It's not illegal to explode things- only certain things and people. In my neck of the woods, all i have to do is notify the sheriff in advance. In other areas you might need a permit and perhaps a license or more.
If you think drug dealers are not bad guys then why did you equate them as such. There are plenty of other "bad guys" to choose from. Pedophiles trading kiddie porn or murder for hire or even what the op offered "criminals and terrorists".
Back in the 90s i worked at a company that required a degree in anything to be eligible for any jobs paying salaries instead of hourly. There were liberal arts majors, a couple physical education majors, one elementary education major, and a couple useless for the job degrees i don't remember working in positions not even close to being related to their degrees. It was like the degree was the equivalent of a HS diploma.
I don't know about T-Mobile but I'm on the Boost mobile which is similar. I just installed a different browser and turned the safe search filters off on Google and do not have any restrictions. Dolphin and an add on can even act like a desktop browser and play flash videos. Might be worth a try.
Because the ISP model (at least in the majority of the US) is to oversubscribe their bandwidth based on the assumption that not everyone will be using it at once. Throttling ports gets around the problem in this model where services run in the absence of users and use as much bandwidth as possible. It ensures a reasonable experience for users actually on line. It's mostly employed in saturated markets and does sometimes decrease speeds to below purchased rates.
I have very limited experience on the ISP side of things (mostly hosting and a corp connection between 6 builings over 20 miles separation connected by T3) but that is my understanding.
I'm not sure how you got this idea. Not all spy agencies are going to publicly explain activity they take or even disclose they took any steps. Usually there's some political motivation associated with such disclosure but we cannot assume a lie because of lack of information. Spy agencies do not operate like you and your friends on Twitter and Facebook.
If those farmers did not grow, would the state budget revenue drop more than two tenths of a percent? From what I can tell, agriculture in California is a 40 some billion a year industry generating 100 billion in related economic activity. That certainly seems like a lot of opportunities to tax people and things.
Wow. That's like saying you should not run to the store to purchase ingredients to make the five sandwiches you are short in feeding everyone because you need 200 sandwiches altogether. Those five people can go hungry.
The problem is not how to produce all the water needs but how to produce the excess of what you are short in supplying.
Pre Obama cuba policy was not a failure. Obama's cuba policy is incoherent too. It is as if he just decided to reward some rich donors by opening trade to exploit a new poor country. The only redeeming quality about it is that Fidel is not running the show.
As for China, are you speaking about the smog created from the US and Europe off shoring their manufacturing in order to skirt their own labor and environmental laws ?
I'm not sure if your point says what you think it does. I don't even think it's applicable either. The alternative to free trade is not no trade.
Wow. History just isn't a strong point with you is it ?
First, the part about party loyalty is bunk. Just this week -this story to be exact - congress defied their party leaders and voted against something their leaders wanted. And yes,there was serious discussion about it.
The civil war is what keeps Texas in the union. Did you forget that a bunch of states already tried to cut ties with the union and a bloody war was fought to force them back? Well maybe they would still be separated if they didn't attack a union fort and start the war.
Do you really want a free trade agreement with a country that pollutes the environment , uses slave labor, and doesn't have freedom of religion or free speech? I'm not sure it's in the interests of any free nation to strike such a deal.
You are confusing free trade with fast track or trade promotion authority (tpa). These are not mutually exclusive and congress can have lots of input into free trade as the agreements are not simple you take barriers down and we will too agreements. They often contain crap marginally relating to trade along with ways to interpret provisions.
If congress rewrites sections to limit trade, its no longer a free trade treaty. But we certainly do not want cars without seatbelts because they can be sold that way in sumfukistan. We also do not want to limit congress abilities to mandate airbags or disallow chemicals that kill people when burns either.
Congress has the role of regulating foreign trade. They can be a part of any free trade agreement and can even do so without the president participating .
The US will be fine. It is largely working as intended and if anything serious did happen, congress would band together in a heartbeat. That is actually where we should be worried. Imagine the world today if congress had serious debate and opposition to the Iraq war or the patriot act when initially passed. The dysfunction of local governments during Katrina ended up with overwhelming support to change laws and allow the federal government to declare the local response is inadequate, incompetent, or somehow lacking and intervene before official requests are made.
Now what you think is a serious defect is really your misunderstanding of US federal jusidiction. The federal government is not the same type of government that the UK's parliament is. They are limited in scope and abilities by the US constitution because even from the start the founders knew we were too diverse and needed most of the governance from state and local levels. Each colony was a nation in itself when the union was formed. This is even obvious in the terminology used - state in every other part of the world means country but in the US its what others would call a providence.
Yes people want to change that and others want to stop that change and we end up with gridlock at times. This is by design though.
Settle down now. He is just a sales agent who was recently promoted to middle management. He is still trying to make that transition from exaggerating what the product can do and unrealistic delivery times to what unrealistic features and deadlines the devs are capable of. Just save your comments until he starts abusing TPS reports.
I don't think the wording changed either. At first I thought that maybe my settings pushed it to the front page twice somehow or i read it in the fire hose or something. But your comment is too early in the thread order for that to be the case. Maybe someone is upset their astroturfing didn't end up listing their products so slashdot had to post it again else have to refund payment for the slashvertisement.
Still doesn't alter the point. ID accepts every piece of empirical evidence for evolution and substitutes god did it where science inserts conclusions and conjecture from the evidence.
That's right. What most people don't realize is that the moon is the remnants of a space craft that ran out of fuel. It been collecting dust ever since. The Aztecs and you might say Adam and eve are direct results of the instance. They came down looking for a fuel source but didn't have the tools to make use of any resources they found. Due to diverse scattering, They grew apart in identities and their civilized ways somewhat devolved into distinct cultures once resources from the mother ship ran out and future generations had to fend for themselves.
ID is not creationism. It uses creationism but mixes it with the known evolution. My point stands as all evidence for evolution is in intelligent design - they just skip the logical conclusions and say God did it. Of course that is over simplified but sums it up in a nutshell.
Sure there's evidence for ID. It takes the evidence for evolution and fills in the gaps with god did it. You could say that there's just about the same amount of evidence for both.
Of course you do not get ahead. You make it too expensive to do so.
Well, some still get ahead. They know something you don't i guess. But keep on the path you are trekking down. I would hate to see your worldview shattered and your beliefs overturned. Perhaps they will raise minimum wage and you will get ima raise or something.
Well, i think the better alternative is to make it easier to start businesses and stay in business and keep Americans employed. I guess we don't agree.
I see that you have something stuck in your head and no amount of rationality will change it. Here is a hint, it is already cheaper almost all the way around to open companies off shore. But let's ignore that and attack companies and make it even more expensive to locate in the US . And while we are at it, we will have something to cry about while the government taxes you in order to subsidize a select few winners and wages further stagnate. Maybe if we are lucky, those off shore havens will make the costs of doing business more expensive and they might come back. FFS, that sounds like our foreign policy - lead from behind - so far behind it doesn't look like leading at all.
I'm not sure we are talking about the same things or if I'm misinterpreting your comment. I think we are at the same points but you seem to think I'm wrong somehow.
Your Google example proves my point. When Google employees had ample opportunity to go elsewhere, their salaries were raised to keep them. When unemployment is low, it has the same effect. In 1995, I was making $13 an hour rolling burritos because one : i was good at it but two: i could have gone a number of other places making more or similar wages and those places weren't limited to restaurants. This is because the unemployment rate in the area was lower than the national average by almost two points.
And yes, subsidies go to bonuses and investors. Its what makes them willing to invest the money in the first place. If they do not get a decent return, they will invest their time, effort, and money somewhere else. If the costs of getting into and staying in business wasn't so high that the subsidies were needed, other businesses would/could open too.
You would be surprised at how much demand is suppressed by costs being to high. You would also be surprised at how much pricing is influenced by lack of competition. Wal-Mart isn't so popular because it sells foreign made products, it's because they sell cheaper products.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not illegal to explode things- only certain things and people. In my neck of the woods, all i have to do is notify the sheriff in advance. In other areas you might need a permit and perhaps a license or more.
If you think drug dealers are not bad guys then why did you equate them as such. There are plenty of other "bad guys" to choose from. Pedophiles trading kiddie porn or murder for hire or even what the op offered "criminals and terrorists".
Back in the 90s i worked at a company that required a degree in anything to be eligible for any jobs paying salaries instead of hourly. There were liberal arts majors, a couple physical education majors, one elementary education major, and a couple useless for the job degrees i don't remember working in positions not even close to being related to their degrees. It was like the degree was the equivalent of a HS diploma.
I don't know about T-Mobile but I'm on the Boost mobile which is similar. I just installed a different browser and turned the safe search filters off on Google and do not have any restrictions. Dolphin and an add on can even act like a desktop browser and play flash videos. Might be worth a try.
Because the ISP model (at least in the majority of the US) is to oversubscribe their bandwidth based on the assumption that not everyone will be using it at once. Throttling ports gets around the problem in this model where services run in the absence of users and use as much bandwidth as possible. It ensures a reasonable experience for users actually on line. It's mostly employed in saturated markets and does sometimes decrease speeds to below purchased rates.
I have very limited experience on the ISP side of things (mostly hosting and a corp connection between 6 builings over 20 miles separation connected by T3) but that is my understanding.
I'm not sure how you got this idea. Not all spy agencies are going to publicly explain activity they take or even disclose they took any steps. Usually there's some political motivation associated with such disclosure but we cannot assume a lie because of lack of information. Spy agencies do not operate like you and your friends on Twitter and Facebook.
If those farmers did not grow, would the state budget revenue drop more than two tenths of a percent? From what I can tell, agriculture in California is a 40 some billion a year industry generating 100 billion in related economic activity. That certainly seems like a lot of opportunities to tax people and things.
Wow. That's like saying you should not run to the store to purchase ingredients to make the five sandwiches you are short in feeding everyone because you need 200 sandwiches altogether. Those five people can go hungry.
The problem is not how to produce all the water needs but how to produce the excess of what you are short in supplying.
Pre Obama cuba policy was not a failure. Obama's cuba policy is incoherent too. It is as if he just decided to reward some rich donors by opening trade to exploit a new poor country. The only redeeming quality about it is that Fidel is not running the show.
As for China, are you speaking about the smog created from the US and Europe off shoring their manufacturing in order to skirt their own labor and environmental laws ?
I'm not sure if your point says what you think it does. I don't even think it's applicable either. The alternative to free trade is not no trade.
Wow. History just isn't a strong point with you is it ?
First, the part about party loyalty is bunk. Just this week -this story to be exact - congress defied their party leaders and voted against something their leaders wanted. And yes ,there was serious discussion about it.
The civil war is what keeps Texas in the union. Did you forget that a bunch of states already tried to cut ties with the union and a bloody war was fought to force them back? Well maybe they would still be separated if they didn't attack a union fort and start the war.
Do you really want a free trade agreement with a country that pollutes the environment , uses slave labor, and doesn't have freedom of religion or free speech? I'm not sure it's in the interests of any free nation to strike such a deal.
Look up the definition of state. The point still stands even if i was wrong in the explanation.
You are confusing free trade with fast track or trade promotion authority (tpa). These are not mutually exclusive and congress can have lots of input into free trade as the agreements are not simple you take barriers down and we will too agreements. They often contain crap marginally relating to trade along with ways to interpret provisions.
If congress rewrites sections to limit trade, its no longer a free trade treaty. But we certainly do not want cars without seatbelts because they can be sold that way in sumfukistan. We also do not want to limit congress abilities to mandate airbags or disallow chemicals that kill people when burns either.
Congress has the role of regulating foreign trade. They can be a part of any free trade agreement and can even do so without the president participating .
The US will be fine. It is largely working as intended and if anything serious did happen, congress would band together in a heartbeat. That is actually where we should be worried. Imagine the world today if congress had serious debate and opposition to the Iraq war or the patriot act when initially passed. The dysfunction of local governments during Katrina ended up with overwhelming support to change laws and allow the federal government to declare the local response is inadequate, incompetent, or somehow lacking and intervene before official requests are made.
