Then, if you can store your energy, then TAKE YOUR HOUSE OFF THE GRID AND TELL PGE "scrrrrew you!!".
But, you'll probably be told you'll have to pay for service even IF your meter to/from PG&E never budges. Then, you may need a lawyer, then the state may tell you EVERYBODY has to pay, unless they are their own utility. Even THEN, there'll be a myriad of rules and regulations so hamstringing as to COST you anyway. Maybe make you give up.
Just put a portable heater near the thermostate and your AC will kick on. For pranks to freeze people in an office where I worked years ago, I would exhale one or more of the silver, square thermostats. About 20 seconds or so later the chiller/ac would start up. But, I ddin't do this ALL the time. After all, it would be the source of false maintenance visits. Putting ice cubes near the thermostat probably would work to kick the heater on.
But, if you're hell-bent on having your AC or heater on on demand, something like that might work. Until new defeats are invented, which, in an escalation, will be defeated again.
twice in one day... Look at my timestamp. (No, I'm not grousing, just pointing out things...)
I guess / only wants journalistic firehose submissions. And, can't seem to want to rotate through as wide a number of readers' submissions... Oh well...
Maybe this is restating what you've said, but the nice thing about switchgrass instead of corn is that the switchgrass frees up or releases from captivity the fields earmarked for use as corn-for -fuel use. This means that the recent uptick in crops-to-store-to-consumer pricing/cost should settle down. There was a big fear (in some quarters) that the cost of some foods related to/around corn/corn oils/etc would skyrocket.
But, an aside: I think all I need to do is listen to NPR/TOTN/Science Friday, SciAm, et al, and pick up things half a week to a week earlier than get posted here. (And, like going to switchgrass from corn, I can deal with less dupes...)
But, as for what gets posted, damn it seems awfully cliquish. As in someone can be first submitting, but someone else gets the goods just by posting a different URL and coming up with a slash-baiting jingle.
Maybe to combat this, Slash should rotate submitters and limit them to x-number per month or quarter and put of a "compliance" graph showing that the same, tired old names are sidelined for a while. Well, unless worse submissions run for a while...
Anyone recall how Boeing slammed Airbus? Now, turnabout can be a bitch, even from strange places. With all the news about non-secure data buses and such, Boeing is caught up in damage control. I wonder if this bodes well for Airbus. (Yeh, I heard that some of their planes had control issues such as defying pilot/co-pilot crash-recovery input...)
I posted this to the so-called firehose yesterday, via my Journal, using the Yahoo! link (boy, it's sometimes DISCOURAGING to bother posting to the firehose when one is not worth paying attention to...):
"US to unveil key license rules Friday"
Just after we discussed "ID Tech May Mean an End to Anonymous Drinking"
"Americans born after Dec. 1, 1964, will have to get more secure driver's licenses in the next six years under ambitious post-9/11 security rules to be unveiled Friday by federal officials."
"The hijacker-pilot who flew into the Pentagon, Hani Hanjour, had a total of four driver's licenses and ID cards from three states. The DHS, which was created in response to the attacks, has created a slogan for REAL ID: "One driver, one license.""
What I think is crap about the "One driver, one license" (and I hope states fight HARD against it on THIS part to obtain accommodation/flexibility) is that some people who are a resident in one state start and maintain a business. That state may have a myriad of laws some of which requiring proof of identity. Also, some one who opens banking and other sensitive accounts in one name (say, someone legally modifies or marries and needs/desires a change of name) may need an audit trail of proof of identity.
Now, said person moves to another state, becomes a resident, and in theory, that state's DMV would seize the old ID and now their ID audit/paper trail is messed up.
The Feds OUGHT to do is (I suppose they already did) get a dump of all ID's and cross-reference them with the legitimately-obtained REALID issues but NOT take the old IDs away. This way, states which can validate/verify their prior issues can allow multi-state residents to satisfy banking/property/other legal issues.
Typically, California would punch a hole through the DOB on the ID obtained in another state when issuing a CA ID to someone who requested to retain their "foreign" ID. I gave legit reasoning and I was allowed to NOT have my DOB punched; I just marked it up NOT VALID IN CALIFORNIA so that if I ever went back to Oregon, I would be able to present both IDs and say, "Here, see, I am the same FACE, same DOB, same F/L NAME, Blood Type, etc."
I HOPE for the sake of those who have legit reasons similar to or better than mine can avoid ID audit trail issues. Some may say/ask "If all that's changed is address and state, then what's the big deal?", but some outside entities may decide THEY want to see ID they feel matches their own files.
As long as there's no fraud involved (and the involved entities determine that), then multiple, instead ONE ID or REAL ID should not be a problem. Still, each state will have its own requirements for demonstrating safer operation of a vehicle. Here is where driving demonstration needs to be separate from ID/Address/domicile/abode and right to vote.
"We could pause and resume movie playback simply by holding our palm in the air, or control a cursor by waving a fist at the screen. Selecting options can be achieved by giving a thumbs-up. It's not as easy as, say, using a remote control, but it is very cool indeed."
So, I guess it won't be long before the enigmatic, Lexu-matic Qosmio G45s will tote their lappys onto buses and plans and look like real fu or kung fu fighters. I can see Tarantino furiously penning (waving?) a script now...
EVEN THOUGH I just bought a vista-harboring Gateway laptop, and even though I bought Punch! CAD and TurboCAD. Cad-Schroer has a few things for me to wrap my brain around, and the Linux client is UNIXy, but if ever I want to use the *dows client, I can do that too.
Too bad not many other companies in CAD provide a free (for personal use) Linux binary/rpm.
So, stevie, you're NOT welcome in MY double-ring. I like them working the way nature intended, "unchallenged"...
"Americans born after Dec. 1, 1964, will have to get more secure driver's licenses in the next six years under ambitious post-9/11 security rules to be unveiled Friday by federal officials."
"The hijacker-pilot who flew into the Pentagon, Hani Hanjour, had a total of four driver's licenses and ID cards from three states. The DHS, which was created in response to the attacks, has created a slogan for REAL ID: "One driver, one license.""
What I think is crap about the "One driver, one license" (and I hope states fight HARD against it on THIS part to obtain accommodation/flexibility) is that some people who are a resident in one state start and maintain a business. That state may have a myriad of laws some of which requiring proof of identity. Also, some one who opens banking and other sensitive accounts in one name (say, someone legally modifies or marries and needs/desires a change of name) may need an audit trail of proof of identity.
Now, said person moves to another state, becomes a resident, and in theory, that state's DMV would seize the old ID and now their ID audit/paper trail is messed up.
The Feds OUGHT to do is (I suppose they already did) get a dump of all ID's and cross-reference them with the legitimately-obtained REALID issues but NOT take the old IDs away. This way, states which can validate/verify their prior issues can allow multi-state residents to satisfy banking/property/other legal issues.
Typically, California would punch a hole through the DOB on the ID obtained in another state when issuing a CA ID to someone who requested to retain their "foreign" ID. I gave legit reasoning and I was allowed to NOT have my DOB punched; I just marked it up NOT VALID IN CALIFORNIA so that if I ever went back to Oregon, I would be able to present both IDs and say, "Here, see, I am the same FACE, same DOB, same F/L NAME, Blood Type, etc."
I HOPE for the sake of those who have legit reasons similar to or better than mine can avoid ID audit trail issues. Some may say/ask "If all that's changed is address and state, then what's the big deal?", but some outside entities may decide THEY want to see ID they feel matches their own files.
As long as there's no fraud involved (and the involved entities determine that), then multiple, instead ONE ID or REAL ID should not be a problem. Still, each state will have its own requirements for demonstrating safer operation of a vehicle. Here is where driving demonstration needs to be separate from ID/Address/domicile/abode and right to vote.
since I made a tangent in my comment in this article about ID Tech anyway:
" WASHINGTON - Americans born after Dec. 1, 1964, will have to get more secure driver's licenses in the next six years under ambitious post-9/11 security rules to be unveiled Friday by federal officials. ADVERTISEMENT
The Homeland Security Department has spent years crafting the final regulations for the REAL ID Act, a law designed to make it harder for terrorists, illegal immigrants and con artists to get government-issued identification. The effort once envisioned to take effect in 2008 has been pushed back in the hopes of winning over skeptical state officials."
SuperSoaker.... Make a nukulerized mini-soaker/quantum heat sink and call it a physical feat. Snatch defeat from the jaws of victory... shunt the heat to another dimension...
But, you know, if this country can't handle a presidency of a white female and vice presidency of black male who can win by a landslide if they just run together, and then who switch roles halfway into their term, and then actually DO make changes (without being assassinated), then this country is not much better than some of the dictatorships out there, and we are all in a delusional world pacified by tv shows, concerts, and drive-by-shooting-on-the-news hour.
