driving addicts to ever-more-harmful worst-case toxic concoctions
Addicts drive themselves there, because they're no longer getting what they're looking for out of lighter-weight drugs. Do you actually know any addicts? I'm guessing not.
The battery issue is solved by using aeroplanes, which use far less energy to stay airborne, and instead of hovering, circling the target.
Which sill doesn't get you anything CLOSE to the ability to take off, travel hundreds of miles carrying extremely sophisticated (and heavy) optical/coms gear, and to work in the area for 24 hours non-stop.
And since you can keep a Phantom in the air for about 15 minutes, you'd need (using calculatore...) 108 of them for that same 27 hour mission. Sort of like getting nine women on that baby project so you can get it done in only one month, right?
Even the "serious" small UAV's just can't come close to dealing with the weather, altitude, speed, and the rest that those big beasts are designed to handle. I'm almost surprised that they only cost $12m.
Airplanes crash. It's going to happen. Can't make up for that, in some situations, by using lots of tiny ones.
Why should the president who considers Snowden's actions to be hugely damaging consider him worth a pardon?
The Obama White House contact webpage still claims that "President Obama is committed to creating the most open and accessible administration in American history." It's time put up or shut up on that BS.
Anyone who thought that Obama ever meant any such thing is a complete rube. If you like your transparency the way it is now, you can keep it, period. Right?
are you calling Snowden a traitor, for pointing out the vast, incredibly illegal spying program that has massively damaged US diplomatic and economic interests
Before we proceed: are you saying that it's illegal to intercept foreign communications? If so, are you saying that the "diplomatic" damage done be talking out loud about spying on, say, Germany, should also be considered damage that THEY (the Germans) are doing when they spy on us, spy on the UK, spy on France, spy on Russia... and all of them also spying on each other? Are you that uninformed?
Recognition that he (Snowden) babbled about a lot more than just say "the NSA is doing stuff we all know they're doing." Including specific details on overseas operations/capabilities.
We all know that Snowden should be protected by the whisleblower protection act
No, we don't all know that. Because he didn't pursue his crusade using any of the procedures that would grant him that protection. Not even close.
but the government is weaseling its way around the law
Really? Which one. Be specific. The law is very clear about taking over other people's NSA user accounts, dumping tons of data, running off with it, and disclosing it in direct contradiction to the oath you just recently swore not to do that very thing.
Funny, since he was working for the government, he is liable for espionage charges
You don't have to be working for the government to be prosecuted for espionage. Why are you just making stuff up?
Do you really expect anyone to take anything else you say seriously when you start out with something as transparently wrong as that?
I work very hard, but could I ever enter the World of this VC?
No. Because I do not know the right people to get there.
So who did the first people who got wealthy know? How is it that we have millions of prosperous people in this country, including many who are the children of first-generation immigrants? Did they "know" somebody before they started their small business and worked three jobs until their family could buy a house and get their kids through college?
But they don't have the contacts and may even be considered someone who is the "wrong sort" and won't "fit in" to their "corporate culture".
br.
So why aren't they starting a business of their own where having a nose ring and tattoo sleeves IS the corporate culture? If nothing about how you act and conduct yourself has anything to do with success, then what's the barrier? If there is a huge market of customer and employers and employees all of whom would be successful if they just bought, sold, and worked for, and employed "their type" - why aren't they doing it? When you can raise a few hundred grand through Kickstarter by just maxing out your tribal appeal, what's the excuse for living in a hovel if you're otherwise "just as good as" someone who actually knows how to put together a business plan, deal with employing people, contending with the nightmare payload of tax and regulatory matters that come with running a business, and the rest?
The chip is not there to protect customers interests. It's there so the store (or bank in my case) can say: Nope, your card wasn't copied, the chip was used at the ATM.
And being able to know that and prevent use of a cloned card IS in the customer's interest. You're making it sound like those two things are mutually exclusive.
What's sad is that the state is using a technicality to override a valid contract, over the objections of all other parties.
