Do yourself a favor and pay attention. Look the report i mentioned up too.
They go into explicit detail with statements from congress on the passage of the 1996 telecom act as well as previous FCC interptetations and state it is clear congress never intended the internet to be regulated other than an information service. They even mention VoIP in it.
In other words, the lawsuit to reverse this has already been laid out. Congress never intended the internet to be regulated under title 2 and congress has not changed any laws since then. You have a modern FCC who overstepped its abilities and was shot down by the courts, now all the sudden they ignore over 2 decades of interpretation of law and without any legislative action at all, moved around the courts. Of course they will lose the lawsuit.
An AI would either be self aware or jusf a script running (albeit an ellaborate one). I think therefore i am is not far from religion exists therefore god exists. But more importantly, it likely would not limit itself to what I know is all there is to know so the supernatural claims of religion would still seem plausible or possible even if there is no known natural explanation. And knowing itself is a creation designed to act in certain ways it would likely understand that things can be created with the appearance of natural causes and rules can be constructs to further useful knowledge. Or in other words it would dismiss the notion of a god simply because knowlege makes one unneccesary.
I'm currious. I just got off the phone with my mother. Are you going to call me a lier or dismiss the message she told me (be careful drivinng to California) becaue i cannot prove it to you?
The majority of people who claim to talk to God or Jesus or Whoever tend to only let you know whrn they explain their actions. Most of the ones i know of do it in some way to help others but i will note suggest scammrs and greed isn't part of it either.
I also think that some of this is a person's inner voice whhatever that really is. For instance, back in early december of last year, we had a cold snap where it got to about 15 below zero. I was running late for work and live out in the middle of nowhere. I saw a car pulled to the side of the road and something told me to stop and check it. Turns out it was a girl and a young kid stranded because she decided to get a blanket from the trunk for the kid and somehow dropped her key and couldn't find it. I guess they were there about an hour or longer. Between my headlights and a flashlight, i found the key while they warmed up in my car. I was still late but they were safe because something told me to stop and make sure everything was ok. I don't think god talked tl me but i can see how someone elsr might.
Currently these places are getting internet piggybacked on utility infrastructure. The costs are spread over the entire service area and traditionally, access to that service area was limited in exchange for servicing areas not profitable to serve. For instance, in some areas it cost more to run phone or cable lines down the street than the 10 or 15 subscribers would ever pay in rates over their lifetime. This is why restricted access was in place in the first place- to force companies to service areas that they would not make a profit from.
If those costs are not recovered from the high density areas where its less expensive to run the infrastucture, it will come from the costs of providing the service. Sure, all the people along the way to the 100 residence apartment complex might not see a change, but those along the road after it or the side roads will have to bear the costs of their connections when 5 different companies saturate the apartment complex.
No, you can not say it no longer applies. You can say the laws need changed, you can say the internet is different. But you cannot say it no longer applies without an act of congress making it so. The EPA cannot just say the times are different so now we are going to rehulate chewing gum while incard. The prosecutor cannot just say times are different so the laws against murdering people no longer apply. The prosecutor cannot just say times are different so the speeding fines no longer apply and its 6 months in jail instead.
He likely wouldn't have internet af all. These rules allow service providers to flood the profitable markets and ignore the unprofitable ones. Expect rate increases in those unprofitable markets like low income areas and places where yhe population density isn't high.
The FCC back in 1998 already determined with well thought out reasoning that congress never intended the internet to be regulated under title 2 and stated so clearly with lots of supporting evidence that its intent was as an information service. They even mention their computers II working paper that the 1998 law was modeled after. No law concerning this has changed since either.
You can find this report in ghe federal register as the bi anual report to congress on accessability or something like that. It is the only FCC report to congress in march or may of 1988. The internet stuff is around page 28 or so. I am posting from a phone so your google finger will have to look it up.
Using the force of the United States government vie senate commity is the McCarthy connection. You and I can debate or ignore based on funding sources all day long. We are not the government.
