My daughter got a Lumia. It's pretty nice hardware for the price. I've seen it for $89 recently. I can't comment about the OS though, but my daughter likes it.
This would be so easy for criminals to work around. Just use a cheap prepaid phone and change it often, as seen on Breaking Bad. They are less than $15 at Walmart.
It depends on what information they are collecting. The article is paywalled so I didn't read it. Are they doing a Man in the Middle attack where they could collect data sent from people or are they tracking phones when they poll for available mobile bases?
They have also agreed to ensure that terrorist and extremist material is captured by their filters to prevent children and young people coming across radicalising material.
Free speech protection includes more than just speeches at a rally. The actions of the IRS were directed at conservative groups applying for for tax exempt status. These groups wanted tax exempt status not because they were supporting specific candidates but rather where trying to change public opinion through education/informational campaigns. In fact, this particular tax exempt status is only given to political education/information groups.
The IRS purposely impeded certain groups trying to publish political information. How is that not trying to limit the free speech?
taxes from fossil fuels could be earmarked for renewable energy subsidies... Or alternately they could simply be distributed uniformly to the populace..
Do you believe that the US federal government (or any government, really) would honestly, fairly and judiciously distribute these subsidies? It would just become a political fundraising scheme. How is their track record so far? Personally, I think it would become a tremendous waste.
start by stripping the fossil fuel industry of the many tax breaks, subsidies, and environmental indemnities
"Oil subsidies" is mostly just political talk. Removing them will not have the effect you desire The bulk of these programs described as "subsidies" are not money handouts or special tax breaks, they just consist of the federal government doing business with energy companies. The top 3 are the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, HEAP - Home Energy Assistance Program, and farm fuel tax exemptions. The first two involve the government buying energy. The farm fuel exemption is because those vehicles are not driven on the road, which is reasonable. Plus farmers get the tax break, not oil companies. The remaining "subsidies" are tax breaks that all manufactures can take, not just oil companies.
Extinction due to climate change? What science is that based on? During the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum there was a great diversification of terrestrial life. For the majority. of the time mammals have roamed the earth it has been so warm that there have been no polar ice caps, yet life kept chugging along and adapting.
"Oil subsidies" is a purely a political term. The main oil "subsidies" are HEAP and the strategic oil reserve. both of which involve the government buying energy, not just giving out money. What you describe as a subsidy, most people would describe simply as "doing business with the govt."
"Adverse health impacts" often seem to be tossed into an analysis in order to jack up the cost. Because, you know, that without fossil fuels nobody would ever get sick and die.
Seriously, who is the donor? Do you get to decide what they eat before they donate? What if you actually met the donor? That would be weird. "Oh, by the way, I ate your shit."
For being the "Land of the free" we sure have alot of people attacking individual freedom.
C'mon now. Please don't try to put music sales from Apple in the same category as political or religious freedom, which is what "land of the free" is about. This Apple thing, DRM and such, is a business transaction. You are completely free to make a business transaction for equivalent products with different companies. You could even go to a library, borrow a CD and rip the songs you want. How much more free do you want?
I don't think you need to fear that. The US gave control of the Panama canal to Panama back in the 80's. Why would it be different in Nicaragua, particularly if the US didn't build it?
A quick look at google maps and I estimate Panama is about 40 miles across and about 150 feet (65 k, 40 m) of altitude to overcome. Nicaragua is about 150 miles and about 650 feet (240 k, 200 m) of altitude to overcome.
The altitude difference would add a lot to operating expenses. They'd have to pump a lot of water to locks about 600 feet higher than in Panama.
Slashdot Mirror
My daughter got a Lumia. It's pretty nice hardware for the price. I've seen it for $89 recently. I can't comment about the OS though, but my daughter likes it.
This would be so easy for criminals to work around. Just use a cheap prepaid phone and change it often, as seen on Breaking Bad. They are less than $15 at Walmart.
