The national trend, during the past forty years, has been to do away with the common law right to resist an unlawful arrest. The right has been abrogated by judicial decree as well as legislative enactment. Elimination of the right is based on several factors, including the development of modern criminal procedure, the ability of criminal defendants to seek redress via other means, and the improvement of jail conditions. In the rush to eliminate a right perceived as against contemporary public policy, the courts have paid little attention to the original justification for the rule - that an illegal arrest is an affront to the dignity and sense of justice of the arrestee - and instead have focused on the alternatives to forcible resistance that have been developed, such as civil suits and the writ of habeas corpus.
The true fact is defendants are NOT able to redress unlawful arrest and unlawful arrest methods.
The rush has been to eliminate the criminal recourse against unlawful arrest and unlawful arrest methods have resulted in complicit support of unlawful arrest and unlawful arrest methods.
Abstract: The national trend, during the past forty years, has been to do away with the common law right to resist an unlawful arrest. The right has been abrogated by judicial decree as well as legislative enactment. Elimination of the right is based on several factors, including the development of modern criminal procedure, the ability of criminal defendants to seek redress via other means, and the improvement of jail conditions. In the rush to eliminate a right perceived as against contemporary public policy, the courts have paid little attention to the original justification for the rule - that an illegal arrest is an affront to the dignity and sense of justice of the arrestee - and instead have focused on the alternatives to forcible resistance that have been developed, such as civil suits and the writ of habeas corpus.
Mississippi is one of a dozen states that still permit a person to resist an unlawful arrest. Almost all of these states are located in the South. The question this geographical anomaly raises is why has the right to resist arrest survived in the South, and Mississippi in particular? This article suggests that a possible explanation may be the influence of uniquely Southern conceptions of honor and the right to use deadly force in self-defense. Historians have long acknowledged that Southern culture strongly supports the importance of personal honor and condones a "subculture of violence." This article examines the development and history of the right to resist an unlawful arrest at common law and in the United States, scholarly criticism of the common law rule, and the current status of the rule in the United States, the Southern "subculture of violence" and how that relates to cases involving resisting arrest in Mississippi. All Mississippi cases involving claims of a right to resist unlawful arrest are examined. The language of the Mississippi cases provides support for the argument that the right to resist arrest has remained entrenched in Southern law, and helps to explain why Southern states generally and Mississippi in particular have chosen to retain a common law rule which has fallen into disrepute in other regions of the country.
No you won't be installing XP on your new Laptop for the simple reason that XP drivers won't exist for it. I suggest XP inside a virtualbox or similar.
NO, it just happens that people who live in suburbs are FAT.
People who live in suburbs consume a disproportional amount of resources, because they haul their fat ass around with 2 tons of steal. Its not their fat ass which is the problem, but how they haul it around, and that they take so much space to park it. "Their 2 ton wheel barrow."
Suburbs are the worst land usage and the most inefficient use of resources on the planet. Even worse, services are extremely expensive to maintain in suburbs. Why is America with its inefficient life style having a problem competing?
Static security. Your pin number, id, password, bank bar code, address, birthday, employer, maiden name, SSN, drivers license number. Anything static does not get changed often enough, and people "courts" stupidly trust them as unique ID's. Which is why it is so hard for individuals to clean up after id theft.
Non static, - key sequence generators which use your initial pin to generate a new pin every few hours/mins/seconds - challenge protocols, which ask an question and require an appropriate answer - broadcast / multi-path counter measure against man in the middle
The problem is people are really horrible at both doing manual key sequence generation or challenge protocols. As a result the non static id is generate via some physical thing you hold, which of course can be stolen. But it does make remote theft much harder, and people are much better at handling theft of something physical. High security requires the user must authenticate themselves to the non static id device.
I have never tried LSD and never will. I have seen what it can do to people's minds. At the same time I can fully understand why people use it to escape. In 2005 I was hit ridding my bicycle which caused me to lose 3cm of my frontal lobe. People say I am lucky to be alive. Ya, but they don't know what I feel and don't feel any more. Not even my wife. Imagine having no emotional connection with the present reality around you, and only having emotional connection with past memories from long before. Not being able to say to anyone you love them, when you know they love you. And in your heart you, have given yourself to the complete destruction of the way of life many people in America have come to know. I have spent countless nights awake, because my mind is replays a simple thought over and over again. Doctors who know of my condition have prescribe me enough sleeping pills to last a year at time. Because they know, or perhaps they can imagine my condition. To top that, my only escape from thoughts replaying endlessly is crazy strange random thoughts. Oh, how much I enjoy escaping my obsessive repetitive thoughts. Instead of using LSD, I literal knock myself out to stop the endless cycle.
I am not a physicist. I am just looking for pointers to information, pun not intended.
What I am really curious about is the conservation or non-conservation of information? What events cause the creation or destruction of information?
As the universe expands and as information does not expand or does not expand as quickly, increased disorder is required. Is increasing disorder a driving force, rather than the result?
I grew up on a family farm just like one of those farms near by. Only to see the land swallowed up by suburbs. I am sure you can fix a few things which is handy. I hope your job requires your move to the suburbs, and please ignore my comments.
If you have moved to the suburbs because you think you are avoiding a coming disaster, you are wrong, you are causing it. The land your house sits on and was paved over for you car, was farm land producing food for you to eat. This land can never be reclaimed for farming. It is gone forever. Remember that when disaster comes and you are looking for beens to eat.
I am not worried cause I am getting older. It is my children who need to worry, and your children too. The land paved over for suburbs is gone. As long as there is enough good land left it is no big deal right? But in Canada that means the best land in the country is gone or disappearing now. The remainin land is less productive.
I am curious how the suburbs are less dependent on farms for food then cities? Unless you have a big garden or live on a farm yourself, you are still dependent of someone else for you the food on your table. My grandmother went through a very harsh experience, and as result always made sure that her garden was sufficient to live off. Do you a garden?
Ok, there are a few family farms a few hours away. Most farms produce enough of a food commodity to supply a large town, but do not produce a wide enough range of food commodities to live off. I think you are dreaming, go back to the city and reduce your environmental footprint.
By moving to the suburbs you have only taken farm land away from the farms that produce your food.
It looks like it is essentially a mozilla addon that allows rss feeds and blog syndication.
Latest API News We've updated the Friends' Activity Sidebar Firefox extension to include the option to be notified of your friends' votes (in addition to their stories and comments). To use this new feature, install version 1.1 of the extension from Mozilla Addons, and... Netscape 9, might be a need to have mozilla addon. I will definitely be watching this.
The Ouch you are talking about is unfortunately NOT just for suburbs, it is for the whole world. This is not really a problem of only America. It doesn't make it not a problem. One thing is for sure unless people change their selfish ways. car=freedom equals selfish. Individual land ownership make senses for farmers who tend the land. In fact this rule of land ownership by the care takes of the land needs to apply to cities too. House owners DON'T care for the land. If you think paving over your front lawn to park your car is caring for land. Then your "rights" as a care taker of land need to be taken away.
"Land ownership is where a large portion of peoples' wealth is found." In places like Vancouver, New York, Hong Kong,...., it is not land ownership, but property ownership. People do invest in their future by taking care of their property by taking care of their community, through building committees. This is in fact a much better model because it encourages people to take care of not only their personal home, but the surrounding area which really sets the value of their property. Personal land ownership in cities only kills redevelopment, forcing cities to constantly acquire new farmer's fields for development. The farmers are not complaining because selling your field for suburban development is like striking gold. And it is striking gold for the original developer too until the suburb requires redevelopment. But this time the original developer has made his/her profit and no longer cares. You can see how bad a model it truly is. Even when the old suburbs require redevelopment it is impossible. As a result over time they slid into slums invested with crime. Because no one takes care of the place if the place you live in is a slum. It would be better if the place could be destroyed so it can finally be redeveloped as required. So slum dwellers destroying their own neighborhoods are doing the only thing that makes since. Because redevelopment is required.
What gets me is people who buy a house in a new suburb, say this will never happen here. It will, is is only a matter of time. The house they bought was only build to last 30yrs and less. Ofter houses in suburbs are build without footing drains "Toronto" to save a few dollars. The result is the house is only build for 10yrs. Beyond that you are looking a constant repairs, wet basements. I know this because I have lived in all over Canada and the US. After a few houses require major repairs, a few people will sell rather than fix. And it is not long with a few run down houses, pot holes that the neighborhood needs some work. Then add in to the fact that the jobs have move to new suburbs far away in some farmer's field. No jobs within driving distance. And add in to the fact that the run down neighborhood does not have good school. You looking at the beginnings of a slum.
How long did it take?! 30yrs is about right. Think about it PEOPLE!!!!
This ouch you are talking about is coming a lot quicker than you might think. Muslims rightly believe going to war over resources is a sin. The US is going to reduce its dependence on Middle east oil by turning northern Alberta into a moon scape at more than 3 to 5 times the current rate.
To everyone BELIEVES CARES=FREEDOM I say!!!!
IS YOUR FREEDOM THE ONLY FREEDOM THAT MATTERS!! What about the freedom of others?!?
In American Suburbs you are 100% correct Cars = freedom. But making a luxury a necessity is NOT freedom. It simply increases the cost of living, making America less competitive. In Asia where a car is a luxury, the car ownership is not part of labor costs. As a result the cost of working is about $8000 USD less per worker.
Why do cars equal freedom, it is simple. It seams I have to keep repeating the same thing over and over again because people don't want to get it.
1) They really really love their cars. So the cities must be build for cars, forget about people they are not important. This is why cars=freedom 2) Being forced to use c
IS YOUR FREEDOM THE ONLY FREEDOM THAT MATTERS!! What about the freedom of others?!?
In American Suburbs you are 100% correct Cars = freedom. But making a luxury a necessity is NOT freedom. It simply increases the cost of living, making America less competitive. In Asia where a car is a luxury, the car ownership is not part of labor costs. As a result the cost of working is about $8000 USD less per worker.
Why do cars equal freedom, it is simple. It seams I have to keep repeating the same thing over and over again because people don't want to get it.
1) They really really love their cars. So the cities must be build for cars, forget about people they are not important. This is why cars=freedom 2) Being forced to use cars everywhere gives people more opportunity to show off their lovely cars. This is great because this means you free to show off your SUV even to people who would rather you stop burning oil. 3) They have never had a chance to experience a transit based waking community. As long as you think cars=freedom I can safely say that you have NOT experience a transit based walking community. 4) Think transit is for poor people and second class people. And they don't want to be considered poor or second class. This is what you really mean when you say "cars=freedom", I think. 5) Hell you can't build a city with out lots of roads and parking lots. How can I drive my car there. This makes me laugh!! You make me cry. People like you are the reason for many of America's problems.
If American and Canadian suburbs were designed as transit hubs as I previously described numerous times. You would have the free if you can choose to drive your car or NOT drive your car. If you want to see my points about transit hubs. Just look under Redundant. These are not new ideas, in fact these ideas have been sucessfully proven around the world. So I guess they are redundant in that sense. The suburbs today are a new creation. Before the age of cars=freedom, cities where build for walking. Rows of stores fronts with parking behind. There was no high rises in those days, but people could easily walk to the store. Hitching up a horse is not a small task. It is not like turning the key of a car. It met that people often walked to the store rather than hitching up a horse. So yes this is all redundant, we have forgotten how to build cities for people simply be cause we love cars. And you prove my point, by the fact that you THINK that cars equal freedom. They don't!
I have a fiend who is moving to Hong Kong or Japan from the US, because he figures the US is hopeless and he is bored out of his skull.
Why has it take people so long to realize that cities need be build for people??
P.S. suburbs are still booming, just take a look at.
The only reason I can think of why it has taken people SO long to figure this out is: 1) They really really love their cars. So the cities must be build for cars, forget about people they are not important. 2) Being forced to use cars everywhere gives people more opportunity to show off their lovely cars. 3) They have never had a chance to experience a transit based waking community. 4) Think transit is for poor people and second class people. And they don't want to be considered poor or second class. 5) Hell you can't build a city with out lots of roads and parking lots. How can I drive my car there. This makes me laugh!!
Solution transit hubs. Drive your car to the shopping center, transit, office hub. Park it and take a bus, train to another hub. Better still buy a condo over looking the hub's community park and sell your car.
But wait builders need to stop building houses, and start building communities. Until that happens enjoy your lonely time driving and getting fat in the burbs. Every day your car meets lots of cars, but you never meet new people.
Actually it is kind of strange North America has lots of land, but there is no land to build these communities. The land is covered with houses and it is virtually impossible to find enough space to build a hub anywhere but in the middle of some farmer's field. Solution is simple take a few city blocks around shopping centers and turn them into hubs. Even this is very difficult, because land price speculation and single hold out owners will kill redevelopment. An other solution is for the city governments to take over ownership of land. Home owners own their house, but rent their land. Much like property taxes, but urban redevelopment is not prevented by land price speculation and hold out owners. This seams to work quite well in Hong Kong. Give up you can't fight this. Get in your car, drive to the store and buy some chips and beer. Better get yourself piss drunk at least that way it won't hurt so to know you are destroying the world and yourself.
Wait the moment we start building hubs witch don't require cars, car sales will go down the the economy will fail. WRONG!!! Making a luxury into an necessity only increases the cost of living. The massive construction boom caused by building these hubs will more than make up for the lost car sales. But it will hurt the car industry. I am forgetting your love your car. Can't let anything happen to your car. Give it up, get out more, meet some people and save the world with less green house gases and less fighting over oil.
Re:Being fat versus getting jacked at gunpoint...
on
Does Sprawl Make Us Fat?
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
What make any place dangerous is an inadequate law enforcement system. Compare Chicago to New York, and you will see what I mean. Not all suburbs are safe, if you think so ask the people who live in old inner suburbs. So is the answer to keep building out and out further?
NO! why it has taken people SO long to figure out that cities need to be build for people.
The burbs are build for cars. And they do an excellent job of making sure your car can enjoy everyday zipping about on roads. The parking lots of stores located beside each other are fenced off, so that your car gets enjoy driving out on to the road and in to the next parking lot.
The only reason I can think of why it has taken people SO long to figure this out is: 1) They really really love their cars. So the cities must be build for cars, forget about people they are not important. 2) Being forced to use cars everywhere gives people more opportunity to show off their lovely cars. 3) They have never had a chance to experience a transit based waking community. 4) Think transit is for poor people and second class people. And they don't want to be considered poor or second class. 5) Hell you can't build a city with out lots of roads and parking lots. How can I drive my car there. This makes me laugh!!
Solution transit hubs. Drive your car to the shopping center, transit, office hub. Park it and take a bus, train to another hub. Better still buy a condo over looking the hub's community park and sell your car.
But wait builders need to stop building houses, and start building communities. Until that happens enjoy your lonely time driving and getting fat in the burbs. Every day your car meets lots of cars, but you never meet new people.
Actually it is kind of strange North America has lots of land, but there is no land to build these communities. The land is covered with houses and it is virtually impossible to find enough space to build a hub anywhere but in the middle of some farmer's field. Solution is simple take a few city blocks around shopping centers and turn them into hubs. Even this is very difficult, because land price speculation and single hold out owners will kill redevelopment. An other solution is for the city governments to take over ownership of land. Home owners own their house, but rent their land. Much like property taxes, but urban redevelopment is not prevented by land price speculation and hold out owners. This seams to work quite well in Hong Kong. Give up you can't fight this. Get in your car, drive to the store and buy some chips and beer. Better get yourself piss drunk at least that way it won't hurt so to know you are destroying the world and yourself.
Wait the moment we start building hubs witch don't require cars, car sales will go down the the economy will fail. WRONG!!! Making a luxury into an necessity only increases the cost of living. The massive construction boom caused by building these hubs will more than make up for the lost car sales. But it will hurt the car industry. I am forgetting your love your car. Can't let anything happen to your car. Give it up, get out more, meet some people and save the world with less green house gases and less fighting over oil.
Mini-Cities are call transit community hubs. But there are not going to happen in any suburb that I know.
