I'm not worried about global warming. I do however enjoy having clean air to breath. Those of you who have been to China in the last decade know what I'm talking about.
I was going to Google "military surplus surface to air missile" but that seems a little risky in this day and age. I'd be sure to have the FBI at my office in a few min with a query like that. I'm afraid the government has won.
FYI - this is what the second amendment was for. I should be able to buy a shoulder mounted surface to air missile launcher for just this reason.
meh, my curiosity got the best of me: FIM-92_Stinger.
I'm sure I'm on a blacklist someplace now... but of course its not that easy to find such a weapon...
However, even the private sector meltdown mentioned in the mcclathydc article was still government caused. The FED kept lowering interest rates to insure that the private markets would continue to borrow. If borrowing slowed, the economy slowed and the FED didn't like it. The FED repeatedly lowered interest rates allowing the economy to overheat. Eventually someone had to pay for all this debt, apparently its us. So yes the article is correct that the private sector did melt down as much or more than Fannie and Freddie, however it was still a government caused meltdown.
The ones already ordered are still being built.
If gas prices go back up giving cost parity for wind, he plans to continue the plan.
As we modernize the infrastructure he plans to continue; just the current infrastructure can't handle the increased load, so it is a waist.
If it wasn't for the government created recession he would still be pressing forward.
I really have to stop reading this it is making me sick.
Here is something even non-pirates have done at least once in there life:
You have a computer with a CD burner, which you use to burn copies of music you have downloaded onto writable CDs for all of your friends.
So you mean that since the days of cassette tapes every person who has made their girlfriend/boyfriend a mix tape or mix CD is in violation of the law? It must be true, the RIAA says so.
I know I shouldn’t be replying to myself, but I’m still reading the RIAA website and I found another jewel:
Even if you don’t illegally offer recordings to others, you join a file-sharing network and download unauthorized copies of all the copyrighted music you want for free from the computers of other network members.
If I own the CD's, but don't have software to burn them, don't I have the right to download the songs off a P2P network? I purchased the right to have a backup copy, does it matter how I get it? Seems to me like the RIAA is full of it on this one.
Piracy Tips for Consumers, I was reading the "royalty rates" link and saw that the RIAA was behind it, so I went to their website and found this jewel.
Of note: Watch for Compilations that are "Too Good to Be True". Why are they too good to be true? If customers would want that compilation why haven't you sold it to them?
Even better: Trust your ear: The sound quality of pirate CDs is often poor or inconsistent. It is a freaking digital copy, it is the exact same quality! Does anyone actually believe this stuff?
Hasn't this been tried before?
Although the remake is much better.
For some reason people believe it, even if it isn't true, just make a commercial or better yet a movie about it.
lol, 200 mile range. The Porsche I raced had driven down from Michigan that morning. Try a 1600 mile range. 8 hours by 200 MPH. You also assume the officer will even recognize the make and model.
I was right there with you till you said "HAVING pictures like this should be probable cause for investigating him further".
My question would be why? You're entire argument up to this point was that he didn't do anything wrong. So having those images gives you the right to search his property and invade his privacy? And how did you get those images anyway?
Ok, now a young girl goes missing in his neighborhood, I could see him being a suspect, but until that happens there is no crime. And even then its more likely that her neighbor, pastor, or someone who knew the girl took her than the creep down the street.
I'm curious when we reached http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tipping_Point on this issue, because I can recall just three generations ago people getting married at age 13. I also recall in many states having 16 as the legal age to wed. So why is it that when a male looks at a female who has entered puberty and starts producing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pheromone and all the other outward appearances that she is ready for sex, that it is somehow "sick and disgusting"? I wouldn't want someone looking at my daughter that way, but that doesn't mean what they are doing is wrong.
Not only that now you're criminalizing thoughts and desires or even human curiosity. For instance my wife wanted me to turn out the light last night so she reached out her and said "go, go, gadget arm". I walked over and turned out the light, then on the way back to bed I said "go go gadget penis", at which she laughed for a while. This reminded me of http://xkcd.com/305/ (rule 34); so I Googled "go go gadget penis" and instead of the obvious image of inspector gadget with an extend able penis, I get his daughter doing the dog. This image would be enough to land me in jail according to the current laws and as you can see that wasn't what I was looking for at all. I did also find a great quote from Leslie Nelson that "go go gadget penis" is the greatest one liner of all time.
You'd bet wrong if you're betting 90%, realistically its probably the other way around. Any 80's music would all be passed the 20 year mark, all of Motown would be in the public domain, 70's rock. All of the Beatles music... The majority of Aerosmith. The vast majority of music out there is older than 7 years. I may just be getting old, but has any good music been made in the last 7 years?
Yeah, I chose the "don't listen". Now if everyone else would too...
Then maybe prices would get to be about $0.15 each like they should be, or better yet the music should be treated like an ad for the artist and be given out for free to generate an interest to see them in concert.
