I couldn't even register my full name as a screenname because it was already in use.
Well duh! Don't you remember the 70s and 80s? The given name "irc.goatse.cx" and family name "troll" were hugely popular back then. Isn't it a little self centered of you to assume that you would be able to get it on a service with as many users as AOL?;)
Hmm..well, what you need to do. Cancel cable tv...and only keep cable internet connectivity. Just split that line, and voila...you've got unfiltered basic cable tv and cable internet...for the price of only cable internet. They can't filter the internet connection without degrading its quality...
The problem with that is that most cable providers will still want to put traps on your line because they can't stand the thought of you getting a single free channel to go along with your broadband.
In any case, it's a moot point. I have DSL. I like the technology better and it's more reliable in my experience. Roadrunner had/has all sorts of fits in my neighborhood related to some sort of interference (bad enough that it shows on channels 2 and 3) that Time Warner could never track down.
I would cancel the cable entirely if I could tune in the local channels without them. Unfortunately I live in an apartment (rules out external antenna as an option) surrounded by thick trees at the bottom of a hill (rules out good indoor reception). At least they are only getting $4.95/month of my money.
That's a pretty selective line of bullshit, pardon my bluntness. Like most Christians, it seems that you interpret the bible in the way that is most compatible with your world views. I'm not begrudging you for that -- just calling for it for the hypocritical view that it is.
You really buy that economic theory as being supported by Christianity? You know that I could probably make a case that the very internet you are spewing this nonsense on was originally researched by tax dollars. Tax dollars subsidized some of the first backbone links. The Government that you hate so much still has a distant form of control over it.
The point is that if your family is that important to you, why isn't the creator of the world that important to you?
Because in my world the creator of the world looks something like this. Or perhaps this.
BTW, Jobe still praised God, because that's just what you should do.
I feel no obligation to praise your God.
There's no reason for an abused child to grow up chiding his parents for having abused him
Oh really? Perhaps your view would change if you dated a social worker for awhile. You tell me that a kid that grew up being burned by cigarettes and sexually abused shouldn't spit on his parents. Such parents deserve nothing but contempt from the community and the kid.
The issue here is *faith*. If you have faith that God as the creator of the universe exists, then you have no other choice but to place him first. You might not be able to prove it, but you are sufficiently certain on your own that he is there, and there's, again, only one reasonable response.
I have faith in science and the innovativeness of the human race. I would argue that every leap humanity has made forward has been in spite of religion, not because of it.
That said, if people want to buy into this stuff then it isn't really my place to tell them not to do so. But I get really sick and tired of the morally superior attitude that a lot of religious people have. Even the ones that aren't busy proselytizing are usually doing me favors like "praying for me" -- or thinking to themselves about how I'm going to hell.
I don't even have to agree or disagree with your belief that carrying around a gun deters crime. There's lots of data that could go either way on that subject.
I just find it scary that you carry around a firearm but claim that killing is immoral. God help you if somebody ever takes that gun away from you.
I won't carry around a gun because I don't think I could take a human life over a mugging. I don't care how much the lowlife deserves it -- I'm not going to blow somebody away over money. And if I can't say that I'd blow him away without hesitation then I'm not going to carry that gun. If he takes it away from me because I can't pull the trigger then I am fucked.
You're stronger than I can. If I thought only of my family I'd go back to being a criminal.
Actually, thinking of your family would be considered a migigating cirmemstance in most crimes. Can you honestly tell me that if your fortunes took a turn for the worst that you wouldn't steal to feed your kids? If somebody was threatening them that you wouldn't stop them with whatever force was required?
I would never kill. If I had to shoot someone in the foot or in the shoulder I would, but only in defense.
That's a fucking cop out, I'm sorry. I could think of much more ideal weapons to carry for self defense if you are overly concerned about taking a life. Pepper spray, mace and tasers come to mind. The minute you pull out a gun you better be ready to take a life in self defense -- because if you aren't ready to do that and the thug gets the gun away from you then somehow I doubt he will be aiming for your foot or sholder.
Rothbard addresses these questions. If you're interested in a copy e-mail me and I'll mail you my copy to read.
I'm not interested in "dog eat dog" Darwinian economic theory.
I don't worry about it. when I have a family I'll build on a nice 3 acre lot. My neighbors are free to sell what they want. Most businesses wouldn't open in a residential area with no traffic. Any that did would go broke.
That's nice if you have that luxury or desire a rural lifestyle. And even in a rural lifestyle you can still get fucked by your neighbors. What do you think will happen to your property values if your neighbor sells his lot to a coal fired power plant? Or a toxic waste dump? And what of the people that can't afford to or don't desire to live on a three acre lot in the middle of nowhere? Should they be screwed over by the system because zoning laws are "immoral"?
Big churches are as bad as big corporations and big government. My church is 250 members. At 300 I'll recommend a spin off.
You don't like big corporations? What the hell do you think would happen in your little Austrian School of economics/ownership socieity? Standard oil comes to mind.
Which is why I demand monthly budgets and operations reports from my church. Who did we help? How are they progressing? How are we cutting costs? How are we reaching out to others? I can't get this from government.
