Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Do the home owners (Score 1) 162

Well, you just said flat out, user pays $150/month in lieu of ISP+power.

Note that last month my ISP+Power was less than $100/month (thanks to solar offsetting it).

Since all new homes in Ca now require solar be installed, this sounds pretty dodgy. Plus how large is this installation? Plus there will be an easement preventing you from doing anything within a certain area of the installation and to provide access from the street for any repairs/upgrades. I expect this to plan to fail quickly. Personally, I think the answer to the power issue is to eliminate the need for giant AI data centers all together.

Comment Re:too much local red tape and negotiations (Score 1) 199

No, I think it's simply a problem of who they have contracts with. They all live an work in the metro areas so that's where they find the outside contractors. They never seemed to ask if the appraisers had Ag experience. Of the the trials I observed they all admitted to having never appraised Ag land prior to that appraisal. As I said it never went well for the state.

Comment Re:too much local red tape and negotiations (Score 1) 199

I've watched several trials here in the Central Valley. One of the main issues is Sacramento sends appraisers from metro areas to appraise farm land. They appraiser starts with, well, there are not any utilities near by, the nearest sewer hookup is 6 miles and there are not any access points, etc, etc. The jury who is full of farmers all but do a face plant and then award ten times what the state/authority had appraised each acre of Almonds for.

Comment Re: mill (Score 1) 139

The issue is that making your own out of metal requires skill and expensive equipment.

Yes, because guns were never made by hand before the invention of CNC. It is quite doable to make a gun or any of it's parts by hand, it just takes alot of time and effort. A law that tries to prevent easy manufacture will not stop someone who is determined. It's just another stupid unenforceable code that will be ignored. However it did enriched the bank accounts of the politicians who proposed it

Comment Re:Can Amazon find DSPs in the most rural of rural (Score 1) 22

Amazon's rural push will require a lot more rural business owners willing to make deliveries...

It will be interesting to see how many individuals in rural areas will sign up to be Amazon DSPs (Delivery Service Partners), and stay in the program. In medium/high density areas the ROI can be positive, but if you need to spend more money on fuel (or electricity) than you can make delivering the boxes it may be not a long term business opportunity (no matter how Amazon tries to frame it on their DSP site).

That was my question about all this. Why would "rural business owners" drive for 30 minutes or more to make a delivery for Amazon? I'm thinking that Amazon believes that the suburbs are the rural areas. Where I live (which is not the middle of nowhere by any means) is over an hour to the nearest incorporated city. The business' owners in the nearest "town" will not be making deliveries, in many if not most cases they are the only one there. More marketing hyperbole.

Comment Re:There's plenty of privacy "in public" (Score 1) 197

Anyone who has pulled over to the side of the road and walked behind some bushes to take a leak, ONLY pulls their throbbing wang out to piss when they can correctly assume that they have privacy. You don't know wtf you're talking about.

Let me guess, you put your hands in front of your face and chant "nanny nanny, you can't see me" and believe that you are hidden. Have you ever heard of public urination ordinances? In Ca it falls under PC 372, but many if not most cities and/or counties have specific ordinances against it. Just because you can't or don't want to see others does not mean you are not in public. Talk about "patently absurd".

Comment Re:In other news (Score 1) 197

just because you don't like it, does not make illegal.

Correct, but people still talk about it because they don't like mass surveillance and might seek to make it illegal. Which is their right in a democratic society.

Our ideas around expectations of privacy date to a time when it was not possible for the government to "walk with" every single individual 24/7 in every public place in the country. Now it is becoming technically possible. Not surprising that someone might want to update the laws.

Please don't mistake my post as a "pro" surveillance statement. I was pointing out that many people mistake their desires for what's actually codified.

Comment Re:In other news (Score 1) 197

There is, however, the expectation that the government cannot legally track you absent reasonable suspicion.

Since we are discussing cameras in the public view, if you are in public anyone can legally follow i.e. "track" you. Just because you don't like it, does not make illegal. Also the "government" can walk with you, talk with you, and even LIE to you (gasp).

Slashdot Top Deals

Overload -- core meltdown sequence initiated.

Working...