They'll BOTH be in office if they run together; they both have insurmountable egos, and their backers are too myopic to persuade the two to go for the guaranteed win over what role they initially get.
Besides, if Obama WON, and said, Hillary, you take President first; I'll go second, would the Justices or Congress or Senate or Judiciary have any ground to say, "NO! It don't WERK DAT WAY!"?
I'm not saying they SHOULDN'T verify, I was just saying it turned ME off that MY information would be in their system if I'd purchased anything requiring ID check. It's the potential and the actual abuse of the information that annoys me.
On the radio the discussion was about east coast bars swiping information, lying to the patrons and telling them it was for security reasons, to prevent re-entry of banned or troublesome former-patrons.
(Me here forward:)
The thing was, they were promptly selling this information to other parties who reprocessed it as thank you offers, happy birthday offers, coupons, ads etc with extreme precision because these companies had ALL the necessary information to reduce the cost of marketing these people. It also gave these marketers a way of upping the price/cost of information these marketers wanted.
Later, when I moved to Oregon for a year, I saw the cashier at a convenience store actually SWIPING the card of someone buying alcohol and I think cigarettes (it's been a while, so it could be the reverse or the checking of purchase of both...).
That turned me off. I don't recall buying alcohol myself at that mart. What I think is stupid is swiping the ID of someone who obviously is well above 25 or 30, and doesn't appear to be wearing spy or makeup-artist appliances.
I guess then that people with passports (I don't know if stores will try to scan these and if they can't then decline/refuse the sale) can present them instead of their driver's license.
Somebody needs to come up with a two-or-three-part license/age-verification/right-to-vote device/card so that for clubbing and purchases not involving checks or credit, only NAME AND AGE/DOB appear.
Then, for big-ticket items, the second part (matching) has to be presented to provide ADDRESS (Current and maybe 5 previous or 5-10 years of previous addresses based on reconciled IRS & quarterly payroll records for working/retired adults).
The THIRD part would be for retirement/pre-retirement benefits/public assistance receipt and cash-out of stocks/purchase of property and so on, that don't need to be passed on to anyone except government/law enforcement.
Maybe I've blurred some areas, but I'm ALL FOR saying "SCREW YOU" to clubs, bars, and any place scraping information they have NO business obtaining, possessing or reselling. If they want to ban patrons, then use imagery/facial recognition equipment at the point of ejection or to replay tapes of a confused situation/melee.
Anyone reading headlines about bar bouncers participating in assaulting or stalking of patrons can easily see how this 2-3-part identification deprives nosy bar or shop employees from gleaning residency information on cash-only patrons. It could possibly even work for police identification situations when the police stop is a graduated information determination: First: verify the detainee is NOT who your on the lookout for. If name is STILL too close a match, ask the detainee to produce part two.
Same could work for other scenarios. Use your imagination.
Well, I have a complaint. It is just so, so tragic that neither Clinton nor Obama will openly run on the SAME ticket. Here they have, for FIRST TIME IN US HISTORY TWO gender and color/gender minorities who BOTH have major votes and stand to easily defeat any member of their opposition. . Clinton so much has to make this a personal thing, and probably in the background Diebold was tasked with "preserving the status quo" (keep "the (wo)man" in charge).
We have this so-called great nation, with so many female business owners (I think over 54% of small businesses are female-run or created, and small businesses by far beat in numbers the number of people employed by big companies...) and a nation of historically harangued minorities of color (some, but not all Asians, harangued, too, but paradoxically MANY Asians academically and economically up-end the traditional "expectations" (of white, Black and Latino arguments/side-taking for/against Affirmative Action/Civil Rights, etc.) by amassing clout, money, and economic standing in THIS country in under 25 what many blacks and Latinos have consistently failed to do in over 100 years (granted, only since 1965-ish have MOST of them had an opportunity by law to not be discriminated against, tho institutionally, well...). So, technically, pretty much all non-Caucasian "Americans" have had since roughly 1975 to realize an opportunity to excel (OK, many have, and truly, there are more than dozens of black and Latino millionaires (not counting sports players, ok?)...