I guess you've never bothered to attend a Village Trustee meeting or use the Freedom of Information Act then. On the local and state level I could probably account for nearly every penny of my tax dollars if I was so inclined. With enough effort you could likewise do so for your Federal tax dollars -- although something tells me that you can't get a line item budget report on the CIA or NSA:)
I don't follow an organized Christianity.
I find it ironic how you preach the value of charity while at the same time advocating a raw form of captialism that history has shown us will not work. Even Adam Smith admitted this. People that adopt that line of reasoning scare as much (if not more so) then communists. At least the theory of communism is a noble one.
I serve my family better by following God's mandates.
Funny, I thought I served my family better by thinking about what is in their best interest before acting -- rather then following the "mandates" of a deity that I can't prove exists.
Every action can be prepared for. I defended against 2 muggings and 1 carjacking by displaying my weapon. I've never fired a shot in a stressful situation.
You spew "don't kill - war is never justified" and yet you carry around a firearm for self-defense? Doesn't that strike you as a bit hypocritical?
Read Rothbard's "What has Government done to our money?" It's $5ish and explains the theft of inflation and taxes.
So, no taxes. Who pays for the road? Who pays for the police? The fire department? The justice system? And how the hell do you suggest getting rid of inflation? A return to the gold standard?
If they pollute your land, it is trespass.
What about if they lower your property values? You think taxes and inflation are stealing but you are in favor of unrestricted zoning? It's not stealing from your wealth if somebody opens his porn shop next door to your house and it kills your property values?
My church does more with my 10% voluntary tithe and 1 weekly day of service than your government does with your 50% forced tax payment. My church can help the crackhead quit and get a job, government wants them to continue breeding losers so government continues to grow and be needed.
The government needs people to be dependant but your church doesn't? That is such a bullshit argument! Historically there has been a great many cases of various churches going to extreme lengths to keep people brainwashed and dependant on the Church. It still goes on today -- if my girlfriend and I were to get married we'd either have to promise to raise whatever kids resulted from the marriage as Catholics or she'd have to forgo a Catholic wedding.
I may not agree with everything that the Government does but don't give me this crap about how much better for society your church and religion is. For every example of honest charity conducted by a religious authority I could point out two others where they used the charity as a front to proselytize.
First of all, I am an American. It wasn't intended to be subtle, either; if you thought it was subtle, I would hate to see what it looks like when you're on the pull.
Hehe, you don't wanna see me on the pull:) I just grow weary of the putdowns by Europeans (mostly).
Second, funny mods should give karma because humor is as important as anything else in life - our sense of humor is what keeps us "sane" (for some value of sanity.) I enjoy humorous comments as much as and in some cases more than those comments which have honestly earned an insightful or informative mod.
I completely agree with you. I rather enjoy humor and I'm known as a bit of a wiseass in the real world. I think the/. motiviation is to keep people from using +5's to build up karma and then go on a trolling spree. In any case I don't think it's a big enough thing to worry about -- though I would tend to agree that "overated" mods shouldn't subtract from your karma when you didn't gain any in the first place for your +5, funny. *Shrug*
This is not and will never be an outlet of professional journalism.
Sure it is! They even report the important stories twice incase you missed them. It's like CBS having "up to the minute" that repeats itself all night long after 3AM;)
Don't get me started on auto billing (money grab); for me GMAC, Mass. Electric, and my Auto Insurance drive me crazy by only giving me the choice of mailing a paper check or giving them permission to access my bank account. There is some amount of satisfaction in controlling when and how much each vendor gets each month. For these three the price of a stamp is worth it.
I feel bad for you just having to do business with GMAC. They rank up there with Capital One in my book.
I'm a bit luckier. My credit union has a free billpayer service. Any bill that I have the option of sending a paper check to I can pay via this service. I can even add my own payees that aren't on the official list. A lot of the vendors are setup for electronic payments -- meaning they get my payment the day after I send it. The others actually get a paper check in the mail with my account number.
I'm very happy with that arrangement because I control the transactions. I've never had a problem with pushing electronic transactions. I just have a problem when they get to pull them from my account. For that reason I don't even have direct deposit of my payroll -- because my company has a rather draconian agreement that gives them the power to debit my account if they feel that they have made an error.
You should look and see if your credit union or bank has a similar billpayer product. It's worked out well for me:)
1. Serve God first (not the flag, not your boss, not the IRS, not your family)
In what brainwashed world is God more important then family? Most people would die to protect their loved ones. Most (sane) people would not die for their god -- although the current situation in the Middle East seems to defy this logic.
2. Don't have anger towards God. If life is bad, you didn't prepare properly.
Everything in life can't be prepared for. Can you prepare for a mugging? How about a car accident?
3. Don't worship logos, fads or ipods err idols.
Hahaha, at least we agree on something:)
4. Set aside one day a week to do God's work.
If it works for you.
5. Respect your parents
I know a few abused children that would take exception to this rule.
6. Never kill -- no war is just
That blanket statement is as stupid as people who would assume war is the solution to everything. Fighting aggression is as just as it comes.
7. Don't cheat on your spouse
Can't say I argue with that one.
8. Don't steal - Taxation is theft, currency inflation is theft
Taxation is theft? I'll remember that the next time I'm driving on a paved road. Currency inflation is theft? Sounds more like an economic theory to me. Do you think that reasonable interest on a loan is theft? I'm not trolling -- that's an honest question.