Solution transit hubs. Drive your car to the shopping center, transit, office hub. Park it and take a bus or train to another hub. Better still buy a condo over looking the hub's community park and sell your car.
But wait builders need to stop building houses, and start building communities. Until that happens enjoy your lonely time driving and getting fat in the burbs. Every day your car meets lots of cars, but you never meet new people.
Actually it is kind of strange North America has lots of land, but there is no land to build these communities. The land is covered with houses and it is virtually impossible to find enough space to build a hub anywhere but in the middle of some farmer's field. Solution is simple take a few city blocks around shopping centers and turn them into hubs. Even this is very difficult, because land price speculation and single hold out owners will kill redevelopment. An other solution is for the city governments to take over ownership of land. Home owners own their house, but rent their land. Much like property taxes, but urban redevelopment is not prevented by land price speculation and hold out owners. This seams to work quite well in Hong Kong. Give up you can't fight this. Get in your car, drive to the store and buy some chips and beer. Better get yourself piss drunk at least that way it won't hurt so to know you are destroying the world and yourself.
Wait the moment we start building hubs witch don't require cars, car sales will go down the the economy will fail. WRONG!!! Making a luxury into an necessity only increases the cost of living. The massive construction boom caused by building these hubs will more than make up for the lost car sales. But it will hurt the car industry. I am forgetting your love your car. Can't let anything happen to your car. Give it up, get out more, meet some people and save the world with less green house gases and less fighting over oil.
Why it has taken people SO long to figure out that cities need to be build for people.
The burbs are build for cars. And they do an excellent job of making sure your car can enjoy everyday zipping about on roads. The parking lots of stores located beside each other are fenced off, so that your car gets enjoy driving out on to the road and in to the next parking lot.
The only reason I can think of why it has taken people SO long to figure this out is: 1) They really really love their cars. So the cities must be build for cars, forget about people they are not important. 2) Being forced to use cars everywhere gives people more opportunity to show off their lovely cars. 3) They have never had a chance to experience a transit based waking community. 4) Think transit is for poor people and second class people. And they don't want to be considered poor or second class. 5) Hell you can't build a city with out lots of roads and parking lots. How can I drive my car there. This makes me laugh!!
Ya, you should get a PhD if you know why it has taken people SO long to figure out that cities need to be build for people.
The burbs are build for cars. And they do an excellent job of making sure your car can enjoy everyday zipping about on roads. The parking lots of stores located beside each other are fenced off, so that your car gets enjoy driving out on to the road and in to the next parking lot.
The only reason I can think of why it has taken people SO long to figure this out is: 1) They really really love their cars. So the cities must be build for cars, forget about people they are not important. 2) Being forced to use cars everywhere gives people more opportunity to show off their lovely cars. 3) They have never had a chance to experience a transit based waking community. 4) Think transit is for poor people and second class people. And they don't want to be considered poor or second class. 5) Hell you can't build a city with out lots of roads and parking lots. How can I drive my car their. This makes me laugh!!
Solution transit hubs. Drive your car to the shopping center, transit, office hub. Park it and take a bus, train to another hub. Better still buy a condo over looking the hub's community park and sell your car.
But wait builders need to stop building houses, and start building communities. Until that happens enjoy your lonely time driving and getting fat in the burbs. Every day your car meets lots of cars, but you never meet new people.
Actually it is kind of strange North America has lots of land, but there is no land to build these communities. The land is covered with houses and it is virtually impossible to find enough space to build a hub anywhere but in the middle of some farmer's field. Solution is simple take a few city blocks around shopping centers and turn them into hubs. Even this is very difficult, because land price speculation and single hold out owners will kill redevelopment. An other solution is for the city governments to take over ownership of land. Home owners own their house, but rent their land. Much like property taxes, but urban redevelopment is not prevented by land price speculation and hold out owners. This seams to work quite well in Hong Kong. Give up you can't fight this. Get in your car, drive to the store and buy some chips and beer. Better get yourself piss drunk at least that way it won't hurt so to know you are destroying the world and yourself.
Wait the moment we start building hubs witch don't require cars, car sales will go down the the economy will fail. WRONG!!! Making a luxury into an necessity only increases the cost of living. The massive construction boom caused by building these hubs will more than make up for the lost car sales. But it will hurt the car industry. I am forgetting your love your car. Can't let anything happen to your car. Give it up, get out more, meet some people and save the world with less green house gases and less fighting over oil.
This article and his website contain absolutely no technical details.
He thinks money and politics is the problem.
The problems are technical. I don't see a research plan all I see is political mumbo jumbo. He needs to separate the technical from the political mumbo jumbo. Until he does I can't take this guy seriously.
I use bittorrent for common stuff like recent linux iso's. And emule for rare hard to find iso's. For example when SUSE first came out the ftp server was too busy, so I pulled down the 5 SUSE iso's via emule.
Slashdot Mirror
All these bids are irrational numbers.
I think the message is clear. Patents have irrational value.
Fact
California Criminal Law Review, Vol. 2, July 2000
Abstract:
The national trend, during the past forty years, has been to do away with the common law right to resist an unlawful arrest. The right has been abrogated by judicial decree as well as legislative enactment. Elimination of the right is based on several factors, including the development of modern criminal procedure, the ability of criminal defendants to seek redress via other means, and the improvement of jail conditions. In the rush to eliminate a right perceived as against contemporary public policy, the courts have paid little attention to the original justification for the rule - that an illegal arrest is an affront to the dignity and sense of justice of the arrestee - and instead have focused on the alternatives to forcible resistance that have been developed, such as civil suits and the writ of habeas corpus.
