Let's look it up....http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

        "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Since there is no "Right to Travel" listed earlier in the Constitution, it is not explicitly denied here.

Unlike most codes of law in the United States, the Constitution does not generally apply to individual citizens. Rather, the Constitution defines and codifies the Federal government, and is generally accepted to be the limit of Federal and State powers and responsibilities.

Finally, I remember that when I was younger (mind you, this was back in the 1970's), having to provide identification and being subjected to searches before being able to travel was the scope of godless Communists and tinpot dictators.

That we have come to this point is a sad commentary on the United States. That many others not only accept this but actively defend it is even more disappointing.

I'm just giving my opinion, and I've been in plenty of taxis in Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta and elsewhere.

If you don't agree with my opinion, I have no problem with that.

Since the Uber premium services rely on existing limo services, why wouldn't I just go directly to those service providers? Although if I were in a position where I couldn't find one, Uber could potentially be useful in that situation.

Also, it's nice that Uber provides additional insurance, but the point is that in most locations, Uber, Lyft and the rest are still in a legal grey area in which I'd personally rather not find myself.

Again, if you want to avail yourself of the service, feel free.

We may not agree, but I see no reason for the angry invective.

Between this nonsense and the fact that the ride sharing services don't have the proper licensing and proof of insurance, I wouldn't feel comfortable using any of them.

I fear that I'd dislike Germany

Having been to Munich several times, I can say that you probably wouldn't have many of the problems you say you had in Paris.

There are different neighborhoods in Munich where the buildings don't all look the same. The older section of the city center does have a very similar look to it, but there's still enough variation to make it interesting. While there are many chain restaurants for those who want them, with a little effort you can find interesting local places. In fact, one of the best places I found is across the street from the Hard Rock Cafe, and it's not the Hoffbrau Haus (which is also across from Hard Rock). Neuperlach Zentrum and Nauperlach Zud are a couple of neighborhoods worth checking out that are away from the city center, but easily reachable via public transportation. There are also some good Chinese and Italian restaurants.

You'll find plenty of Germans with at least some knowledge of English, and the signs on all the buses and trains in multiple languages. Public transportation is wonderful, and runs all day.

That said, you'll probably also enjoy the Nordic countries, which are close by to Germany. I'm looking forward to going back and exploring some more.

...institutions like Wikipedia are supposed to keep decent standards alive

I think I see where the problem lies....

Hey now! Did we even read the bill? We don't know that it will be bad

But we have to pass the bill so we know what's in it!

I don't see why paper and pen aren't used. Even this guy's voting solution boils down to a paper ballot.

As for auto dashboards, I prefer them with discrete tactile switches and knobs. That way, my attention is focused on the road, where it should be.

I admire the fact that some folks are looking at making improvements, but there are some instances where involving technology serves only to complicate matters.

I may be older, but you can stay on my lawn if you wish. Just please don't make a mess.

There's no reason the replacement would have a fee on every transaction.

Actually, there are two reasons the replacement would have a fee:

1. To recoup the cost of the infrastructure.
2. To increase the profits for the provider.

These are banks, after all.

Let's look it up....http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Since there is no "Right to Privacy" listed earlier in the Constitution, it is not explicitly denied here.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Since, to my knowledge, no State has prohibited privacy, nor has there been a Constitutional Amendment denying a citizen's right to privacy, the right to privacy most certainly exists.

Unlike most codes of law in the United States, the Constitution does not generally apply to individual citizens. Rather, the Constitution defines and codifies the Federal government, and is generally accepted to be the limit of Federal and State powers and responsibilities.

^^^ THIS ^^^

Since I don't have any mod points, please accept a virtual +10 from me.

The funny thing is that people are not only complicit in having their rights taken away, they're PAYING to do so.

If I had fewer scruples, I'm sure I could find a way to make money off this as well.

I'm sorry, I couldn't understand you over the WOOOSSSSHHHHH.

That assumes that "anyone they can find at software company" is anywhere near the jail.