it's a 40k price tag. This means over the life of the car you will save very little.
Additionally, I live in the southeast. How much do you want to bet there's no AC under that closed, plastic, solar oven.
I can get a yaris for a few bottle caps and a broken cigarette, it will have AC, it's toyota, a make with a reputation for endurance, and it will get reasonable MPG.
I can put the 28k I saved into a mutual fund and roll it over for gas money.
victimless crimes like drugs and speeding to the active denial of a person's fundamental right to live.
So when I come down the road you live on going say 160 and can't stop in time for you pulling out of your driveway, I guess that's a victimless crime?
I don't disagree that drug use in and of itself is a victimless crime (the crimes that people who are addicted to the harder drugs are obviously not victimless, but that doesn't apply to marijuana or LSD), but making a blanket statement that speeding is a victimless crime is just stupid.
the speeding itself had no victim, but when your car hit someone it became vehicular homicide (via gross negligence).
until that time, though, what was the saying? "My right to swing my fist ends where another's nose begins"?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-drug policy than slapping everyone who smokes marijuana with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-theft policy than slapping everyone who steals with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-murder policy than slapping everyone who murders with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-speeding policy than slapping everyone who speeds with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-x policy than slapping everyone who x-es with a felony charge?
This isn't some conspiracy to disenfranchise *snip*
i'm sorry but it is. There is nothing inherently immoral about doing marijuana vs tobacco, there is nothing inherently immoral about speeding, and i'm sorry you can't compare victimless crimes like drugs and speeding to the active denial of a person's fundamental right to live. This is nothing more than extremist "law = morality" frothing.
Can any reader come up with a "common everyday activity" which just happens to be a felony? I can't,
filesharing - the net act
liquor sales - the volstead act
marijuana/lsd use - the nixon drug laws (i'm so sorry to tell you, but, even though I don't do this personally, it is an everyday activity for millions, and there is no proven addictive properties to either. people who use these drugs are not "Evil")
and I'm just fine with disenfranchising cokeheads.
Ah, so your subjective morality and insistence you have the authority to make the decisions for others has more merit than people like me, who think coke heads should have a right to buy coke if they want to. It's their body.
Of course, simply slap a felony on any of these charges and suddenly they no longer have a voice. Fascists like you have silenced them. I'm sorry but there is no more accurate term to someone who believes they should be able to gag anyone who doesn't agree with them.
Unfortunately, I don't believe anything will change "AmerKa"(TM)
Hopefully the EU, Candada, et. al. will clue in like China did years ago and start treating the gold old US like the senile "over the edge" grandfather it is, paying lip service but shunting the nation to irrelevance.
If the interests are as greedy as they currently are, they'll keep pushing the old thoroughbred until it's heart explodes, and it collapses hard, dying before it hits the ground.
Me, I'll have moved on to a better nation to the north.
it is civil disobedience to break the minnesota law, and do ignore the numerous laws people from 9 to 30 ignore every day in order to maintain the same functional freedom their forefathers had.
The thing that sucks is having a felony on your record, and explaining your stupidity when asked about it for the rest of your life.
One should note that there is an automatic disqualification for most employment (and voting, ironically enough).
and when exactly will this be properly challenged and struck down?
if they're so keen on protecting our voting rights, then they shouldn't be able to silence people by putting a microscope to them and digging up some common everyday activity which happens to be a felony.
What better way to silence critics of your anti-drug policy than slapping everyone who smokes marijuana with a felony charge?
When last I checked, the constitution said nothing about smoking weed or snorting coke when they outlined the right to vote.
Selling a vote for a certain law or policy in congress is entirely different then selling a vote for an election.
You're right. One is 1/350 odd millionth of the popular vote, the other has direct, harmful impact on the public.
And you have no proof that congress men actually sold their votes. People donate to candidates who support issues they care about. It is entirely possible that the vote was completely separate from the campaign donations.
In the words of every valley girl "oh please". Please do sit and spin some more on this.
I could go on about problems with your concept of "we the people" with your notion of that in relation to the population under thirty and the decline of the education system but I will save that for another time.
Ah yes, let's turn around and bash the citizenry when they engage in civil disobedience and stay home because they know nobody gives a damn.
I'd have taken advantage of it, called in the media, and explained to them just how common "selling your vote" is in congress, and how there is nobody who truly represents "we the people", especially that portion of us below 30.
Apparently the assertion is absolute zero produces anti-gravity, and anti-gravity is a variable force.
The problem with that is we've artifically produced temperatures so close to absolute zero, but the materials chilled never became lighter.
Of course, I got about 15% of the way through. there could have been something more substantial.
please change your post setting to "plain text" under "options". It does not prevent you using basic html tags, it does preserve most of your space formatting though.
