Keywords: Moulded Rubber, rubber gaskets, Neoprene, Nitrile, Silicone, EPDM, VITON,HYPALON
Keywords: Moulded Rubber, rubber gaskets, Neoprene, Nitrile, Silicone, EPDM, VITON,HYPALON
Free speech isn't absolute, the concept is more about freedom from prior restraint than freedom from all possible consequences.
^^^WHAT HE SAID^^^
Learn tips and techniques on how to accessorize with evening bags in this free video clip. Expert: Kathy Johnston Contact: www.mylordsandladies.com Bio: http://bit.ly/2fUVcKD
Download at : https://drive.google.com/file/......
(100% fresh link no ad here)
Any help to Facebook: www.facebook.com/sourob.hasan
Please subscribed my channel or i am upload new videos every 3 days Consecutive
Thank you for having us...
Freedom leads to mistakes in the short term; critical thought and independence in the long term.
Censorship leads to safety in the short term; naivete and dependence in the long term.
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. It never has.
The FTC has jurisdiction over this stuff. In general the FTC hasn't been as aggressive in pursuing this sort of thing. Maybe the false advertising part of the FTC could be broken out and made into its own agency?
It could be the equivalent of Britain's ASA, but run by the government and with actual power to levy fines etc.
I'm taking the conservative approach: If it's legal it's free speech. Otherwise the advertisers wouldn't risk posting said info.
That's a very poor moral framework, and cedes too much power to the legal system. Legal does not equal moral and vice versa. I agree with the point you're making, but I believe putting morality subsequent to "legal" or "free" is one way we get into trouble.
I've always wondered how many people would be driving electric cars if it wasn't for the state/Fed subsidies (rebates) or other benefits like Leaf's free charging.
I've always wondered how many people would be driving ICE cars if they had to pay to remove the CO2 that they are pumping into the atmosphere.
People are effectively paying for the CO2 emitted, they pay in that they passed on the EV tax break. What would it cost to remove the CO2 rather than just stop producing more? That depends on how it's done, wouldn't it?
I read a paper some time ago from, as I recall, a retired chemistry professor. His plan to take CO2 from the atmosphere was to mine basalt and spread it out on cropland. Basalt is mostly just sand, which does nothing for the crops. About a quarter of it is calcium and magnesium oxides that react with CO2 and create limestone. There's a lot of basalt to mine, we aren't going to run out.
Why would farmers agree to have ground basalt spread on their fields? Because they do something like this already, spreading lime on fields is a common practice to control acidity in the soil and restore nutrients taken up by the crops. This professor (I can't remember his name) claims farmers should be able to be convinced to do this with a subsidy. I assume this subsidy would cover the cost difference of getting the lime from traditional sources plus a bit for the trouble.
That brings the question on how farmers get this lime now for their fields. Turns out that they mine limestone and cook the CO2 out in large furnaces. This is a very old practice, going back hundreds or thousands of years. There are century old lime kilns all over the world. So, all the CO2 that this lime captures is the same as what was released in the firing of the limestone. Then there is the CO2 produced from fueling the furnaces.
Why not replace this lime with basalt now? Why would we have to pay farmers to do this? Because basalt is a very hard rock and is difficult to mine. Limestone is relatively soft and easy to mine. Then there is the matter that basalt is only about half as effective by weight to control acidity as the lime from a lime kiln. This costs money. Don't blame the farmers for this, they just want to grow food as cheaply as they can so that you can buy it.
Oh, another reason why this professor might not be taken seriously. He advocates using nuclear power to drive this basalt mining. The reasoning is simple, driving heavy mining equipment from wind and solar power is simply not practical. Using fossil fuels to drive the process is counter productive.
So, what would this cost? One cost is having to use nuclear power. It seems that "environmentalists" that lack basic arithmetic skills cannot seem to figure out that carbon sequestration like this cannot be practically driven by wind and solar. If you want to get CO2 out of the air then first stop digging. That means nuclear power. Next step is mine basalt and grind it up so the natural process of reacting with CO2 in the air is sped up enormously. The first step, using nuclear power costs nothing really, people are willing to build nuclear power if only given permission to do so. The second step, where CO2 is actually removed, costs money. According to this professor it's very expensive now because there is no market, create a market and the price should come down.
No, it's just attempt to normalize the usage of these stupid devices.
After the Revolutionary War, there was a debate on the proposed new constitution. Many of the essays that we now cherish as The Federalist Papers and The Anti-Federalist Papers were published anonymously. In some cases, we still don't know who wrote them.
That is what the term slander (spoken) and libel (anything besides spoken) mean.
Also, free speech only means the government can't interfere with you saying something as long as it is not defamatory or recklessly endangering people's lives (shouting fire in a crowded room)
It does not mean:
1) Companies refusing to help you publish something.
2) People refusing to listen/obey you.
3) Refusing to pay taxes or otherwise refuse to abide by general government rules that are not targeted at your free speech. But the government can not treat you different from other people that do the same thing for other reasons.