No, what's sad is that the state IS one of the parties when you're talking about relationships between people and whatever offspring they spawn. But so long as people expect the state to step in and use other people's tax money to make up for a lack of resources on the part of the person who decided to have a baby, and this is - rather than an exceptional, rare circumstance - very, very common... then, the state is going to be one of the parties. And they're the party with the option to deprive you of your possessions and your liberty if you don't play ball in that three-way psuedo-marriage.
How much less could you care? You sound enthusiastic about the food, but not about cleaning the juicer. But you seem to have SOME cares about that, since you could care less. Can you clarify?
I don't think calling a group of people idiots is going to bring them around to your way of thinking.
True. But then, people so irrational that they haven't stopped chanting "No Nukes!" since a 1980's rally starring Jane Fonda aren't going to take a deep breath, read up on the current reality and come to their senses.
If you have a better way to reduce our usage of fossil fuels without statist central command types running our lives, let's have it!
It's called nuclear energy. We have all sorts of options along those lines, but idiot lefty green-types can't stand the idea because it has the word "nuclear" in it.
you're afraid of your political opponents gaining power
Well, sure. Who wants a bunch of statist central command types running their lives? Tax-ravenous Nanny Staters are bad news. Why should we want them to get any more power than they've already got? They've latched onto climate alarmism as their latest propaganda tool, and it's perfectly delightful when they are deprived of easy, distracting sound bite fodder. Half their fun already ended when they had to switch from "global warming" to "climate change," and this just makes it a little harder for them to spew their usual lines. That's just great.
why did they have to be *ordered* by the commission to upgrade pipes?
Because they're not allowed to change anything that involves the money they collect from customers and which impacts the ratio of how it's used to pay for operations, maintenance, and to make it worth it for investors to bother investing. You know, investors. Like the millions of people who own that stock as part of their retirement fund. Like the employees. Like many of their customers, right there in the DC area.
No, I am European, and here a gas-leak is a big deal and rarely ever happens. Hence I point out the utter patheticness of the situation in your country.
You are simply wrong. Every gas system has leaks. In a large city, thousands of them. The point is that such leaks are normal and completely insignificant under most circumstances. And when the leak is serious, it's dealt with. Here, just like there. Of course, you're deliberately ignoring Europe's fine history of houses and buildings blowing up from gas leaks.
Why are you ignoring it? Because doing so fits into your holier-than-thou narrative. Or, you think it does. Mostly, it just makes you sound like an uninformed, pompous idiot.
I find it hilarious and sad that a libertarian can't understand that gas companies are doing everything they can to ignore and deflect problems that will cost them large sums of money to fix.
Would you find it equally hilarious to discover that you're simply wrong? Or not so much, because you know the real story and you're just bitching at a straw man? Everybody knows it's expensive to replace ancient, rusty infrastructure buried in the Potomac mud under streets that nobody wants to tear up for the thousandth time. The problem is that it's the city government, in its micro-managing of the selling price of the gas delivery service, that is completely responsible for whether or not the utility company can raise the money needed to do the work, and in pandering to local, uninformed voters, deny that option.
Combine that with the fact that the article is a sensationalist bit of mostly nonsense describing what amounts to every municipal NG system ever made, and you've got you, just complaining about things for the sake of doing so, so that you can rail against anyone who prefers less government involvement in things like costs and budgeting of private businesses.
That's the sound of the US crumbling under unregulated greed and power.
No, that's the sound of the DC City Council crumbling to local pressure, pandering to know-nothing residents, and refusing to allow the company that they completely dominate through stifling regulation and micro-management to raise the funds necessary to repair ancient pipes buried under asphalt in the mud of a tidal swamp along the Potomac. In this case, government is exactly the problem. Why? Because the city government doesn't want to explain to its residents that re-building very old infrastructure costs a huge amount of money that can't appear out of thin air.
Corporate America manages to destroy critical infrastructure wholesale all bu itself...
Teh Eeeeevil Corporatist Fascists Are Destroying The Gas Lines!
What are you, twleve?
The issue is that the local government regulates the rates the utility can charge, meddles with budgets, complains about or outright blocks the needed tearing-up of streets that are required to do the millions of dollars worth of work... and the utility company itself is stiffed by countless customers (including embassies, and even federal agencies that consume huge amounts of the product they deliver). Don't like the gas company's budgeting? Talk to the 100% corrupt DC Council about it, so they will allow the utility to raise the funds necessary to re-build decades old infrastructure that's buried literally in a paved-over tidal swamp.
No, it does not. However, this shooting was the result of a heated argument
No, it happened in the course of a heated argument, and from what's been reported, as the younger guy ratcheted things up as his own wife went to hold him back. Those are things we know. You seem to have special inside knowledge allowing you to come to conclusions that nobody else has said. Were you there?
This is not a presumption of innocence situation--it is undisputed that he shot this man and it resulted in his death.
You should use the preview feature as it's intended, so that you can actually read the things you write before you submit.
We always presume innocence (despite your obvious preference for trial by Reddit, or whatever), and all sorts of people employ force in a conflict, as self defense, and are subsequently found to be entirely innocent. That you see self defense and innocence to be mutually exclusive is truly strange. I hope you never get called to jury duty, and especially hope that if you have to physically defend yourself from someone violent that you don't feel you then have to kill yourself for having been guilty by default.
AFTER THE GUN WAS DRAWN
Ah, so you WERE there! So you know that she wasn't trying to stop her husband's next action, seeing as she did that it would be a very bad idea to further escalate the argument with an assault on the old guy. Glad you have that all figured out, what with the wealth of secret details you have, freeing you from that pesky presumption of innocence thing.
Slashdot Mirror
You are just looking for a viable excuse for shooting your mother in law to the moon.
My mother in law is larger than the moon, you insensitive clod.
driving addicts to ever-more-harmful worst-case toxic concoctions
Addicts drive themselves there, because they're no longer getting what they're looking for out of lighter-weight drugs. Do you actually know any addicts? I'm guessing not.
The battery issue is solved by using aeroplanes, which use far less energy to stay airborne, and instead of hovering, circling the target.
Which sill doesn't get you anything CLOSE to the ability to take off, travel hundreds of miles carrying extremely sophisticated (and heavy) optical/coms gear, and to work in the area for 24 hours non-stop.
Subtract 3 hrs for takeoff/landing and getting on station for 24 hrs, so you get 2 hrs aloft/ 1 million = 500k/hr.
Are you grasping the fact that they don't throw out each Predator after its first use? Sometimes they get to use them two, maybe even three times.
I wonder if that bounty in some city in Colorado would apply here?
You do know that isn't actually real, right? Just checking.
And since you can keep a Phantom in the air for about 15 minutes, you'd need (using calculatore...) 108 of them for that same 27 hour mission. Sort of like getting nine women on that baby project so you can get it done in only one month, right?
Even the "serious" small UAV's just can't come close to dealing with the weather, altitude, speed, and the rest that those big beasts are designed to handle. I'm almost surprised that they only cost $12m.
Airplanes crash. It's going to happen. Can't make up for that, in some situations, by using lots of tiny ones.
Hilarious that people modded this as flamebait. Anything to avoid the truth, right people? Typical.
The Obama White House contact webpage still claims that "President Obama is committed to creating the most open and accessible administration in American history." It's time put up or shut up on that BS.
Anyone who thought that Obama ever meant any such thing is a complete rube. If you like your transparency the way it is now, you can keep it, period. Right?
are you calling Snowden a traitor, for pointing out the vast, incredibly illegal spying program that has massively damaged US diplomatic and economic interests
Before we proceed: are you saying that it's illegal to intercept foreign communications? If so, are you saying that the "diplomatic" damage done be talking out loud about spying on, say, Germany, should also be considered damage that THEY (the Germans) are doing when they spy on us, spy on the UK, spy on France, spy on Russia ... and all of them also spying on each other? Are you that uninformed?
Bush pardoned himself
Fiction. Deliberate BS on your part.
Why stops Obama from pardoning Snowden?
Recognition that he (Snowden) babbled about a lot more than just say "the NSA is doing stuff we all know they're doing." Including specific details on overseas operations/capabilities.