I like someone who knows how a pessimist thinks
on
The Privacy Paradox
·
· Score: 1
If not given the assurance people think only about the bad outcome caused by their confession, when given the assurance they actually compound two fears, the fear of bad outcome and the fear of having the promise broken.
I know that it is hard for you to grasp, since you live in a fantasy land where everyone enjoys both working for free and giving the fruits of their labour away for others to profit from... but PAYING the people that do the science and make the art is a probably a good way to start "promoting science and the useful arts".
Youtube is really just napster 2.0 (remember that cultural phenomenon??) a nice central repository to get sued into oblivion for using work that doesn't belong to them without permission.
Cheers
what exactly about gun powder, the gutenberg press, beethoven, mozart, da vinci, linux, mplayer, the bsd core of osx, firefox, and the internet have to do with fantasy? Partisan hacks like you who assert bullshit like the idea that art and science only happen when they're paid for need to be hung.
I suppose listening to the radio is stealing (they called it that), and the VCR is the boston strangler, and anyone who bought one of the millions of dual cassette decks with "high speed dubbing" should be executed on sight.
Most uses of youtube have been political protest, novelty, spectacle, and most commonly of all, as a third party method of hosting their own video for embedding into their blogs.
All the doctorow speeches, EFF protest videos, most of the US congressional hearings on cspan, and even the proceedings in the british house of lords have uploaded on youtube.
Youtube was used effectively by the pubs in 2004 to swiftboat kerry.
Of course you don't care about any of that, you are just some whacko who's record store probably went out of business. You blamed the public like the MAFIAA, but the truth is you were an ass to them just like you're being an ass now
since when did I say "if i can afford it, it means i should by it"?
when did I even imply it.
When last I checked AOL billing machines needed to be coded in Longs to prevent overflows when calculating out people's subtotals.
If you can afford a vacation home, and are going to spend on it, don't be half-assed, and don't pretend like you can't afford to put basic broadband into it like this GGGGP was.
"Dsl lite" for 20 a month for both places vs 70 a month for broadband at one while you spend your entire vacation angrily pounding on your computer waiting for gmail to load at the other place.
Network externalities are a perfectly normal and good consequence of having a large user base. You wouldn't be bitching about network externalities if there was a sufficiently large Linux user base to make desktop Linux viable, now would you?
There is no monolithic "linux", and linux does the opposite of create barriers to entry because it is non-profit by virtue of its underlying license. Anyone can fork off the code and make their own distro to satisfy a specific market segment, and any attempts to wall it off will result in correction from the community.
This does not happen with closed source applications or for-profit corporations because they have a profit motive to keep competition from arising.
As to your other point, software patents and process patents are examples of the State being used to support monopolies, and are as you claim very harmful.
but limited liability is ok? It divorces people from the responsibility the company they invested in has to the good of its host community, giving it the opportunity to become parasitic (which history has continually proven does happen, even in the absence of other interventions).
The solution is either the removal of limited liability, or further involvement of the state to correct parasitic behavior.
oh, and thank you very much for giving me something to do tomorrow.
please do expect my sig to change, and my next journal entry to be the thorough debunking of all the intellectually dishonest proliferation of fallacy on that website you linked.
The only true monopoly is one enforced by the State. If a 'monopoly' in a free market is sufficiently onerous, that fact in itself will be incentive for the creation of a competitor.
Get your head out of your ass (or in this case, completely theoretical reaganomic dogma) and look at history. The first thing trusts do is erect noticable barriers to entry.
Specifically, in the computer industry, they use network externalities (in case you didn't study that, it's what keeps windows dominant) and patents on software/business models.
The more underhanded firms will also lob fake dmca notices, etc,etc.
yeah, and there's a plug for a microsoft competitor in a Score:5 reply to the first post on most vista articles, microsoft is still an operating system monopoly.
The firm only needs "near" perfect control of the market to qualify as a trust.
Further, if you look after that plug, there's a reply right below it saying "I didn't know that site existed before you linked it".
Except that isn't possible, because theories that hold up well at describing things like gravity on a large scale break down horribly at the quantum level. Even basic interactions between particles cannot be described in the sense of, say, a truck hitting a telephone pole.
person A: "one day, man will fly"person B: "Except that isn't possible, because man was not born with wings!"
Slashdot Mirror
it's a 40k price tag. This means over the life of the car you will save very little.
Additionally, I live in the southeast. How much do you want to bet there's no AC under that closed, plastic, solar oven.
I can get a yaris for a few bottle caps and a broken cigarette, it will have AC, it's toyota, a make with a reputation for endurance, and it will get reasonable MPG.
I can put the 28k I saved into a mutual fund and roll it over for gas money.
Aricebo is to radio telescopes what hubble and spitzer are to optical .
It's the most sensitive EM listening post on the planet.
I don't see what makes it "uncompetitive"
The inducing and inciting apostacy act, or IIAA, will set a new precedent in Iranian law of contributory liability.
you have no recourse against a seller, exposing you to all manner of fraud without any means of recovering your funds.
I'm surprised Germans tolerate that kind of crap.
victimless crimes like drugs and speeding to the active denial of a person's fundamental right to live.
So when I come down the road you live on going say 160 and can't stop in time for you pulling out of your driveway, I guess that's a victimless crime?
I don't disagree that drug use in and of itself is a victimless crime (the crimes that people who are addicted to the harder drugs are obviously not victimless, but that doesn't apply to marijuana or LSD), but making a blanket statement that speeding is a victimless crime is just stupid.
the speeding itself had no victim, but when your car hit someone it became vehicular homicide (via gross negligence).
until that time, though, what was the saying? "My right to swing my fist ends where another's nose begins"?
How many plastic water bottles... find their way into the same lake, and how long does it take them to dissipate?
Doctor: You appear to have a very strange cylindrical lump in your thyroid gland.
Patient: Oh my, is it serious?!
DONT eat my fireworks?!
BRILLIANT!
What better way to silence critics of your anti-drug policy than slapping everyone who smokes marijuana with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-theft policy than slapping everyone who steals with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-murder policy than slapping everyone who murders with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-speeding policy than slapping everyone who speeds with a felony charge?
What better way to silence critics of your anti-x policy than slapping everyone who x-es with a felony charge?
This isn't some conspiracy to disenfranchise *snip*
i'm sorry but it is. There is nothing inherently immoral about doing marijuana vs tobacco, there is nothing inherently immoral about speeding, and i'm sorry you can't compare victimless crimes like drugs and speeding to the active denial of a person's fundamental right to live. This is nothing more than extremist "law = morality" frothing.
Can any reader come up with a "common everyday activity" which just happens to be a felony? I can't,
filesharing - the net act
liquor sales - the volstead actmarijuana/lsd use - the nixon drug laws (i'm so sorry to tell you, but, even though I don't do this personally, it is an everyday activity for millions, and there is no proven addictive properties to either. people who use these drugs are not "Evil")
and I'm just fine with disenfranchising cokeheads.
Ah, so your subjective morality and insistence you have the authority to make the decisions for others has more merit than people like me, who think coke heads should have a right to buy coke if they want to. It's their body.
Of course, simply slap a felony on any of these charges and suddenly they no longer have a voice. Fascists like you have silenced them. I'm sorry but there is no more accurate term to someone who believes they should be able to gag anyone who doesn't agree with them.
Unfortunately, I don't believe anything will change "AmerKa"(TM)
Hopefully the EU, Candada, et. al. will clue in like China did years ago and start treating the gold old US like the senile "over the edge" grandfather it is, paying lip service but shunting the nation to irrelevance.
If the interests are as greedy as they currently are, they'll keep pushing the old thoroughbred until it's heart explodes, and it collapses hard, dying before it hits the ground.
Me, I'll have moved on to a better nation to the north.
it is civil disobedience to break the minnesota law, and do ignore the numerous laws people from 9 to 30 ignore every day in order to maintain the same functional freedom their forefathers had.
One should note that there is an automatic disqualification for most employment (and voting, ironically enough).
and when exactly will this be properly challenged and struck down?
if they're so keen on protecting our voting rights, then they shouldn't be able to silence people by putting a microscope to them and digging up some common everyday activity which happens to be a felony.
What better way to silence critics of your anti-drug policy than slapping everyone who smokes marijuana with a felony charge?
When last I checked, the constitution said nothing about smoking weed or snorting coke when they outlined the right to vote.
Selling a vote for a certain law or policy in congress is entirely different then selling a vote for an election.
You're right. One is 1/350 odd millionth of the popular vote, the other has direct, harmful impact on the public.
And you have no proof that congress men actually sold their votes. People donate to candidates who support issues they care about. It is entirely possible that the vote was completely separate from the campaign donations.
In the words of every valley girl "oh please". Please do sit and spin some more on this.
I could go on about problems with your concept of "we the people" with your notion of that in relation to the population under thirty and the decline of the education system but I will save that for another time.
Ah yes, let's turn around and bash the citizenry when they engage in civil disobedience and stay home because they know nobody gives a damn.
I'd have taken advantage of it, called in the media, and explained to them just how common "selling your vote" is in congress, and how there is nobody who truly represents "we the people", especially that portion of us below 30.
Why ? If they offer you money to display ads, why not take it ? Is being paid to advertise a product completely immoral on Slashdot now ?
There is a difference between merely advertising, and knowingly participating in a company's targeted manipulation of your friend to extract money.
