will have to follow the rules of your state for any transaction within it.
Interstate commerce has traditionally never been about preempting commerce from other states, it has been about not allowing the states put penalties, taxes, and so on that would place commerce within the states at an advantage above anyone from outside it. Its to stop Iowa from banning all sales of Tesla cars instead of making Tesla follow Iowa laws while selling the cars in their state. But substitute anything that has regulation on it for cars and the same will be true. For instance, you own a roofing company in Arizona, you cannot claim interstate commerce when repairing/replacing a roof in Florida to get around local building codes, permits and so on that are more strict because of the hurricane threat not present in AZ. Once you enter the state to do business, you are subject to their rules.
Yep.. but i don't think it is about jobs like most seem to jump to. I think it is about trying to tie future employment to MS products to avoid these countries from gravitating to cheaper opensource platforms and thereby making MS somewhat irrelevant in those markets. Right now, the biggest driver of MS products in those areas is compatability with US and other prefominate MS businesses. But as anymosity grows against the NSA and other spy agencies and the governments behind them along with the interoperability of web platforms that can change. So by locking a future generation into MS frameworks, they are securing future demand in these markets.
They do not think progrsmming is trivial. They think that as long as the magic smoke doesn't escape, the computer can do anything if the right incantations are being used.
Seriously, a lot of them simply have no idea that it involes much more that downloading something or putting a disk in the coffe cup holder and click the right buttons in the right order. And when you do your job programming correctly, it is all they functionally need to know. It is a catch 22 i guess.
That's completely correct. Only people without money create jobs. The homeless person down by the river employs 4 people now. My single mother neighbor who has been accepting government assistance since her ten year old boy was born employs 2 full time employees which is ip from one before the recession hit.
Now back to reality land. A job is created if enough funds are availible to compensate a person for the amount of value they add to an employer's product, service, or wealth. The ability to resell is not completely linked to this else there would be fewer grounds keepers, home health workers, maids, and so on. What makes a job is the the capital resources being availible to fullfil a want or need and that simply does not happen without excess money from somewhere. Employers create jobs more than non employers because they have the resources and the majority of framework involved already in place and are in a better position to capitalize on opertunity. You seem to confuse oppertunity with job creation. You should not do that because in a lot of situations, it is the ability to exploit that oppertunity not the fact that it exists.
The entire reason the waiver program exists is because California has put restrictions in place before the EPA started regulating it. How about you get an idea about what you are talking about and brush up on your comprehension skills a bit before failing in lecturing others.
Taking your reasoning to its logical conclusion, any product that entered Iowa wouldn't represent interstate commerce because it then needs to be sold in Iowa.
That would be correct if the sales happened after the product entered Iowa. For instance, I cannot develop and sell a gun that is legal in Ohio but illegal in California and sell that gun in California after taking it there. I can however, sell it to someone else who may or may not be planning to take it to California and that would be between them and the state.
So, the federal government says that I can drive my bananas over the border. However, when I get there, I can't sell them
That would be incorrect. When you get there, you can sell them just like they allow others in the state to sell them. If that means you need a license or bond or something, then that is what you need to do.
That would defeat the purpose of the commerce clause.
Not at all. You see, California has for the longest times, set Emission, safety, and fuel consumption standards on cars that are a lot more strict than EPA regulation. When Ford or Chevy or whoever sells a car in California, it has to meet those standards regardless of where it is manufactured. Otherwise, Ford can say piss off, these gas guzzling polluting cars were made in Ohio or something. A California resident could scoff at newly passed regulation by simply relocating outside the state then importing back into it.
This isn't the first road block Tesla has had on these matters. I'm curious, why- with all that money at their disposal- did Tesla not bring this argument up at any of their other court cases? Are Tesla's lawyers incompetent or something? Are they taking bribes from big oil or something? Why is it that internet armchair lawyers have the answers before Tesla's bona fide bar members do?
Perhaps the problem is that even though it is within the enumerated powers of Congress, Congress has acted in ways that allow states like California to set laws more strict than the ones the federal government hands out (see Emissions and all). Or in other words, perhaps congress already enumerated and this is what we got.
The law says that a dealer in Iowa can't be the manufacturer. The federal law (should trump Iowa law) says that states can't restrict interstate commerce.
This isn't interstate commerce though.
Iowa says it's illegal for a Californian company to sell to an Iowan buyer. Iowa is violating US law to block these drives and sales.
No, the law says t's illegal for a Californian company to sell to an Iowan buyer _in_Iowa_. That buyer can go to California or any other state where the sale is legal, purchase the car and bring it back to Iowa (then go through the process of transferring the tittle from California to Iowa and all).