Listening to music in the car is great, seeing it live is in a league of its own.
I call BS, this is a tech site you should understand the "early adopter" mantra. So no, we need people to spend 2 million on a car, not only is it not wrong it is a very much needed part of society. The 2 million on that car is some of the best spent money in society. It pays for better technology which makes everyones life better, maybe not this year, maybe not in 20 years, but the tech used to build this car will help with the building of future cars.
Taxes are charity. So the wealthiest by default are the most "generous". Who else is paying for Social Security, Medicade, Medicare, your child's schooling etc?
I wouldn't compare a 1987 CRX since it had no amenities or safety features. But the new VWs or even non-hybrid Toyota's are better. I personally bought a 2009 Corolla and I drive it like its a race car and it still gets 32 MPG, but I'm redlining it every time I shift. A Prius costs $22,000 and a Corolla costs $15,000, you can buy a lot of gas for $7,000 and the Corolla looks cooler.
You may not be able to outrun radio waves, but you can outrun the response to radio waves.
I was pulled over racing against an imported http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_911_GT3 that the driver claimed he had personally done 190 MPH in. This was on I-75 near Tampa. Police Interceptors only go 140 MPH. Not only that they would have to accelerate up to speed to catch you. At 190 MPH you are going faster than 3 miles a min which also means you're going faster than 1 mile every 20 seconds. Exits on I-75 are about every 3 miles. So the officer would have to radio a head, then the responding officer would have to get in position. Also the officers aren't going to pit you at that speed nor try anything else to stop you since it would be to dangerous. At that speed they'll pretty much leave you alone, they may try and get your plates but other than that there isn't much they can do.
In Atlanta they operate Bell 206B Jet Ranger's for their helicopters, they only have a Top Speed of 220 MPH so the Bugatti would even be able to outrun the aerial pursuit.
Slashdot Mirror
I counter your ice melting with this Antarctic ice increasing:
Sea Ice May Be On Increase In The Antarctic
Late 20th Century increase in South Pole snow accumulation
South Pole: Ice Core and Snow Accumulation Studies
I'm not worried about global warming. I do however enjoy having clean air to breath. Those of you who have been to China in the last decade know what I'm talking about.
I was going to Google "military surplus surface to air missile" but that seems a little risky in this day and age. I'd be sure to have the FBI at my office in a few min with a query like that. I'm afraid the government has won.
FYI - this is what the second amendment was for. I should be able to buy a shoulder mounted surface to air missile launcher for just this reason.
meh, my curiosity got the best of me: FIM-92_Stinger.
I'm sure I'm on a blacklist someplace now... but of course its not that easy to find such a weapon...
I just went to the site. It is hard to navigate and I couldn't find anything I was looking for. I don't know if 18 million is enough to fix it...
It is exactly like Demigod.
Don't they have the same thing at the local motel for a quarter?
Good read. Thanks.
However, even the private sector meltdown mentioned in the mcclathydc article was still government caused. The FED kept lowering interest rates to insure that the private markets would continue to borrow. If borrowing slowed, the economy slowed and the FED didn't like it. The FED repeatedly lowered interest rates allowing the economy to overheat. Eventually someone had to pay for all this debt, apparently its us. So yes the article is correct that the private sector did melt down as much or more than Fannie and Freddie, however it was still a government caused meltdown.
The ones already ordered are still being built.
If gas prices go back up giving cost parity for wind, he plans to continue the plan.
As we modernize the infrastructure he plans to continue; just the current infrastructure can't handle the increased load, so it is a waist.
If it wasn't for the government created recession he would still be pressing forward.
A downloaded MP3 may have lower quality, but a direct burn/ISO doesn't.
I really have to stop reading this it is making me sick.
Here is something even non-pirates have done at least once in there life:
You have a computer with a CD burner, which you use to burn copies of music you have downloaded onto writable CDs for all of your friends.
So you mean that since the days of cassette tapes every person who has made their girlfriend/boyfriend a mix tape or mix CD is in violation of the law? It must be true, the RIAA says so.
I know I shouldn’t be replying to myself, but I’m still reading the RIAA website and I found another jewel:
Even if you don’t illegally offer recordings to others, you join a file-sharing network and download unauthorized copies of all the copyrighted music you want for free from the computers of other network members.
If I own the CD's, but don't have software to burn them, don't I have the right to download the songs off a P2P network? I purchased the right to have a backup copy, does it matter how I get it? Seems to me like the RIAA is full of it on this one.
Piracy Tips for Consumers, I was reading the "royalty rates" link and saw that the RIAA was behind it, so I went to their website and found this jewel.
Of note: Watch for Compilations that are "Too Good to Be True". Why are they too good to be true? If customers would want that compilation why haven't you sold it to them?
Even better: Trust your ear: The sound quality of pirate CDs is often poor or inconsistent. It is a freaking digital copy, it is the exact same quality! Does anyone actually believe this stuff?