Anyway, (rambling) Clinton and Obama need to cast aside their gauntlets. Clinton needs to quit whining. Hell, her HUSBAND already served twice. If she weren't running against Obama, and had no other non-Caucasian contender, I'd throw ALL my weight behind her. Same/ditto for Obama. But, both of them together is like splitting and squandering an opportunity. They BOTH should run as ticket mates and threaten the corruption that is visible and invisible in this country: patriarchal/old-boy power, and institutionalized down-trodding on economically disadvantaged. BOTH these clowns need to get on the same page, get in there, and stop and then reverse the sending of US military personnel into foreign countries to occupy or prop up business-backed "expeditions".
Diebold needs to just "die", and maybe die "boldly". Ticket tampering should be MORE than a federal offense: it should be punishable by dismemberment.
Mod me troll or off-topic if you want, but any FOOL can see that (despite the historians here who'll say, "been there, done that, it failed...) we have NOT had today's opportunity before. If Clinton and Obama can't pull their heads out of their asses, then we should just continue down the SAME, TIRED, LITTERED old road we're on until the PUBLIC mobs the government. Oh, wait, we're mostly apathetic, so that won't happen, either.
Slashdot Mirror
"Nuclear power gets a bad rap because of the word "nuclear","
Well, then change to word to "Noo-kee-yah" (Carter) or
Nu-kuh-luhr (bush v2 mod 15.2.21) or
New-kea-yuh (the forcoming Ikea power plant in a wood cabinet)...
Sounds like Dokter EEvuhl has reinvented a new RealDoll... Or is starting up a new...
Anal Parsons Project...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Alan_Parsons_Project
Then, if you can store your energy, then TAKE YOUR HOUSE OFF THE GRID AND TELL PGE "scrrrrew you!!".
But, you'll probably be told you'll have to pay for service even IF your meter to/from PG&E never budges. Then, you may need a lawyer, then the state may tell you EVERYBODY has to pay, unless they are their own utility. Even THEN, there'll be a myriad of rules and regulations so hamstringing as to COST you anyway. Maybe make you give up.
Just put a portable heater near the thermostate and your AC will kick on. For pranks to freeze people in an office where I worked years ago, I would exhale one or more of the silver, square thermostats. About 20 seconds or so later the chiller/ac would start up. But, I ddin't do this ALL the time. After all, it would be the source of false maintenance visits. Putting ice cubes near the thermostat probably would work to kick the heater on.
But, if you're hell-bent on having your AC or heater on on demand, something like that might work. Until new defeats are invented, which, in an escalation, will be defeated again.
twice in one day... Look at my timestamp. (No, I'm not grousing, just pointing out things...)
I guess / only wants journalistic firehose submissions. And, can't seem to want to rotate through as wide a number of readers' submissions... Oh well...
Maybe this is restating what you've said, but the nice thing about switchgrass instead of corn is that the switchgrass frees up or releases from captivity the fields earmarked for use as corn-for -fuel use. This means that the recent uptick in crops-to-store-to-consumer pricing/cost should settle down. There was a big fear (in some quarters) that the cost of some foods related to/around corn/corn oils/etc would skyrocket.
But, an aside: I think all I need to do is listen to NPR/TOTN/Science Friday, SciAm, et al, and pick up things half a week to a week earlier than get posted here. (And, like going to switchgrass from corn, I can deal with less dupes...)
See:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17910749
7 January 2008
and:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5183608
1 February *2006*
Good Riiadance, Byatches...
But, as for what gets posted, damn it seems awfully cliquish. As in someone can be first submitting, but someone else gets the goods just by posting a different URL and coming up with a slash-baiting jingle.
Maybe to combat this, Slash should rotate submitters and limit them to x-number per month or quarter and put of a "compliance" graph showing that the same, tired old names are sidelined for a while. Well, unless worse submissions run for a while...
BOING BOING! Boeing...?
Somewhat on/off topic...
Anyone recall how Boeing slammed Airbus? Now, turnabout can be a bitch, even from strange places. With all the news about non-secure data buses and such, Boeing is caught up in damage control. I wonder if this bodes well for Airbus. (Yeh, I heard that some of their planes had control issues such as defying pilot/co-pilot crash-recovery input...)
NEED multi-state or multiple ID's?
I posted this to the so-called firehose yesterday, via my Journal, using the Yahoo! link (boy, it's sometimes DISCOURAGING to bother posting to the firehose when one is not worth paying attention to...):
"US to unveil key license rules Friday"
Just after we discussed "ID Tech May Mean an End to Anonymous Drinking"
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/10/2113240
We get:
"US to unveil key license rules Friday"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080110/ap_on_go_ot/secure_driver_s_licenses
"Americans born after Dec. 1, 1964, will have to get more secure driver's licenses in the next six years under ambitious post-9/11 security rules to be unveiled Friday by federal officials."
