In most of New Mexico the interstate is set at 75. I've done lots of driving on it on my 250cc motorcycle that has a top speed of about 80.
What I notice is that most people drive at or under the limit. Sure, once in a while a guy will pass you going 85 or 90, but it still feels safe. There's no wildlife to jump into your way and no blind corners. - Nothing but horizon.
But in my experience the majority of people in a 75 mph zone are at or within 5 mph of the limit. I don't think you can say the same thing about most 55 mph zones.
I've spent a few days riding along with cops on their shifts to see what things are like and I've seen this problem first hand. On one shift the cop I was hanging out with dealt with 3 seperate incidents of children not being handed over to the other parent of a divorced marriage when they were suppose to be.
Each time the officer had to explain that he had no power and that the mother/father would have to go to court to get the judge to issue a warrant for the delinquent parent's arrest.
He would do his best, call the offending parent and negotiate with them trying to get them to stick to the custody agreement, but if they refused, there was absolutely nothing he could do. And these parents had court documents saying that the child/children were supposed to be in their custody at such and such a time. It didn't seem to matter.
Now, all these incidents were either miscommunications or spiteful parents. But in the case of an actual kidnapping, if they left on a Friday afternoon they would have until Monday morning before anything would be done to them. And you're right, by then they'd be in Italy.
how can I be libertarian (note small "l") and not?
I think one could be "pro-life" and still a libertarian. Libertarianism's basic principle is that, under justice, each of us (especially the government) has the obligation not to aggress against anyone. Aggress in this case includes unfair tax burdens and over-reaching laws as well as violent actions.
So one could argue that aborting a fetus is aggressing against the fetus. Now, whether or not the fetus falls under the category of 'anyone' is where the age old debate would begin again.
I'm just saying, there is an argument to be made where someone could, without conflict, be both libertarian and pro-life (Not that I am or am not either of those).
Seems like you ought to be getting much better mileage than that. My Honda Rebel 250cc gets a minimum of 75mpg and if I concentrate (shut the bike off at long redlights/downhills and don't accelerate hard and keep it at or under 55mph) I can hit 105mpg.
Plus it goes 85mph and holds its own on the highway. I've taken mine across the country, Santa Fe to Boston... twice.
Not as safe as an SUV-Tank but some of us have different values. If I'm making the choice to do something dangerous I want the greater risk to be with my own life, not someone elses.
Along with allowing you to put a cap on the public access. I have open wifi for my neighbors (mostly university students in cheap apartments). Some neighbors have thanked me, brought me an occasional baked good and I've never experienced a problem with network slow down. If they are downloading ISO's or movies they're doing it when I'm not home, which is fine with me. I've paid for it, they may as well use it. But as far as I know they're checking email and reading cnn.com.
But it'd be great to have a router with firmware that allows you to put a cap, I'd set it at about 200/100k for public users and maximum of course for my own machines. I know it can be done right now but it requires multiple routers and probably a linux box. Why not make it all-in-one? I'd happily pay an extra $20-30 for a router with those capabilities.
While we're at it make it so when it detects my wired desktop or wireless laptop aren't connected it lifts the cap so my neighbors can make full use of my connection when I'm not. Then, when I turn on the desktop or connect with the laptop it automagicly reduces the public access back down to my preset level.
And create a log of when all connected MAC addresses were on so you can print it out and show it to the police to help catch, in at least a little way, those who deserve to be caught.
Before the grannie's start hemming and hawing: I use speakeasy, they encourage sharing (I suppose because it reduces the profits of their competitors).
My workstations are behind firewalls.
And if a kiddie-porn-downloadin', copyright-infringin' terrorist happens to use my access point well I'd happily stand up to the court to help set a precedent. I'm a student, I have no assets for them to take/freeze. I'll forever be self-employed so I don't have to worry about a record. I'm through with any political careers. If they take my computers I'll just use the library's for a semester. Meanwhile I'll get a lesson in civics and help set a precedent for supporters of open access points. And it's the tiniest of risks anyway and the rewards (being neighborly, helping people, sticking it to telcos, feeling-good) far outweigh it.