9. Be honest with all your words and actions
Hard to dispute that one.
10. Don't be jealous or control what isn't yours - Zoning laws are wrong, business regulations are wrong, slavery is wrong (the draft)
Zoning laws are wrong? How is the community deciding what to do with a community resource wrong? How is the community deciding to regulate a business that was harming the community wrong? It's pretty easy to be anti-zoning laws until somebody builds a toxic waste dump right next to your house.
God commands this of me. Nowhere does he say "force others to do these things"
That's nice. And what I'm about to say may or may not apply to you -- but I'm just as disgusted by people with morally superior attitudes who don't "force" it on other people as I am by people who do. We live in a community of human beings. That community begins with your family includes your neighbors, your countrymen and ultimately the planet. I have a hard time putting a deity that I can't prove exists before that community.
Why is it mandatory to assign blame to the VoIP provider? What about "no blame"? It's a live at your own risk world. It's perfectly reasonable to expect, if a consumer has VoIP service, that they are well aware of the limitations of that service.
It's perfectly reasonable to expect that people who aren't tech savvy would expect that the 911 service would have worked. This is all the more true when the providers originally did not feel inclined to disclose this limitation. If they aren't going to disclose it, then how the hell is the consumer going to find out? Do you go around test dialing 911 on every phone you use to make sure it works? Your position is the extreme other end of this argument. I'd like to think that my proposals fall somewhere between "fuck the consumer" and "E-911 should be required on every connected device in the world".
The fact that slashdot doesn't give karma for funny mods must stem from its American roots - that puritanical attitude gets into everything.
It's funny that you mention the FAQ but failed to quote this part: "Note that being moderated Funny doesn't help your karma. You have to be smart, not just a smart-ass."
Why did your otherwise insightful comment need to include a subtle slam directed at Americans? More to the point why should funny mods give karma? What's wrong with the current system?
I don't mind paying full price for the electronic edition but I don't have the patience to deal with some kid that only shows up on collection day expecting to be paid for papers that were never delivered.
I had that problem with them too. The other problem I had was that even when my dead tree paper was being delivered they wouldn't let me pay the paperboy or send them a check. They insisted on setting up automatic billing. I have a problem with automatic billing for _any_ vendor.
Have not subscribed to a paper in over ten years. On line is the only way to go for me.
I get most of my news from Google News now. What's annoying about that though is I miss out on all the local news. Short of dealing with the stupidity of the paperboy my only choice is to TiVo the local 6:00 news (I'm never home) and/or read the paper at work. We actually have a halfway decent locally owned CBS affiliate in these parts so that's where I get all of my local news. Sometimes they even give an interesting (read: local) perspective on national and international news too.
because any reasonable human being wouldn't notice the spec of graphite for Bush.
Your assuming that the people doing the counting are reasonable human beings. That's a pretty big assumption. Such arguments often result in the ballot being thrown out -- even though the voters intent is quite clear.
I wouldn't advocate exclusively relying on a machine to do the vote. Why should we exclusively rely on human beings with a stake in the outcome? What would be wrong with computer voting machine (one machine count) that prints human and OCR readable ballots (one machine count, one human count)? A printed ballot would get rid of the spec of graphite/hanging chad problem while still being countable by your human beings.
Again I do note that the welfare state has made this a real (and deplorable) possibility.
Given your need to throw the "welfare state" into this argument I can see that you will probably never agree with what I have to say. How the hell is that remotely relavant to this discussion?
One wonders how the human race managed to survive for the 60-80 years without 911. Think of all the dead people who died from not having 911 service in 1960. Can we sue the phone companies for negligence? Hell no. People were expected to know their own emergency numbers and their own location.
And people no longer have that expectation because 911 is damn near universal in the United States. Can you tell me the number of your local police department off the top of your head without looking at a phone book? A phone book that I might also point out that most users of VoIP or cellular only service will not have. I'd also point out that back in the 60s on a POTS telephone you could dial the operator and she would likely be somebody local who could quickly connect you to the local authorities. Think I can get a local operator in this day in age (VoIP or POTS)?
You speak of 911 service as if it's a bad thing. I see it as an improvement. Is there a reason why it shouldn't be deployed or have been deployed in the first place? Is 911 part of the "welfare state" in your World? I suppose if somebody is unable to relay their location for whatever reason then in your world that's just natural selection and they deserve what they get.
Furthermore, if you read my comment history you will not find a comment where I said that 911 should be forced on the VoIP providers. In fact I seem to recall saying that VoIP customers should even be offered the option of opting out of it. That would be an informed choice on their part. When this whole mess started the VoIP providers just rolled out their product and didn't bother to tell anybody that 911 wouldn't work.
Given the fact that in many cases you could port your existing number (that presumably had E-911 service) to the VoIP service it seems pretty harsh to blame the consumer. The big thing I want to see is the information about the pros and cons of the various services released in a prominent way so that people can make these informed choices after they have all the facts.
I used to have a subscription to the local newspaper, but after a while I cancelled it because I felt guilty for using so much paper and never really reading it, even though I recycled it.
I don't feel too hostile towards our local paper even though they sold out to a souless conglomerate that brings in most of the reporters from out of town. I would still have a subscription if it wasn't for the fact that my paper always seemed to be missing, four hours late, or soaking wet.