We all know that Snowden should be protected by the whisleblower protection act
No, we don't all know that. Because he didn't pursue his crusade using any of the procedures that would grant him that protection. Not even close.
but the government is weaseling its way around the law
Really? Which one. Be specific. The law is very clear about taking over other people's NSA user accounts, dumping tons of data, running off with it, and disclosing it in direct contradiction to the oath you just recently swore not to do that very thing.
Funny, since he was working for the government, he is liable for espionage charges
You don't have to be working for the government to be prosecuted for espionage. Why are you just making stuff up?
Everyone works hard.
Do you really expect anyone to take anything else you say seriously when you start out with something as transparently wrong as that?
I work very hard, but could I ever enter the World of this VC?
No. Because I do not know the right people to get there.
So who did the first people who got wealthy know? How is it that we have millions of prosperous people in this country, including many who are the children of first-generation immigrants? Did they "know" somebody before they started their small business and worked three jobs until their family could buy a house and get their kids through college?
But they don't have the contacts and may even be considered someone who is the "wrong sort" and won't "fit in" to their "corporate culture".
br. So why aren't they starting a business of their own where having a nose ring and tattoo sleeves IS the corporate culture? If nothing about how you act and conduct yourself has anything to do with success, then what's the barrier? If there is a huge market of customer and employers and employees all of whom would be successful if they just bought, sold, and worked for, and employed "their type" - why aren't they doing it? When you can raise a few hundred grand through Kickstarter by just maxing out your tribal appeal, what's the excuse for living in a hovel if you're otherwise "just as good as" someone who actually knows how to put together a business plan, deal with employing people, contending with the nightmare payload of tax and regulatory matters that come with running a business, and the rest?
The chip is not there to protect customers interests. It's there so the store (or bank in my case) can say: Nope, your card wasn't copied, the chip was used at the ATM.
And being able to know that and prevent use of a cloned card IS in the customer's interest. You're making it sound like those two things are mutually exclusive.
What's sad is that the state is using a technicality to override a valid contract, over the objections of all other parties.
No, what's sad is that the state IS one of the parties when you're talking about relationships between people and whatever offspring they spawn. But so long as people expect the state to step in and use other people's tax money to make up for a lack of resources on the part of the person who decided to have a baby, and this is - rather than an exceptional, rare circumstance - very, very common ... then, the state is going to be one of the parties. And they're the party with the option to deprive you of your possessions and your liberty if you don't play ball in that three-way psuedo-marriage.
but could care less since I do feel better
How much less could you care? You sound enthusiastic about the food, but not about cleaning the juicer. But you seem to have SOME cares about that, since you could care less. Can you clarify?
I'm an idiot lefty green-type, and I LOVE nuclear power.
Then there's hope for you. What's the hang-up on getting the rest of your buddies to see the light?
I don't think calling a group of people idiots is going to bring them around to your way of thinking.
True. But then, people so irrational that they haven't stopped chanting "No Nukes!" since a 1980's rally starring Jane Fonda aren't going to take a deep breath, read up on the current reality and come to their senses.
If you have a better way to reduce our usage of fossil fuels without statist central command types running our lives, let's have it!
It's called nuclear energy. We have all sorts of options along those lines, but idiot lefty green-types can't stand the idea because it has the word "nuclear" in it.
you're afraid of your political opponents gaining power
Well, sure. Who wants a bunch of statist central command types running their lives? Tax-ravenous Nanny Staters are bad news. Why should we want them to get any more power than they've already got? They've latched onto climate alarmism as their latest propaganda tool, and it's perfectly delightful when they are deprived of easy, distracting sound bite fodder. Half their fun already ended when they had to switch from "global warming" to "climate change," and this just makes it a little harder for them to spew their usual lines. That's just great.
why did they have to be *ordered* by the commission to upgrade pipes?
Because they're not allowed to change anything that involves the money they collect from customers and which impacts the ratio of how it's used to pay for operations, maintenance, and to make it worth it for investors to bother investing. You know, investors. Like the millions of people who own that stock as part of their retirement fund. Like the employees. Like many of their customers, right there in the DC area.