So bring it on.
Is life so precious or peace so sweet that we should pay for it with the price of chains and slavery?
Only knowledge needed is real life knowledge like "don't go out with a stranger", "don't trust a stranger" and "make sure there's always someone else around who can help you, unless you're strong enough to handle the situation yourself. The last one isn't even children-specific, everyone should know that.
hmmmm, then how are all these people suppose to meet, get married and get knocked up? With a best-friend forever in the backseat? I guess it's just important to realize that at some point a stranger no longer is one. Being able to judge just when that point is is one of the things that seperates children from adults. But like with most things that mark maturity, some fifteen year olds might be able to do it while some twenty-two year olds can't.
I agree this girl was either (a) dumb or (b) was feeling slutty at the moment and then changed her mind after the fact. But at some point people, even teenagers, build trusting relationships with people other than their parents and family (the people most likely to molest/assault/mame/kill them btw).
What if she was 17 and had gone to innocent dinners and movies with the guy once a week for three months after having met him? Maybe she would go back to his place with the thought of making out and cuddling on the couch but then he ushers her into the bedroom and 'can't help himself'. It makes him a criminal. But I don't think it makes her an idiot, just another person with bad luck.
Life's a risk. In some instances it's better to chance being made a fool than to mistrust a friend. Of course, this instance should show us that I mean real friends, not the myspace kind.
My salary is a little lower at $1,200/week but I'm also able to save $750/week leaving me with $250/week (after taxes) to live on.
And I'm with you. My life is great. I live downtown and walk most places, take bus/trains in the winter and scoot around on my six year old 250cc motorcycle in the summer (90 mpg btw). I finagled free rent on a nice two bedroom apartment by being on-call security 3 nights a week. So it's sort of like a second job but not really. Basically I just have to be home and not drunk. Anyway I only get woken up about once every two months and it's only for maybe a 40 minute period when I do.
I eat well. I always seem to have spending cash. I catch a lot of second-run movies, hit the museums a lot, play video games. No kids, no mortgage, no debt = lots of savings.
I think first-run movies are the pinacle of insane consumerism. I'm lucky in that my boyfriend's like me and doesn't have the 14 year old teenage girl, "OMG! I have to see that **insert latest trumpted-up film** NOW!" attitude. Why spend $10 when if you just hold out for four to six weeks you can see it for $1.50??? In the meantime you're watching the other 'must-sees' that came out two months before that. And it permeates through every consumable, those new housewives who must have a new house with a bonus room in the new neighborhood with the other new soccer moms, big new cars every two years, latest immature technology, $350 pants.
I'm looking to retire by the time I'm 30 after 8 years at a job I like and live off the interest of my investments. Then I'll have a second/third/fourth 'career' in the decades after that. I'd like to write some fiction, get an advanced degree, work on some open-source projects, robotics, dabble in politics/non-profits and generally take it easy. I'm just fortunate in that my hobbies don't cost much, the job I like pays well and one of my favorite ways to spend a Sunday morning is reading finance periodicals.
Find the unreasonable mens' bosses, and convince them.
Say that they too are unreasonable. Which they obviously are if reason is on the kids side yet many HS's enforce internet censorship it would appear the bosses are upholding the decisions of the administration.
Thank you for your literalist interpretation. I'll give it all the respect it deserves.
Hardly literal. I used it to point out that the kid was taking action as opposed to getting endless, meaningless petitions signed much like the spirit of the sig. Given your inability to correctly identify literal interpretations versus analogies I'll give your words all the shit they deserve.
First of all, I'm quite sure that there are several sixteen year old high school 'kids' who are more mature, intelligent and knowledgeable than several 25 year old high school teachers.