Instead of charging $3.75 a week for that "service" why don't they charge $2.50 and make everything available on a subscriber version of the website? I would pay for that -- access to local news is something that people should have, imho.
The altruistic side of me also thinks that they should release all news that is no longer economically viable (older then three months?) into the public domain and keep archives on their website. Of course they don't have much incentive to do this because they can sell "archive access", but it would be a public service. Between the money they originally made and the advertising dollars on the website I doubt it would be a losing game for them.
Actually, this is the first insightful comment I've seen thus far in the entire discussion. It's sadly true.
Recall when that old man drove through a marketplace and killed several people? I actually heard people on the pundit shows that felt sorry for him. They thought it was an outrage that he was likely going to be criminally charged.
Care to venture a guess as to what the outrage would be if a 17 year old drove through that same marketplace and mowed down a few people? "They are too young to drive! Take away their license! Try him as an adult!" God help that 17 year old if he had a sip of communion wine before driving and hit a 0.01-0.02 BAC.
If you can't independently assess the differences between POTS and VoIP such that you're totally enamoured with marketing speak then please don't make that my problem. I hope you're not surprised if your VoIP telephone doesn't work on an unconnected private LAN.
I'm not worried about you or I. I'm worried about the 70 year old with a heart problem that has no idea it won't work if the power goes out, his internet connection goes down or that 911 may or may not work (until recently they were not even telling people about the 911 limitations).
I don't think many people are "totally enamored" with marketing speak. But I still think you'll find that they support truth in advertising laws for a reason.
The problem is that there is no way to allow true a la Carte pricing without digital cable technology. When I downgraded my cable service to ghetto (6 channels -- ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, PBS and public access) they had to put no less then three giant brick frequency traps on my line. I'm told that such traps often cause other problems with Roadrunner and Digital Phone (I have DSL so I can't comment).
The problem with digital cable technology is that the FCC hasn't yet (AFAIK) forced them to adopt a standard that would be included in all television sets. So you are going to have to lease a converter from the cable company. At the very least this will give you headaches with your TiVo, (yeah, I know about IR blasters, but that's a PITA), VCR and picture in picture. At the very worst you are now locked into yet another piece of hardware that you don't own and have no control over.
It's also my understanding that the newer cable converters make note of what you watch and the cable provider gets to aggregate that information and sell it to marketing droids. At least TiVo is nice enough to disclose that they do this.
I won't touch digital cable with a ten foot pole until my TV comes with a receiver that doesn't phone the mothership -- and one that I actually own.
Vonage sure seemed to be providing full disclosure as of August which was the first time I checked them out. I saw the issues about 911 were clearly layed out and I would have gone with it if I could have gotten a local number.
Yes, because the FCC and various State Governments forced them to do so. Did they also disclose the power outage/internet access limitations?
Do you think that 911 will work when your lovely POTS goes down and you can't dial out? Believe it or not, my POTS was out of service more often than my internet service has gone down. I've had approximately 1 hour of internet downtime in the past year. When I had a POTS, every month it was out for about half an hour.
I find that hard to believe and if it's true then you should be on the phone to your state regulatory agency (the PSC in NYS) bitching about it. The nice thing about a regulated industry is that they will force them to address the problem.
In twenty some years that I can recall I only ever remember POTS going down once. And that was because some drunk guy hit a telephone pole right up the street.
We have a secret ballot over here, but there's no law compelling you to keep secret who you voted for if you choose not to. Why is such a law useful?
That law applies only to the elections officials working at the polling place. If you are disabled and can't use the machine you are allowed to ask us for help. Two of us (one from each political party) must go in with you. We are prohibited from revealing how you voted.
Pictures are a bit less invasive (and still allow verification of the ID) when the proposal to require a thumbprint or even (in the more extreme cases) DNA sample or retina scan.
No, but they require $50 or so depending on your state, not to mention a stable address and not being a debtor to the State. Poll taxes are unconstitutional for a reason.
Debtor to the state? I don't think that my state can revoke your license for owing them taxes. They can revoke it if you owe unpaid child support -- but that's not being a debtor to the state. As for the stable address, I managed to get a PO box put on my drivers license. I don't know if that was the clueless lady at DMV or if I'm allowed to do that, but you can bet your ass that I'll be renewing via mail from now on:)
Nah, you still live in a (representative) democracy. SCOTUS had to stop the madness at some point, and it just happened to not fall your guy's way. They didn't "step in"; they were asked for a ruling by both sides.
SCOTUS didn't have to "step in". That's complete bullshit. Even if Florida had remained a mess and Bush/Gore kept fighting it out there were other systems in place that could have solved the problem.
The Florida State Legislature could have stepped in and decided whose electors to use. In fact they had already started this process. Or Congress could have decided what to do with Florida's electors. Or Congress could have voted themselves (House picks the President, Senate picks the VP -- we could have had Bush/Liebermann). Both of those legislative bodies are elected you'll note.
The fact remains that nine unelected judges decided that they were the most qualified to decide who should be President. Arrogent bastards. They should have stayed the fuck out of it.
Slashdot Mirror
I couldn't even register my full name as a screenname because it was already in use.
