Yeah, I enlisted rather than risk draft. But i didn't get a chance to vote for anything until later, and it's hard to discern which party could take credit for what. I'm suspecting no choice was good.

Overall, however, I've tried to vote for less federal government. Plenty of ways to blame everyone else for what you perceive as harming you and your future.

Go for it.

Well. I was born in the 50s, and only witnessed the birth and growth of those born 10-20 years after me.

And they had substantial opportunity for college. The GI Bill still afforded veterans great opportunities. College enrollment rays among high school graduates grew steadily between 1978-1988, which doesn't make lot of sense if opportunity
diminished.

BTW, being anonymous leaves you with less credibility than if you had a name. But you're probably either too lazy to register, or too afraid of losing karma, to fess up. Stay anonymous. Comments from the unknown are assumed to be just as valid as from those who choose not to hide their identity.

So this includes those born between 1960 and 1970 who, by accident of birth, were on a universe where the opportunity for a college education was excluded, possibly by imperial fiat?

You wrote that as if there is a difference.

1. Taxing marijuana so far has been problematic. Taxing medicine is risky, and resistance to that might cause more problems. Recreational use, of course, has an excellent taxation model in alcohol.

2. Beware of taxing stuff. If they want to, they can kill you if they think you aren't paying those years the way they think you should.

And taxes are good, right? Not like that's stealing or anything.

And it all goes to a good cause.

Really. You could have proposed Britain and Iceland. Lack of true free speech rights combined with an alarming lack of respect for the 1% = balance.

Russia could overfly Vanuatu once, problem solved.
At least you didn't defend the UN...

It's inevitable that the copyright holders will expect IP addresses or ranges to be blocked or simply deleted from routing tables.

And then innocent bystanders will become caught up in this.

That's how this escalates. And how it is dangerous to let them do even the little thing.

For other types of distribution, what remedies at law exist?

For instance, if I start mailing pirated Blu-Ray disc all over the world, do they instruct the various shipping agents, postal agencies, and so forth to refuse to accept anything from me, and also to refuse to deliver to me? Can they do this without informing me? Do I have recourse if this also denies me lawful services?

If I merely pack and ship these discs for someone else, is there a fix in law to also deny me access to shipping methods?

Do they put me/us in jail? Do they have the right to go wherever I am in the world, arrest me, and imprison me for this? Would I be denied even the mail from the court informing me of this?

This seems to be another example of technology being used to accomplish what could not be otherwise done. Removing a domain from DNS sure does eliminate their ability to distribute illegally-derived content, but doing so surreptitiously seems to be nasty business.

Is this an expansion of enforcement actions that may not itself be legal?

I don't prefer to ignore this. I instead am thankful.

You don't want the UN involved. And you'll have to recommend a better nation or group of nations to oversee DNS. Or another corporation.

This arrangement has worked very well for a long time. There is nothing to fix, and everything to defend.

I suspect it was dialog, not food, that was the object.

Of the bilinguals I deal with, Francophones will speak English with minimal reluctance. Asians will readily. Spanish-speakers much less so. But my sample size is in the dozens.

Try 'con permiso'...

It's bad where you are, you just don't see it. Unless you live where banks aren't a big deal

It's called Overdraft Protection by my bank. Bank-style interest today is what, 1.35%? Nope, more like 0.45%. CDs are going for 1%APY.

There is a scheme here.