Oddly enough, I had the opposite reaction. I used to go to coffee shops pre-wireless and found them to be too noisy to be enjoyable. Going to one today though it is quiet enough that I can actually enjoy a conversation with people.
Which makes sense, but is now what they claimed the customers were happy about. They claimed the customers were happy about the lack of wi-fi, not the availability of seating.
I really doubt that these shops are actually getting customers actively coming to them and saying how much they prefer lack of wireless. It is an invisible service... if you do not actively use it then you have no idea if it is there or not. The only case I can really see is complements from those people who bitch and moan that other people are online rather then audibly socializing with each other, since some people seem to be obsessed with the idea that a noisy/chatty environment is high grade social interaction.
Well, they swapped names once in the past already, so maybe it is about time. Modern conservatives have so little to do with conservative thought that it is scary. They really have become retro progressives at this point.
Eh, as long as other governments exist, we will have tools for anonymity. In general governments want control of their own people but have an interest in other governments not controlling their own. Just look at all the money the NSA dumped into projects for helping chinese citizens get around various protections. Who knows, in 10 years maybe we will have chinese sponsored darknets to help americans get around their government....
Solutions looking for a problem rarely do well, and that is what wave was. It was neat tech and fancy UI that did not solve any problems that older and better understood technologies were already addressing well. Thus the majority of the people who really enjoyed it, mostly enjoyed it because they got to learn and master a new game.
Re:I Guess I Don't Exist Then ...
on
Why Wave Failed
·
· Score: 1
The entire tone of the piece felt like that... blaming wave's failure on other people, talking about how wave is one of the most innovative/useful tools google has developed,.. etc. The whole piece had teh feeling of 'we found this great, therefor it is great and anyone who does not see it our way is stupid'.... or put a shorter term 'why does not everyone realize how brilliant we are!'
Normally in cases like this the licensee fee (in theory at least) goes towards the local inspection framework. In most areas you need to have pools inspected so they meet both construction and safety guidelines.
Much of this framework also comes from the assumption that one will not hold onto their property indefinitely.. and thus the next owners are assured that things were properly constructed to within certain guidelines. In the case of a pool this can be important since much of that information disappears once the pool is complete and a new owner can not verify without basically tearing up the pool again. Same with many of the regulations regarding home construction... without inspection and permits you really do not know if a house was built correctly without tearing into parts of it.
Given that they are being shilled by Wired and associated with Adrian Lamo, I think a lot of people are assuming they are just as fake.... esp people familiar with the cozy relationtionship Lamo had with Wired and the personality/mythos they manufactured around him...
Trying to get their name out there via association with a fake hacker and his sob story via the same publication that was used to bring attention to his 'exploits'.. really does not give them good PR.....
The problem with simple systems is that they are all or nothing... you pay everything or if you find a way to not 'count' then you pay nothing.
As for planned economies.. that first one is a pretty extreme example and does not fit our system of government. The second example I admit is not ideal, but it is a lot better then a laissez-faire system since those tend to just result in private companies becoming stronger then the local government anyway, but having even less interest in public growth.
Actually such systems are pretty easy to game, just make sure whatever you do does not count as 'income'. If you are getting a paycheck at a regular job things are pretty simple, but when your worth comes in from more complex sources it gets a lot murkier, which is where other types of taxes kick in.
As for social engineering... corporations are made up of people.
Actually, that is illegal. Under reporting your withholdings can get you into trouble since you are required to be paying your income tax gradually during the year.
Well, at least it is a consistent scam. Our whole legal system is built that way... you need a 3rd party expert in order to actually utilize the system.... sometimes you are not even allowed to access it yourself. Even worse, in criminal cases, your opponent (the prosecutor) has all their expenses paid for them by the taxpayer, but the defendant has to out of pocket everything themselves.
Because 'simple' systems are really easy to abuse? And planned economies tend to be more stable and have better long term growth then completely laissez-faire ones? As stated by others, private companies tend to do what is good for their own short term benefit... this is often at odds with what is good for the whole economy... thus the social engineering.
The term you are looking for is 'right of way' or 'easement' laws, which regulate public crossing of private land. And yeah... it would be fascinating to try to apply those laws to this debate...
IC Clause has little to do with actual direct commerce. All they have to show is that whatever is being regulated can effect inter state economies. For instance, one of the early landmark cases had to do with a farmer growing materials for his own private use....
Yeah, people tend to like to forget that since it is so spread out and not as headline friendly as centralized waste dumps. Heh.. maybe that is our solution to the nuclear waste problem... send the waste off to one of those liquified coal plants, mix the two together, and all you will have is a marginal increase in radioactivity in the final product.
The US is erratic that way... all depends on who was in power and what the public was pushing for at the time, then it gets stuck in law for decades unless there is enough of a push to change it again.
People seem to have serious trouble with this concept. We live in a society that is heavily geared towards 'one twue way',.. thus discussions like this tend to devolve into 'all or nothing' solutions.
Many of the additional costs associated with nuclear are non-technical in nature, so innovation would not help much. Even on the technical site, nuclear has hit a bit of a plateau while solar is rapidly changing.
Slashdot Mirror
Oddly enough, I had the opposite reaction. I used to go to coffee shops pre-wireless and found them to be too noisy to be enjoyable. Going to one today though it is quiet enough that I can actually enjoy a conversation with people.