Honestly, when was the last time you went to ftc.gov? Nobody goes to those sites...
Now if google, wiki, or itunes goes down, then PANIC!
They need to change the rules on these efficiency challenges. This vehicle and this vehicle are completely impractical.
The rules need to be:
1)Must carry more than one occupant in a seated position.
2)Must maintain an average speed of at least 30 mph.
Hasn't this been tried before? Although the remake is much better. For some reason people believe it, even if it isn't true, just make a commercial or better yet a movie about it.
Very Insightful indeed.
lol, 200 mile range. The Porsche I raced had driven down from Michigan that morning. Try a 1600 mile range. 8 hours by 200 MPH. You also assume the officer will even recognize the make and model.
I was right there with you till you said "HAVING pictures like this should be probable cause for investigating him further".
My question would be why? You're entire argument up to this point was that he didn't do anything wrong. So having those images gives you the right to search his property and invade his privacy? And how did you get those images anyway?
Ok, now a young girl goes missing in his neighborhood, I could see him being a suspect, but until that happens there is no crime. And even then its more likely that her neighbor, pastor, or someone who knew the girl took her than the creep down the street.
That reminds me, I've seen a lot of stuff shoved up Cartman's ass, why hasn't Trey Parker been brought up on child pornography charges?
I'm curious when we reached http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tipping_Point on this issue, because I can recall just three generations ago people getting married at age 13. I also recall in many states having 16 as the legal age to wed. So why is it that when a male looks at a female who has entered puberty and starts producing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pheromone and all the other outward appearances that she is ready for sex, that it is somehow "sick and disgusting"? I wouldn't want someone looking at my daughter that way, but that doesn't mean what they are doing is wrong.
Not only that now you're criminalizing thoughts and desires or even human curiosity. For instance my wife wanted me to turn out the light last night so she reached out her and said "go, go, gadget arm". I walked over and turned out the light, then on the way back to bed I said "go go gadget penis", at which she laughed for a while. This reminded me of http://xkcd.com/305/ (rule 34); so I Googled "go go gadget penis" and instead of the obvious image of inspector gadget with an extend able penis, I get his daughter doing the dog. This image would be enough to land me in jail according to the current laws and as you can see that wasn't what I was looking for at all. I did also find a great quote from Leslie Nelson that "go go gadget penis" is the greatest one liner of all time.
Cases like this one scare the crap out of me because the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_mentality of the people in this nation are putting innocent people in jail. We might as well just form a good old fashion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching
You'd bet wrong if you're betting 90%, realistically its probably the other way around. Any 80's music would all be passed the 20 year mark, all of Motown would be in the public domain, 70's rock. All of the Beatles music... The majority of Aerosmith. The vast majority of music out there is older than 7 years. I may just be getting old, but has any good music been made in the last 7 years?
Yeah, I chose the "don't listen". Now if everyone else would too...
Then maybe prices would get to be about $0.15 each like they should be, or better yet the music should be treated like an ad for the artist and be given out for free to generate an interest to see them in concert.
Listening to music in the car is great, seeing it live is in a league of its own.
I call BS, this is a tech site you should understand the "early adopter" mantra. So no, we need people to spend 2 million on a car, not only is it not wrong it is a very much needed part of society. The 2 million on that car is some of the best spent money in society. It pays for better technology which makes everyones life better, maybe not this year, maybe not in 20 years, but the tech used to build this car will help with the building of future cars.
Taxes are charity. So the wealthiest by default are the most "generous". Who else is paying for Social Security, Medicade, Medicare, your child's schooling etc?
I wouldn't compare a 1987 CRX since it had no amenities or safety features. But the new VWs or even non-hybrid Toyota's are better. I personally bought a 2009 Corolla and I drive it like its a race car and it still gets 32 MPG, but I'm redlining it every time I shift. A Prius costs $22,000 and a Corolla costs $15,000, you can buy a lot of gas for $7,000 and the Corolla looks cooler.
You may not be able to outrun radio waves, but you can outrun the response to radio waves.
I was pulled over racing against an imported http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_911_GT3 that the driver claimed he had personally done 190 MPH in. This was on I-75 near Tampa. Police Interceptors only go 140 MPH. Not only that they would have to accelerate up to speed to catch you. At 190 MPH you are going faster than 3 miles a min which also means you're going faster than 1 mile every 20 seconds. Exits on I-75 are about every 3 miles. So the officer would have to radio a head, then the responding officer would have to get in position. Also the officers aren't going to pit you at that speed nor try anything else to stop you since it would be to dangerous. At that speed they'll pretty much leave you alone, they may try and get your plates but other than that there isn't much they can do.
In Atlanta they operate Bell 206B Jet Ranger's for their helicopters, they only have a Top Speed of 220 MPH so the Bugatti would even be able to outrun the aerial pursuit.