Airlines like making money. If they come up with a method that makes people want to fly them over their competitor, they will. And be certain that they'll factor in the cost of having one of their planes high jacked. Heck, the company that would advertise: "We treat you like a human being, but one in 1000 of our planes *will* blow up." would still get my dollars.
The sad thing is that in 7 to 10 years, nobody will even care... People will just accept this as completely normal. What scares me is what will make people uncomfortable then? People will be indignant that TSA employees are allowed to shoot anyone who looks at them funny on the spot? Then it's another 7 to 10 years of easing the measure onto the sheep as part of their everyday life...
We're an ISP with at least twice as many customers. It'd be wonderful if what your friend said was true, but it definitely isn't. Just to hook a cable onto a telephone pole costs a substantial rental fee, per post. Never mind underground fibres.
It's okay if your 1000 customers are all in the same 3-4 square kilometres but we span about 200km. Bandwidth itself is cheap, we could afford to give them a fair bit more than they get now if they all were able to move within a few kilometres of our main links. We certainly would be happy to do so. Transporting it to them is what costs a bundle.
In areas where you have the kind of density that makes running your own fibre economical, you usually also have 2-3 huge telcos very eager to crush any hopes you have of making a profit.
Might be tricky riding in a car with one moving part... Unless you plan to go in through a permanently open window like the Dukes of Hazard... And drive exclusively in a straight line while suffering every bump in the road.
Reading the constitution isn't nearly enough to understand even the hundredth part of it, much less to understand why it matters that we defend it.
I mostly agree there and with the rest of your post too. But I still think someone who swears an oath to the constitution ought to *at least* read it.
As it stands, current trend seems to instruct law enforcement that people who mention the constitution too often might be domestic terrorists. See the MIAC report among several other examples of that.
In its 1967 ruling in Afroyim v. Rusk, the Supreme Court used an argument derived from the 14th Amendment to the Constitution to affirm a right to dual citizenship.
I agree with you, but the supreme court doesn't. A lot of congresscritters have dual citizenship. A surprisingly large proportion of those have a specific country as their other citizenship too. Incidentally, the US is often accused of being greatly influenced/manipulated by that country and this fact doesn't really help counter such accusations.
So basically you're saying: No taxation without representation.
I completely agree with that. But I think what you ought to protest here is the fact that you pay taxes, not the fact that you aren't given a vote. You pay taxes as a property owner, which to a town is more or less equivalent to citizenship. If you want a say in how a government is run, you ought to be one of its citizens, otherwise you still get the option to vote... with your feet.
As an ISP, we actively track and warn customers that are infected. It was a bit of a hurdle at first but merely making our customers aware of the possibility has drastically decreased the number of infections despite the steady increase in number of customers.
Neocons to the left, neocons to the right... I think you got your targets mixed.
The left and right have gotten into the nasty habit of fighting each other by pointing at the hypocrites on the other side but I assure you, it all evens out. They both do everything they can to give the state more power. Actually, come to think of it, I'll grant you that the left (as in typical democrat) is pretty open about wanting the government to control everyone's lives (for their own good, of course) so in that respect they might be a bit more honest.
Bottom line here, the whole left/right issue as presented by you is a joke. There are genuine conservative philosophies and genuine progressive ones too but they're all completely lost in a very thick blizzard of bullshit if taken within the context of the US two party system.
As pointed before, improving JS performance on Firefox often means speeding up the interface too since a large portion is written in JS, as with extensions.
You get points for being right... Tricky part here is getting the U.S. government to believe this. It definitely doesn't act like there is any truth to your statement.
You actually might have brought forth a good point if I had some sort of Apple or Facebook bashing history.
The fact that they're hip isn't my problem though. It's the subtle changes I've seen these things bring forth in otherwise intelligent and rational people that I love. The enormous waste of intellectual and creative capital, sacrifices of basic liberties through unworthy compromises...
Sure, I think I'm too good for Apple and Facebook and just about any other product that falls into Edward Bernays bastard marketing strategy of making people define their very identity through the products they buy. What saddens me here is that I know *you* and most other human beings are too good for that as well.
My initial thought was: At last, they might even screw it up badly enough that people would give up on that terrible, soon-to-beat-TV-in-IQ-sucking-potential idea. Stuff like requiring you to install iTunes to post or some other typical Apple stroke of genius.