Second of all your sig is: when you hear 'activist' you reach for a revolver and yet you call this kid dumb for taking action? You suggest he write letters as oppose to just circumnavigate the issue with a little research and implementation? His goal wasn't to change people's minds. How do you argue with unreasonable men? His goal was to beat back censorship, which he accomplished.
I suppose the American Revolutionists would have been better off writing letters to the editor until they were blue in the face as opposed to taking up arms like a bunch of 'dumb kids' or 'crazy nut-jobs causing trouble'.
There's one country with lots of money to spend and another with lots of people willing to work for little money and a global shipping infrastructure that allows them to trade. They didn't do anything special, they got lucky.
The only way for the U.S. to compete with cheap labor is to make manufacturing even more cost-effective than even the worlds cheapest labor and the only way to do that is robotics.
This is actually untrue. I attempted to make it in Albuquerque about two years ago and, due to tradition, the yeast absolutely refused to begin fermentation.
Slashdot Mirror
In most of New Mexico the interstate is set at 75. I've done lots of driving on it on my 250cc motorcycle that has a top speed of about 80.
What I notice is that most people drive at or under the limit. Sure, once in a while a guy will pass you going 85 or 90, but it still feels safe. There's no wildlife to jump into your way and no blind corners. - Nothing but horizon.
But in my experience the majority of people in a 75 mph zone are at or within 5 mph of the limit. I don't think you can say the same thing about most 55 mph zones.
Oh good, I was worried there a minute. Now I can rest assured that all I'll need to do for a gallon of fuel in thirty years is plop down $40.
herpes, siphylis, crabs, pregnancies, clamedia...
Yeah, my mom caught pregnancies 3 times when I was a kid. Now my brothers are the three biggest walking STD's you've ever seen.
Sorry to hear about your situation.
I've spent a few days riding along with cops on their shifts to see what things are like and I've seen this problem first hand. On one shift the cop I was hanging out with dealt with 3 seperate incidents of children not being handed over to the other parent of a divorced marriage when they were suppose to be.
Each time the officer had to explain that he had no power and that the mother/father would have to go to court to get the judge to issue a warrant for the delinquent parent's arrest.
He would do his best, call the offending parent and negotiate with them trying to get them to stick to the custody agreement, but if they refused, there was absolutely nothing he could do. And these parents had court documents saying that the child/children were supposed to be in their custody at such and such a time. It didn't seem to matter.
Now, all these incidents were either miscommunications or spiteful parents. But in the case of an actual kidnapping, if they left on a Friday afternoon they would have until Monday morning before anything would be done to them. And you're right, by then they'd be in Italy.
how can I be libertarian (note small "l") and not?
I think one could be "pro-life" and still a libertarian. Libertarianism's basic principle is that, under justice, each of us (especially the government) has the obligation not to aggress against anyone. Aggress in this case includes unfair tax burdens and over-reaching laws as well as violent actions.
So one could argue that aborting a fetus is aggressing against the fetus. Now, whether or not the fetus falls under the category of 'anyone' is where the age old debate would begin again.
I'm just saying, there is an argument to be made where someone could, without conflict, be both libertarian and pro-life (Not that I am or am not either of those).
How can you fine somone under the age of 18? They are not a legal adult.
What!?!?! You mean I didn't have to pay all those speeding tickets I got when I was 16!?!?! Stupid, stupid, stupid...
- Anonymous, because "her" employer knows "her" Slashdot name
Uh oh! Missed that checkbox! I'll send you the want ads when I'm done, Myria.
Seems like you ought to be getting much better mileage than that. My Honda Rebel 250cc gets a minimum of 75mpg and if I concentrate (shut the bike off at long redlights/downhills and don't accelerate hard and keep it at or under 55mph) I can hit 105mpg.
Plus it goes 85mph and holds its own on the highway. I've taken mine across the country, Santa Fe to Boston... twice.
Not as safe as an SUV-Tank but some of us have different values. If I'm making the choice to do something dangerous I want the greater risk to be with my own life, not someone elses.