Which makes sense, but is now what they claimed the customers were happy about. They claimed the customers were happy about the lack of wi-fi, not the availability of seating.
And... if they wanted to talk, why were they not doing it before?
I really doubt that these shops are actually getting customers actively coming to them and saying how much they prefer lack of wireless. It is an invisible service... if you do not actively use it then you have no idea if it is there or not. The only case I can really see is complements from those people who bitch and moan that other people are online rather then audibly socializing with each other, since some people seem to be obsessed with the idea that a noisy/chatty environment is high grade social interaction.
Well, they swapped names once in the past already, so maybe it is about time. Modern conservatives have so little to do with conservative thought that it is scary. They really have become retro progressives at this point.
Eh, the GP is using the standard tactic of 'people like me believe X, I am a twue American, thus most Americans believe X'.
It has been a major meme among conservatives for a while now.... any time they do not get their way they claim that the majority believe as they do.
Eh, as long as other governments exist, we will have tools for anonymity. In general governments want control of their own people but have an interest in other governments not controlling their own. Just look at all the money the NSA dumped into projects for helping chinese citizens get around various protections. Who knows, in 10 years maybe we will have chinese sponsored darknets to help americans get around their government....
Solutions looking for a problem rarely do well, and that is what wave was. It was neat tech and fancy UI that did not solve any problems that older and better understood technologies were already addressing well. Thus the majority of the people who really enjoyed it, mostly enjoyed it because they got to learn and master a new game.
The entire tone of the piece felt like that... blaming wave's failure on other people, talking about how wave is one of the most innovative/useful tools google has developed,.. etc. The whole piece had teh feeling of 'we found this great, therefor it is great and anyone who does not see it our way is stupid'.... or put a shorter term 'why does not everyone realize how brilliant we are!'
Is that all? They probably save more then that on needing less gas from driving around looking for infractions....
Normally in cases like this the licensee fee (in theory at least) goes towards the local inspection framework. In most areas you need to have pools inspected so they meet both construction and safety guidelines.
Much of this framework also comes from the assumption that one will not hold onto their property indefinitely.. and thus the next owners are assured that things were properly constructed to within certain guidelines. In the case of a pool this can be important since much of that information disappears once the pool is complete and a new owner can not verify without basically tearing up the pool again. Same with many of the regulations regarding home construction... without inspection and permits you really do not know if a house was built correctly without tearing into parts of it.
Given that they are being shilled by Wired and associated with Adrian Lamo, I think a lot of people are assuming they are just as fake.... esp people familiar with the cozy relationtionship Lamo had with Wired and the personality/mythos they manufactured around him...
Trying to get their name out there via association with a fake hacker and his sob story via the same publication that was used to bring attention to his 'exploits'.. really does not give them good PR.....
The problem with simple systems is that they are all or nothing... you pay everything or if you find a way to not 'count' then you pay nothing. As for planned economies.. that first one is a pretty extreme example and does not fit our system of government. The second example I admit is not ideal, but it is a lot better then a laissez-faire system since those tend to just result in private companies becoming stronger then the local government anyway, but having even less interest in public growth.
Actually such systems are pretty easy to game, just make sure whatever you do does not count as 'income'. If you are getting a paycheck at a regular job things are pretty simple, but when your worth comes in from more complex sources it gets a lot murkier, which is where other types of taxes kick in. As for social engineering... corporations are made up of people.
Ah, I was not aware of the quarterly option. Can you do that to federal also?
Actually, that is illegal. Under reporting your withholdings can get you into trouble since you are required to be paying your income tax gradually during the year.
Well, at least it is a consistent scam. Our whole legal system is built that way... you need a 3rd party expert in order to actually utilize the system.... sometimes you are not even allowed to access it yourself. Even worse, in criminal cases, your opponent (the prosecutor) has all their expenses paid for them by the taxpayer, but the defendant has to out of pocket everything themselves.
Because 'simple' systems are really easy to abuse? And planned economies tend to be more stable and have better long term growth then completely laissez-faire ones? As stated by others, private companies tend to do what is good for their own short term benefit... this is often at odds with what is good for the whole economy... thus the social engineering.
The term you are looking for is 'right of way' or 'easement' laws, which regulate public crossing of private land. And yeah... it would be fascinating to try to apply those laws to this debate...
IC Clause has little to do with actual direct commerce. All they have to show is that whatever is being regulated can effect inter state economies. For instance, one of the early landmark cases had to do with a farmer growing materials for his own private use....
Yeah, people tend to like to forget that since it is so spread out and not as headline friendly as centralized waste dumps. Heh.. maybe that is our solution to the nuclear waste problem... send the waste off to one of those liquified coal plants, mix the two together, and all you will have is a marginal increase in radioactivity in the final product.
The US is erratic that way... all depends on who was in power and what the public was pushing for at the time, then it gets stuck in law for decades unless there is enough of a push to change it again.
People seem to have serious trouble with this concept. We live in a society that is heavily geared towards 'one twue way',.. thus discussions like this tend to devolve into 'all or nothing' solutions.
Many of the additional costs associated with nuclear are non-technical in nature, so innovation would not help much. Even on the technical site, nuclear has hit a bit of a plateau while solar is rapidly changing.
Damn.. already posted so I can not mod-up... but this is spot on.