Well duh! Don't you remember the 70s and 80s? The given name "irc.goatse.cx" and family name "troll" were hugely popular back then. Isn't it a little self centered of you to assume that you would be able to get it on a service with as many users as AOL? ;)
Hmm..well, what you need to do. Cancel cable tv...and only keep cable internet connectivity. Just split that line, and voila...you've got unfiltered basic cable tv and cable internet...for the price of only cable internet. They can't filter the internet connection without degrading its quality...
The problem with that is that most cable providers will still want to put traps on your line because they can't stand the thought of you getting a single free channel to go along with your broadband.
In any case, it's a moot point. I have DSL. I like the technology better and it's more reliable in my experience. Roadrunner had/has all sorts of fits in my neighborhood related to some sort of interference (bad enough that it shows on channels 2 and 3) that Time Warner could never track down.
I would cancel the cable entirely if I could tune in the local channels without them. Unfortunately I live in an apartment (rules out external antenna as an option) surrounded by thick trees at the bottom of a hill (rules out good indoor reception). At least they are only getting $4.95/month of my money.
What is left I give to Caesar -- nothing.
That's a pretty selective line of bullshit, pardon my bluntness. Like most Christians, it seems that you interpret the bible in the way that is most compatible with your world views. I'm not begrudging you for that -- just calling for it for the hypocritical view that it is.
You really buy that economic theory as being supported by Christianity? You know that I could probably make a case that the very internet you are spewing this nonsense on was originally researched by tax dollars. Tax dollars subsidized some of the first backbone links. The Government that you hate so much still has a distant form of control over it.
The point is that if your family is that important to you, why isn't the creator of the world that important to you?
Because in my world the creator of the world looks something like this. Or perhaps this.
BTW, Jobe still praised God, because that's just what you should do.
I feel no obligation to praise your God.
There's no reason for an abused child to grow up chiding his parents for having abused him
Oh really? Perhaps your view would change if you dated a social worker for awhile. You tell me that a kid that grew up being burned by cigarettes and sexually abused shouldn't spit on his parents. Such parents deserve nothing but contempt from the community and the kid.
The issue here is *faith*. If you have faith that God as the creator of the universe exists, then you have no other choice but to place him first. You might not be able to prove it, but you are sufficiently certain on your own that he is there, and there's, again, only one reasonable response.
I have faith in science and the innovativeness of the human race. I would argue that every leap humanity has made forward has been in spite of religion, not because of it.
That said, if people want to buy into this stuff then it isn't really my place to tell them not to do so. But I get really sick and tired of the morally superior attitude that a lot of religious people have. Even the ones that aren't busy proselytizing are usually doing me favors like "praying for me" -- or thinking to themselves about how I'm going to hell.
Ah, that episode was a classic. Homage to one of the best Cold War movies ever. Gotta love South Park :)
I don't even have to agree or disagree with your belief that carrying around a gun deters crime. There's lots of data that could go either way on that subject.
I just find it scary that you carry around a firearm but claim that killing is immoral. God help you if somebody ever takes that gun away from you.
I won't carry around a gun because I don't think I could take a human life over a mugging. I don't care how much the lowlife deserves it -- I'm not going to blow somebody away over money. And if I can't say that I'd blow him away without hesitation then I'm not going to carry that gun. If he takes it away from me because I can't pull the trigger then I am fucked.
You're stronger than I can. If I thought only of my family I'd go back to being a criminal.
Actually, thinking of your family would be considered a migigating cirmemstance in most crimes. Can you honestly tell me that if your fortunes took a turn for the worst that you wouldn't steal to feed your kids? If somebody was threatening them that you wouldn't stop them with whatever force was required?
I would never kill. If I had to shoot someone in the foot or in the shoulder I would, but only in defense.
That's a fucking cop out, I'm sorry. I could think of much more ideal weapons to carry for self defense if you are overly concerned about taking a life. Pepper spray, mace and tasers come to mind. The minute you pull out a gun you better be ready to take a life in self defense -- because if you aren't ready to do that and the thug gets the gun away from you then somehow I doubt he will be aiming for your foot or sholder.
Rothbard addresses these questions. If you're interested in a copy e-mail me and I'll mail you my copy to read.
I'm not interested in "dog eat dog" Darwinian economic theory.
I don't worry about it. when I have a family I'll build on a nice 3 acre lot. My neighbors are free to sell what they want. Most businesses wouldn't open in a residential area with no traffic. Any that did would go broke.
That's nice if you have that luxury or desire a rural lifestyle. And even in a rural lifestyle you can still get fucked by your neighbors. What do you think will happen to your property values if your neighbor sells his lot to a coal fired power plant? Or a toxic waste dump? And what of the people that can't afford to or don't desire to live on a three acre lot in the middle of nowhere? Should they be screwed over by the system because zoning laws are "immoral"?
Big churches are as bad as big corporations and big government. My church is 250 members. At 300 I'll recommend a spin off.
You don't like big corporations? What the hell do you think would happen in your little Austrian School of economics/ownership socieity? Standard oil comes to mind.
Which is why I demand monthly budgets and operations reports from my church. Who did we help? How are they progressing? How are we cutting costs? How are we reaching out to others? I can't get this from government.