Along with allowing you to put a cap on the public access. I have open wifi for my neighbors (mostly university students in cheap apartments). Some neighbors have thanked me, brought me an occasional baked good and I've never experienced a problem with network slow down. If they are downloading ISO's or movies they're doing it when I'm not home, which is fine with me. I've paid for it, they may as well use it. But as far as I know they're checking email and reading cnn.com.
But it'd be great to have a router with firmware that allows you to put a cap, I'd set it at about 200/100k for public users and maximum of course for my own machines. I know it can be done right now but it requires multiple routers and probably a linux box. Why not make it all-in-one? I'd happily pay an extra $20-30 for a router with those capabilities.
While we're at it make it so when it detects my wired desktop or wireless laptop aren't connected it lifts the cap so my neighbors can make full use of my connection when I'm not. Then, when I turn on the desktop or connect with the laptop it automagicly reduces the public access back down to my preset level.
And create a log of when all connected MAC addresses were on so you can print it out and show it to the police to help catch, in at least a little way, those who deserve to be caught.
Before the grannie's start hemming and hawing: I use speakeasy, they encourage sharing (I suppose because it reduces the profits of their competitors).
My workstations are behind firewalls.
And if a kiddie-porn-downloadin', copyright-infringin' terrorist happens to use my access point well I'd happily stand up to the court to help set a precedent. I'm a student, I have no assets for them to take/freeze. I'll forever be self-employed so I don't have to worry about a record. I'm through with any political careers. If they take my computers I'll just use the library's for a semester. Meanwhile I'll get a lesson in civics and help set a precedent for supporters of open access points. And it's the tiniest of risks anyway and the rewards (being neighborly, helping people, sticking it to telcos, feeling-good) far outweigh it.
So bring it on.
Is life so precious or peace so sweet that we should pay for it with the price of chains and slavery?
here here. I second that.
I get that the guy was a creepy sex offender....
Or, depending on the state, an eighteen year old who once got a blowjob from his seventeen year old girlfriend.
Only knowledge needed is real life knowledge like "don't go out with a stranger", "don't trust a stranger" and "make sure there's always someone else around who can help you, unless you're strong enough to handle the situation yourself. The last one isn't even children-specific, everyone should know that.
hmmmm, then how are all these people suppose to meet, get married and get knocked up? With a best-friend forever in the backseat? I guess it's just important to realize that at some point a stranger no longer is one. Being able to judge just when that point is is one of the things that seperates children from adults. But like with most things that mark maturity, some fifteen year olds might be able to do it while some twenty-two year olds can't.
I agree this girl was either (a) dumb or (b) was feeling slutty at the moment and then changed her mind after the fact. But at some point people, even teenagers, build trusting relationships with people other than their parents and family (the people most likely to molest/assault/mame/kill them btw).
What if she was 17 and had gone to innocent dinners and movies with the guy once a week for three months after having met him? Maybe she would go back to his place with the thought of making out and cuddling on the couch but then he ushers her into the bedroom and 'can't help himself'. It makes him a criminal. But I don't think it makes her an idiot, just another person with bad luck.
Life's a risk. In some instances it's better to chance being made a fool than to mistrust a friend. Of course, this instance should show us that I mean real friends, not the myspace kind.
Don't bother answering me.
oops
I just want you to think about terms like "justice" before you throw them around willy nilly.
justice, amends, appeal, authority, authorization, charter, code, compensation, consideration, constitutionality, correction, credo, creed, decree, due process, equity, evenness, fair play, fair treatment, fairness, hearing, honesty, impartiality, integrity, judicatory, judicature, justness, law, lawful, lawfulness, legal process, legality, legalization, legitimacy, litigation, penalty, reasonableness, recompense, rectitude, redress, reparation, review, right, rule, sanction, sentence, truth
oops again
Wow. Suddenly disturbing to think...that the reason behind almost every purchase was "in case I need (want?) to shoot another person."
So... it took a discussion about biometrics to get you to realize that people might use guns for self-defense or to enforce justice?
Hear Hear!