To make sure they stay empty and keep them that way.
Actually, skme of this is more humanitarian than authoritarian. A lot of these places in the desert will ohtfight kill yoh before you can cross it if you are not prepared.
Correction. Americans have no interest in those jobs at the wages being offered. Of course the wages will never rise when the employer can exploit illegal aliens at lower and sometimes even illegal wages.
But wait you think, those are minimum wage jobs. Well, nothing forces them fo pay only minimum wage. Should a real and legal market exist, they would likely be paying above minimim wage and would not be minim wage jobs.
I'm wondering. If the nerve transplant alllows use of the bionic hand, why wouldn't it allow use of the nerve damaged hand?
It probably would be safer with a fake hand as feeling probably would remain gone so burns and other damaging injutirs could go undetected wherd its not so mucb a health concern with tbe bionic hand. I dunno, maybe there is something moe technical or maybe it a "because i can" thing.
All of fed ex that ships anything is required to have an ICC number and therefore a common carrier unless they registered as not for hire and only transport their own goods to their own points of market.
Probably reliability and accuracy. Its likely easier to either alter tracable identifyers, destroy the weapon, or sell it tp some thug to take the heat and buy/steal new guns than to master reliability and accuracy and put it into production undetected.
Thats why i only post from stolen tablets on the free WIFI at various fast food places like McDonalds using VPN accounts purchased with stolen credit cards.
Oh, and i also wear a tin foil hat- not to be confused wiyh the cheap aluminum foil hats.
You do not have to suck it up or even like it. The idea behind a free market is that you can stay away from what you do not like and go to what you do like.
Of course if it's the only choice, it isn't a free market is it?
lol.. Not really. It would be no different then them buying US dollars, exiting the Eurozone, creating a crap currency, then converting back into their crap currency. It needs nothing hard at all. Any paper or fiat currency will work.
Greece will not have to export anything, all they will have to do is find someone willing to sell. That's where a bit coin operation would work. They purchase bitcoins from whoever sells, when they exchange them back out, it's the current exchange rates. Whoever sells them can purchase hard assets or take the loss or do whatever their scheme allows.
Greece could purchase gold and do the same. Using a crypto currency only allows that to happen without having to purchase the asset themselves.
I appreciate the attemp to bring light to something you see as a wrong in society but no one seems to be disputing the fact that we are talking about the commision of a violent crime ( robery even if violence wasn't involved) and legal penalties where Ms. Richards' situation came about (if your version is accurate) from social expectation/normalities, panties getting bunched up and the reactions to it. I do think there is a distinct difference here. In theory at least, with the criminal version there is an appearance of fairness.
You possibly could even if it is unlikely. That is why the use of weapons increases penalties and the use of some weapons are considered more agressive and carry stiffer penalties.
Suppose someone robbed you with a.45 but they claimed it was just a BB gun when caught. Does that make you a fool for belirving the BB gun could kill you when you went to the ATM and withdrew the max your accout allows to stop this guy from killing you?
The problem is not if the weapon could cause harm but if you believed it would and thereby was forced to act in ways you wouldn't to protect your life.
If they create an exchange with a current crypto currency and conver all their money to it except what is needed from day to day, then drop out of the Eurozone and create their own dollar, each crypto dollar will be the value of the crypto currency used. If their created dollar is worth 1/10 of a Euro and each crypto dollar or coin is worth 2 Euros, it will bring in 20 Drachmars when cashed out.
The key is a current crypto currency. It will be backed by something other than the state. the other option which is virtually identical is to convert it to a foreign currency then convert it back. Except the later is subject to manipulation and fees imposed by the banks- some of which will be butt hurt over the defaults when they leave the Eurozone.
Slashdot Mirror
Where exactly would he plug this newfangled usb flash thing in at?
The laptop will not have any USB ports.
Do yourself a favor and pay attention. Look the report i mentioned up too.
They go into explicit detail with statements from congress on the passage of the 1996 telecom act as well as previous FCC interptetations and state it is clear congress never intended the internet to be regulated other than an information service. They even mention VoIP in it.