Then my brain started working again and I realized that Facebooks success is precisely the same as Apples of late: it relies on people being so absorbed in their own image that they become oblivious to all the horrors lurking beneath shiny, polished skin.
I'll take a moment to note OS-X as a temporary exception but we all know they dream to replace that with iOS as soon as they've dumbed their user base down enough.
She was given every opportunity to go about her business and NOT be arrested, but that wasn't what was going to make her happy.
I might have watched that video wrong, but I'm pretty sure she stopped blowing bubbles when he asked. Assuming that blowing bubbles at cops is *illegal*, that is. I don't think either of us is a lawyer competent enough in the field to assess that. Her crime more or less amounts to telling him he could have been nicer about it. If people who question grounds for a cop to be rude to them are committing a crime, we're in for a delightful future.
You never, ever, ever even so much as disagree with a fellow police officer in front of a civilian. Even if the other cop is wrong, even if the other cop is committing a crime, taking a bribe, raping your sister... It's part of the unspoken code and I assure you that those who stray from that code do not remain employed by the police force very long.
Yeah, I know that one scared the crap out of you guys... How could you have survived without leeching off that much tax revenue? Now you have Alberta and its tar sands though it shouldn't be a problem.
Or are you saying you'd miss the frogs? I always had trouble with that... Most of Canada treats Quebec like second rate citizens, but still goes completely bonkers a the thought of not having to deal with them anymore.
DeGaule was head (arguably founder) of a republic and understood that you only have liberty through independence of states. The ability to vote with your feet is what keeps governments in check. Sort of like what the US managed to accomplish back when their constitution mattered.
... when the people of France can barely understand Quebecois.
To be fair here, people of *Paris* can barely understand Quebecois *and* just about every other province of France. People from Quebec can understand both Parisian French and just about every other French dialects. You're also much more likely to have your English understood by a random Quebec person than anywhere in France as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Airlines like making money. If they come up with a method that makes people want to fly them over their competitor, they will. And be certain that they'll factor in the cost of having one of their planes high jacked. Heck, the company that would advertise: "We treat you like a human being, but one in 1000 of our planes *will* blow up." would still get my dollars.
The sad thing is that in 7 to 10 years, nobody will even care... People will just accept this as completely normal. What scares me is what will make people uncomfortable then? People will be indignant that TSA employees are allowed to shoot anyone who looks at them funny on the spot? Then it's another 7 to 10 years of easing the measure onto the sheep as part of their everyday life...
We're an ISP with at least twice as many customers. It'd be wonderful if what your friend said was true, but it definitely isn't. Just to hook a cable onto a telephone pole costs a substantial rental fee, per post. Never mind underground fibres.
It's okay if your 1000 customers are all in the same 3-4 square kilometres but we span about 200km. Bandwidth itself is cheap, we could afford to give them a fair bit more than they get now if they all were able to move within a few kilometres of our main links. We certainly would be happy to do so. Transporting it to them is what costs a bundle.
In areas where you have the kind of density that makes running your own fibre economical, you usually also have 2-3 huge telcos very eager to crush any hopes you have of making a profit.
Okay... Now I'm involved, you happy?
Listen to Crazy Train, you'll get it.
Might be tricky riding in a car with one moving part... Unless you plan to go in through a permanently open window like the Dukes of Hazard... And drive exclusively in a straight line while suffering every bump in the road.
And we could all try to tackle those individual bugs (isn't that the point of open source) instead of wasting time posting about the delays...
Now I just have to hold back the little troll on my shoulder shouting something to the effect that patches would be ignored as usual.
Reading the constitution isn't nearly enough to understand even the hundredth part of it, much less to understand why it matters that we defend it.
I mostly agree there and with the rest of your post too. But I still think someone who swears an oath to the constitution ought to *at least* read it.
As it stands, current trend seems to instruct law enforcement that people who mention the constitution too often might be domestic terrorists. See the MIAC report among several other examples of that.
I'd go even cheaper: Make them read the constitution they swore an oath to defend.
Also, morons who can't pronounce "nuclear" wouldn't be eligible to be president.
Let's raise the bar to "aluminium", it's the president we're talking about.
In its 1967 ruling in Afroyim v. Rusk, the Supreme Court used an argument derived from the 14th Amendment to the Constitution to affirm a right to dual citizenship.
I agree with you, but the supreme court doesn't. A lot of congresscritters have dual citizenship. A surprisingly large proportion of those have a specific country as their other citizenship too. Incidentally, the US is often accused of being greatly influenced/manipulated by that country and this fact doesn't really help counter such accusations.