Also, what law do you think Iowa is violating? Don't quite the US constitution as it is not a law, it is a restriction on government. If congress has not made a law pertaining to this, whether they have authority to do so is meaningless unless they have acted on that authority. As far as I am aware, they have not which is how California is able to place emissions restrictions on cars manufactured outside the state over and above federal regulation for all car sold in the state.
Wow.. You are comparing a commercial business trying to sell cars to slavery?
I know Tesla is a darling and people seem to forget and ignore all the Corporations of Evil bable when it concerns them, but come on, you are completely crazy if you think requiring licenses and arms length distances between companies is even close to slavery.
You pretend that these right wingers got into office and passed these laws as soon as possible simply to throw sticks at tesla.
I doubt that is the case and most those laws were created years earlier. Some perhaps even when democrats were in charge. I know my home state has the same laws and they were passed well before I was born. I also know for a fact that the left has had control of my home state several times over my lifetime and failed to remove those laws.
So lets stop pretending this is a left/right issue. It is a state issue, the laws came into play long before Tesla was more than a twinkle in anyone's eye and you complaining about the right wing only makes you look like a rabid idiot who is too lazy to look at reality.
Mandrake which turned into mandriva was originally a french distro which is probably why. Well, they always had an English version that I know of, but their organization and offices when they went commercial was based from France.
As a fork, it likely forked with a lot of the developers in that area.
Heh.. I never paid any attention to Mageia. But openmandriva could take a lesson from their "about us" page. It is clear as day what happened (cudos to Mageia).
I guess I will have to look into both of these when I get time. I lost interest in the mandrake/mandriva distro when they came out with the one release. I really liked the urpmi and their software centers that played off it (before other distros were doing it).
At one time, Mandrake was a kick ass distro that was simple easy for beginners and powerful enough for about any power user and could easily become a server as well. I'm using ubunto/debian clones now like Netrunner and cannot stand the differences between a redhat style and debian style in the configs and such. But I guess a lot of that has progressed anyways so it would be like starting over. Anyways, thanks for the info.
Slashdot Mirror
Lol.. Like I said, for treatments of ailments that happen to be a lot like your reality- only in your head.
Now do I need to spell that out? Placebos are particularly effective on people who are not ill but think they are- a condition commonly referred to as hypochondria. It's similar to your Schizophrenia but more limited to ones body.
Now on a more serious note, I have only once ever recommended anyone not seek professional treatment for an ailment. It was a specific type of cancer along a specific progression and I have seen people wither away while being treated. The cancer is quick to kill once it develops enough to cause functional problems in the body. In this stage, treatment is a long shot and most of the extension on life is spend vomiting from Chemo or sedated and unconscious because the amount of pain killers needed would kill you anyways. I told someone with it about watching them try to save my grandmother and how miserable she was the last 5 months of her conscious life (lived sedated for 2 more months) compared to the usual 2-3 weeks of bothering before death. That person chose to be treated and before being so far gone he couldn't communicate any more, told some people he should have listened to me. Outside of that, it all exists in your head.
Yes, anyone within the range of the gases as they expand would hear it. Any microphone within this range and any sensor capable of picking up sounds would hear it too.
First, you have no clue about me. Second, like a lot of stuff you post, its all in your head so what is wrong with placebo remedies?
I think ypu started yo see it but tripped and fell right past it. In all your examples you mentioned situations where you sought out their advice. Now suppose ghat didn't happen and a doctor came up to you out of the blue and said take these pills. Imagine a lawyer who is not your lawyer walking up to you suggesting you do the no contest thing.
Thats were we are with the situation today. The vast amount of exposure someone has with a real scientist is where they say the world is ending and a politician steps up saying vote for me, i eill fix everything and it will only require part of the freedom you have today.
It would make noise anywhere the expanding gasses reached before disapating. Immediately is a reletive term.
This is what happens when people think they are smarter than others but fail to pay attention- poor reading comprehension.
Mine is what. When the repeat it i saw yes. Then they look confused and i say what the fuck is the difference its just a damn coffe i could get anywhere else for one fifth the price so what is my name.
Its a little more complicated than that. First, these monopolies are piggybacking on infrastructure and right of ways granted by laws in most cases that were intended to remedy a public need as defined by the government. They recieved tax benifits, exclusivity, and the benifit of time before there ever was an ability to deliver internet on that infrastructure. Why it was ever considered separate is a question that muddles the mix.
Next comes the question of consumer protections. If you purchase service with speeds up to 10 meg, no matter how it is spun, you simply are not getting that if they slow your access down in order to make these fast lanes. Along these same lines, there are still benifits in yhe form of tax breaks and grants to expand infrastructure for delivering broadband to underserved areas. Now does the broadband definition still apply if the connection to your work or school VPN is slower because netflix paid for fast access and your neighbor is binging on movies the first four months of his unemployment?