In other words, the lawsuit to reverse this has already been laid out. Congress never intended the internet to be regulated under title 2 and congress has not changed any laws since then. You have a modern FCC who overstepped its abilities and was shot down by the courts, now all the sudden they ignore over 2 decades of interpretation of law and without any legislative action at all, moved around the courts. Of course they will lose the lawsuit.
Probably not.
An AI would either be self aware or jusf a script running (albeit an ellaborate one). I think therefore i am is not far from religion exists therefore god exists. But more importantly, it likely would not limit itself to what I know is all there is to know so the supernatural claims of religion would still seem plausible or possible even if there is no known natural explanation. And knowing itself is a creation designed to act in certain ways it would likely understand that things can be created with the appearance of natural causes and rules can be constructs to further useful knowledge. Or in other words it would dismiss the notion of a god simply because knowlege makes one unneccesary.
I'm currious. I just got off the phone with my mother. Are you going to call me a lier or dismiss the message she told me (be careful drivinng to California) becaue i cannot prove it to you?
The majority of people who claim to talk to God or Jesus or Whoever tend to only let you know whrn they explain their actions. Most of the ones i know of do it in some way to help others but i will note suggest scammrs and greed isn't part of it either.
I also think that some of this is a person's inner voice whhatever that really is. For instance, back in early december of last year, we had a cold snap where it got to about 15 below zero. I was running late for work and live out in the middle of nowhere. I saw a car pulled to the side of the road and something told me to stop and check it. Turns out it was a girl and a young kid stranded because she decided to get a blanket from the trunk for the kid and somehow dropped her key and couldn't find it. I guess they were there about an hour or longer. Between my headlights and a flashlight, i found the key while they warmed up in my car. I was still late but they were safe because something told me to stop and make sure everything was ok. I don't think god talked tl me but i can see how someone elsr might.
Those rules certainly have been in place. Its why we have monopolies and so few choices.
I did not say underserved. I said more expensive.
Currently these places are getting internet piggybacked on utility infrastructure. The costs are spread over the entire service area and traditionally, access to that service area was limited in exchange for servicing areas not profitable to serve. For instance, in some areas it cost more to run phone or cable lines down the street than the 10 or 15 subscribers would ever pay in rates over their lifetime. This is why restricted access was in place in the first place- to force companies to service areas that they would not make a profit from.
If those costs are not recovered from the high density areas where its less expensive to run the infrastucture, it will come from the costs of providing the service. Sure, all the people along the way to the 100 residence apartment complex might not see a change, but those along the road after it or the side roads will have to bear the costs of their connections when 5 different companies saturate the apartment complex.
No, you can not say it no longer applies. You can say the laws need changed, you can say the internet is different. But you cannot say it no longer applies without an act of congress making it so. The EPA cannot just say the times are different so now we are going to rehulate chewing gum while incard. The prosecutor cannot just say times are different so the laws against murdering people no longer apply. The prosecutor cannot just say times are different so the speeding fines no longer apply and its 6 months in jail instead.
He likely wouldn't have internet af all. These rules allow service providers to flood the profitable markets and ignore the unprofitable ones. Expect rate increases in those unprofitable markets like low income areas and places where yhe population density isn't high.
Cpmcast will win their lawsuite too.
The FCC back in 1998 already determined with well thought out reasoning that congress never intended the internet to be regulated under title 2 and stated so clearly with lots of supporting evidence that its intent was as an information service. They even mention their computers II working paper that the 1998 law was modeled after. No law concerning this has changed since either.
You can find this report in ghe federal register as the bi anual report to congress on accessability or something like that. It is the only FCC report to congress in march or may of 1988. The internet stuff is around page 28 or so. I am posting from a phone so your google finger will have to look it up.
Using the force of the United States government vie senate commity is the McCarthy connection. You and I can debate or ignore based on funding sources all day long. We are not the government.
To make sure they stay empty and keep them that way.