It depends on what information they are collecting. The article is paywalled so I didn't read it. Are they doing a Man in the Middle attack where they could collect data sent from people or are they tracking phones when they poll for available mobile bases?
The old "think of the children" argument.
Free speech protection includes more than just speeches at a rally. The actions of the IRS were directed at conservative groups applying for for tax exempt status. These groups wanted tax exempt status not because they were supporting specific candidates but rather where trying to change public opinion through education/informational campaigns. In fact, this particular tax exempt status is only given to political education/information groups.
The IRS purposely impeded certain groups trying to publish political information. How is that not trying to limit the free speech?
60 years is not even close to forever.
to make a bunch of research data free
Does JSTOR also offer indexing services for these research papers? If so, that may be data that JSTOR creates and not necessarily free.
Do you believe that the US federal government (or any government, really) would honestly, fairly and judiciously distribute these subsidies? It would just become a political fundraising scheme. How is their track record so far? Personally, I think it would become a tremendous waste.
"Oil subsidies" is mostly just political talk. Removing them will not have the effect you desire The bulk of these programs described as "subsidies" are not money handouts or special tax breaks, they just consist of the federal government doing business with energy companies. The top 3 are the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, HEAP - Home Energy Assistance Program, and farm fuel tax exemptions. The first two involve the government buying energy. The farm fuel exemption is because those vehicles are not driven on the road, which is reasonable. Plus farmers get the tax break, not oil companies. The remaining "subsidies" are tax breaks that all manufactures can take, not just oil companies.
In a clutter purge back in 2005, I threw out my Atari ST 520 with hi-res 640x480 monochrome monitor. I really regret that.
Extinction due to climate change? What science is that based on? During the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum there was a great diversification of terrestrial life. For the majority. of the time mammals have roamed the earth it has been so warm that there have been no polar ice caps, yet life kept chugging along and adapting.
"Oil subsidies" is a purely a political term. The main oil "subsidies" are HEAP and the strategic oil reserve. both of which involve the government buying energy, not just giving out money. What you describe as a subsidy, most people would describe simply as "doing business with the govt."
"Adverse health impacts" often seem to be tossed into an analysis in order to jack up the cost.
Because, you know, that without fossil fuels nobody would ever get sick and die.
Seriously, who is the donor?
Do you get to decide what they eat before they donate?
What if you actually met the donor? That would be weird. "Oh, by the way, I ate your shit."
I don't know about catching lies, but I know that a polygraph test is an excellent way to convince people that an honest person is lying.
HIPAA sure didn't protect Thomas Eric Duncan. His name and info have been all over the news.
"No additional fee" would be more accurate that "free" in this case.
For being the "Land of the free" we sure have alot of people attacking individual freedom.
C'mon now. Please don't try to put music sales from Apple in the same category as political or religious freedom, which is what "land of the free" is about.
This Apple thing, DRM and such, is a business transaction. You are completely free to make a business transaction for equivalent products with different companies. You could even go to a library, borrow a CD and rip the songs you want. How much more free do you want?
Less filling.
The obvious reason is because women like posting about themselves.
Ok. Consider the Cenezoic era, the "Age of Mammals". For a majority of this era it has been so warm that there have been no polar ice caps
Yes, Hurray! You can buy a different computer that actually meets your needs.
Usually in the private sector, such widespread unprofessionalism would put a company out of business or at least affect the bottom line.
I think the altitude difference may be a bigger factor than the length of the canal.
I don't think you need to fear that. The US gave control of the Panama canal to Panama back in the 80's. Why would it be different in Nicaragua, particularly if the US didn't build it?
A quick look at google maps and I estimate
Panama is about 40 miles across and about 150 feet (65 k, 40 m) of altitude to overcome.
Nicaragua is about 150 miles and about 650 feet (240 k, 200 m) of altitude to overcome. The altitude difference would add a lot to operating expenses. They'd have to pump a lot of water to locks about 600 feet higher than in Panama.