"The hijacker-pilot who flew into the Pentagon, Hani Hanjour, had a total of four driver's licenses and ID cards from three states. The DHS, which was created in response to the attacks, has created a slogan for REAL ID: "One driver, one license.""
What I think is crap about the "One driver, one license" (and I hope states fight HARD against it on THIS part to obtain accommodation/flexibility) is that some people who are a resident in one state start and maintain a business. That state may have a myriad of laws some of which requiring proof of identity. Also, some one who opens banking and other sensitive accounts in one name (say, someone legally modifies or marries and needs/desires a change of name) may need an audit trail of proof of identity.
Now, said person moves to another state, becomes a resident, and in theory, that state's DMV would seize the old ID and now their ID audit/paper trail is messed up.
The Feds OUGHT to do is (I suppose they already did) get a dump of all ID's and cross-reference them with the legitimately-obtained REALID issues but NOT take the old IDs away. This way, states which can validate/verify their prior issues can allow multi-state residents to satisfy banking/property/other legal issues.
Typically, California would punch a hole through the DOB on the ID obtained in another state when issuing a CA ID to someone who requested to retain their "foreign" ID. I gave legit reasoning and I was allowed to NOT have my DOB punched; I just marked it up NOT VALID IN CALIFORNIA so that if I ever went back to Oregon, I would be able to present both IDs and say, "Here, see, I am the same FACE, same DOB, same F/L NAME, Blood Type, etc."
I HOPE for the sake of those who have legit reasons similar to or better than mine can avoid ID audit trail issues. Some may say/ask "If all that's changed is address and state, then what's the big deal?", but some outside entities may decide THEY want to see ID they feel matches their own files.
As long as there's no fraud involved (and the involved entities determine that), then multiple, instead ONE ID or REAL ID should not be a problem. Still, each state will have its own requirements for demonstrating safer operation of a vehicle. Here is where driving demonstration needs to be separate from ID/Address/domicile/abode and right to vote.
I'll pause here...
???
"We could pause and resume movie playback simply by holding our palm in the air, or control a cursor by waving a fist at the screen. Selecting options can be achieved by giving a thumbs-up. It's not as easy as, say, using a remote control, but it is very cool indeed."
So, I guess it won't be long before the enigmatic, Lexu-matic Qosmio G45s will tote their lappys onto buses and plans and look like real fu or kung fu fighters. I can see Tarantino furiously penning (waving?) a script now...
I pine for Sol, not a massive black hole. Otherwise, we'll have a massive cleanup job? Oh, wait...
You're welcome!
* (ballmer/msoft?)
What a cosmic implosion for all that banter and bickering in yesterday's thread. Any bets on msoft being DeepGoat (the Deepthroat) source of the leak?
Just like naval vessels, it seems we have rumour for EVERY occasion, hehehehe.
But, here's truth, Stevie B:
I LOVE my Linux Experience, thank you very much (despite some hickups). I have ALTFAA (A Laptop For An Adult), and I'm experiencing:
http://www.cad-schroer.com/index.php?screen=1&land=com
EVEN THOUGH I just bought a vista-harboring Gateway laptop, and even though I bought Punch! CAD and TurboCAD. Cad-Schroer has a few things for me to wrap my brain around, and the Linux client is UNIXy, but if ever I want to use the *dows client, I can do that too.
Too bad not many other companies in CAD provide a free (for personal use) Linux binary/rpm.
So, stevie, you're NOT welcome in MY double-ring. I like them working the way nature intended, "unchallenged"...
100% overrated -2?
Well, double-dumb-ass on YOU, moderator. (You are allowing logic to override your ability to display recognition of a sense of humour...)
Double the FSB, double the BSB, Whatever the kilo-his or the kilo-hers
Whatever your persuasion, that means double-the-pleasure, or double-the-trouble...
Do the Hubble thing, butt try not to hobble...
(Now, if only they Hubble can find the Wrigley's Pleasure Planet, mmm double the taste...)
I'm going on a limb being redundant here, but what the heck:
Just after we discussed "ID Tech May Mean an End to Anonymous Drinking"
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/10/2113240
We get:
"US to unveil key license rules Friday"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080110/ap_on_go_ot/secure_driver_s_licenses
"Americans born after Dec. 1, 1964, will have to get more secure driver's licenses in the next six years under ambitious post-9/11 security rules to be unveiled Friday by federal officials."