I guess you've never bothered to attend a Village Trustee meeting or use the Freedom of Information Act then. On the local and state level I could probably account for nearly every penny of my tax dollars if I was so inclined. With enough effort you could likewise do so for your Federal tax dollars -- although something tells me that you can't get a line item budget report on the CIA or NSA :)
I don't follow an organized Christianity.
I find it ironic how you preach the value of charity while at the same time advocating a raw form of captialism that history has shown us will not work. Even Adam Smith admitted this. People that adopt that line of reasoning scare as much (if not more so) then communists. At least the theory of communism is a noble one.
I serve my family better by following God's mandates.
Funny, I thought I served my family better by thinking about what is in their best interest before acting -- rather then following the "mandates" of a deity that I can't prove exists.
Every action can be prepared for. I defended against 2 muggings and 1 carjacking by displaying my weapon. I've never fired a shot in a stressful situation.
You spew "don't kill - war is never justified" and yet you carry around a firearm for self-defense? Doesn't that strike you as a bit hypocritical?
Read Rothbard's "What has Government done to our money?" It's $5ish and explains the theft of inflation and taxes.
So, no taxes. Who pays for the road? Who pays for the police? The fire department? The justice system? And how the hell do you suggest getting rid of inflation? A return to the gold standard?
If they pollute your land, it is trespass.
What about if they lower your property values? You think taxes and inflation are stealing but you are in favor of unrestricted zoning? It's not stealing from your wealth if somebody opens his porn shop next door to your house and it kills your property values?
My church does more with my 10% voluntary tithe and 1 weekly day of service than your government does with your 50% forced tax payment. My church can help the crackhead quit and get a job, government wants them to continue breeding losers so government continues to grow and be needed.
The government needs people to be dependant but your church doesn't? That is such a bullshit argument! Historically there has been a great many cases of various churches going to extreme lengths to keep people brainwashed and dependant on the Church. It still goes on today -- if my girlfriend and I were to get married we'd either have to promise to raise whatever kids resulted from the marriage as Catholics or she'd have to forgo a Catholic wedding.
I may not agree with everything that the Government does but don't give me this crap about how much better for society your church and religion is. For every example of honest charity conducted by a religious authority I could point out two others where they used the charity as a front to proselytize.
Fuck organized religion!
First of all, I am an American. It wasn't intended to be subtle, either; if you thought it was subtle, I would hate to see what it looks like when you're on the pull.
Hehe, you don't wanna see me on the pull :) I just grow weary of the putdowns by Europeans (mostly).
Second, funny mods should give karma because humor is as important as anything else in life - our sense of humor is what keeps us "sane" (for some value of sanity.) I enjoy humorous comments as much as and in some cases more than those comments which have honestly earned an insightful or informative mod.
I completely agree with you. I rather enjoy humor and I'm known as a bit of a wiseass in the real world. I think the /. motiviation is to keep people from using +5's to build up karma and then go on a trolling spree. In any case I don't think it's a big enough thing to worry about -- though I would tend to agree that "overated" mods shouldn't subtract from your karma when you didn't gain any in the first place for your +5, funny. *Shrug*
This is not and will never be an outlet of professional journalism.
Sure it is! They even report the important stories twice incase you missed them. It's like CBS having "up to the minute" that repeats itself all night long after 3AM ;)
Don't get me started on auto billing (money grab); for me GMAC, Mass. Electric, and my Auto Insurance drive me crazy by only giving me the choice of mailing a paper check or giving them permission to access my bank account. There is some amount of satisfaction in controlling when and how much each vendor gets each month. For these three the price of a stamp is worth it.
I feel bad for you just having to do business with GMAC. They rank up there with Capital One in my book.
I'm a bit luckier. My credit union has a free billpayer service. Any bill that I have the option of sending a paper check to I can pay via this service. I can even add my own payees that aren't on the official list. A lot of the vendors are setup for electronic payments -- meaning they get my payment the day after I send it. The others actually get a paper check in the mail with my account number.
I'm very happy with that arrangement because I control the transactions. I've never had a problem with pushing electronic transactions. I just have a problem when they get to pull them from my account. For that reason I don't even have direct deposit of my payroll -- because my company has a rather draconian agreement that gives them the power to debit my account if they feel that they have made an error.
You should look and see if your credit union or bank has a similar billpayer product. It's worked out well for me :)
1. Serve God first (not the flag, not your boss, not the IRS, not your family)
In what brainwashed world is God more important then family? Most people would die to protect their loved ones. Most (sane) people would not die for their god -- although the current situation in the Middle East seems to defy this logic.
2. Don't have anger towards God. If life is bad, you didn't prepare properly.
Everything in life can't be prepared for. Can you prepare for a mugging? How about a car accident?
3. Don't worship logos, fads or ipods err idols.
Hahaha, at least we agree on something :)
4. Set aside one day a week to do God's work.
If it works for you.
5. Respect your parents
I know a few abused children that would take exception to this rule.
6. Never kill -- no war is just
That blanket statement is as stupid as people who would assume war is the solution to everything. Fighting aggression is as just as it comes.
7. Don't cheat on your spouse
Can't say I argue with that one.
8. Don't steal - Taxation is theft, currency inflation is theft
Taxation is theft? I'll remember that the next time I'm driving on a paved road. Currency inflation is theft? Sounds more like an economic theory to me. Do you think that reasonable interest on a loan is theft? I'm not trolling -- that's an honest question.