Now what you think is a serious defect is really your misunderstanding of US federal jusidiction. The federal government is not the same type of government that the UK's parliament is. They are limited in scope and abilities by the US constitution because even from the start the founders knew we were too diverse and needed most of the governance from state and local levels. Each colony was a nation in itself when the union was formed. This is even obvious in the terminology used - state in every other part of the world means country but in the US its what others would call a providence.
Yes people want to change that and others want to stop that change and we end up with gridlock at times. This is by design though.
Settle down now. He is just a sales agent who was recently promoted to middle management. He is still trying to make that transition from exaggerating what the product can do and unrealistic delivery times to what unrealistic features and deadlines the devs are capable of. Just save your comments until he starts abusing TPS reports.
I don't think the wording changed either. At first I thought that maybe my settings pushed it to the front page twice somehow or i read it in the fire hose or something. But your comment is too early in the thread order for that to be the case. Maybe someone is upset their astroturfing didn't end up listing their products so slashdot had to post it again else have to refund payment for the slashvertisement.
Still doesn't alter the point. ID accepts every piece of empirical evidence for evolution and substitutes god did it where science inserts conclusions and conjecture from the evidence.
That's right. What most people don't realize is that the moon is the remnants of a space craft that ran out of fuel. It been collecting dust ever since. The Aztecs and you might say Adam and eve are direct results of the instance. They came down looking for a fuel source but didn't have the tools to make use of any resources they found. Due to diverse scattering, They grew apart in identities and their civilized ways somewhat devolved into distinct cultures once resources from the mother ship ran out and future generations had to fend for themselves.
What supreme court ruling? I missed it i guess. All i know about is a second circuit ruling.
ID is not creationism. It uses creationism but mixes it with the known evolution. My point stands as all evidence for evolution is in intelligent design - they just skip the logical conclusions and say God did it. Of course that is over simplified but sums it up in a nutshell.
Sure there's evidence for ID. It takes the evidence for evolution and fills in the gaps with god did it. You could say that there's just about the same amount of evidence for both.
Of course you do not get ahead. You make it too expensive to do so.
Well, some still get ahead. They know something you don't i guess. But keep on the path you are trekking down. I would hate to see your worldview shattered and your beliefs overturned. Perhaps they will raise minimum wage and you will get ima raise or something.
Well, i think the better alternative is to make it easier to start businesses and stay in business and keep Americans employed. I guess we don't agree.
Lol.. ok .
I see that you have something stuck in your head and no amount of rationality will change it. Here is a hint, it is already cheaper almost all the way around to open companies off shore. But let's ignore that and attack companies and make it even more expensive to locate in the US . And while we are at it, we will have something to cry about while the government taxes you in order to subsidize a select few winners and wages further stagnate. Maybe if we are lucky, those off shore havens will make the costs of doing business more expensive and they might come back. FFS, that sounds like our foreign policy - lead from behind - so far behind it doesn't look like leading at all.
I'm not sure we are talking about the same things or if I'm misinterpreting your comment. I think we are at the same points but you seem to think I'm wrong somehow.
Your Google example proves my point. When Google employees had ample opportunity to go elsewhere, their salaries were raised to keep them. When unemployment is low, it has the same effect. In 1995, I was making $13 an hour rolling burritos because one : i was good at it but two: i could have gone a number of other places making more or similar wages and those places weren't limited to restaurants. This is because the unemployment rate in the area was lower than the national average by almost two points.
And yes, subsidies go to bonuses and investors. Its what makes them willing to invest the money in the first place. If they do not get a decent return, they will invest their time, effort, and money somewhere else. If the costs of getting into and staying in business wasn't so high that the subsidies were needed, other businesses would/could open too.
You would be surprised at how much demand is suppressed by costs being to high. You would also be surprised at how much pricing is influenced by lack of competition. Wal-Mart isn't so popular because it sells foreign made products, it's because they sell cheaper products.