The rich man's "use"? Yeah, I hate that word.
The rich man's "use"? Yeah, I hate that word.
I don't see a problem with a (regulated) private company owning utility lines as long as they don't also own what is being transmitted over those same lines.
We kind of have that with power at least in Ohio. AEP owns the infrastructure, but I can buy the electrons from whomever I want. It's decent in theory, but 9/10 times the "standard" tariffed AEP offer is better than that of any of the other competitors.
But getting back on track, if I wanted to use Spectrum's wires to deliver my internet service, they'd tell me to take a hike. That's what needs to be de-coupled just like we have for power. My preference is that we own the wires like we own the roads, but I can settle for the regulated private utility method, so long as that utility has to open up its infrastructure to anyone who wants to offer service.
So you believe these things are "on par with claiming the prior president had bugged his phones while possessing zero evidence to support the claim?"
Yes. Apparently if you keep all the data in RAM, it's "streaming" and not infringement. But the moment you write that sucker to disk, you're a dirty pirate.
The philosophers are still trying to figure out if swapping memory to disk counts as streaming or downloading.
Meh. I'm done playing with a sense of fairness. Anything my side does is fine (assuming you know what my side is), anything the other side does is wrong.
Its incredibly hypocritical, but have you seen who is in the white house lately? I'm waiting for him to declare that Linux has 20% market share on the desktop he lies so much.
Not to mention that Trump's position on H-1B visas is for the wrong reason. It's based in xenophobia, nationalism, and racism.
Alas, my state does not allow me to register a vote against a candidate. Only for one.
Can you make do with a version of software that's EOL? Sure, but it'll cause problems. How can we solve those problems? Well, throw staff time at them. Would that be new hires? No, they're people whose salaries we're already paying. So the view you can minimize the immediate cash outlay by running obsolete software. This would not be reckoned by a private enterprise as a legitimate cost savings, but that's why the IT guys in government have to contend with.
Oh, you'd be surprised. I've worked many places that consider employee time to be "free". We can buy a library that will solve problem X or just build it ourselves. The library costs money, but building it ourselves is free! After all, we're paying our programmers anyway!
The problem with UBI is if we replace food stamps and medicaid with UBI and the people just blow it on drugs and are then starving on the streets and filling up emergency rooms what do you do?
I'm fine if they starve on a UBI. They can visit the local church soup kitchen.
Medical care is a different story. No one has said that a UBI is meant to handle health care.
Which may include over 40 hours a week.
Exactly. Do you know how much I want to work? Zero hours. Do you know how much I have to work? Yeah.
Yes. If you try to assault someone with aid of their service, they will turn your information over to the authorities pursuant to a court order.
Actually if you read the history of the Electoral College, the framers thought that each state would have the people elect the electors by district and entrust them with finding a suitable candidate. In fact, they assumed the House would decide the election most of the time. Then we had political parties and that stopped pretty damn quickly.
I don't have a problem with the fact that smaller states are overrepresented given the federal nature of our government, and that is the effect, but it was never explicitly the intent. I do have a problem that whoever attains the most votes (even if it isn't a majority) gets all of the electors. They should be assigned by way of proportional representation. Half the votes gets you half the electors. Any reasonable method is acceptable for determining splitting of fractional electors.
If you're talking about services, yes. If you're talking about infrastructure no.
I live in an area where there there are two cable companies (Wide Open West and Time Warner). There is no reason there couldn't be a 3rd except for the fact that no one thinks it's a good investment to run another series of cables throughout my neighborhood.
Decouple service from infrastructure and you will get all the competition you want.
I fully supported Texas seceding. I still do.
Oddly enough that happened the last time one or more states wished to secede.
It is simply not legal and anyone who says otherwise is deluding themselves.
Consultants are mystical people who ask a company for a number and then give it back to them.