I'm very sparing with RAID as well. Maybe the balance would tilt in favor of UPS use if I used RAID more often.

The computer turns off.

The only difference is that it's less graceful that if you have a UPS.

Depends on your income. For Eric Schmidt long term cap gains will be 23.5.

This Eric pays 15%.

My kids pay 0%.

Ownership is just a notation in a book somewhere.

When the revolution comes that will be erased too.

Since when did patents ever legitimately cover algorithms in the first place?

The idea that 'doing it on a computer' is enough to get a patent is ridiculous. The computer is a general purpose calculating device that applies to any known practical algorithm. IT IS OBVIOUS to put your algorithm on a computer.

Software patents are intrinsically unpatentable. End of story.

The argument that allowing patents on algorithms benefits society is a fail also. Patents are a contract between inventor and government that grants a limited right to prevent others from practicing an technique in exchange for revealing the details of the implementation.

Since anyone with a reasonable toolkit can monitor code execution the contract is completely one sided. We get nothing. They get a monopoly.

> So what do you call 3.4 billion a year for the next ten years, as approved in 2012 when the postmaster general asked to close branches and congress instead laughed at him and whipped out the checkbook?

I call that fair. If congress is going to insist on the USPS providing unprofitable services they should finance it. If people don't like the results they should stop whining when the USPS closes a post office in their area.

The USPS gets a lot of interference from Congress. If Congress were to leave them alone they no doubt would be more efficient.

That's why I stopped using UPS's on my home computers. I was having more failures caused by the UPS's than if I didn't have them in my system.

I think the turning point was when journaling file systems came to Linux.

Yes, you are right. It was 1789. It was actually the 5th act of Congress to establish the customs service and begin collecting taxes on imported goods.

So the date is wrong by two years

It is STILL a fact that one of the first acts of Congress, the FIFTH, actually, was establishment of the Customs Service which enabled inspections at ports of entry to enforce collection of tarriffs. (July 31 1789).

And it does and has allowed seizure of personal effects since the very founding of the Republic. After all contraband and articles subject to tarrifs can and are often smuggled in personal effects.

To protest otherwise exposes your ignorance.

What are we going to quote next? The Daily Mail?

USE PRIMARY SOURCES PLEASE.

The Constitution also gives Congress the power to regulate trade. You cannot do that without the ability to inspect items coming into the US.

One of the very first laws passed by the first Congress in 1787 was the provision to allow customs inspections at borders.

What people are complaining about here is US law that is just as old and well established as the Constitution itself.

As a matter of fact 329 ports of entry is a far smaller area than a 100 mile wide swath around the entire periphery of the United States.

The bill of rights is not the entire Constitution.

The Constitution does give the Congress the duty to secure borders and regulate commerce. In fact one of the very first acts of the first Congress in 1787 was to establish the border search provisions that you are complaining about.

It's my understanding (and I've seen this in ACLU publications and so on) that the 4th amendment free zone only applies at entry points.

The 100 mile range applies more to issues like immigration stops visa checks etc.

http://www.visaserveblog.com/tp-110714115312/post-121023152428.shtml

Actually they can go over 100 miles if they feel like it.

"That whenever in the opinion of a chief patrol agent or special agent in charge a distance in his or her sector or district of more than 100 air miles from any external boundary of the United States would because of unusual circumstances be reasonable, such chief patrol agent or special agent in charge shall forward a complete report with respect to the matter to the Commissioner of CBP, or the Assistant Secretary for ICE, as appropriate, who may, if he determines that such action is justified, declare such distance to be reasonable."