The true fact is defendants are NOT able to redress unlawful arrest and unlawful arrest methods.
The rush has been to eliminate the criminal recourse against unlawful arrest and unlawful arrest methods have resulted in complicit support of unlawful arrest and unlawful arrest methods.
California Criminal Law Review, Vol. 2, July 2000
Abstract:
The national trend, during the past forty years, has been to do away with the common law right to resist an unlawful arrest. The right has been abrogated by judicial decree as well as legislative enactment. Elimination of the right is based on several factors, including the development of modern criminal procedure, the ability of criminal defendants to seek redress via other means, and the improvement of jail conditions. In the rush to eliminate a right perceived as against contemporary public policy, the courts have paid little attention to the original justification for the rule - that an illegal arrest is an affront to the dignity and sense of justice of the arrestee - and instead have focused on the alternatives to forcible resistance that have been developed, such as civil suits and the writ of habeas corpus.
Mississippi is one of a dozen states that still permit a person to resist an unlawful arrest. Almost all of these states are located in the South. The question this geographical anomaly raises is why has the right to resist arrest survived in the South, and Mississippi in particular? This article suggests that a possible explanation may be the influence of uniquely Southern conceptions of honor and the right to use deadly force in self-defense. Historians have long acknowledged that Southern culture strongly supports the importance of personal honor and condones a "subculture of violence." This article examines the development and history of the right to resist an unlawful arrest at common law and in the United States, scholarly criticism of the common law rule, and the current status of the rule in the United States, the Southern "subculture of violence" and how that relates to cases involving resisting arrest in Mississippi. All Mississippi cases involving claims of a right to resist unlawful arrest are examined. The language of the Mississippi cases provides support for the argument that the right to resist arrest has remained entrenched in Southern law, and helps to explain why Southern states generally and Mississippi in particular have chosen to retain a common law rule which has fallen into disrepute in other regions of the country.
No you won't be installing XP on your new Laptop for the simple reason that XP drivers won't exist for it. I suggest XP inside a virtualbox or similar.
Lotuslive is an integrated online messaging service supplied through IBM purchased Outblaze
http://www.outblaze.com/index.php/corporate/
Lotus Notes and Microsoft are one of many SMTP/ IMAP clients supported.
Welcome to BIG OIL^W^WCanada
Tar Sands supplying American auto suburbs with oil for the next 20 years.
BIG OIL has also invested heavily in Canada's, media, government.
This investment is an efficient way to ensure that Canada' Tar Sands will continue to have the world's lowest oil extraction royalties.
NO, it just happens that people who live in suburbs are FAT.
People who live in suburbs consume a disproportional amount of resources, because they haul their fat ass around with 2 tons of steal. Its not their fat ass which is the problem, but how they haul it around, and that they take so much space to park it. "Their 2 ton wheel barrow."
Suburbs are the worst land usage and the most inefficient use of resources on the planet. Even worse, services are extremely expensive to maintain in suburbs. Why is America with its inefficient life style having a problem competing?
Static security. Your pin number, id, password, bank bar code, address, birthday, employer, maiden name, SSN, drivers license number. Anything static does not get changed often enough, and people "courts" stupidly trust them as unique ID's. Which is why it is so hard for individuals to clean up after id theft.
Non static,
- key sequence generators which use your initial pin to generate a new pin every few hours/mins/seconds
- challenge protocols, which ask an question and require an appropriate answer
- broadcast / multi-path counter measure against man in the middle
The problem is people are really horrible at both doing manual key sequence generation or challenge protocols. As a result the non static id is generate via some physical thing you hold, which of course can be stolen. But it does make remote theft much harder, and people are much better at handling theft of something physical. High security requires the user must authenticate themselves to the non static id device.
There are many variations on the theme.
I have never tried LSD and never will. I have seen what it can do to people's minds. At the same time I can fully understand why people use it to escape. In 2005 I was hit ridding my bicycle which caused me to lose 3cm of my frontal lobe. People say I am lucky to be alive. Ya, but they don't know what I feel and don't feel any more. Not even my wife. Imagine having no emotional connection with the present reality around you, and only having emotional connection with past memories from long before. Not being able to say to anyone you love them, when you know they love you. And in your heart you, have given yourself to the complete destruction of the way of life many people in America have come to know. I have spent countless nights awake, because my mind is replays a simple thought over and over again. Doctors who know of my condition have prescribe me enough sleeping pills to last a year at time. Because they know, or perhaps they can imagine my condition. To top that, my only escape from thoughts replaying endlessly is crazy strange random thoughts. Oh, how much I enjoy escaping my obsessive repetitive thoughts. Instead of using LSD, I literal knock myself out to stop the endless cycle.
I am not a physicist. I am just looking for pointers to information, pun not intended.
What I am really curious about is the conservation or non-conservation of information? What events cause the creation or destruction of information?
As the universe expands and as information does not expand or does not expand as quickly, increased disorder is required. Is increasing disorder a driving force, rather than the result?
I grew up on a family farm just like one of those farms near by. Only to see the land swallowed up by suburbs. I am sure you can fix a few things which is handy. I hope your job requires your move to the suburbs, and please ignore my comments.