1. Womens 6 Pcs Shoulder Bags Top-Handle Handbag Tote Purse Set http://amzn.to/2hW7f9z 2. TcIFE Women Top Handle Satchel Handbags Tote Purse http://bit.ly/2fUVa5t
The other thing to remember is, the internet is international. What is "free speech" where you are is not necessarily "free speech" where the reader is. Your laws don't apply everywhere (for whatever value of your).
Also "free speech" does not mean freedom from consequences.
Sonos has been making smart home multi-room speakers for a long time — I first listened to a ZonePlayer S5 a full eight years ago. But it's 2017, and smart speakers can't just be controlled from an app on a phone any more. They need to listen to your
'Find My Phone' Command Now Works With Google HomeUbergizmo
Comparing Alexa, Google Assistant, Cortana and Siri smart speakersTechCrunch
Google and Sonos spark smart home turf warThe Sydney Morning Herald
Wall Street Journal-Christian Post-Financial Times-Blasting News
all 11 news articles
Oh the other hand, each human teenager has to lear to drive on their own with a highly imperfect form of communal wisdom sharing. Autonomous vehicles will be driven by intelligence that can share perfectly in every success and every failure of every car that manufacture makes. If we consider that a teenager has spent an optimistic 1 hour a day observing out the window of a moving car x 365.24 x 15 that's 5479 hours of experience. The same experience (in terms of hours observed) could be acquired by just 230 camera equipped cars driving for 24 hours. Perhaps computer start with a disadvantage of no other real experience, so lets bump up the order of magnitude by two orders and say 2300 cars spend 12 hours a day for a month. Not unreasonable. And the cars will just keep getting better because they don't loose any experience between generations.
2 Billion devices running Android, not to mention all the other cheap computing devices (IoT), isn't enough???
Making it a free speech issue is taking it too far, it's always really just been about whether it's false advertising / fair trade / fraud / etc.
You make an interesting point. If we're going to pretend we're some free, market-based society, then there have to be consequences for deliberately misleading people on the internet. Since markets can only exist within some regulatory framework (even if that regulatory framework consists only of the person committing fraud getting his ass kicked), then of course the same regulatory framework must exist in some form on the internet too.
"If you like your health-care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health-care plan, period." President Obama, speech to the American Medical Association, June 15, 2009
Because its a parody religion whos members straight up say "If you believe this shit your a loony", and pretty much everything about it is designed to mock and confuse those of "Serious" religions.
It IS kind of a cult, but in the same way trotskyites or Ayn rand followers are a cult. Nutty as shit, but not ACTUALLY religious, and unlike the trots and randoids, pretty openly have fun with it all.
The WHOLE point of free speech is that you can say whatever the fuck you want -- and people can't censor you for that.
Whether it is _actually_ true or not, is beside the point.
Now this may be slander, but that is a different issue.
Left up to the opinions off the top of the heads of a bunch of fools thinking they are educated when their 'university' training is equivalent to a trade school
Our security courses enable you to acquire the security guard license and you can start working as a crowd controller or a security guard official. Call us:
Security Courses Melbourne
U4184 / 270 Macaulay Rd, North Melbourne VIC 3051
03 9021 3797
As other posters have noted, take "The Internet" out of it. People are still in thrall of the digital sophistication of the Internet, though those of us in the technology business know how easy it is for anyone to put up a website and post what they want. It gives everyone a printing press, and most of those digital tabloids are worse than the Weekly World News, i.e. they are not merely idiotic, but also uninteresting.
People who believe Alex Jones are also the sort who would believe the Weekly World News. As the Internet becomes less dazzling and more mundane to the populace, they will more and more figure out what is true and what is not.
Do Alex Jones and Weekly World News knowingly disseminate false information? Of course. But if someone lets on they believe something because they saw it in a Facebook comment or in the Weekly World News, it's a cue to indicate their level of sophistication.
http://superfoodhealthyliving.com/fruity-cacao.html http://www.superfoodhealthyliving.com/products.html Healthy recipes for weight loss health foods superfood vegetables raw foods list superfood drink superfoods easy healthy recipes for two raw food diet weight. Green superfood top 10 superfoods raw cacao quick healthy recipes list of whole foods green superfood recipes for healthy meals on a budget raw food sunfoods. Low calorie recipes Continue reading Benefits Of Organic, Green Superfood h
The Empire Landmark Hotel is the latest brutalist icon set to be demolished in a frenzy of property speculation. Is it wrong to destroy an entire decade? For nearly 40 years from his vantage point at the top of the Empire Landmark Hotel, Yunus Khan has watched Vancouver grow up. You would barely recognise it, he says of the city as it looked when he took his first job at the hotel, doing maintenance. Beyond the 42nd-storey window, the jagged silhouette of the North Shore mountains, the lush s
I saw the FBI's surveillance box plugged in to the border router. With my own eyes. Not even classified - I was a working a student job at university. I read the leaked copy of the CALEA implenting regulations. That's a creepy fucking document, especially when you consider it predates the 911 events.
Point is, a lot of us in this business KNEW mass surveillance was happening. Like 50,000 or 100,000 civilians KNEW about it. But clover fools - like many people here who really ought to know better - dismissed us as conspiracy nuts, right up until the Snowden media spectacle.
I just don't get how people can maintain such serene unthinking confidence in their world view, in their "facts". After seeing again and again how our reality is socially constructed.