It's no different then a gold digger's behavior.
If your best friend will go with this, I think it's time to find a new friend.
I got further.
Apparently the assertion is absolute zero produces anti-gravity, and anti-gravity is a variable force.
The problem with that is we've artifically produced temperatures so close to absolute zero, but the materials chilled never became lighter.
Of course, I got about 15% of the way through. there could have been something more substantial.
please change your post setting to "plain text" under "options". It does not prevent you using basic html tags, it does preserve most of your space formatting though.If not given the assurance people think only about the bad outcome caused by their confession, when given the assurance they actually compound two fears, the fear of bad outcome and the fear of having the promise broken.
BINGO!
How about Ada Lovelace, someone so geeky she was programming for computers before they existed.
Marie Curie also falls into this.. can't get geekier than playing with radioactive materials out of pure interest.
I know that it is hard for you to grasp, since you live in a fantasy land where everyone enjoys both working for free and giving the fruits of their labour away for others to profit from... but PAYING the people that do the science and make the art is a probably a good way to start "promoting science and the useful arts".
Youtube is really just napster 2.0 (remember that cultural phenomenon??) a nice central repository to get sued into oblivion for using work that doesn't belong to them without permission.
Cheers
what exactly about gun powder, the gutenberg press, beethoven, mozart, da vinci, linux, mplayer, the bsd core of osx, firefox, and the internet have to do with fantasy?
Partisan hacks like you who assert bullshit like the idea that art and science only happen when they're paid for need to be hung.
I suppose listening to the radio is stealing (they called it that), and the VCR is the boston strangler, and anyone who bought one of the millions of dual cassette decks with "high speed dubbing" should be executed on sight.
Most uses of youtube have been political protest, novelty, spectacle, and most commonly of all, as a third party method of hosting their own video for embedding into their blogs.
All the doctorow speeches, EFF protest videos, most of the US congressional hearings on cspan, and even the proceedings in the british house of lords have uploaded on youtube.
Youtube was used effectively by the pubs in 2004 to swiftboat kerry.
Of course you don't care about any of that, you are just some whacko who's record store probably went out of business. You blamed the public like the MAFIAA, but the truth is you were an ass to them just like you're being an ass now
since when did I say "if i can afford it, it means i should by it"?
when did I even imply it.
When last I checked AOL billing machines needed to be coded in Longs to prevent overflows when calculating out people's subtotals.
If you can afford a vacation home, and are going to spend on it, don't be half-assed, and don't pretend like you can't afford to put basic broadband into it like this GGGGP was.
"Dsl lite" for 20 a month for both places vs 70 a month for broadband at one while you spend your entire vacation angrily pounding on your computer waiting for gmail to load at the other place.
Network externalities are a perfectly normal and good consequence of having a large user base. You wouldn't be bitching about network externalities if there was a sufficiently large Linux user base to make desktop Linux viable, now would you?
There is no monolithic "linux", and linux does the opposite of create barriers to entry because it is non-profit by virtue of its underlying license. Anyone can fork off the code and make their own distro to satisfy a specific market segment, and any attempts to wall it off will result in correction from the community.
This does not happen with closed source applications or for-profit corporations because they have a profit motive to keep competition from arising.
but limited liability is ok? It divorces people from the responsibility the company they invested in has to the good of its host community, giving it the opportunity to become parasitic (which history has continually proven does happen, even in the absence of other interventions).
The solution is either the removal of limited liability, or further involvement of the state to correct parasitic behavior.
oh, and thank you very much for giving me something to do tomorrow.
please do expect my sig to change, and my next journal entry to be the thorough debunking of all the intellectually dishonest proliferation of fallacy on that website you linked.The only true monopoly is one enforced by the State. If a 'monopoly' in a free market is sufficiently onerous, that fact in itself will be incentive for the creation of a competitor.
Get your head out of your ass (or in this case, completely theoretical reaganomic dogma) and look at history. The first thing trusts do is erect noticable barriers to entry.
Specifically, in the computer industry, they use network externalities (in case you didn't study that, it's what keeps windows dominant) and patents on software/business models.
The more underhanded firms will also lob fake dmca notices, etc,etc.
yeah, and there's a plug for a microsoft competitor in a Score:5 reply to the first post on most vista articles, microsoft is still an operating system monopoly.
The firm only needs "near" perfect control of the market to qualify as a trust.
Further, if you look after that plug, there's a reply right below it saying "I didn't know that site existed before you linked it".
as a post on slashdot, that says something.
Except that isn't possible, because theories that hold up well at describing things like gravity on a large scale break down horribly at the quantum level. Even basic interactions between particles cannot be described in the sense of, say, a truck hitting a telephone pole.
person A: "one day, man will fly"person B: "Except that isn't possible, because man was not born with wings!"