If you have moved to the suburbs because you think you are avoiding a coming disaster, you are wrong, you are causing it. The land your house sits on and was paved over for you car, was farm land producing food for you to eat. This land can never be reclaimed for farming. It is gone forever. Remember that when disaster comes and you are looking for beens to eat.
I am not worried cause I am getting older. It is my children who need to worry, and your children too. The land paved over for suburbs is gone. As long as there is enough good land left it is no big deal right? But in Canada that means the best land in the country is gone or disappearing now. The remainin land is less productive.
Where did you move to? the suburbs?
I am curious how the suburbs are less dependent on farms for food then cities? Unless you have a big garden or live on a farm yourself, you are still dependent of someone else for you the food on your table. My grandmother went through a very harsh experience, and as result always made sure that her garden was sufficient to live off. Do you a garden?
Ok, there are a few family farms a few hours away. Most farms produce enough of a food commodity to supply a large town, but do not produce a wide enough range of food commodities to live off. I think you are dreaming, go back to the city and reduce your environmental footprint.
By moving to the suburbs you have only taken farm land away from the farms that produce your food.
It looks like it is essentially a mozilla addon that allows rss feeds and blog syndication. Latest API News
We've updated the Friends' Activity Sidebar Firefox extension to include the option to be notified of your friends' votes (in addition to their stories and comments). To use this new feature, install version 1.1 of the extension from Mozilla Addons, and... Netscape 9, might be a need to have mozilla addon. I will definitely be watching this.
The Ouch you are talking about is unfortunately NOT just for suburbs, it is for the whole world. This is not really a problem of only America. It doesn't make it not a problem. One thing is for sure unless people change their selfish ways. car=freedom equals selfish. Individual land ownership make senses for farmers who tend the land. In fact this rule of land ownership by the care takes of the land needs to apply to cities too. House owners DON'T care for the land. If you think paving over your front lawn to park your car is caring for land. Then your "rights" as a care taker of land need to be taken away.
...., it is not land ownership, but property ownership. People do invest in their future by taking care of their property by taking care of their community, through building committees. This is in fact a much better model because it encourages people to take care of not only their personal home, but the surrounding area which really sets the value of their property. Personal land ownership in cities only kills redevelopment, forcing cities to constantly acquire new farmer's fields for development. The farmers are not complaining because selling your field for suburban development is like striking gold. And it is striking gold for the original developer too until the suburb requires redevelopment. But this time the original developer has made his/her profit and no longer cares. You can see how bad a model it truly is. Even when the old suburbs require redevelopment it is impossible. As a result over time they slid into slums invested with crime. Because no one takes care of the place if the place you live in is a slum. It would be better if the place could be destroyed so it can finally be redeveloped as required. So slum dwellers destroying their own neighborhoods are doing the only thing that makes since. Because redevelopment is required.
"Land ownership is where a large portion of peoples' wealth is found." In places like Vancouver, New York, Hong Kong,
What gets me is people who buy a house in a new suburb, say this will never happen here. It will, is is only a matter of time. The house they bought was only build to last 30yrs and less. Ofter houses in suburbs are build without footing drains "Toronto" to save a few dollars. The result is the house is only build for 10yrs. Beyond that you are looking a constant repairs, wet basements. I know this because I have lived in all over Canada and the US. After a few houses require major repairs, a few people will sell rather than fix. And it is not long with a few run down houses, pot holes that the neighborhood needs some work. Then add in to the fact that the jobs have move to new suburbs far away in some farmer's field. No jobs within driving distance. And add in to the fact that the run down neighborhood does not have good school. You looking at the beginnings of a slum.
How long did it take?! 30yrs is about right. Think about it PEOPLE!!!!
This ouch you are talking about is coming a lot quicker than you might think. Muslims rightly believe going to war over resources is a sin. The US is going to reduce its dependence on Middle east oil by turning northern Alberta into a moon scape at more than 3 to 5 times the current rate.
To everyone BELIEVES CARES=FREEDOM I say!!!!
IS YOUR FREEDOM THE ONLY FREEDOM THAT MATTERS!! What about the freedom of others?!?
In American Suburbs you are 100% correct Cars = freedom. But making a luxury a necessity is NOT freedom. It simply increases the cost of living, making America less competitive. In Asia where a car is a luxury, the car ownership is not part of labor costs. As a result the cost of working is about $8000 USD less per worker.
Why do cars equal freedom, it is simple. It seams I have to keep repeating the same thing over and over again because people don't want to get it.
1) They really really love their cars. So the cities must be build for cars, forget about people they are not important.
This is why cars=freedom
2) Being forced to use c
IS YOUR FREEDOM THE ONLY FREEDOM THAT MATTERS!! What about the freedom of others?!?
In American Suburbs you are 100% correct Cars = freedom. But making a luxury a necessity is NOT freedom. It simply increases the cost of living, making America less competitive. In Asia where a car is a luxury, the car ownership is not part of labor costs. As a result the cost of working is about $8000 USD less per worker.
Why do cars equal freedom, it is simple. It seams I have to keep repeating the same thing over and over again because people don't want to get it.
1) They really really love their cars. So the cities must be build for cars, forget about people they are not important.
This is why cars=freedom
2) Being forced to use cars everywhere gives people more opportunity to show off their lovely cars.
This is great because this means you free to show off your SUV even to people who would rather you stop burning oil.
3) They have never had a chance to experience a transit based waking community.
As long as you think cars=freedom I can safely say that you have NOT experience a transit based walking community.
4) Think transit is for poor people and second class people. And they don't want to be considered poor or second class.
