Mike Holt has a whole sub forum dedicated to power quality and surge protection (Power quality + Surge forum)
Mike has also written the books on grounding and bonding - Grounding vs Bonding text book
Every cut reduces freedom a little bit- because taking economic responsibility for yourself instead of paying for it with taxes reduces freedom.
I thought the previous story said the new Cisco router was only 3 times faster than the previous model. Hardly game changing if so. Further as the upgrade cost will probably be on par to upgrading from a Saturn 5 rocket to the Space Shuttle I doubt every one will jump on it at once.
Now you've got it:
"taking something that isn't yours"
There's no "taking" involved here, and that's the crux of our problem. Data has been copied, nothing has been removed. You're literally arguing that if I light a candle from yours, then I have stolen your candle. Actually, even that isn't a good analogy, because there would be a tiny but measurable amount of wax that would be used up to heat my wick to ignition. Under copyright infringement, bits have been copied, but absolutely nothing has been lost.
Here's your problem. Items in the real world -- plants and minerals and the things that come from them -- can be claimed and owned. Ideas, concepts and arrangements -- "here's a better way to start a campfire," "Bears like to live in caves," "Do re mi fa so la ti do" -- can't be. You can lock up your dog. You can't lock up "Ave Maria" or "Light is both a particle and a wave." Once that idea is out, it's out.
There is no natural right to what is oxymoronically called "Intellectual property." Shakespeare, Mozart and Bill Hicks belong to the whole world.
The problem is that the way things occur naturally, people who discover new things want to keep it a secret. So, to encourage these people to share and share alike -- because nobody discovers anything out of whole cloth, everybody is working off the shoulders of the giants who came before -- we artificially create and offer copyright and patents. "Tell us what you found, and we'll make sure you get sole profit from it for a while." The original Statute of Anne set this at 14 years.
The means anything from 1996 back would be public domain. Sounds generous to me.
The problem is that the greedy suits -- not the artists, not the scientists -- the suits reneged on this deal. They took the money we offered them and bribed the living Hell out of our government to grant them copyright in perpetuity, a perversion of the original idea. It's widely accepted that Mickey Mouse will never come into the public domain, which is ironic considering Walt Disney didn't create those fairy tales he animated. Under the ideas of "Intellectual Property," Disney should be paying royalties to the Grimm Brothers forever, and the Grimm Brothers owe a bunch of wizened old people in Bavaria a ton of money as well.
So here we the people are, screwed beyond belief. CBS is going to childishly, petulantly destroy forever Jack Benny's work rather than let it pass into the public domain.
You know what the statutory, black-letter penalty is for abusing copyright? You lose it. I can't think of a more perfect example of reneging on the copyright deal than to burn something rather than let it pass into public domain.
And so, if CBS, Disney and Sony want to revoke the deal we extended copyright under, then so be it. There is no copyright. Let a thousand hackers bloom, and may the children of Napster and Bittorrent march forever.
And when the suits finally cry "Uncle," then let's talk about setting copyright to a more reasonable seven year term.
I rather have Apple kill Flash.
If you're going to wish for something unrealistic and beyond their power, at least shoot for world peace.
Okay, so there are three possible visions of the future Web:
1. The AdobeWeb, where every page is just an empty shell around an embedded SWF. There is some risk that this may happen.
2. The SilverWeb, where every page is just an empty shell around an embedded Silverlight object. With ActiveX barely treading water, this is Microsoft's forlorn hope.
3. The iPhone Web, where every page is HTML+JavaScript and scales nicely to small screen sizes.
Personally, I like option 3 the best. And only Apple (and possibly Google, eventually) are backing this horse.
I get the "OpenDNS search", which tells me that "ipv6.google.com is not loading right now" and shows me the search results for "ipv6 google".
You can always hang your own router off of the ethernet port of the FiOS router.....just saying.
By the way, I've never known anyone who gets aggressive when drunk. Happy or silly, yes. Aggressive, no.
Yeah, well, that's a big pile of bullshit right there.
FYI, about 100.000 violent crimes annually in the US are done under the influence of alcohol. This doesn't include the many cases of domestic abuse and violence of all kinds, that end unreported.
the Supreme Court says it's okay, then it's defacto constitutional, so says the Constitution
Where? Please show me where the United States was given the power to police itself? That's as illogical as saying Microsoft should police itself to see whether or not it's violating antitrust laws. (Irrelevant portions snipped - you can read the whole thing at constitution.org).
Article. III. [Section 1.] The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court... [Section 2.] The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; -- to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; -- to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; -- to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; -- to Controversies between two or more States; -- between a State and Citizens of another State; -- between Citizens of different States; -- between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects. In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make
I can not lay my hand on any portion that allows SCOTUS to declare laws passed by Congress to be unconstitutional. Can you?
I also can not law my hand on any portion that forbids me or other Americans from saying, "That's unconstitutional" - can you?
In fact President Andrew Jackson once offered, "The Chief Justice gave his opinion. Now let's see him enforce it," and went ahead and executed the laws Congress had passed anyway.
"The Constitution . . . meant that its coordinate branches should be checks on each other. But the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch." --Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, 1804. ME 11:51
"The question whether the judges are invested with exclusive authority to decide on the constitutionality of a law has been heretofore a subject of consideration with me in the exercise of official duties. Certainly there is not a word in the Constitution which has given that power to them more than to the Executive or Legislative branches." --Thomas Jefferson to W. H. Torrance, 1815. ME 14:303
"If this opinion be sound, then indeed is our Constitution a complete felo de se [act of suicide] . . . The Constitution on this hypothesis is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please." --Thomas Jefferson to Spencer Roane, 1819. ME 15:212
"The ultimate arbiter is the people of the Union, assembled by their deputies in convention, at the call of Congress or of two-thirds of the States. Let them decide to which they mean to give an authority claimed by two of their organs. And it has been the peculiar wisdom and felicity of our Constitution, to have provided this peaceable appeal, where that of other nations is at once to force."
--Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 1823. ME 15:451
--author of the Declaration of Independence
--author of the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom and the phrase "separation of church and state"
--founder of the Democratic Party
The bigger the theory the better.
