The sanctions law will probably be so hastily/poorly written that if Snowden ever returns to the US, the US will have to sanction itself
You mean the US government will actually follow the US law? That would be a neat novelty.
But considering how much of the web requires javascript these days, its hardly something to complain about in a comment.
Most of the Web gracefully degrades. At least you see enough to decide if you are still interested in the site or not, and how dangerous it looks like.
I don't want to enable JS to just read some dumb text - or worse, get a video playing "YOU HAVE BEEN 0WN3D!" in fullscreen mode. Most people would call it paranoia, but the Slashdot crowd is somewhat more aware of what lurks out there.
If you don't like it, get NoScript and move on with your life.
That's what I use. Exceptions are granted on "as needed after careful consideration" basis, not just because some damn site wants JS. There are too many news sites out there; I can't read them all even if I make it my full time job. A site that doesn't render for no good reason gets skipped. Buyer's market.
Business Insider have a somewhat cynical take on Snowden's asylum claim which I think is worth reading.
JavaScript required. Not worth reading.
Theft from a mailbox is easy to defeat by using a lockable, steel mailbox. This company also sells secure mailbox clusters.
They should do that - it's a crime, after all. By not going after vandals they are saying that vandalism is safe for criminals. This is not the message that any sane society should send. Trayvon Martin was killed only because at no point in his life he was told to stop doing what he was doing. Per Peter's Principle he eventually bit more than he could chew. If you don't seek out and punish vandals, some of them will be soon playing knock out kings, or killing people for fun - and will get themselves killed. Arresting them early, for a small crime, may save them from committing a large crime.
And if in turn _you_ are going to be pedantic, then let _me_ be pedantic by pointing out you are are wrong.
Electrocution, source 1:
1. to kill by electricity.
2. to execute (a criminal) by electricity, as in an electric chair.
Origin: 1885–90, Americanism; electro- + (exe)cute
Electrocution, source 2:
1: to execute (a criminal) by electricity
2: to kill by electric shock
— electrocution noun
Origin of ELECTROCUTE
electr- + -cute (as in execute)
First Known Use: 1889
Yes, the word has been dumbed down by some stupid dictionaries due to dumb people using it wrong so frequently. The derivation should be your CLUE to what the real meaning is.
Clue: you have never been electrocuted.
Seriously? If the drive in the laptop fails, it has failed in any scenario. It doesn't matter what strategy you use to back up. You are looking at installing a new one and copying the backup in any event. In any backup scenario you have to do an added trick with grub to copy the boot sector to the second drive. Then all you have to do to recover is pop a new drive in the laptop and dd the backup drive to the new drive, boot sector, partition table, file system, files and all.
You don't expect an investigation, collection of fingerprints, canvassing for witnesses, checking the local security cameras? I thought I had low expectations from city services, but I'm outmatched here
What do you mean their opinion doesn't matter? Of course everyone gets to weigh in on whether or not parks are subsidized - cities are not run by dictators
the last time I needed the police, then didn't even come out to look at my vandalized car, they just had me fill out an online form to report it. In your unsubsidized city, why wouldn't you fund those services with user fees?
Funny how contradictory these statements are. City police is financed by the taxpayers of the city, and the citizens are free to weigh in, and the police chief is not a dictator... except when he is, as he denies you the service that you have already paid for.
As you noticed, I am proposing to not pay for fire and police per call simply because they are equally needed by all, at more or less the same rate. Charing per call would result in the same distribution of fees. However firefighting services often charge those who are responsible for fires, and those are some serious expenses ($10-20K, if the fire was large enough.) Ambulances are already private, and they charge you for a ride. Police will charge you if your house's alarm system triggers too often in error (there are a couple of free false alarms per year, or something - depends on the city.) Also the city nearby charges a separate tax on alarm systems, to help pay the extra expenses incurred by the police.
Most of our city parks do have homeless drug users in the bushes, but that doesn't make them awful places.
One person's measure of awfulness may differ from another person's measure. But you are right in some way. I often see people driving trucks that are covered in graffiti; and I see joggers that jog through trash-littered areas, navigating around homeless. I am amazed how well trained they are to tune out those aspects of civilization. I cannot do that as good as experienced riders of NYC subway do - who, clothed in very expensive business suits, walk around pools of supicious liquids on the floor and pretend that there is nothing there, and that the stench is just light fragrance of roses. Yes, I am quick to leave such places to never return. Having been born and raised in a 10M+ city made me hate crowds. Harry Harrison's short story Make Room! Make Room! resonates with me, and I understand Solarians.
I have a real one, and it does the same thing. In fact all of them I have had (including the old flying saucer style from the TiBook era) do that. It's the inrush current, not a defect.
That's a defect. There's supposed to be an inrush current limiter.
They are subsidized by everyone, regardless of whether they want the park or use the train. Their opinion does not matter. If you want fairness, remove subsidies and charge visitors to the park. Wil you still jog there? The train ticket will also rise in price, making the car even more attractive.
There are only a few services that are equally applicable to everyone: fire, police, and such, just because everyone has more or less the same probability of needing them. There bickering about taxes to support them becomes unproductive. Everything else benefits one small group of people, while being paid for by everyone. I always say that such services should be financed by their users. If they are good, they can get even better. If they are bad, they should go out of business and give up the resources that they occupy to something else or to someone else who can do better things for people (and for which those people will want to pay.) As it is currently, the park may be an awful place, with a drug user under every bush, and still nothing would be done.
The system of cross-subsidies confuses the market so much that nobody can tell with any certainty who pays for what, and how much. Your example with roads is a good one. Who pays for upkeep of roads? What is the share of gas tax, city taxes, state taxes and federal taxes in all that? It's even dependent on the type of the road. No serious discussion can be held until all these numbers are easy to find and easy to understand. Such confusion is only helping bureaucrats to move money around, in and out of their personal slush funds, to finance whatever they feel important at expense of what the people find important.
Do you need a healthy meal a couple times per day, or you only want it? You will survive on water every day and on bread every week, after all. Does an artist need paper and pencil, or it's just something he wants?
There are few black people around here. They are not a significant factor in local crime. Illegal immigrants from Central America are the majority. They look the same as any other Latino who lives here for generations. Maybe you can tell by clothes. But behavior is the only reliable clue; and the good part is that it works on all races and all skin tones. In the end, you only care about actions.
Crap switching power supplies from China are a huge problem. You not only have to look for a UL logo, but check the logo in the UL database. UL even has special rules for China about where the UL stickers come from.
Tests of computer power supplies have shown that the UL-certified ones will consistently deliver their rated current. That makes sense, because that's how UL tests them. Others, loaded up to their rated load, overheat, shut down, burn out, or in a few cases, catch fire. The really bad ones lack key safety components, like a fuse.
I bought some laptop-type switching power supplies on Amazon which showed a UL logo in the picture, but the delivered power supply looked different and lacked a UL logo. I raised hell with Amazon over that, and they kicked that seller off.
The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin
