To add insult to injury, the tax payer paid for most of the cable that the internet service providers own.
Bullshit. Simply saying that doesn't make it true. Subscribers "paid for most of the cable that the internet service providers own." Being able to deduct business expenses isn't a subsidy, and at best it only subsidizes a capital investment at a percentage equivalent to the applicable tax rate the company might otherwise have paid.
Psi thinks the FTC, not the FCC, is the right agency to handle those problems.
It's interesting to note that all those corporations that benefited greatly from a 'light-touch' FCC now suddenly insist that all startups need to suffer under a 'heavy-touch' FCC, an FCC that will impose requirements and regulations on internet companies that wish to compete with the Facebooks and the Googles of the world, but will struggle under an increased regulatory burden.
AT&T got a largely free ride on infrastructure from the government,
Define "largely free ride" - you mean the government paid for all those switches and fiber runs and routers, or do you mean - just like every other business in America - AT&T got to deduct capital expenses from revenues, lowering their tax obligation?
When UPS buys a truck, they get to deduct the cost from their taxes - does that mean UPS owes everyone free shipping?
When The corner pizzeria buys a new pizza oven they get to deduct that cost from their taxes - does that mean free pizza for everyone?
I also fully expect Trump to walk out but because he has no clue what he's doing. He's batting a 0 on the international stage at the moment.
Trump has accomplished exactly as much as Obama did on the "international stage" when he won the Nobel Peace Prize - no word yet if Trump has used drones to kill US citizens without benefit of due process...
he views negotiations as something that can be won when a good negotiation would be where everyone wins.
That is the logic that rendered previous negotiations with North Korean leaders pointless and expensive - we trade shallow promises for US aid, giving North Korea much-needed aid and the President got to hold a press conference saying they've "resolved" the North Korea "issue". By your thinking this is a "win-win" and did little more but tee up the next administration to repeat the process in a few years for another "win-win" agreement.
When dealing with a brutal dictator, only Neville Churchill thinks handing them something is necessary - "Peace in our time!"
So what? Steel is a vital part of our national defense, so protecting that industry is in the national interest - if we go to war, should we have to rely on imported steel?
Canada buys 10% of it's dairy from the us, and uses protections (tariffs) to keep 90% of dairy needsmet by Canadian dairies - what if Trump said "we want to put a tariff on all foreign steel to ensure we retain the ability to meet 90% of our steel needs domestically, and like Canada with dairy, we'll commit to buying 10% of our steel from foreign producers"?
What would a scientist add to the negotiations? This is a septuagenarian billionaire who has negotiated a butt-load of international deals and a chubby thirty-something wanna-be who killed his brother to get his job.
There is no chance the success or failure in this negotiation will hinge on someone at the table being someone Neil DeGrasse-Tyson would swoon over.
This will be bare-knuckles, street negotiating, and I fully expect trump to walkout atleast once before negotiations are completed, if for no other reason than to prove to Little rocketman that we are willing to walk away.
Who is the "they" you speak of? I can think offhand of anybody who says "accept all the immigrants who show up."
Ask any prominent US Democrat politician at the federal level which immigrants we should refuse entry to - they may not say the words 'take them all', but they will argue we should not turn anyone away, we can't break up families, and we should accept, rather than stigmatize, members of MS-13 as they try and cross the border.
"Random" in this application means the numbers assigned to each applicant are generated by the RAND function, then chosen sequentially from the resulting list.
If instead every applicant was assigned a sequential number, then the RAND function was used to pick from that list, then it is possible that certain sequential numbers would have a less equal chance of being selected, but not under the reverse.
If the RAND function assigns multiple users the same 'random' number, so what? All duplicates get selected at the same time.
Is the argument that Canada needs to print out 100,000 tickets, drop them in a (large) bucket, and pick 10,000 'winners', shuffling all remaining tickets after each 'pull'?
I'm shocked the summary didn't include a reference to President Trump - how did that slip through?
The fact is, Canada does have a protected market for dairy that keeps its dairy farmers in business.
And somehow the US protecting it's steel industries for the same reason (to keep US steel mills in business) is somehow an insult to Canadian soldiers that have fought alongside American soldiers?
So the trump administration is going to be the first administration in the past few decades to negotiate de-nuclearization in North Korea without a senior White House science advisor at the table (or even in the administration, right?
And every other administration for the last few decades has had a senior White House science advisor at the table for such talks, right?
Well, honestly, every prior administration that negotiated with North Korea got rolled and wound up pouring money, aid on North Korea while they kept working on getting the bomb.
Do we really need to repeat the failures of prior administrations? Why didn't the presence of a senior White House science advisor prevent all the prior administrations from signing flawed agreements?