No, I am European, and here a gas-leak is a big deal and rarely ever happens. Hence I point out the utter patheticness of the situation in your country.
You are simply wrong. Every gas system has leaks. In a large city, thousands of them. The point is that such leaks are normal and completely insignificant under most circumstances. And when the leak is serious, it's dealt with. Here, just like there. Of course, you're deliberately ignoring Europe's fine history of houses and buildings blowing up from gas leaks.
Right? Right.
Why are you ignoring it? Because doing so fits into your holier-than-thou narrative. Or, you think it does. Mostly, it just makes you sound like an uninformed, pompous idiot.
I find it hilarious and sad that a libertarian can't understand that gas companies are doing everything they can to ignore and deflect problems that will cost them large sums of money to fix.
Would you find it equally hilarious to discover that you're simply wrong? Or not so much, because you know the real story and you're just bitching at a straw man? Everybody knows it's expensive to replace ancient, rusty infrastructure buried in the Potomac mud under streets that nobody wants to tear up for the thousandth time. The problem is that it's the city government, in its micro-managing of the selling price of the gas delivery service, that is completely responsible for whether or not the utility company can raise the money needed to do the work, and in pandering to local, uninformed voters, deny that option.
Combine that with the fact that the article is a sensationalist bit of mostly nonsense describing what amounts to every municipal NG system ever made, and you've got you, just complaining about things for the sake of doing so, so that you can rail against anyone who prefers less government involvement in things like costs and budgeting of private businesses.
That's the sound of the US crumbling under unregulated greed and power.
No, that's the sound of the DC City Council crumbling to local pressure, pandering to know-nothing residents, and refusing to allow the company that they completely dominate through stifling regulation and micro-management to raise the funds necessary to repair ancient pipes buried under asphalt in the mud of a tidal swamp along the Potomac. In this case, government is exactly the problem. Why? Because the city government doesn't want to explain to its residents that re-building very old infrastructure costs a huge amount of money that can't appear out of thin air.
Corporate America manages to destroy critical infrastructure wholesale all bu itself...
Teh Eeeeevil Corporatist Fascists Are Destroying The Gas Lines!
... and the utility company itself is stiffed by countless customers (including embassies, and even federal agencies that consume huge amounts of the product they deliver). Don't like the gas company's budgeting? Talk to the 100% corrupt DC Council about it, so they will allow the utility to raise the funds necessary to re-build decades old infrastructure that's buried literally in a paved-over tidal swamp.
What are you, twleve?
The issue is that the local government regulates the rates the utility can charge, meddles with budgets, complains about or outright blocks the needed tearing-up of streets that are required to do the millions of dollars worth of work
CNBC talking heads fawn all over him and blame Democrats for the poor business climate.
You don't actually watch anything produced by that network, do you? Didn't think so.
No, it does not. However, this shooting was the result of a heated argument
No, it happened in the course of a heated argument, and from what's been reported, as the younger guy ratcheted things up as his own wife went to hold him back. Those are things we know. You seem to have special inside knowledge allowing you to come to conclusions that nobody else has said. Were you there?
This is not a presumption of innocence situation--it is undisputed that he shot this man and it resulted in his death.
You should use the preview feature as it's intended, so that you can actually read the things you write before you submit.
We always presume innocence (despite your obvious preference for trial by Reddit, or whatever), and all sorts of people employ force in a conflict, as self defense, and are subsequently found to be entirely innocent. That you see self defense and innocence to be mutually exclusive is truly strange. I hope you never get called to jury duty, and especially hope that if you have to physically defend yourself from someone violent that you don't feel you then have to kill yourself for having been guilty by default.
AFTER THE GUN WAS DRAWN
Ah, so you WERE there! So you know that she wasn't trying to stop her husband's next action, seeing as she did that it would be a very bad idea to further escalate the argument with an assault on the old guy. Glad you have that all figured out, what with the wealth of secret details you have, freeing you from that pesky presumption of innocence thing.
Definitely find a way out of jury duty, please.