Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: Mecial Cannabis companies (Score 3, Informative) 275

by rossz (#47877681) Attached to: California Tells Businesses: Stop Trying To Ban Consumer Reviews

Did you fail comprehension? He clearly stated they sold the item at the advertised price. Loss leaders are perfectly legal (at least here in California), but you have to actually have to have a reasonable amount of the product on hand. So if a single person buys out all the stock, the business could get in trouble for not having the product on hand, which could be seen as bait-and-switch. When there is an extremely limited supply, it must be clearly stated in the advertisement. A loss leader is meant to attract customers in the hopes that they will buy additional items and make up for the loss and possibly gain a new regular customer. Also, it is perfectly legal to set a limit on sale items.

Comment: If there were competition (Score 1) 338

by rossz (#47725909) Attached to: FCC Warned Not To Take Actions a Republican-Led FCC Would Dislike

If there were competition, the broadband companies would be going out of their way to roll out something bigger and better than the next guy. Except, all too often, a broadband company gets a monopoly in a city, raise their prices while cutting their services. They have zero incentive to roll out any improvements. They rarely even bother with doing basic maintenance. Upgrades and repairs cost money, that cuts into profits. It's not like the market has anywhere else to go.

A taxpayer funded project isn't a barrier to future infrastructure improvements. Monopolies are a barrier to future infrastructure improvements.

Comment: Bend the rules for the rich (Score 1) 327

by rossz (#47668941) Attached to: California May Waive Environmental Rules For Tesla

If waiving environmental laws and giving huge tax breaks for big businesses is good for the state, then doing the same for small and medium businesses is also good for the state. In fact, this kind of thing is evidence that the laws should be revisited and possibly revised. I already felt that way about the tax laws here in California (some of the highest taxes in the country). I'm not so sure about the environment laws, however.

Comment: It's a Trap! (Score 2) 176

by rossz (#47560097) Attached to: Senate Bill Would Ban Most Bulk Surveillance

Given that the executive branch, that being the POTUS, has never seen a surveillance law it didn't like, I seriously doubt this law would actually impede the government's lust for any and all information on the People.

Besides, the actual implmentation of any law is always the exact opposite of the bill name. My guess, "The USA Freedom Act" means "freedom for the government to do whatever the fuck they want."

Comment: Re:It all means nothing (Score 3, Informative) 253

Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.

If every single person who said they would vote third party if it wasn't throwing away their vote actually voted third party, we'd see some serious changes. Just accept that it doesn't matter one bit whether a democrat or a republican wins the election. The results will be the same. Once you accept this simple truth, you are free. Now you can vote for a third party candidate without that fear of letting "the other guy" win. Vote third party. Always. I don't care which third party. Just don't vote for the status quo.

"I'm a mean green mother from outer space" -- Audrey II, The Little Shop of Horrors