I bet if you made every train free, then fired every person involved in selling tickets, Amtrak might be profitable, or at least viewed more favorably by the taxpayers subsidizing the organization.
Are West Virginians so stupid they can't read a timetable at the station and calculate the cost of a ticket?
Trains pre-date the Internet, and ticket kiosks are a thing now, the need to have a person sit in a box and wait for someone to buy a ticket no longer makes any sense.
The only source of funds the telcos have is from their customers, so it only makes sense to pass the cost on to the consumer - they are the ones with the money.
Residential broadband doesn't have 15% profit, so if you expected providers to 'eat' that 15% tax out of their end without raising costs or lowering services, you are forcing them to become non-profits/unprofitable... as a reminder, unprofitable businesses don't remain in business very long.
What you have described s the universal access fee already charged, it finds things like e-rate, which provides monies to schools, libraries, and municipalities to buy internet's services.
what State doesn't have a single ticket agent? Does that state have a kiosk to buy tickets from? Are West Virginians too dumb to work a fancy ticket machine?
Every Amtrak train I've ever ridden (NE Corridor, possibly a unique subset of Amtrak as a whole) allowed passengers to buy unreserved seats on the train, does that count?
Amtrak hemorages money at an amazing rate - they run nearly empty trains in most of the system, and only the NE Corridor and a few other lines actually exceed 50% occupancy during peak hours/days.
That each area of the factory can demonstrate a capability to do it's work on one car inside three minutes "demonstrates" the "capability" of doing 500 cars/day.
Slashdot Mirror
Pretty sure we paid the French government, and I believe we returned the favor around the time of WW2.
To add insult to injury, the tax payer paid for most of the cable that the internet service providers own.
Bullshit. Simply saying that doesn't make it true. Subscribers "paid for most of the cable that the internet service providers own." Being able to deduct business expenses isn't a subsidy, and at best it only subsidizes a capital investment at a percentage equivalent to the applicable tax rate the company might otherwise have paid.
Psi thinks the FTC, not the FCC, is the right agency to handle those problems.
It's interesting to note that all those corporations that benefited greatly from a 'light-touch' FCC now suddenly insist that all startups need to suffer under a 'heavy-touch' FCC, an FCC that will impose requirements and regulations on internet companies that wish to compete with the Facebooks and the Googles of the world, but will struggle under an increased regulatory burden.
I don't see how they won't be effectively dealt with by the FCC as necessary.
Actually, Ajit Pai's position is that the Federal Trade Commission should handle network providers that treat customer data improperly, not the FCC.
Bullshit.
AT&T got a largely free ride on infrastructure from the government,
Define "largely free ride" - you mean the government paid for all those switches and fiber runs and routers, or do you mean - just like every other business in America - AT&T got to deduct capital expenses from revenues, lowering their tax obligation?
When UPS buys a truck, they get to deduct the cost from their taxes - does that mean UPS owes everyone free shipping?
When The corner pizzeria buys a new pizza oven they get to deduct that cost from their taxes - does that mean free pizza for everyone?
The players aren't fined, the team is, that is how they got around player contracts.
I also fully expect Trump to walk out but because he has no clue what he's doing. He's batting a 0 on the international stage at the moment.
Trump has accomplished exactly as much as Obama did on the "international stage" when he won the Nobel Peace Prize - no word yet if Trump has used drones to kill US citizens without benefit of due process...
he views negotiations as something that can be won when a good negotiation would be where everyone wins.
That is the logic that rendered previous negotiations with North Korean leaders pointless and expensive - we trade shallow promises for US aid, giving North Korea much-needed aid and the President got to hold a press conference saying they've "resolved" the North Korea "issue". By your thinking this is a "win-win" and did little more but tee up the next administration to repeat the process in a few years for another "win-win" agreement.
When dealing with a brutal dictator, only Neville Churchill thinks handing them something is necessary - "Peace in our time!"
So what? Steel is a vital part of our national defense, so protecting that industry is in the national interest - if we go to war, should we have to rely on imported steel?
Canada buys 10% of it's dairy from the us, and uses protections (tariffs) to keep 90% of dairy needsmet by Canadian dairies - what if Trump said "we want to put a tariff on all foreign steel to ensure we retain the ability to meet 90% of our steel needs domestically, and like Canada with dairy, we'll commit to buying 10% of our steel from foreign producers"?
Little Rocket Man is in Singapore for talks, that's something that Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Reagan couldn't get done with him or his father.
But that's nothing.
North and South Korea are talking about ending their 50 year 'war'.
But that's nothing.
What did Obama do? He sent aid, held s press conference and declared NK was no longer working on a nuke - whoops.
Trumps methods are raw, but effective.
