You were trying to claim that people either can be in support of monopolies or that they cannot be in support of any monopoly. That is obviously a black and white situation and entirely untrue. And there are multiple reasons that there are monopolies on running wires through neighborhoods. The number one reason is safety. Do you realize that there used to be almost free reign in running electric wires in the US? Take a look at these photos of NYC. You can see thousands of wires all over the neighborhoods. It was dangerous and an eye sore. Having unlicensed and under insured Uber drivers is potentially harmful to unknowing and unsuspecting customers. This is the reason that taxi licensing exists. Are you proposing that we no longer require any sort of licensing for anyone to drive on the open roads? What is the justification for Uber to be allowed to run an unlicensed taxi service? If its okay for them to operate without licensing, can my 95 year old grandmother drive unlicensed through your neighborhood?
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
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).
That's not the biggest challenge. The biggest challenge is that it is no more convenient or reliable to pay a bill with my smartphone than it is with a credit card. My credit card doesn't run out of power. And I don't have to worry about it not getting a good connection inside a store. And I don't have to worry about pulling out a $500 phone and juggling it around every time I want to pay for something.
I actually did find Apple Pay useful once. I went for a quick run to the store with my girlfriend and didn't bring my wallet, but happened to have my phone. Had I brought my wallet, however, I would have just used my card. It was handy to have a backup plan.
Heroin is certainly addictive but addiction is a response to stress and pain, not a moral failing or a bio-chemical crutch.
Long term use of these drugs do create a change in your biochemical system. Not a permanent change, but there are, in my opinion, two types of addictions: a chemical addiction and an emotional one. You are either trying to escape pain/stress, as you say, or your body stops producing the chemicals provided by the drug. You could have a procedure done to block the pain and would still have a hard time quitting long term opioid use.
From your own source:
There has been much debate of the allegedly poor performance of the bullet on target, especially the first-shot kill rate when the muzzle velocity of the firearms used and the downrange bullet deceleration do not achieve the minimally required terminal velocity of over 750 m/s (2,500 ft/s) at the target to cause fragmentation.
Not only are you wrong, you are so wrong that the round is actually criticized for not causing enough damage.
From what I was told in the service the round was designed to wound not to kill on purpose. If you wound someone, one of their comrades has to drag them back to cover. You thereby take two enemies out of the fight. But hell, what would the armorer know.
I think "designed to wound" is a reassuring way to say "technically not as lethal". We switched to smaller ammo for logistical reasons, to carry more ammo, and statistically less lethality is not a bad thing for the reason you mentioned, it's just not the real reason we switched to 5.56. Way I look at it is, without increasing the weight or cost, is there any obvious thing you can do to make a 5.56 nato round more lethal? The FMJ is for penetrating body armor, and only increases the chances of having exit wounds. So it was light, cheap, and "lethal enough" - not designed to be less lethal, in my opinion.
I believe that the Geneva Convention (or some addendum to it) prohibits the use of hollow point ammunition in military rounds. That is why we use FMJ.
6 months probation is about right for what he did anyway. I can't believe they're clogging prisons with petty criminals like this then turning violent criminals out because of over crowding. A BB gun as a deadly weapon? They're turning the legal system into a farce with that kind of bullshit.
Florida has some pretty generous laws with regard to carrying and using a firearm for defensive purposes. To help balance that out, the laws are very strict with regard to actually using a firearm in a threatening manner. Since a BB gun often looks similar to firearms to the lay person, they fall under the same penalties.
there are circles to Hell, and they aren't in the same class as Sony and Comcast.
Is this where Google+ got their Circles idea from? I wonder if Satan had filed a trademark on Circles in the US?
The article points out how LoopPay can more easily work with existing terminals, and ApplePay needs retailers to get new terminals.
But aren't most retailers going to be upgrading in the near term anyway? The U.S. is moving to credit cards with chips now which mean most serious retailers will be upgrading. The little retailers are probably mostly going to upgrade also, once Square supports ApplePay because you don't want to pass up those customers.
It's a nice try but I don't think it will get much traction no matter how easy it is for retailers to support, since they have to convince the customer first...
Retailers and banks are upgrading their terminals and cards respectively because of a new law that either took effect in January of 2015 or will in Jan of 2016 (I forget which). The law puts the responsibility of a fraudulent transaction on the head of the party with the least amount of security. If the card offers chip security and the retailer uses mag stripe, then the retailer is responsible for fraud. If the retailer has a chip terminal and the card only has a mag stripe, then the bank is responsible. Any mom and pop business that gets burned by this once will upgrade ASAP, I'm sure.
Looking at the list of donors page, it has this curious summary:
In 2015 we received 2535 donations of 87299 € . In this year we received 2826 donations of 97255 €
I'm not sure how to read that as this year is 2015. But if this is all for one person, they don't seem to be hurting for funds now.
My guess is that one is a list of donations for the proceeding 12 months while the other is just for the 2015 calendar year. This would mean that he received almost no donations in the 2014 time period.
Get me an affordable light field imaging camera and I might spend as much as I did on my phone. Otherwise, it's still just pictures and I dont see the point in carrying another device which doesn't offer significant advantages to what my phone provides.
That, of course, depends entirely on what you are doing. I have a dSLR and a waterproof (33ft) camera. If I am hiking, snorkeling, or something like that, I would use the waterproof camera. If I want to do tricks that require manual control of the aperture, shutter speed, long distance shots, or very low light shots, I would use my dSLR. If I am just out and about living my life, I will use my phone. Just because you have not imagined a use that requires a real camera does not mean that those uses are non-existent.
Anyone looking at life in prison for a non-violent drug crime is living under an unjust system.
I think in this case, the sheer scale of the crime would warrant a harsher sentence than your street corner pusher. The guy was helping many people sell product and then launder the proceeds back into currency they could actually use. I expect a general to face stiffer penalties for breaking the rules than a private. I'm not saying life in prison is necessarily called for, but he shouldn't get 3 years out in 1 kind of treatment.
The error range for the strenuous jogging group is absolutely huge and only represents 2 deaths out 36 (or 40, depending on which plot you're looking at). Yeah, the differences between strenuous jogging and sitting on your ass might be technically statistically significant, but are the numbers in these groups sufficient to tell if there's a difference, ie is the study sufficiently powered?
Not to mention that this depends entirely on the person. If my math is correct, this article is suggesting than running faster than a an 8:45 mile can be dangerous to you. I'm a pretty big guy. I can run an 8:30 mile for 5 miles without becoming short of breath. If I were a foot shorter, perhaps that would be a very strenuous pace for me. I don't see how running that fast could be dangerous for me if I am running at the same number of strides per minute as someone who runs slower than me.
Does said US citizen get to hold his US passport?
Does he get to use US Embassies?
BLOCKQUOTE>Will he be rescued by the US military if kidnapped in Iraq?
I lived in Venezuela during the military coup of 2002. The US embassy actually did make arrangements to potentially helicopter out US citizens if the situation got bad enough. So they do look out for US citizens abroad, when possible. I would call in twice a day to determine whether or not I was supposed to try and escape the country. And no, I was not a US Government employee there at the time.
What do encryption chips have to do with anything? If a card is stolen and known stolen, the owner can report the theft and the card is deactivated, whether or not it contains an "encryption chip". If the card is stolen and the owner does not know it was stolen, and the thief also has the pin, then they can use the card, whether or not it has an "encryption chip". Or am I totally understanding what this "encryption chip" does?
The encryption chip prevents someone from duplicating your card, at least in theory. They could make a copy of your card using an ATM skimmer and then steal your PIN and you wouldn't even know that someone had access to your bank card.