Now do not get me wrong. If they can create a fast lane without slowing any other customer down below the speeds they purchased and it is optional, i do not have a problem with it. It likely will not be that way though.
Ahh. My troll is back. I was wondering what happened to you.
So you think you can work me over with a dildo so well that i would be begging you to stop.while i know you wouldn't be capable on your own, i don't know whether to be flattered by your interest or scared that you think you would be superman in any relationship with me. Oh well, at least i know what drives you now. I'm not gay but i do not care that you are. So hug hug kiss kiss and please stay on topic as you cowardly troll me.
No it is not relevant in the real world. All the other sources will not dry up tomorrow. In the real world, technology advances and the amount of oil in reserve will increase as the ability to access oil in place increases (if that confuses you, look up oil reserves for more information). Further more, new oil is not likely to extend the amount we have in matters of time available but make oil cheaper and increase the usage. That is the real world- the world where life goes on past simple mems.
Yes, if all other sources of oil disappeared over night and everything can be extracted quickly enough, 11 days.
Its like saying superman can beat batman with cat woman's dildo. Sounds good but really useless in the real world.
And you can move your mom in upstairs rent free to thank her for all the time she let you live in her basement.
But there would be an atmosphere of sorts or are we forgetting that an explosion is basically a chemical reaction that releases energy and gases rapidly?
That mass has to go somewhere and some of it will be condensed enough to be an atmosphere before it dissipates.
Lol.. then this isn't exactly designed with you in mind.
The concept is that whenever, doing whatever, that you are doing, you can easily deploy this thing, it will follow you and then return ready to do it again. So it is not comparable to a tripod and a camera as you sometimes never know what you might come across when hiking, biking or whatever. Even in a city environment (I don't know about using around cops at they might shoot it or arrest you or something), there can be times when you want something documented. With this, you do not need to lug around a camera and tripod and hope all the action happens only have you set it up and is times perfectly with the timer on the camera. You simply think hmm.. This is interesting, I want video/pictures, undo a clasp, make a gesture with your hand, a few seconds later, you have them.
You are missing the key elements here _in_Iowa_. If the sale took place via mail order or internet and the consumer went to them via one of those methods, it would be interstate commerce. However, once they start conducting parts of the sale in Iowa, it becomes an intrastate commerce transaction and all the rules effecting others in the state will apply. This is the entire idea behind the substantial nexus concept the courts use to determine if a company from another state is subject to the taxing laws and jurisdiction of any certain state.
But lets look at this from a much broader perspective. You purchase clothing and food that likely was made in another state or perhaps even another country. This is interstate commerce by no means. However, once that food and clothing is located within the state, it if hasn't already changed hands of ownership from the original marketer to you, it then becomes subject to state laws. So if they decide to open a mall with a food court, they do not get to claim interstate commerce and exempt themselves from the rules and regulations of your state and local laws because they are selling to you in your state. If they operated a website and you purchased the items online and they shipped them to you from out of state, they would/may not be (depending on if they advertise directly in the state, store product there and so on to create that substantial nexus again).
Now this is muddled a bit with how the Supreme Court has expanded the meaning of interstate commerce to shoe horn laws and regulation in that the federal government should have no business dealing with unless the US constitution is amended. But as of now, it is still the way described- Once I advertise or do anything with the sale in your state, I will have to follow the rules of your state for any transaction within it.
Interstate commerce has traditionally never been about preempting commerce from other states, it has been about not allowing the states put penalties, taxes, and so on that would place commerce within the states at an advantage above anyone from outside it. Its to stop Iowa from banning all sales of Tesla cars instead of making Tesla follow Iowa laws while selling the cars in their state. But substitute anything that has regulation on it for cars and the same will be true. For instance, you own a roofing company in Arizona, you cannot claim interstate commerce when repairing/replacing a roof in Florida to get around local building codes, permits and so on that are more strict because of the hurricane threat not present in AZ. Once you enter the state to do business, you are subject to their rules.
Yep.. but i don't think it is about jobs like most seem to jump to. I think it is about trying to tie future employment to MS products to avoid these countries from gravitating to cheaper opensource platforms and thereby making MS somewhat irrelevant in those markets. Right now, the biggest driver of MS products in those areas is compatability with US and other prefominate MS businesses. But as anymosity grows against the NSA and other spy agencies and the governments behind them along with the interoperability of web platforms that can change. So by locking a future generation into MS frameworks, they are securing future demand in these markets.
They do not think progrsmming is trivial. They think that as long as the magic smoke doesn't escape, the computer can do anything if the right incantations are being used.
Seriously, a lot of them simply have no idea that it involes much more that downloading something or putting a disk in the coffe cup holder and click the right buttons in the right order. And when you do your job programming correctly, it is all they functionally need to know. It is a catch 22 i guess.
That's completely correct. Only people without money create jobs. The homeless person down by the river employs 4 people now. My single mother neighbor who has been accepting government assistance since her ten year old boy was born employs 2 full time employees which is ip from one before the recession hit.
Now back to reality land. A job is created if enough funds are availible to compensate a person for the amount of value they add to an employer's product, service, or wealth. The ability to resell is not completely linked to this else there would be fewer grounds keepers, home health workers, maids, and so on. What makes a job is the the capital resources being availible to fullfil a want or need and that simply does not happen without excess money from somewhere. Employers create jobs more than non employers because they have the resources and the majority of framework involved already in place and are in a better position to capitalize on opertunity. You seem to confuse oppertunity with job creation. You should not do that because in a lot of situations, it is the ability to exploit that oppertunity not the fact that it exists.
Sigh.. Are you really that dense?
The entire reason the waiver program exists is because California has put restrictions in place before the EPA started regulating it. How about you get an idea about what you are talking about and brush up on your comprehension skills a bit before failing in lecturing others.
That would be correct if the sales happened after the product entered Iowa. For instance, I cannot develop and sell a gun that is legal in Ohio but illegal in California and sell that gun in California after taking it there. I can however, sell it to someone else who may or may not be planning to take it to California and that would be between them and the state.
That would be incorrect. When you get there, you can sell them just like they allow others in the state to sell them. If that means you need a license or bond or something, then that is what you need to do.
Not at all. You see, California has for the longest times, set Emission, safety, and fuel consumption standards on cars that are a lot more strict than EPA regulation. When Ford or Chevy or whoever sells a car in California, it has to meet those standards regardless of where it is manufactured. Otherwise, Ford can say piss off, these gas guzzling polluting cars were made in Ohio or something. A California resident could scoff at newly passed regulation by simply relocating outside the state then importing back into it.
This isn't the first road block Tesla has had on these matters. I'm curious, why- with all that money at their disposal- did Tesla not bring this argument up at any of their other court cases? Are Tesla's lawyers incompetent or something? Are they taking bribes from big oil or something? Why is it that internet armchair lawyers have the answers before Tesla's bona fide bar members do?
Perhaps the problem is that even though it is within the enumerated powers of Congress, Congress has acted in ways that allow states like California to set laws more strict than the ones the federal government hands out (see Emissions and all). Or in other words, perhaps congress already enumerated and this is what we got.
This isn't interstate commerce though.
No, the law says t's illegal for a Californian company to sell to an Iowan buyer _in_Iowa_. That buyer can go to California or any other state where the sale is legal, purchase the car and bring it back to Iowa (then go through the process of transferring the tittle from California to Iowa and all).
Also, what law do you think Iowa is violating? Don't quite the US constitution as it is not a law, it is a restriction on government. If congress has not made a law pertaining to this, whether they have authority to do so is meaningless unless they have acted on that authority. As far as I am aware, they have not which is how California is able to place emissions restrictions on cars manufactured outside the state over and above federal regulation for all car sold in the state.
Wow.. You are comparing a commercial business trying to sell cars to slavery?
I know Tesla is a darling and people seem to forget and ignore all the Corporations of Evil bable when it concerns them, but come on, you are completely crazy if you think requiring licenses and arms length distances between companies is even close to slavery.
You pretend that these right wingers got into office and passed these laws as soon as possible simply to throw sticks at tesla.
I doubt that is the case and most those laws were created years earlier. Some perhaps even when democrats were in charge. I know my home state has the same laws and they were passed well before I was born. I also know for a fact that the left has had control of my home state several times over my lifetime and failed to remove those laws.
So lets stop pretending this is a left/right issue. It is a state issue, the laws came into play long before Tesla was more than a twinkle in anyone's eye and you complaining about the right wing only makes you look like a rabid idiot who is too lazy to look at reality.
Mandrake which turned into mandriva was originally a french distro which is probably why. Well, they always had an English version that I know of, but their organization and offices when they went commercial was based from France.
As a fork, it likely forked with a lot of the developers in that area.
Heh.. I never paid any attention to Mageia. But openmandriva could take a lesson from their "about us" page. It is clear as day what happened (cudos to Mageia).
I guess I will have to look into both of these when I get time. I lost interest in the mandrake/mandriva distro when they came out with the one release. I really liked the urpmi and their software centers that played off it (before other distros were doing it).
At one time, Mandrake was a kick ass distro that was simple easy for beginners and powerful enough for about any power user and could easily become a server as well. I'm using ubunto/debian clones now like Netrunner and cannot stand the differences between a redhat style and debian style in the configs and such. But I guess a lot of that has progressed anyways so it would be like starting over. Anyways, thanks for the info.