9. Be honest with all your words and actions
Hard to dispute that one.
10. Don't be jealous or control what isn't yours - Zoning laws are wrong, business regulations are wrong, slavery is wrong (the draft)
Zoning laws are wrong? How is the community deciding what to do with a community resource wrong? How is the community deciding to regulate a business that was harming the community wrong? It's pretty easy to be anti-zoning laws until somebody builds a toxic waste dump right next to your house.
God commands this of me. Nowhere does he say "force others to do these things"
That's nice. And what I'm about to say may or may not apply to you -- but I'm just as disgusted by people with morally superior attitudes who don't "force" it on other people as I am by people who do. We live in a community of human beings. That community begins with your family includes your neighbors, your countrymen and ultimately the planet. I have a hard time putting a deity that I can't prove exists before that community.
Why is it mandatory to assign blame to the VoIP provider? What about "no blame"? It's a live at your own risk world. It's perfectly reasonable to expect, if a consumer has VoIP service, that they are well aware of the limitations of that service.
It's perfectly reasonable to expect that people who aren't tech savvy would expect that the 911 service would have worked. This is all the more true when the providers originally did not feel inclined to disclose this limitation. If they aren't going to disclose it, then how the hell is the consumer going to find out? Do you go around test dialing 911 on every phone you use to make sure it works? Your position is the extreme other end of this argument. I'd like to think that my proposals fall somewhere between "fuck the consumer" and "E-911 should be required on every connected device in the world".
The fact that slashdot doesn't give karma for funny mods must stem from its American roots - that puritanical attitude gets into everything.
It's funny that you mention the FAQ but failed to quote this part: "Note that being moderated Funny doesn't help your karma. You have to be smart, not just a smart-ass."
Why did your otherwise insightful comment need to include a subtle slam directed at Americans? More to the point why should funny mods give karma? What's wrong with the current system?
I don't mind paying full price for the electronic edition but I don't have the patience to deal with some kid that only shows up on collection day expecting to be paid for papers that were never delivered.
I had that problem with them too. The other problem I had was that even when my dead tree paper was being delivered they wouldn't let me pay the paperboy or send them a check. They insisted on setting up automatic billing. I have a problem with automatic billing for _any_ vendor.
Have not subscribed to a paper in over ten years. On line is the only way to go for me.
I get most of my news from Google News now. What's annoying about that though is I miss out on all the local news. Short of dealing with the stupidity of the paperboy my only choice is to TiVo the local 6:00 news (I'm never home) and/or read the paper at work. We actually have a halfway decent locally owned CBS affiliate in these parts so that's where I get all of my local news. Sometimes they even give an interesting (read: local) perspective on national and international news too.
because any reasonable human being wouldn't notice the spec of graphite for Bush.
Your assuming that the people doing the counting are reasonable human beings. That's a pretty big assumption. Such arguments often result in the ballot being thrown out -- even though the voters intent is quite clear.
I wouldn't advocate exclusively relying on a machine to do the vote. Why should we exclusively rely on human beings with a stake in the outcome? What would be wrong with computer voting machine (one machine count) that prints human and OCR readable ballots (one machine count, one human count)? A printed ballot would get rid of the spec of graphite/hanging chad problem while still being countable by your human beings.
Again I do note that the welfare state has made this a real (and deplorable) possibility.
Given your need to throw the "welfare state" into this argument I can see that you will probably never agree with what I have to say. How the hell is that remotely relavant to this discussion?
One wonders how the human race managed to survive for the 60-80 years without 911. Think of all the dead people who died from not having 911 service in 1960. Can we sue the phone companies for negligence? Hell no. People were expected to know their own emergency numbers and their own location.
And people no longer have that expectation because 911 is damn near universal in the United States. Can you tell me the number of your local police department off the top of your head without looking at a phone book? A phone book that I might also point out that most users of VoIP or cellular only service will not have. I'd also point out that back in the 60s on a POTS telephone you could dial the operator and she would likely be somebody local who could quickly connect you to the local authorities. Think I can get a local operator in this day in age (VoIP or POTS)?
You speak of 911 service as if it's a bad thing. I see it as an improvement. Is there a reason why it shouldn't be deployed or have been deployed in the first place? Is 911 part of the "welfare state" in your World? I suppose if somebody is unable to relay their location for whatever reason then in your world that's just natural selection and they deserve what they get.
Furthermore, if you read my comment history you will not find a comment where I said that 911 should be forced on the VoIP providers. In fact I seem to recall saying that VoIP customers should even be offered the option of opting out of it. That would be an informed choice on their part. When this whole mess started the VoIP providers just rolled out their product and didn't bother to tell anybody that 911 wouldn't work.
Given the fact that in many cases you could port your existing number (that presumably had E-911 service) to the VoIP service it seems pretty harsh to blame the consumer. The big thing I want to see is the information about the pros and cons of the various services released in a prominent way so that people can make these informed choices after they have all the facts.
WTF is so unreasonable about that?
I used to have a subscription to the local newspaper, but after a while I cancelled it because I felt guilty for using so much paper and never really reading it, even though I recycled it.
I don't feel too hostile towards our local paper even though they sold out to a souless conglomerate that brings in most of the reporters from out of town. I would still have a subscription if it wasn't for the fact that my paper always seemed to be missing, four hours late, or soaking wet.