What would a scientist add to the negotiations? This is a septuagenarian billionaire who has negotiated a butt-load of international deals and a chubby thirty-something wanna-be who killed his brother to get his job.
There is no chance the success or failure in this negotiation will hinge on someone at the table being someone Neil DeGrasse-Tyson would swoon over.
This will be bare-knuckles, street negotiating, and I fully expect trump to walkout atleast once before negotiations are completed, if for no other reason than to prove to Little rocketman that we are willing to walk away.
Who is the "they" you speak of? I can think offhand of anybody who says "accept all the immigrants who show up."
Ask any prominent US Democrat politician at the federal level which immigrants we should refuse entry to - they may not say the words 'take them all', but they will argue we should not turn anyone away, we can't break up families, and we should accept, rather than stigmatize, members of MS-13 as they try and cross the border.
"Random" in this application means the numbers assigned to each applicant are generated by the RAND function, then chosen sequentially from the resulting list.
If instead every applicant was assigned a sequential number, then the RAND function was used to pick from that list, then it is possible that certain sequential numbers would have a less equal chance of being selected, but not under the reverse.
If the RAND function assigns multiple users the same 'random' number, so what? All duplicates get selected at the same time.
Is the argument that Canada needs to print out 100,000 tickets, drop them in a (large) bucket, and pick 10,000 'winners', shuffling all remaining tickets after each 'pull'?
I'm shocked the summary didn't include a reference to President Trump - how did that slip through?
The fact is, Canada does have a protected market for dairy that keeps its dairy farmers in business.
And somehow the US protecting it's steel industries for the same reason (to keep US steel mills in business) is somehow an insult to Canadian soldiers that have fought alongside American soldiers?
Puh-leeze!
So the trump administration is going to be the first administration in the past few decades to negotiate de-nuclearization in North Korea without a senior White House science advisor at the table (or even in the administration, right?
And every other administration for the last few decades has had a senior White House science advisor at the table for such talks, right?
Well, honestly, every prior administration that negotiated with North Korea got rolled and wound up pouring money, aid on North Korea while they kept working on getting the bomb.
Do we really need to repeat the failures of prior administrations? Why didn't the presence of a senior White House science advisor prevent all the prior administrations from signing flawed agreements?
I bet if you made every train free, then fired every person involved in selling tickets, Amtrak might be profitable, or at least viewed more favorably by the taxpayers subsidizing the organization.
Hand cash to the conductor - problem solved.
Seriously?
Are West Virginians so stupid they can't read a timetable at the station and calculate the cost of a ticket?
Trains pre-date the Internet, and ticket kiosks are a thing now, the need to have a person sit in a box and wait for someone to buy a ticket no longer makes any sense.
Amtrak is passenger rail service.
Passenger rail service is only economically feasible in a very few markets, the vast majority of the rides Amtrak provides are run at a loss.
Those train runs are, in many cases, retained to secure support from their respective state politicians.
The subsidies help Amtrak balance the books.
The only source of funds the telcos have is from their customers, so it only makes sense to pass the cost on to the consumer - they are the ones with the money.
Residential broadband doesn't have 15% profit, so if you expected providers to 'eat' that 15% tax out of their end without raising costs or lowering services, you are forcing them to become non-profits/unprofitable... as a reminder, unprofitable businesses don't remain in business very long.
What you have described s the universal access fee already charged, it finds things like e-rate, which provides monies to schools, libraries, and municipalities to buy internet's services.
what State doesn't have a single ticket agent? Does that state have a kiosk to buy tickets from? Are West Virginians too dumb to work a fancy ticket machine?
Every Amtrak train I've ever ridden (NE Corridor, possibly a unique subset of Amtrak as a whole) allowed passengers to buy unreserved seats on the train, does that count?
Amtrak hemorages money at an amazing rate - they run nearly empty trains in most of the system, and only the NE Corridor and a few other lines actually exceed 50% occupancy during peak hours/days.
So every station in WV needs a human ticket agent because West Virginians can't buy tickets on-line?
Can they not use a ticket kiosk?
Can they not just buy their ticket on the train and have Amtrak waive the ticket fee?
How many West Virginians ride Amtrak trains?
Seems to me this language was inserted in the bill for one reason only - secure the vote of a recently let-go Amtrak ticket agent.
All of which proves/supports the notion that Bloomberg is a Republican?
500 / 24 hours gives you just over 20 cars/hr.
20 cars/hr gives you one car every three minutes.
That each area of the factory can demonstrate a capability to do it's work on one car inside three minutes "demonstrates" the "capability" of doing 500 cars/day.
Right, it's a republican thing to:
Take salt shakers of restaurant tables;
Limit soft drink sizes;
And push for anti-gun laws.
You're right, Bloomberg is a raging conservative.