This is what you really mean when you say "cars=freedom", I think.
5) Hell you can't build a city with out lots of roads and parking lots. How can I drive my car there. This makes me laugh!!
You make me cry. People like you are the reason for many of America's problems.
If American and Canadian suburbs were designed as transit hubs as I previously described numerous times. You would have the free if you can choose to drive your car or NOT drive your car. If you want to see my points about transit hubs. Just look under Redundant. These are not new ideas, in fact these ideas have been sucessfully proven around the world. So I guess they are redundant in that sense. The suburbs today are a new creation. Before the age of cars=freedom, cities where build for walking. Rows of stores fronts with parking behind. There was no high rises in those days, but people could easily walk to the store. Hitching up a horse is not a small task. It is not like turning the key of a car. It met that people often walked to the store rather than hitching up a horse. So yes this is all redundant, we have forgotten how to build cities for people simply be cause we love cars. And you prove my point, by the fact that you THINK that cars equal freedom. They don't!
I have a fiend who is moving to Hong Kong or Japan from the US, because he figures the US is hopeless and he is bored out of his skull.
Why has it take people so long to realize that cities need be build for people??
P.S. suburbs are still booming, just take a look at.
The only reason I can think of why it has taken people SO long to figure this out is:
1) They really really love their cars. So the cities must be build for cars, forget about people they are not important.
2) Being forced to use cars everywhere gives people more opportunity to show off their lovely cars.
3) They have never had a chance to experience a transit based waking community.
4) Think transit is for poor people and second class people. And they don't want to be considered poor or second class.
5) Hell you can't build a city with out lots of roads and parking lots. How can I drive my car there. This makes me laugh!!
Solution transit hubs. Drive your car to the shopping center, transit, office hub. Park it and take a bus, train to another hub. Better still buy a condo over looking the hub's community park and sell your car.
But wait builders need to stop building houses, and start building communities. Until that happens enjoy your lonely time driving and getting fat in the burbs. Every day your car meets lots of cars, but you never meet new people.
Actually it is kind of strange North America has lots of land, but there is no land to build these communities. The land is covered with houses and it is virtually impossible to find enough space to build a hub anywhere but in the middle of some farmer's field. Solution is simple take a few city blocks around shopping centers and turn them into hubs. Even this is very difficult, because land price speculation and single hold out owners will kill redevelopment. An other solution is for the city governments to take over ownership of land. Home owners own their house, but rent their land. Much like property taxes, but urban redevelopment is not prevented by land price speculation and hold out owners. This seams to work quite well in Hong Kong. Give up you can't fight this. Get in your car, drive to the store and buy some chips and beer. Better get yourself piss drunk at least that way it won't hurt so to know you are destroying the world and yourself.
Wait the moment we start building hubs witch don't require cars, car sales will go down the the economy will fail. WRONG!!! Making a luxury into an necessity only increases the cost of living. The massive construction boom caused by building these hubs will more than make up for the lost car sales. But it will hurt the car industry. I am forgetting your love your car. Can't let anything happen to your car. Give it up, get out more, meet some people and save the world with less green house gases and less fighting over oil.
What make any place dangerous is an inadequate law enforcement system. Compare Chicago to New York, and you will see what I mean. Not all suburbs are safe, if you think so ask the people who live in old inner suburbs. So is the answer to keep building out and out further?
NO!
why it has taken people SO long to figure out that cities need to be build for people.
The burbs are build for cars. And they do an excellent job of making sure your car can enjoy everyday zipping about on roads. The parking lots of stores located beside each other are fenced off, so that your car gets enjoy driving out on to the road and in to the next parking lot.
The only reason I can think of why it has taken people SO long to figure this out is:
1) They really really love their cars. So the cities must be build for cars, forget about people they are not important.
2) Being forced to use cars everywhere gives people more opportunity to show off their lovely cars.
3) They have never had a chance to experience a transit based waking community.
4) Think transit is for poor people and second class people. And they don't want to be considered poor or second class.
5) Hell you can't build a city with out lots of roads and parking lots. How can I drive my car there. This makes me laugh!!
Solution transit hubs. Drive your car to the shopping center, transit, office hub. Park it and take a bus, train to another hub. Better still buy a condo over looking the hub's community park and sell your car.
But wait builders need to stop building houses, and start building communities. Until that happens enjoy your lonely time driving and getting fat in the burbs. Every day your car meets lots of cars, but you never meet new people.
Actually it is kind of strange North America has lots of land, but there is no land to build these communities. The land is covered with houses and it is virtually impossible to find enough space to build a hub anywhere but in the middle of some farmer's field. Solution is simple take a few city blocks around shopping centers and turn them into hubs. Even this is very difficult, because land price speculation and single hold out owners will kill redevelopment. An other solution is for the city governments to take over ownership of land. Home owners own their house, but rent their land. Much like property taxes, but urban redevelopment is not prevented by land price speculation and hold out owners. This seams to work quite well in Hong Kong. Give up you can't fight this. Get in your car, drive to the store and buy some chips and beer. Better get yourself piss drunk at least that way it won't hurt so to know you are destroying the world and yourself.
Wait the moment we start building hubs witch don't require cars, car sales will go down the the economy will fail. WRONG!!! Making a luxury into an necessity only increases the cost of living. The massive construction boom caused by building these hubs will more than make up for the lost car sales. But it will hurt the car industry. I am forgetting your love your car. Can't let anything happen to your car. Give it up, get out more, meet some people and save the world with less green house gases and less fighting over oil.