So basically you're saying: No taxation without representation.
I completely agree with that. But I think what you ought to protest here is the fact that you pay taxes, not the fact that you aren't given a vote. You pay taxes as a property owner, which to a town is more or less equivalent to citizenship. If you want a say in how a government is run, you ought to be one of its citizens, otherwise you still get the option to vote... with your feet.
As an ISP, we actively track and warn customers that are infected. It was a bit of a hurdle at first but merely making our customers aware of the possibility has drastically decreased the number of infections despite the steady increase in number of customers.
Neocons to the left, neocons to the right... I think you got your targets mixed.
The left and right have gotten into the nasty habit of fighting each other by pointing at the hypocrites on the other side but I assure you, it all evens out. They both do everything they can to give the state more power. Actually, come to think of it, I'll grant you that the left (as in typical democrat) is pretty open about wanting the government to control everyone's lives (for their own good, of course) so in that respect they might be a bit more honest.
Bottom line here, the whole left/right issue as presented by you is a joke. There are genuine conservative philosophies and genuine progressive ones too but they're all completely lost in a very thick blizzard of bullshit if taken within the context of the US two party system.
As pointed before, improving JS performance on Firefox often means speeding up the interface too since a large portion is written in JS, as with extensions.
You get points for being right... Tricky part here is getting the U.S. government to believe this. It definitely doesn't act like there is any truth to your statement.
Ah if the wifi radio spectrum was some kind of unlimited magical wonderland of infinite bandwidth where noting interferes with anything else...
You forgot the most powerful extra-governmental force: The people.
You actually might have brought forth a good point if I had some sort of Apple or Facebook bashing history.
The fact that they're hip isn't my problem though. It's the subtle changes I've seen these things bring forth in otherwise intelligent and rational people that I love. The enormous waste of intellectual and creative capital, sacrifices of basic liberties through unworthy compromises...
Sure, I think I'm too good for Apple and Facebook and just about any other product that falls into Edward Bernays bastard marketing strategy of making people define their very identity through the products they buy. What saddens me here is that I know *you* and most other human beings are too good for that as well.
My initial thought was: At last, they might even screw it up badly enough that people would give up on that terrible, soon-to-beat-TV-in-IQ-sucking-potential idea. Stuff like requiring you to install iTunes to post or some other typical Apple stroke of genius.
Then my brain started working again and I realized that Facebooks success is precisely the same as Apples of late: it relies on people being so absorbed in their own image that they become oblivious to all the horrors lurking beneath shiny, polished skin.
I'll take a moment to note OS-X as a temporary exception but we all know they dream to replace that with iOS as soon as they've dumbed their user base down enough.
She was given every opportunity to go about her business and NOT be arrested, but that wasn't what was going to make her happy.
I might have watched that video wrong, but I'm pretty sure she stopped blowing bubbles when he asked. Assuming that blowing bubbles at cops is *illegal*, that is. I don't think either of us is a lawyer competent enough in the field to assess that. Her crime more or less amounts to telling him he could have been nicer about it. If people who question grounds for a cop to be rude to them are committing a crime, we're in for a delightful future.
You never, ever, ever even so much as disagree with a fellow police officer in front of a civilian. Even if the other cop is wrong, even if the other cop is committing a crime, taking a bribe, raping your sister... It's part of the unspoken code and I assure you that those who stray from that code do not remain employed by the police force very long.
Yeah, I know that one scared the crap out of you guys... How could you have survived without leeching off that much tax revenue? Now you have Alberta and its tar sands though it shouldn't be a problem.
Or are you saying you'd miss the frogs? I always had trouble with that... Most of Canada treats Quebec like second rate citizens, but still goes completely bonkers a the thought of not having to deal with them anymore.
DeGaule was head (arguably founder) of a republic and understood that you only have liberty through independence of states. The ability to vote with your feet is what keeps governments in check. Sort of like what the US managed to accomplish back when their constitution mattered.
Most companies would kill for a 45% profit margin.
Some companies *do* kill for a 45% profit margin... And then there's investment banks.
... when the people of France can barely understand Quebecois.
To be fair here, people of *Paris* can barely understand Quebecois *and* just about every other province of France. People from Quebec can understand both Parisian French and just about every other French dialects. You're also much more likely to have your English understood by a random Quebec person than anywhere in France as well.