My salary is a little lower at $1,200/week but I'm also able to save $750/week leaving me with $250/week (after taxes) to live on.
And I'm with you. My life is great. I live downtown and walk most places, take bus/trains in the winter and scoot around on my six year old 250cc motorcycle in the summer (90 mpg btw). I finagled free rent on a nice two bedroom apartment by being on-call security 3 nights a week. So it's sort of like a second job but not really. Basically I just have to be home and not drunk. Anyway I only get woken up about once every two months and it's only for maybe a 40 minute period when I do.
I eat well. I always seem to have spending cash. I catch a lot of second-run movies, hit the museums a lot, play video games. No kids, no mortgage, no debt = lots of savings.
I think first-run movies are the pinacle of insane consumerism. I'm lucky in that my boyfriend's like me and doesn't have the 14 year old teenage girl, "OMG! I have to see that **insert latest trumpted-up film** NOW!" attitude. Why spend $10 when if you just hold out for four to six weeks you can see it for $1.50??? In the meantime you're watching the other 'must-sees' that came out two months before that. And it permeates through every consumable, those new housewives who must have a new house with a bonus room in the new neighborhood with the other new soccer moms, big new cars every two years, latest immature technology, $350 pants.
I'm looking to retire by the time I'm 30 after 8 years at a job I like and live off the interest of my investments. Then I'll have a second/third/fourth 'career' in the decades after that. I'd like to write some fiction, get an advanced degree, work on some open-source projects, robotics, dabble in politics/non-profits and generally take it easy. I'm just fortunate in that my hobbies don't cost much, the job I like pays well and one of my favorite ways to spend a Sunday morning is reading finance periodicals.
Then he's simply a selfish fool.
You say selfish like it's a bad thing.
Find the unreasonable mens' bosses, and convince them.
Say that they too are unreasonable. Which they obviously are if reason is on the kids side yet many HS's enforce internet censorship it would appear the bosses are upholding the decisions of the administration.
Thank you for your literalist interpretation. I'll give it all the respect it deserves.
Hardly literal. I used it to point out that the kid was taking action as opposed to getting endless, meaningless petitions signed much like the spirit of the sig. Given your inability to correctly identify literal interpretations versus analogies I'll give your words all the shit they deserve.
errr, circumvent, circumnavigate, circumcision... same difference.
Troll, but I'll bite.
First of all, I'm quite sure that there are several sixteen year old high school 'kids' who are more mature, intelligent and knowledgeable than several 25 year old high school teachers.
Second of all your sig is: when you hear 'activist' you reach for a revolver and yet you call this kid dumb for taking action? You suggest he write letters as oppose to just circumnavigate the issue with a little research and implementation? His goal wasn't to change people's minds. How do you argue with unreasonable men? His goal was to beat back censorship, which he accomplished.
I suppose the American Revolutionists would have been better off writing letters to the editor until they were blue in the face as opposed to taking up arms like a bunch of 'dumb kids' or 'crazy nut-jobs causing trouble'.
So what are they doing right?
Accepting Visa
There's one country with lots of money to spend and another with lots of people willing to work for little money and a global shipping infrastructure that allows them to trade. They didn't do anything special, they got lucky.
The only way for the U.S. to compete with cheap labor is to make manufacturing even more cost-effective than even the worlds cheapest labor and the only way to do that is robotics.
**puke**
"It is not the strongest who survive, but rather he who is most responsive to change."
~Charles Darwin
Hydrogen power pretty much is a waste of time and money because you lose net energy making it...
**yawn**
idiots
Sake can be made anywhere in the world...
This is actually untrue. I attempted to make it in Albuquerque about two years ago and, due to tradition, the yeast absolutely refused to begin fermentation.
They told me it would never happen -- elevators would always be as they were. I guess he was mostly right, since it is now 10 years later...
Right, because 10 years almost equals never.
You dope.
It goes like this:
What do you call a doctor who failed out of med-school?
**pause**
A dentist!