GP stated figures for the last 60 million years. Your graph covers less than 2.5% of that range, so it doesn't have anywhere near enough data to refute the GP's claim.
However, if you look at the graph of the last 65 million years, you'll see that we are, quite literally, the coldest we've been during that entire period.
See, the lions are generally not considered to be moral actors. Humans usually are.
You must know a different bunch of humans than I do.......
The extent to which they could use this against you is to tell you that you can't claim a charitable deduction for making contributions to these tea party organizations. This isn't quite the jack-booted thugs trampling over your liberties which you seem to imagine. Problematic, certainly, but let's try to have at least a little perspective here.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people see something like this situation, and voice an opinion that basically states:
"I can conceive of a possible worse situation than what we currently have, so let's not bother doing anything about it until it gets to be equivalent to that worse situation."
The problem with this, of course, is that it's ALWAYS possible to conceive of a worse situation than what we're currently in.
Imagine if we did that with our health:
"Well...I'm getting a bit overweight, but I don't need to start exercising, because I'm not dead yet."
"Well, I know I stink, and I'm always short of breath, but I don't need to quit smoking, because I haven't been diagnosed with inoperable lung cancer yet."
Once we get to the point of the worse situation, it's frequently too late to do anything about it.
And the bits had to climb uphill! Both ways!
Buck naked! Through 40 miles of snow!
(Props to anybody who gets the reference.)
but the most talented crackers I've known seem to be detached from what happens in the real world outside of what they directly come in contact with daily.
So, basically, they're exactly like the vast majority of everybody else....
What's more, his analogy actually supports Comcast NOT charging Netflix, rather than the other way around.
Being a Canadian resident, if I want to send a letter to someone in Canada, I pay Canada Post to deliver it.
If, on the other hand, I want to send a letter to someone in a different country, say, the USA, or England, I pay Canada Post to deliver it. I do not have to pay the United States Postal Service or Royal Mail to deliver my letter sent from Canada.
In this analogy, countries and regional postal services are equivalent to ISPs. If I want to send a network packet (letter) to someone on a different ISP (in a different country), I pay my local ISP (postal service) to deliver it. Any ISP (country) beyond that is not my responsibility.
You are an unethical "I Got Mine" tea begging Libertarian, obviously. Fuck You.
Please, can I have my tea? I need my tea! Pleeeeaaaaase?!
No, the thing about science is that all the successful theories give useful and correct predictions. Religion does not.
Really? Christianity predicts (implicitly, not necessarily explicitly) that people will be dirtbag pricks who will do rotten stuff to get ahead. Seems pretty accurate and useful to me.....
Why should a car that won't be committing traffic infractions pay a fee for traffic infractions? That doesn't even come close to making sense. That's like saying everyone who puts on a seat belt should pay an extra fee to make up for "lost revenue" from fewer tickets for not wearing a seat belt.
You must be new here. Welcome to government.
something that makes the world better instead of being a necessary evil.
It's only a necessary evil because, to throw words back in people's faces, people refuse to live in a civilized society and not do things which endanger other people's lives such as speeding, talking on their cell phones while speeding, stiff-arming the steering wheel while speeding and talking on their cell phones, robbing, raping, and murdering people, to name just a few things.
You're making the assumption that speeding, by itself, is actually dangerous, and not simply a revenue generator for the municipality. This article itself seems to support the second assertion, rather than the first.
I gave my local MPP (provincial representative, as driving laws are provincial in Canada) the following thought exercise:
Assuming all the rest is followed 100% perfectly, take away any single law or requirement of the Highway Traffic Act, and what happens?
Take away the requirement to stop and yield to oncoming traffic for left turns? Lots of accidents.
Take away the requirement to stay in the right hand lane on a two lane road? Lots of accidents.
Take away the requirement to check your blind spot before changing lanes? Lots of accidents.
Take away the requirement to be sober and attentive while driving? Lots of accidents.
Take away the requirement to stick below an arbitrary speed limit? No accidents.
Again, assuming that all other sections of the HTA (or whatever your local law is called) are followed properly, when you remove speed limits, the only thing that happens is that people get where they're going faster.
Speed limits are one of two things:
- revenue generators for municipalities.
- band-aid solutions to having idiot drivers who shouldn't be operating a car in the first place from killing (more) people on the roads.
Probably actually a combination of both. The problem of car accidents isn't speeding. Speeding can NOT cause an accident by itself. It REQUIRES something else stupid to have been done, making the speed, at most, a catalyst. Reduce the speed, and you'll reduce, not eliminate, accidents. Remove the "something else stupid" and you'll eliminate accidents, regardless of speed.
Look at all these "Locality's worst driver" shows that are on TV around the world. Now ask yourself this question: How did any of the subjects of these shows EVER PASS A DRIVER'S TEST in the first place? They're completely and totally incompetent, yet they passed through a driving exam just fine, as all of them have licences.
The problem, from the government's point of view, with getting these drivers off the road permanently, is simply money.
Bad drivers pay more in fuel tax, due to poor driving habits that use more fuel, they pay more tax on insurance premiums, due to paying more than good drivers for insurance, they pay tax on autobody repairs when they hit something, they pay pay pay all sorts of stuff that good drivers don't.
If 50% of the drivers on the road were eliminated because they couldn't pass a more stringent driving test, the government would probably lose 70% of their revenue from automobile-based taxes. They're not willing to do this, so they pay lip service to road safety, by increasing enforcement, reducing speed limits, raising fines, etc.etc.bullshit,etc.
Here's another example: You can have an at fault accident that kills someone every year, and keep your driver's licence. As long as you can pay the insurance premiums, you can drive. Skip paying a $35 parking ticket, and what happens when you try to renew your licence? You can't.
What's really important to them? Road safety? I think not.
If you'd included a question mark, we could have applied Betteridge's law of headlines.
And of course, the answer to your question would have been "No."
By now, SNMP v3 should be the only version implemented on *any* device, given that the standard was published in 1999.
According to TFA, most of the affected devices have been EOL'd, but are still in use and/or are for sale in secondary markets. Even so, I'd be surprised if any of these even existed before 2004, a full five years after the SNMP v3 spec was published. Sigh.
WEP was broken in 2001. My local DSL ISP provides wireless routers to their customers. They come from the ISP configured with WEP. In 2014.
You can't remove computer from the demand without the domain admin password. If they're handing out that password to end users, they've got a whole other series of problems.
Bloody autocorrect. That's what I get for typing posts using my phone.
Can't say that I've ever tried it on a system with local admin rights. Usually I don't set up my domains in such a manner, because users can't resist the fuzzy kitten videos that come with free....ahem...."screensavers".
It was a Chevy Malibu. Yes, the "domestics are shit because....GM!!" fixed a problem for free, on my 14 year old car.
You can't remove computer from the demand without the domain admin password. If they're handing out that password to end users, they've got a whole other series of problems.
No man is an island if he's on at least one mailing list.