Mini-Cities are call transit community hubs. But there are not going to happen in any suburb that I know.
Solution transit hubs. Drive your car to the shopping center, transit, office hub. Park it and take a bus or train to another hub. Better still buy a condo over looking the hub's community park and sell your car.
But wait builders need to stop building houses, and start building communities. Until that happens enjoy your lonely time driving and getting fat in the burbs. Every day your car meets lots of cars, but you never meet new people.
Actually it is kind of strange North America has lots of land, but there is no land to build these communities. The land is covered with houses and it is virtually impossible to find enough space to build a hub anywhere but in the middle of some farmer's field. Solution is simple take a few city blocks around shopping centers and turn them into hubs. Even this is very difficult, because land price speculation and single hold out owners will kill redevelopment. An other solution is for the city governments to take over ownership of land. Home owners own their house, but rent their land. Much like property taxes, but urban redevelopment is not prevented by land price speculation and hold out owners. This seams to work quite well in Hong Kong. Give up you can't fight this. Get in your car, drive to the store and buy some chips and beer. Better get yourself piss drunk at least that way it won't hurt so to know you are destroying the world and yourself.
Wait the moment we start building hubs witch don't require cars, car sales will go down the the economy will fail. WRONG!!! Making a luxury into an necessity only increases the cost of living. The massive construction boom caused by building these hubs will more than make up for the lost car sales. But it will hurt the car industry. I am forgetting your love your car. Can't let anything happen to your car. Give it up, get out more, meet some people and save the world with less green house gases and less fighting over oil.
Why it has taken people SO long to figure out that cities need to be build for people.
The burbs are build for cars. And they do an excellent job of making sure your car can enjoy everyday zipping about on roads. The parking lots of stores located beside each other are fenced off, so that your car gets enjoy driving out on to the road and in to the next parking lot.
The only reason I can think of why it has taken people SO long to figure this out is:
1) They really really love their cars. So the cities must be build for cars, forget about people they are not important.
2) Being forced to use cars everywhere gives people more opportunity to show off their lovely cars.
3) They have never had a chance to experience a transit based waking community.
4) Think transit is for poor people and second class people. And they don't want to be considered poor or second class.
5) Hell you can't build a city with out lots of roads and parking lots. How can I drive my car there. This makes me laugh!!
A fellow Canadian
Ya, you should get a PhD if you know why it has taken people SO long to figure out that cities need to be build for people.
The burbs are build for cars. And they do an excellent job of making sure your car can enjoy everyday zipping about on roads. The parking lots of stores located beside each other are fenced off, so that your car gets enjoy driving out on to the road and in to the next parking lot.
The only reason I can think of why it has taken people SO long to figure this out is:
1) They really really love their cars. So the cities must be build for cars, forget about people they are not important.
2) Being forced to use cars everywhere gives people more opportunity to show off their lovely cars.
3) They have never had a chance to experience a transit based waking community.
4) Think transit is for poor people and second class people. And they don't want to be considered poor or second class.
5) Hell you can't build a city with out lots of roads and parking lots. How can I drive my car their. This makes me laugh!!
Solution transit hubs. Drive your car to the shopping center, transit, office hub. Park it and take a bus, train to another hub. Better still buy a condo over looking the hub's community park and sell your car.
But wait builders need to stop building houses, and start building communities. Until that happens enjoy your lonely time driving and getting fat in the burbs. Every day your car meets lots of cars, but you never meet new people.
Actually it is kind of strange North America has lots of land, but there is no land to build these communities. The land is covered with houses and it is virtually impossible to find enough space to build a hub anywhere but in the middle of some farmer's field. Solution is simple take a few city blocks around shopping centers and turn them into hubs. Even this is very difficult, because land price speculation and single hold out owners will kill redevelopment. An other solution is for the city governments to take over ownership of land. Home owners own their house, but rent their land. Much like property taxes, but urban redevelopment is not prevented by land price speculation and hold out owners. This seams to work quite well in Hong Kong. Give up you can't fight this. Get in your car, drive to the store and buy some chips and beer. Better get yourself piss drunk at least that way it won't hurt so to know you are destroying the world and yourself.
Wait the moment we start building hubs witch don't require cars, car sales will go down the the economy will fail. WRONG!!! Making a luxury into an necessity only increases the cost of living. The massive construction boom caused by building these hubs will more than make up for the lost car sales. But it will hurt the car industry. I am forgetting your love your car. Can't let anything happen to your car. Give it up, get out more, meet some people and save the world with less green house gases and less fighting over oil.
This article and his website contain absolutely no technical details.
He thinks money and politics is the problem.
The problems are technical. I don't see a research plan all I see is political mumbo jumbo.
He needs to separate the technical from the political mumbo jumbo. Until he does I can't take this guy seriously.
I never use ftp anymore.
I use bittorrent for common stuff like recent
linux iso's. And emule for rare hard to find
iso's. For example when SUSE first came out the
ftp server was too busy, so I pulled down the
5 SUSE iso's via emule.
NICE crash,
B 49 C7A88621C721C33ACB3|/
get your video here from emule, amule, edonkey
ed2k://|file|48InchCrash.mpg|4345860|C03CE17B98
Well linux 2.6 supports stream connection protocol. That should help the voice stream connections. Once their are set up.
If countries would ever endorse ipv6 we could use anycase for converence calls.
Someone please provide
Links to protocols used by this phone.