We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
I ignore what you said because there's no way they can present "proof" that contradicts the facts.
Don't be so sure. Everything introduced in a court case is a fact, the jury needs to decide who made the most compelling argument based on their facts and whose facts are in fact the correct ones. it's all about picking a story to get the jury to focus on on the argument you make and decide it is the correct one.
There's indeed all kind of commercial issues. No-one will disagree on that.
Yet, daily practices are very strange pricing schemes with all EU telco's. Where calling mobile may be cheaper than land line. But roaming is indeed a very practical issue for anyone crossing a border, and getting charged over 2 euro for 1 megabyte of data is more the rule than the exception. Smarter users avoid getting unexpected bills using pre-pay plans. But on average, _everyone_ is being ripped of left or right. There are no fair plans. It's hard to find a,say, 100 euro true unlimited plan. It's hard to find roaming at normal prices. It _does_ exist though, it you search. But as said, most providers will just rip you off whenever they find a chance.
It is interesting to see how the EU and USA mobile markets evolved differently, which I attribute in part to the different cultural identity in the two places. US Companies see themselevs as US companies and so it was natural for them to dvelop a US network acrosss the entire country. The EU companies were more likly to seethemselves as French or German as were regulators in those countries who would protrct them from foriegn competition. As aresultyou have a very localized network rather than an EU wide network.
More legally - this shows how the EU has sometimes embarrassing little power. The EU parliament votes. The joining countries overrule. They just use 'EU' as excuse when convenient, and ignore as soon they please too, which often leads to schizophrenic state politics. This is just a symptom.
Concluding: the EU parliament chooses the most ethical-correct choice. The members of the EU choose to ignore it for, mostly, commercial reasons.
The EU is learning ehat the US learned right after the American War. A confederation does not work to create a single political or social entity.
But when you think about it, what would stop a provider with a single antenna in say, Andorra or Vatican, to offer unlimited plans at Euro 5/month and free ride on providers with real network coverage?
Providers have roaming agreements where they reimburse each other for roaming in the US. As long as it is relatively balanced there is no real cost to it. A single tower providercwould get killed in such a acenario sinc they would pay much more than they take in. That's also why they will drop you if you roam too much.
There are ways of dealing with this scenario. The simplest being, don't keep the information on the laptop. After entering the country, use VPN or some other secure means of downloading the data.
Exactly, I have an IronKey drive that is password protected and self destructs after 10 wrong attempts. It's small and easily stored away from all the other jump drives etc. I carry it to increase its chance of being overlooked if some wants to search my machine. They can search my laptop and nothing important is revealed.
To a large degree I think the problem is actually lack of practice actually building power plants. So of course the cost and time estimates aren't accurate enough. EPR is a new reactor design.
While the design is new we've been building pressure vessel, primary and secondary containments, turbine buildings and cooling towers for a while. While some of the issues can be traced to a new design the industry also tends to get overly optimistic about the cost structure of each new generation.
I wouldn't worry about seeing any $10,000 or even $100,000 notes as those reside in private collections and while still legal tender someone would be a fool to try an use one. I would however question where they got a $100,000 note and I believe that the secrete service would also have some questions as those were only used for inter-bank transfers.
I fully agree, though it would be interesting to see the face on clerk that was handed one of them and the alarm on the collector's part when the clerk put a big line on it with an anti-counterfeit pen.
Nuclear is cheap. Project delays are not cheap in nuclear, or a dam (hydro if you will) or a tunnel or any large scale project. Uncertain political environment is a death knell for large scale projects.
Another problem is plans are often overly optimistic to make the costs look good and the actual construction varies form the design due to poor project management, which opens up licensing issues and causes further delays driving up costs. The industry is its own worst enemy in many ways.
once you have reactors, you're stuck with them for the better part of a century and when shit goes wrong, it goes really wrong.
can we start switching over to solar panels and batteries yet? seriously, we are bombarded by free power every single day!
While solar has promise it faces a similar issue as many other power generation solutions do: NIMBY. People want power from a wall outlet but don't want production facility nearby, whether it's nuclear, coal, wind, solar or what have you.
You talk out of your ass. Look up relevant cases before spewing in ignorance, two decades ago even the IRS was bitch slapped after refusing trucker who paid in pennies. Refusing legal tender puts you in a very bad position in a court of law.
Sure, Rosen v Continental Airlines. Refusing cash didn't put them in a bad position.
Disclaimer first, this is US centric, though it 'should' work in many countries.
So absent a state law failure to accept cash in no way eliminates a debt.
Actually, it kind of does. Work out the logic and realize that not all businesses are creditors.
You're take is interesting, though wrong. Being a creditor has no bearing on the what you must accept in payment; in fact it's pretty clear no one is required to accept cash. Why don't you try it, go to court, and report back?
How many QA engineers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? 3: 1 to screw it in and 2 to say "I told you so" when it doesn't work.
