Phone booths have been replaced by cell phones
Ah, but a homeless person cannot hide from the rain in his cell-phone! Ergo, we must fund the phone booths!
Paper books replaced clay tablets and should be saved.
Saved by the government?
What will completely replace AM radio?
Replace in what?
If not radio waves
Oh, it would still be radio waves, I'm sure. WiFi, LTE....
You do realize that the entire population of Israel is not superstitious
Superstitions — like fears of number 13 and black cats — are what people resort to, when religion is taken from them
Many Israelis don't give a flying fuck what rabbis say.
Most care, though.
What you could've pointed out is that it is not wrong for observant Jews to produce non-Kosher foods — as long as they don't eat them. That would've been a valid point.
But you didn't — such was your urge to attack the religious, it blinded you to anything else
The eel meat was produced by Forsea Foods in Israel
The rules of Kosher are simple: if it lives in the water, it must have scales to be edible. This excludes eel (as well as crab, lobster, oysters, sturgeon and catfish)...
Now lab-grown could work — because it is fake — but, given rabbinate's earlier refusal to approve fake pork, I doubt, they'll approve fake eel either. Then again, fake crab is fine — because it is made from regular (scaly) fish...
So there is no material difference between receiving a piece of information and receiving ALL information
I don't see any such difference. Do you? If so, can you describe it — well enough to make it possible to outlaw one without outlawing the other?
What else should the government save? How about:
Anything else?
And the article also points out that one of those early Unix desktops "is still alive, well
...
My XFCE4-desktop is awesome, thank you very much. Last uptime was 386 days — and it only went down, because the video card's fan stopped working...
Firefox, Thunderbird, and Libreoffice have to be recompiled on occasion, but that's nothing compared to the forced biweekly reboots my corporate desktop is undergoing — running the OS, that is alleged to have "won"...
The government isn't paying a witness. It's buying information to find a crime.
Nonsense. Paid informants would often alert police to crimes, that cops didn't know about either.
linked to life experience
I'm not that old
Read the article that your link points too.
My link points to the story of one (in)famous paid informant. Christians — and all of the Founders were such — universally disapproved of the man, but the practice of paying such people for their aid to law-enforcement was not banned by them.
Exactly, as he said it was unimaginable that a private entity could harvest this information. Yes at great cost for one person, completely unimaginable to do it for the entire population, even the paper to write it down would have bankrupted them.
It was just as unimaginable for a government — any government — to amass it too.
Yet, the concept of using paid informants was known for millennia — and none of the Founders thought about forbidding their use.
Frankly, I don't see, how these nefarious "data-brokers" are different — in principle — from paid informants, whom law-enforcement has used, for better or worse, for millennia.
At the time of the constitution it was unimaginable that a private entity could harvest this information.
The concept of "private detective" existed for centuries.
If Sherlock Holmes (fictional) and Pinkerton (very real) could sniff out information, why couldn't the government then obtain it from them? Perry Mason wouldn't get anywhere without his trusty private detective agency — with office on the same floor as his own. Hired by the clients — who'd inevitably be falsely accused of murder — they had to share information with police on pain of losing their licenses. Such was already the state of affairs in the 1930-ies!
If today's technology existed back then and we followed the spirit of why the constitution was written I can guarantee that this would be illegal
Sounds like an attempt — an unconstitutional attempt — to ascribe to the Constitution, what is not there...
Finally, how is "buying information from data-brokers" different — in principle — from obtaining it from paid informants?
Unconstitutional activity is still unconstitutional even if the government pays a third party to do it.
Could you cite the part of the Constitution being violated here?
You cannot. The whole problem is that there is nothing illegal — much less unconstitutional — about it all.
It makes sense logically too — if a private dick can know it, why can't the government buy it from him?
The point is to prevent "tearing". A lot of effort has been put into solving that problem.
If the pixels were updated in some random or semi-random pattern on the screen it would probably be unnoticeable, but I suspect that either a lot of architectural changes would be needed both in software and hardware, or you would effectively have to achieve a 480Hz full-screen refresh rate to achieve it without doing things like attaching an address to each pixel output so the rendering device didn't need to assume sequential pixels should be drawn sequentially.
"When it comes to humility, I'm the greatest." -- Bullwinkle Moose