Instead of charging $3.75 a week for that "service" why don't they charge $2.50 and make everything available on a subscriber version of the website? I would pay for that -- access to local news is something that people should have, imho.
The altruistic side of me also thinks that they should release all news that is no longer economically viable (older then three months?) into the public domain and keep archives on their website. Of course they don't have much incentive to do this because they can sell "archive access", but it would be a public service. Between the money they originally made and the advertising dollars on the website I doubt it would be a losing game for them.
Old people can get away with just about anything.
Actually, this is the first insightful comment I've seen thus far in the entire discussion. It's sadly true.
Recall when that old man drove through a marketplace and killed several people? I actually heard people on the pundit shows that felt sorry for him. They thought it was an outrage that he was likely going to be criminally charged.
Care to venture a guess as to what the outrage would be if a 17 year old drove through that same marketplace and mowed down a few people? "They are too young to drive! Take away their license! Try him as an adult!" God help that 17 year old if he had a sip of communion wine before driving and hit a 0.01-0.02 BAC.
If you can't independently assess the differences between POTS and VoIP such that you're totally enamoured with marketing speak then please don't make that my problem. I hope you're not surprised if your VoIP telephone doesn't work on an unconnected private LAN.
I'm not worried about you or I. I'm worried about the 70 year old with a heart problem that has no idea it won't work if the power goes out, his internet connection goes down or that 911 may or may not work (until recently they were not even telling people about the 911 limitations).
I don't think many people are "totally enamored" with marketing speak. But I still think you'll find that they support truth in advertising laws for a reason.
The problem is that there is no way to allow true a la Carte pricing without digital cable technology. When I downgraded my cable service to ghetto (6 channels -- ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, PBS and public access) they had to put no less then three giant brick frequency traps on my line. I'm told that such traps often cause other problems with Roadrunner and Digital Phone (I have DSL so I can't comment).
The problem with digital cable technology is that the FCC hasn't yet (AFAIK) forced them to adopt a standard that would be included in all television sets. So you are going to have to lease a converter from the cable company. At the very least this will give you headaches with your TiVo, (yeah, I know about IR blasters, but that's a PITA), VCR and picture in picture. At the very worst you are now locked into yet another piece of hardware that you don't own and have no control over.
It's also my understanding that the newer cable converters make note of what you watch and the cable provider gets to aggregate that information and sell it to marketing droids. At least TiVo is nice enough to disclose that they do this.
I won't touch digital cable with a ten foot pole until my TV comes with a receiver that doesn't phone the mothership -- and one that I actually own.
Vonage sure seemed to be providing full disclosure as of August which was the first time I checked them out. I saw the issues about 911 were clearly layed out and I would have gone with it if I could have gotten a local number.
Yes, because the FCC and various State Governments forced them to do so. Did they also disclose the power outage/internet access limitations?
Do you think that 911 will work when your lovely POTS goes down and you can't dial out? Believe it or not, my POTS was out of service more often than my internet service has gone down. I've had approximately 1 hour of internet downtime in the past year. When I had a POTS, every month it was out for about half an hour.
I find that hard to believe and if it's true then you should be on the phone to your state regulatory agency (the PSC in NYS) bitching about it. The nice thing about a regulated industry is that they will force them to address the problem.
In twenty some years that I can recall I only ever remember POTS going down once. And that was because some drunk guy hit a telephone pole right up the street.
We have a secret ballot over here, but there's no law compelling you to keep secret who you voted for if you choose not to. Why is such a law useful?
That law applies only to the elections officials working at the polling place. If you are disabled and can't use the machine you are allowed to ask us for help. Two of us (one from each political party) must go in with you. We are prohibited from revealing how you voted.
You on the other hand can tell anyone you like.
Pictures are a type of biometrics.
Pictures are a bit less invasive (and still allow verification of the ID) when the proposal to require a thumbprint or even (in the more extreme cases) DNA sample or retina scan.
No, but they require $50 or so depending on your state, not to mention a stable address and not being a debtor to the State. Poll taxes are unconstitutional for a reason.
Debtor to the state? I don't think that my state can revoke your license for owing them taxes. They can revoke it if you owe unpaid child support -- but that's not being a debtor to the state. As for the stable address, I managed to get a PO box put on my drivers license. I don't know if that was the clueless lady at DMV or if I'm allowed to do that, but you can bet your ass that I'll be renewing via mail from now on :)
Nah, you still live in a (representative) democracy. SCOTUS had to stop the madness at some point, and it just happened to not fall your guy's way. They didn't "step in"; they were asked for a ruling by both sides.
SCOTUS didn't have to "step in". That's complete bullshit. Even if Florida had remained a mess and Bush/Gore kept fighting it out there were other systems in place that could have solved the problem.
The Florida State Legislature could have stepped in and decided whose electors to use. In fact they had already started this process. Or Congress could have decided what to do with Florida's electors. Or Congress could have voted themselves (House picks the President, Senate picks the VP -- we could have had Bush/Liebermann). Both of those legislative bodies are elected you'll note.
The fact remains that nine unelected judges decided that they were the most qualified to decide who should be President. Arrogent bastards. They should have stayed the fuck out of it.