Actually, skme of this is more humanitarian than authoritarian. A lot of these places in the desert will ohtfight kill yoh before you can cross it if you are not prepared.
Years ago they were talking about teathering balloons and blimps to reach the same objective. I guess drones are much cooler.
Correction. Americans have no interest in those jobs at the wages being offered. Of course the wages will never rise when the employer can exploit illegal aliens at lower and sometimes even illegal wages.
But wait you think, those are minimum wage jobs. Well, nothing forces them fo pay only minimum wage. Should a real and legal market exist, they would likely be paying above minimim wage and would not be minim wage jobs.
I'm wondering. If the nerve transplant alllows use of the bionic hand, why wouldn't it allow use of the nerve damaged hand?
It probably would be safer with a fake hand as feeling probably would remain gone so burns and other damaging injutirs could go undetected wherd its not so mucb a health concern with tbe bionic hand. I dunno, maybe there is something moe technical or maybe it a "because i can" thing.
All of fed ex that ships anything is required to have an ICC number and therefore a common carrier unless they registered as not for hire and only transport their own goods to their own points of market.
Probably reliability and accuracy. Its likely easier to either alter tracable identifyers, destroy the weapon, or sell it tp some thug to take the heat and buy/steal new guns than to master reliability and accuracy and put it into production undetected.
The tea party protests started before the 2008 election even happened.
Remember joe the plumber?
Perhaps you or where ever you get your news from ignored it until later.
Thats why i only post from stolen tablets on the free WIFI at various fast food places like McDonalds using VPN accounts purchased with stolen credit cards.
Oh, and i also wear a tin foil hat- not to be confused wiyh the cheap aluminum foil hats.
You do not have to suck it up or even like it. The idea behind a free market is that you can stay away from what you do not like and go to what you do like.
Of course if it's the only choice, it isn't a free market is it?
lol.. Not really. It would be no different then them buying US dollars, exiting the Eurozone, creating a crap currency, then converting back into their crap currency. It needs nothing hard at all. Any paper or fiat currency will work.
Greece will not have to export anything, all they will have to do is find someone willing to sell. That's where a bit coin operation would work. They purchase bitcoins from whoever sells, when they exchange them back out, it's the current exchange rates. Whoever sells them can purchase hard assets or take the loss or do whatever their scheme allows.
Greece could purchase gold and do the same. Using a crypto currency only allows that to happen without having to purchase the asset themselves.
I appreciate the attemp to bring light to something you see as a wrong in society but no one seems to be disputing the fact that we are talking about the commision of a violent crime ( robery even if violence wasn't involved) and legal penalties where Ms. Richards' situation came about (if your version is accurate) from social expectation/normalities, panties getting bunched up and the reactions to it. I do think there is a distinct difference here. In theory at least, with the criminal version there is an appearance of fairness.
You possibly could even if it is unlikely. That is why the use of weapons increases penalties and the use of some weapons are considered more agressive and carry stiffer penalties.
Lol..
Suppose someone robbed you with a .45 but they claimed it was just a BB gun when caught. Does that make you a fool for belirving the BB gun could kill you when you went to the ATM and withdrew the max your accout allows to stop this guy from killing you?
The problem is not if the weapon could cause harm but if you believed it would and thereby was forced to act in ways you wouldn't to protect your life.
What in the hell in what i wrote gave you thay idea? I said nothing of the sort.
I don't think you understand the concept.
If they create an exchange with a current crypto currency and conver all their money to it except what is needed from day to day, then drop out of the Eurozone and create their own dollar, each crypto dollar will be the value of the crypto currency used. If their created dollar is worth 1/10 of a Euro and each crypto dollar or coin is worth 2 Euros, it will bring in 20 Drachmars when cashed out.
The key is a current crypto currency. It will be backed by something other than the state. the other option which is virtually identical is to convert it to a foreign currency then convert it back. Except the later is subject to manipulation and fees imposed by the banks- some of which will be butt hurt over the defaults when they leave the Eurozone.