"The hijacker-pilot who flew into the Pentagon, Hani Hanjour, had a total of four driver's licenses and ID cards from three states. The DHS, which was created in response to the attacks, has created a slogan for REAL ID: "One driver, one license.""
What I think is crap about the "One driver, one license" (and I hope states fight HARD against it on THIS part to obtain accommodation/flexibility) is that some people who are a resident in one state start and maintain a business. That state may have a myriad of laws some of which requiring proof of identity. Also, some one who opens banking and other sensitive accounts in one name (say, someone legally modifies or marries and needs/desires a change of name) may need an audit trail of proof of identity.
Now, said person moves to another state, becomes a resident, and in theory, that state's DMV would seize the old ID and now their ID audit/paper trail is messed up.
The Feds OUGHT to do is (I suppose they already did) get a dump of all ID's and cross-reference them with the legitimately-obtained REALID issues but NOT take the old IDs away. This way, states which can validate/verify their prior issues can allow multi-state residents to satisfy banking/property/other legal issues.
Typically, California would punch a hole through the DOB on the ID obtained in another state when issuing a CA ID to someone who requested to retain their "foreign" ID. I gave legit reasoning and I was allowed to NOT have my DOB punched; I just marked it up NOT VALID IN CALIFORNIA so that if I ever went back to Oregon, I would be able to present both IDs and say, "Here, see, I am the same FACE, same DOB, same F/L NAME, Blood Type, etc."
I HOPE for the sake of those who have legit reasons similar to or better than mine can avoid ID audit trail issues. Some may say/ask "If all that's changed is address and state, then what's the big deal?", but some outside entities may decide THEY want to see ID they feel matches their own files.
As long as there's no fraud involved (and the involved entities determine that), then multiple, instead ONE ID or REAL ID should not be a problem. Still, each state will have its own requirements for demonstrating safer operation of a vehicle. Here is where driving demonstration needs to be separate from ID/Address/domicile/abode and right to vote.
I'll pause here...
Well, this is probably too hot to let sit in the Firehose, and maybe it's relevant:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080110/ap_on_go_ot/secure_driver_s_licenses
since I made a tangent in my comment in this article about ID Tech anyway:
" WASHINGTON - Americans born after Dec. 1, 1964, will have to get more secure driver's licenses in the next six years under ambitious post-9/11 security rules to be unveiled Friday by federal officials.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Homeland Security Department has spent years crafting the final regulations for the REAL ID Act, a law designed to make it harder for terrorists, illegal immigrants and con artists to get government-issued identification. The effort once envisioned to take effect in 2008 has been pushed back in the hopes of winning over skeptical state officials."
SuperSoaker.... Make a nukulerized mini-soaker/quantum heat sink and call it a physical feat. Snatch defeat from the jaws of victory... shunt the heat to another dimension...
http://pelleteria.blog89.fc2.com/
Can we get some "bling" with the bag of chips?
Didn't say that, and didn't say that.
But, you know, if this country can't handle a presidency of a white female and vice presidency of black male who can win by a landslide if they just run together, and then who switch roles halfway into their term, and then actually DO make changes (without being assassinated), then this country is not much better than some of the dictatorships out there, and we are all in a delusional world pacified by tv shows, concerts, and drive-by-shooting-on-the-news hour.
They'll BOTH be in office if they run together; they both have insurmountable egos, and their backers are too myopic to persuade the two to go for the guaranteed win over what role they initially get.
Besides, if Obama WON, and said, Hillary, you take President first; I'll go second, would the Justices or Congress or Senate or Judiciary have any ground to say, "NO! It don't WERK DAT WAY!"?
I'm not saying they SHOULDN'T verify, I was just saying it turned ME off that MY information would be in their system if I'd purchased anything requiring ID check. It's the potential and the actual abuse of the information that annoys me.
On the radio the discussion was about east coast bars swiping information, lying to the patrons and telling them it was for security reasons, to prevent re-entry of banned or troublesome former-patrons.
(Me here forward:)
The thing was, they were promptly selling this information to other parties who reprocessed it as thank you offers, happy birthday offers, coupons, ads etc with extreme precision because these companies had ALL the necessary information to reduce the cost of marketing these people. It also gave these marketers a way of upping the price/cost of information these marketers wanted.
Later, when I moved to Oregon for a year, I saw the cashier at a convenience store actually SWIPING the card of someone buying alcohol and I think cigarettes (it's been a while, so it could be the reverse or the checking of purchase of both...).
That turned me off. I don't recall buying alcohol myself at that mart. What I think is stupid is swiping the ID of someone who obviously is well above 25 or 30, and doesn't appear to be wearing spy or makeup-artist appliances.
I guess then that people with passports (I don't know if stores will try to scan these and if they can't then decline/refuse the sale) can present them instead of their driver's license.
Somebody needs to come up with a two-or-three-part license/age-verification/right-to-vote device/card so that for clubbing and purchases not involving checks or credit, only NAME AND AGE/DOB appear.
Then, for big-ticket items, the second part (matching) has to be presented to provide ADDRESS (Current and maybe 5 previous or 5-10 years of previous addresses based on reconciled IRS & quarterly payroll records for working/retired adults).
The THIRD part would be for retirement/pre-retirement benefits/public assistance receipt and cash-out of stocks/purchase of property and so on, that don't need to be passed on to anyone except government/law enforcement.
Maybe I've blurred some areas, but I'm ALL FOR saying "SCREW YOU" to clubs, bars, and any place scraping information they have NO business obtaining, possessing or reselling. If they want to ban patrons, then use imagery/facial recognition equipment at the point of ejection or to replay tapes of a confused situation/melee.
Anyone reading headlines about bar bouncers participating in assaulting or stalking of patrons can easily see how this 2-3-part identification deprives nosy bar or shop employees from gleaning residency information on cash-only patrons. It could possibly even work for police identification situations when the police stop is a graduated information determination: First: verify the detainee is NOT who your on the lookout for. If name is STILL too close a match, ask the detainee to produce part two.
Same could work for other scenarios. Use your imagination.
Reactionary "collide-o-scope"?
Well, I have a complaint. It is just so, so tragic that neither Clinton nor Obama will openly run on the SAME ticket. Here they have, for FIRST TIME IN US HISTORY TWO gender and color/gender minorities who BOTH have major votes and stand to easily defeat any member of their opposition. . Clinton so much has to make this a personal thing, and probably in the background Diebold was tasked with "preserving the status quo" (keep "the (wo)man" in charge).
We have this so-called great nation, with so many female business owners (I think over 54% of small businesses are female-run or created, and small businesses by far beat in numbers the number of people employed by big companies...) and a nation of historically harangued minorities of color (some, but not all Asians, harangued, too, but paradoxically MANY Asians academically and economically up-end the traditional "expectations" (of white, Black and Latino arguments/side-taking for/against Affirmative Action/Civil Rights, etc.) by amassing clout, money, and economic standing in THIS country in under 25 what many blacks and Latinos have consistently failed to do in over 100 years (granted, only since 1965-ish have MOST of them had an opportunity by law to not be discriminated against, tho institutionally, well...). So, technically, pretty much all non-Caucasian "Americans" have had since roughly 1975 to realize an opportunity to excel (OK, many have, and truly, there are more than dozens of black and Latino millionaires (not counting sports players, ok?)...
Anyway, (rambling) Clinton and Obama need to cast aside their gauntlets. Clinton needs to quit whining. Hell, her HUSBAND already served twice. If she weren't running against Obama, and had no other non-Caucasian contender, I'd throw ALL my weight behind her. Same/ditto for Obama. But, both of them together is like splitting and squandering an opportunity. They BOTH should run as ticket mates and threaten the corruption that is visible and invisible in this country: patriarchal/old-boy power, and institutionalized down-trodding on economically disadvantaged. BOTH these clowns need to get on the same page, get in there, and stop and then reverse the sending of US military personnel into foreign countries to occupy or prop up business-backed "expeditions".
Diebold needs to just "die", and maybe die "boldly". Ticket tampering should be MORE than a federal offense: it should be punishable by dismemberment.
Mod me troll or off-topic if you want, but any FOOL can see that (despite the historians here who'll say, "been there, done that, it failed...) we have NOT had today's opportunity before. If Clinton and Obama can't pull their heads out of their asses, then we should just continue down the SAME, TIRED, LITTERED old road we're on until the PUBLIC mobs the government. Oh, wait, we're mostly apathetic, so that won't happen, either.
Guess I was being the seagull crapping on the commodore's shoulderboards (epaulettes)